9 results found
-
All requirements should be contained within the requirement statement
Requirements which must be met by implemented controls or processes should be entirely contained within the requirement statement. Additional requirements should not be introduced in illustrative procedures.
1 voteThanks for your idea submission! This is what we'll be doing for the next major CSF release.
-
In v10, requirements focused on a single control maturity level should be avoided
Because we have a control maturity model that considers a written policy for each requirement, requirements focused on a single control maturity level should be avoided in v10. For example, the CSF currently contains some requirements about having a written policy, program, standard, guideline, etc. In those requirements, testing of both the "policy" and "implemented" control maturity levels are both test of a written policy (often the same one). Instead, requirements should be action-oriented (e.g. the org. does X) instead of policy oriented (e.g. the org. has a policy about X). Because of the control maturity model, the existence of…
9 votes -
Each requirement statement should address only one idea, and each idea should be addressed by only one requirement statement
In many information security, privacy, and financial auditing approaches, the audited customer needs to produce one piece/set of evidence per requirement. Each requirement needs distinct artifacts. This allows for simple data management - my list of requirements is X long and therefore my list of evidence artifacts/sets should be the same length. I can then track progress as an audited customer by measuring how much evidence I have produced, and how much is left to go. I can even set up workflows within project management tools and GRC tools easily to accommodate this. Put in data terms - my requirement…
7 votes -
6 votes
-
3 votes
-
4 votes
-
An easy way to determine exact number of CSF elements in the policy illustrative procedure
Assessors and assessed entities could benefit from something communicating the exact number of CSF implementation specifications present in the policy illustrative procedures. This could be through something like a number that precedes the policy illustrative procedure or even consistent use of roman numerals in the policy illustrative procedure. This would help everyone involved in preparing for, performing, and reviewing assessments ensure they are working with a generally understood denominator for scoring calculations.
For example:
Instead of saying "Inspect written policies to determine that they contain X, Y, and Z.", the policy illustrative procedure could display as,
"Inspect written policies to…14 votes -
3 votes
-
1 vote
- Don't see your idea?