Tag Archives: Compliance

AWS achieves Spain’s ENS High 311/2022 certification across 172 services

Post Syndicated from Daniel Fuertes original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-achieves-spains-ens-high-311-2022-certification-across-172-services/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) has recently renewed the Esquema Nacional de Seguridad (ENS) High certification, upgrading to the latest version regulated under Royal Decree 311/2022. The ENS establishes security standards that apply to government agencies and public organizations in Spain and service providers on which Spanish public services depend.

This security framework has gone through significant updates since the Royal Decree 3/2010 to the latest Royal Decree 311/2022 to adapt to evolving cybersecurity threats and technologies. The current scheme defines basic requirements and lists additional security reinforcements to meet the bar of the different security levels (Low, Medium, High).

Achieving the ENS High certification for its 311/2022 version underscores AWS commitment to maintaining robust cybersecurity controls and highlights our proactive approach to cybersecurity.

We are happy to announce the addition of 14 services to the scope of our ENS certification, for a new total of 172 services in scope. The certification now covers 31 Regions. Some of the additional services in scope for ENS High include the following:

  • Amazon Bedrock – This fully managed service offers a choice of high-performing foundation models (FMs) from leading artificial intelligence (AI) companies like AI21 Labs, Anthropic, Cohere, Meta, Mistral AI, Stability AI, and Amazon through a single API, along with a broad set of capabilities you need to build generative AI applications with security, privacy, and responsible AI.
  • Amazon EventBridge – Use this service to easily build loosely coupled, event-driven architectures. It creates point-to-point integrations between event producers and consumers without needing to write custom code or manage and provision servers.
  • AWS HealthOmics – This service helps healthcare and life science organizations and their software partners store, query, and analyze genomic, transcriptomic, and other omics data and then uses that data to generate insights to improve health.
  • AWS Signer – This is a fully managed code-signing service to ensure the trust and integrity of your code. AWS Signer manages the code-signing certificate’s public and private keys and enables central management of the code-signing lifecycle.
  • AWS Wickr – This service encrypts messages, calls, and files with a 256-bit end-to-end encryption protocol. Only the intended recipients and the customer organization can decrypt these communications, reducing the risk of adversary-in-the-middle attacks.

AWS achievement of the ENS High certification is verified by BDO Auditores S.L.P., which conducted an independent audit and confirmed that AWS continues to adhere to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability standards at its highest level as described in Royal Decree 311/2022.

AWS has also updated the existing eight Security configuration guidelines that map the ENS controls to the AWS Well-Architected Framework and provides guidance relating to the following topics: compliance profile, secure configuration, Prowler quick guide, hybrid connectivity, multi-account environments, Amazon WorkSpaces, incident response and monitorization and governance. AWS has also supported Prowler to offer new functionalities and to include the latest controls of the ENS.

For more information about ENS High and the AWS Security configuration guidelines, see the AWS Compliance page Esquema Nacional de Seguridad High. To view the complete list of services included in the scope, see the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program – Esquema Nacional de Seguridad (ENS) page. You can download the ENS High Certificate from AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console or from Esquema Nacional de Seguridad High.

As always, we are committed to bringing new services into the scope of our ENS High program based on your architectural and regulatory needs. If you have questions about the ENS program, reach out to your AWS account team or contact AWS Compliance.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security how-to content, news, and feature announcements? Follow us on Twitter.

Daniel Fuertes

Daniel Fuertes

Daniel is a security audit program manager at AWS based in Madrid, Spain. Daniel leads multiple security audits, attestations, and certification programs in Spain and other EMEA countries. Daniel has ten years of experience in security assurance and compliance, including previous experience as an auditor for the PCI DSS security framework. He also holds the CISSP, PCIP, and ISO 27001 Lead Auditor certifications.

Borja Larrumbide

Borja Larrumbide

Borja is a Security Assurance Manager for AWS in Spain and Portugal. He received a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science from Boston University (USA). Since then, he has worked at companies such as Microsoft and BBVA. Borja is a seasoned security assurance practitioner with many years of experience engaging key stakeholders at national and international levels. His areas of interest include security, privacy, risk management, and compliance.

AWS is issued a renewed certificate for the BIO Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten with increased scope

Post Syndicated from Ka Yie Lee original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-is-issued-a-renewed-certificate-for-the-bio-thema-uitwerking-clouddiensten-with-increased-scope/

We’re pleased to announce that Amazon Web Services (AWS) demonstrated continuous compliance with the Baseline Informatiebeveiliging Overheid (BIO) Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten while increasing the AWS services and AWS Regions in scope. This alignment with the BIO Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten requirements demonstrates our commitment to adhere to the heightened expectations for cloud service providers.

AWS customers across the Dutch public sector can use AWS certified services with confidence, knowing that the AWS services listed in the certificate adhere to the strict requirements imposed on the consumption of cloud-based services.

Baseline Informatiebeveiliging Overheid (BIO)

The BIO framework is an information security framework that the four layers of the Dutch public sector are required to adhere to. This means that it’s mandatory for the Dutch central government, all provinces, municipalities, and regional water authorities to be compliant with the BIO framework.

To support AWS customers in demonstrating their compliance with the BIO framework, AWS developed a Landing Zone for the BIO framework. This Landing Zone for the BIO framework is a pre-configured AWS environment that includes a subset of the technical requirements of the BIO framework. It’s a helpful tool that provides a starting point from which customers can further build their own AWS environment.

For more information regarding the Landing Zone for the BIO framework, see the AWS Reference Guide for Dutch BIO Framework and BIO Theme-elaboration Cloud Services in AWS Artifact. You can also reach out to your AWS account team or contact AWS through the Contact Us page.

Baseline Informatiebeveiliging Overheid Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten

In addition to the BIO framework, there’s another information security framework designed specifically for the use of cloud services, called BIO Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten. The BIO Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten is a guidance document for Dutch cloud service consumers to help them formulate controls and objectives when using cloud services. Consumers can consider it to be an additional control framework on top of the BIO framework.

AWS was evaluated by the monitoring body, EY CertifyPoint, in March 2024, and it was determined that AWS successfully demonstrated compliance for eight AWS services in total. In addition to Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2)Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) and Amazon Relational Database Service (Amazon RDS), which were assessed as compliant in March 2023; Amazon Virtual Private Cloud (Amazon VPC), Amazon GuardDuty, AWS LambdaAWS Config and AWS CloudTrail are added to the scope. The renewed Certificate of Compliance illustrating the compliance status of AWS and the assessment summary report from EY CertifyPoint are available on AWS Artifact. The certificate is available in Dutch and English.

For more information regarding the BIO Thema-uitwerking Clouddiensten, see the AWS Reference Guide for Dutch BIO Framework and BIO Theme-elaboration Cloud Services in AWS Artifact. You can also reach out to your AWS account team or contact AWS through the Contact Us page.

AWS strives to continuously bring services into scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural and regulatory needs.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Ka Yie Lee

Ka Yie Lee

Ka Yie is a Security Assurance Specialist for the Benelux region at AWS, based in Amsterdam. She engages with regulators and industry groups in the Netherlands and Belgium. She also helps ensure that AWS addresses local information security frameworks. Ka Yie holds master’s degrees in Accounting, Auditing and Control, and Commercial and Company Law. She also holds professional certifications such as CISSP.

Gokhan Akyuz

Gokhan Akyuz

Gokhan is a Security Audit Program Manager at AWS, based in Amsterdam. He leads security audits, attestations, and certification programs across Europe and the Middle East. He has 17 years of experience in IT and cybersecurity audits, IT risk management, and controls implementation in a wide range of industries.

2023 ISO 27001 certificate available in Spanish and French, and 2023 ISO 22301 certificate available in Spanish

Post Syndicated from Atulsing Patil original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/2023-iso-27001-certificate-available-in-spanish-and-french-and-2023-iso-22301-certificate-available-in-spanish/

French »
Spanish »

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is pleased to announce that a translated version of our 2023 ISO 27001 and 2023 ISO 22301 certifications are now available:

  • The 2023 ISO 27001 certificate is available in Spanish and French.
  • The 2023 ISO 22301 certificate is available in Spanish.

Translated certificates are available to customers through AWS Artifact.

These translated certificates will help drive greater engagement and alignment with customer and regulatory requirements across France, Latin America, and Spain.

We continue to listen to our customers, regulators, and stakeholders to understand their needs regarding audit, assurance, certification, and attestation programs at AWS. If you have questions or feedback about ISO compliance, reach out to your AWS account team.
 


French version

La certification ISO 27001 2023 est désormais disponible en espagnol et en français et le certification ISO 22301 est désormais disponible en espagnol

Nous restons à l’écoute de nos clients, des autorités de régulation et des parties prenantes pour mieux comprendre leurs besoins en matière de programmes d’audit, d’assurance, de certification et d’attestation au sein d’Amazon Web Services (AWS). La certification ISO 27001 2023 est désormais disponible en espagnol et en français. La certification ISO 22301 2023 est également désormais disponible en espagnol. Ces certifications traduites contribueront à renforcer notre engagement et notre conformité aux exigences des clients et de la réglementation en France, en Amérique latine et en Espagne.

Les certifications traduites sont mises à la disposition des clients via AWS Artifact.

Si vous avez des commentaires sur cet article, soumettez-les dans la section Commentaires ci-dessous.

Vous souhaitez davantage de contenu, d’actualités et d’annonces sur les fonctionnalités AWS Security ? Suivez-nous sur Twitter.
 


Spanish version

El certificado ISO 27001 2023 ahora está disponible en Español y Francés y el certificado ISO 22301 ahora está disponible en Español

Seguimos escuchando a nuestros clientes, reguladores y partes interesadas para comprender sus necesidades en relación con los programas de auditoría, garantía, certificación y atestación en Amazon Web Services (AWS). El certificado ISO 27001 2023 ya está disponible en español y francés. Además, el certificado ISO 22301 de 2023 ahora está disponible en español. Estos certificados traducidos ayudarán a impulsar un mayor compromiso y alineación con los requisitos normativos y de los clientes en Francia, América Latina y España.

Los certificados traducidos están disponibles para los clientes en AWS Artifact.

Si tienes comentarios sobre esta publicación, envíalos en la sección Comentarios a continuación.

¿Desea obtener más noticias sobre seguridad de AWS? Síguenos en Twitter.

Atul Patil

Atulsing Patil

Atulsing is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He has 27 years of consulting experience in information technology and information security management. Atulsing holds a master of science in electronics degree and professional certifications such as CCSP, CISSP, CISM, CDPSE, ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, HITRUST CSF, Archer Certified Consultant, and AWS CCP.

Nimesh Ravas

Nimesh Ravasa

Nimesh is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Nimesh has 15 years of experience in information security and holds CISSP, CDPSE, CISA, PMP, CSX, AWS Solutions Architect – Associate, and AWS Security Specialty certifications.

Chinmaee Parulekar

Chinmaee Parulekar

Chinmaee is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. She has 5 years of experience in information security. Chinmaee holds a master of science degree in management information systems and professional certifications such as CISA.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

Post Syndicated from Lara Sunday original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/04/17/enforce-and-report-on-pci-dss-v4-compliance-with-rapid7/

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

The PCI Security Standards Council (PCI SSC) is a global forum that connects stakeholders from the payments and payment processing industries to craft and facilitate adoption of data security standards and relevant resources that enable safe payments worldwide.

According to the PCI SSC website, “PCI Security Standards are developed specifically to protect payment account data throughout the payment lifecycle and to enable technology solutions that devalue this data and remove the incentive for criminals to steal it. They include standards for merchants, service providers, and financial institutions on security practices, technologies and processes, and standards for developers and vendors for creating secure payment products and solutions.”

Perhaps the most recognizable standard from PCI, their Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), is a global standard that provides a baseline of technical and operational requirements designed to protect account data. In March 2022, PCI SSC published version v4.0 of the standard, which replaces version v3.2.1. The updated version addresses emerging threats and technologies and enables innovative methods to combat new threats. This post will cover the changes to the standard that came with version 4.0 along with a high-level overview of how Rapid7 helps teams ensure their cloud-based applications can effectively implement and enforce compliance.

What’s New With Version 4.0, and Why Is It Important Now?

So, why are we talking about the new standard nearly two years after it was published? That’s because when the standard was published there was a two year transition period for organizations to adopt the new version and implement required changes that came with v4.0. During this transition period, organizations were given the option to assess against either PCI DSS v4.0 or PCI DSS v3.2.1.

For those that haven’t yet made the jump, the time is now This is because the transition period concluded on March 31, 2024, at which time version 3.2.1 was retired and organizations seeking PCI DSS certification will need to adhere to the new requirements and best practices. Important to note, there are some requirements that have been “future-dated.” For those requirements, organizations have been granted another full year, with those updates being required by March 31, 2025.

The changes were driven by direct feedback from organizations across the global payments industry. According to PCI, more than 200 organizations provided feedback to ensure the standard continues to meet the complex, ever-changing landscape of payment security.

Key changes for this version update include:

Flexibility in How Teams Achieve Compliance / Customized Approach

A primary goal for PCI DSS v4.0 was to provide greater flexibility for organizations in how they can achieve their security objectives. PCI DSS v4.0 introduces a new method – known as the Customized Approach – by which organizations can implement and validate PCI DSS controls Previously, organizations had the option of implementing Compensating controls, however these are only applicable when a situation arises whereby there is a constraint – such as legacy systems or processes – impacting the ability to meet a requirement.

PCI DSS v4.0 now provides organizations the means to choose to meet a requirement leveraging other means than the stated requirement. Requirement 12.3.2 and Appendices D and E outline the customized approach and how to apply it. To support customers, Rapid7’s new PCI DSS v4.0 compliance pack provides a greater number of insights than in previous iterations. This should lead to increased visibility and refinement in the process of  choosing to mitigate and manage requirements.

A Targeted Approach to Risk Management

Alongside the customized approach concept, one of the most significant updates  is the introduction of targeted risk analysis (TRA). TRAallows organizations to assess and respond to risks in the context of an organization’s specific operational environment. The PCI council has published guidance “PCI DSS v4 x: Targeted Risk Analysis Guidance” that outlines the two types of TRAs that an entity can employ regarding frequency of performing a given control and the second addressing any PCI DSS requirement for when an entity utilizes a customized approach.

To assist in understanding and having a consolidated view of security risks in their cloud environments, Rapid7 customers can leverage InsightCloudSec Layered Context and the recently introduced Risk Score feature. This feature combines a variety of risk signals, assigning a higher risk score to resources that suffer from toxic combinations or multiple risk vectors.Risk score holistically analyzes the risks that compound and increase the likelihood or impact of compromise.

Enhanced Validation Methods & Procedures

PCI DSS v4.0 has provided improvements to the self-assessment (SAQ) document and to the Report on Compliance (RoC) template, increasing alignment between them and the information summarized in an Attestation of Compliance to support organizations in their efforts when self-attesting or working with assessors to increase transparency and granularity.

New Requirements

PCI DSS v4.0 has brought with it a range of new requirements to address emerging threats. With modernization of network security controls, explicit guidance on cardholder data protections, and process maturity, the standard focuses on establishing sustainable controls and governance. While there are quite a few updates – which you can find detailed here on the summary of changes – let’s highlight a few of particular importance:

  • Multifactor authentication is now required for all access into the Cardholder Data Environment (CDE) – req. 8.5.1
  • Encryption of sensitive authentication data (SAD) – req. 3.3.3
  • New password requirements and updated specific password strength requirements: Passwords must now consist of 12 characters with special characters, uppercase and lowercase – reqs. 8.3.6 and 8.6.3
  • Access roles and privileges are based on least privilege access (LPA), and system components operate using deny by default – req. 7.2.5
  • Audit log reviews are performed using automated mechanisms – req. 10.4.1.1

These controls place role-based access control, configuration management, risk analysis and continuous monitoring as foundations, assisting organizations to mature and achieve their security objectives. Rapid7 can help  with implementing and enforcing these new controls, with a host of solutions that offer PCI-related support – all of which have been updated to align with these new requirements.

How Rapid7 Supports Customers to Attain PCI DSS v4.0 Compliance

InsightCloudSec allows security teams to establish, continuously measure, and illustrate compliance against organizational policies. This is accomplished via compliance packs, which are sets of checks that can be used to continuously assess your entire cloud environment – whether single or multi-cloud. The platform comes out of the box with dozens of compliance packs, including a dedicated pack for the PCI DSS v4.0.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

InsightCloudSec assesses your cloud environments in real-time for compliance with the requirements and best practices outlined by PCI It also enables teams to identify, assess, and act on noncompliant resources when misconfigurations are detected. If you so choose, you can make use of the platform’s native, no-code automation to remediate the issue the moment it’s detected, whether that means alerting relevant resource owners, adjusting the configuration or permissions directly or even deleting the non-compliant resource altogether without any human intervention. Check out the demo to learn more about how InsightCloudSec helps continuously and automatically enforce cloud security standards.

InsightAppSec also enables measurement against PCI v4.0 requirements to help you obtain PCI compliance. It allows users to create a PCI v4.0 report to help prepare for an audit, assessment or a questionnaire around PCI compliance. The PCI report gives you the ability to uncover potential issues that will affect the outcome or any of these exercises. Crucially, the report allows you to take action and secure critical vulnerabilities on any assets that deal with payment card data. PCI compliance auditing comes out of the box and is simple to generate once you have completed a scan against which to run the report.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

InsightAppSec achieves this coverage by cross referencing and then mapping our suite of 100+ attack modules against PCI requirements, identifying which attacks are relevant to particular requirements and then attempting to exploit your application with those attacks to obtain areas where your application may be vulnerable. Those vulnerabilities are then packaged up in the PCI 4.0 report where you can see vulnerabilities listed by PCI requirements This provides you with crucial insights into any vulnerabilities you may have as well as enabling  management of those vulnerabilities in a simplistic format.

For InsightVM customers, an important change in the revision is the need to perform authenticated internal vulnerability scans for requirement 11.3.1.2. Previous versions of the standard allowed for internal scanning without the use of credentials, which is no longer sufficient. For more details see this blog post.

Rapid7 provides a wide array of solutions to assist you in your compliance and governance efforts. Contact a member of our team to learn more about any of these capabilities or sign up for a free trial.

Winter 2023 SOC 1 report now available in Japanese, Korean, and Spanish

Post Syndicated from Brownell Combs original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/winter-2023-soc-1-report-now-available-in-japanese-korean-and-spanish/

Japanese | Korean | Spanish

We continue to listen to our customers, regulators, and stakeholders to understand their needs regarding audit, assurance, certification, and attestation programs at Amazon Web Services (AWS). We are pleased to announce that for the first time an AWS System and Organization Controls (SOC) 1 report is now available in Japanese and Korean, along with Spanish. This translated report will help drive greater engagement and alignment with customer and regulatory requirements across Japan, Korea, Latin America, and Spain.

The Japanese, Korean, and Spanish language versions of the report do not contain the independent opinion issued by the auditors, but you can find this information in the English language version. Stakeholders should use the English version as a complement to the Japanese, Korean, or Spanish versions.

Going forward, the following reports in each quarter will be translated. Because the SOC 1 controls are included in the Spring and Fall SOC 2 reports, this schedule provides year-round coverage in all translated languages when paired with the English language versions.

  • Winter SOC 1 (January 1 – December 31)
  • Spring SOC 2 (April 1 – March 31)
  • Summer SOC 1 (July 1 – June 30)
  • Fall SOC 2 (October 1 – September 30)

Customers can download the translated Winter 2023 SOC 1 report in Japanese, Korean, and Spanish through AWS Artifact, a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

The Winter 2023 SOC 1 report includes a total of 171 services in scope. For up-to-date information, including when additional services are added, visit the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program webpage and choose SOC.

AWS strives to continuously bring services into scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural and regulatory needs. Please reach out to your AWS account team if you have questions or feedback about SOC compliance.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security how-to content, news, and feature announcements? Follow us on X.
 


Japanese version

冬季 2023 SOC 1 レポートの日本語、韓国語、スペイン語版の提供を開始

当社はお客様、規制当局、利害関係者の声に継続的に耳を傾け、Amazon Web Services (AWS) における監査、保証、認定、認証プログラムに関するそれぞれのニーズを理解するよう努めています。この度、AWS System and Organization Controls (SOC) 1 レポートが今回初めて、日本語、韓国語、スペイン語で利用可能になりました。この翻訳版のレポートは、日本、韓国、ラテンアメリカ、スペインのお客様および規制要件との連携と協力体制を強化するためのものです。

本レポートの日本語版、韓国語版、スペイン語版には監査人による独立した第三者の意見は含まれていませんが、英語版には含まれています。利害関係者は、日本語版、韓国語版、スペイン語版の補足として英語版を参照する必要があります。

今後、四半期ごとの以下のレポートで翻訳版が提供されます。SOC 1 統制は、春季 および 秋季 SOC 2 レポートに含まれるため、英語版と合わせ、1 年間のレポートの翻訳版すべてがこのスケジュールで網羅されることになります。

  • 冬季SOC 1 (1 月 1 日〜12 月 31 日)
  • 春季 SOC 2 (4 月 1 日〜3 月 31 日)
  • 夏季SOC 1 (7 月 1 日〜6 月 30 日)
  • 秋季SOC 2 (10 月 1 日〜9 月 30 日)

冬季2023 SOC 1 レポートの日本語、韓国語、スペイン語版は AWS Artifact (AWS のコンプライアンスレポートをオンデマンドで入手するためのセルフサービスポータル) を使用してダウンロードできます。AWS マネジメントコンソール内の AWS Artifact にサインインするか、AWS Artifact の開始方法ページで詳細をご覧ください。

冬季2023 SOC 1 レポートの対象範囲には合計 171 のサービスが含まれます。その他のサービスが追加される時期など、最新の情報については、コンプライアンスプログラムによる対象範囲内の AWS のサービスで [SOC] を選択してご覧いただけます。

AWS では、アーキテクチャおよび規制に関するお客様のニーズを支援するため、コンプライアンスプログラムの対象範囲に継続的にサービスを追加するよう努めています。SOC コンプライアンスに関するご質問やご意見については、担当の AWS アカウントチームまでお問い合わせください。

コンプライアンスおよびセキュリティプログラムに関する詳細については、AWS コンプライアンスプログラムをご覧ください。当社ではお客様のご意見・ご質問を重視しています。お問い合わせページより AWS コンプライアンスチームにお問い合わせください。

本記事に関するフィードバックは、以下のコメントセクションからご提出ください。

AWS セキュリティによるハウツー記事、ニュース、機能の紹介については、X でフォローしてください。
 


Korean version

2023년 동계 SOC 1 보고서가 한국어, 일본어, 스페인어로 제공됩니다.

Amazon은 고객, 규제 기관 및 이해 관계자의 의견을 지속적으로 경청하여 Amazon Web Services (AWS)의 감사, 보증, 인증 및 증명 프로그램과 관련된 요구 사항을 파악하고 있습니다. 이제 처음으로 스페인어와 함께 한국어와 일본어로도 AWS System and Organization Controls(SOC) 1 보고서를 이용할 수 있게 되었음을 알려드립니다. 이 번역된 보고서는 일본, 한국, 중남미, 스페인의 고객 및 규제 요건을 준수하고 참여도를 높이는 데 도움이 될 것입니다.

보고서의 일본어, 한국어, 스페인어 버전에는 감사인의 독립적인 의견이 포함되어 있지 않지만, 영어 버전에서는 해당 정보를 확인할 수 있습니다. 이해관계자는 일본어, 한국어 또는 스페인어 버전을 보완하기 위해 영어 버전을 사용해야 합니다.

앞으로 매 분기마다 다음 보고서가 번역본으로 제공됩니다. SOC 1 통제 조치는 춘계 및 추계 SOC 2 보고서에 포함되어 있으므로, 이 일정은 영어 버전과 함께 모든 번역된 언어로 연중 내내 제공됩니다.

  • 동계 SOC 1(1/1~12/31)
  • 춘계 SOC 2(4/1~3/31)
  • 하계 SOC 1(7/1~6/30)
  • 추계 SOC 2(10/1~9/30)

고객은 AWS 규정 준수 보고서를 필요할 때 이용할 수 있는 셀프 서비스 포털인 AWS Artifact를 통해 일본어, 한국어, 스페인어로 번역된 2023년 동계 SOC 1 보고서를 다운로드할 수 있습니다. AWS Management Console의 AWS Artifact에 로그인하거나 Getting Started with AWS Artifact(AWS Artifact 시작하기)에서 자세한 내용을 알아보세요.

2023년 동계 SOC 1 보고서에는 총 171개의 서비스가 포함됩니다. 추가 서비스가 추가되는 시기 등의 최신 정보는 AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program(규정 준수 프로그램별 범위 내 AWS 서비스)에서 SOC를 선택하세요.

AWS는 고객이 아키텍처 및 규제 요구 사항을 충족할 수 있도록 지속적으로 서비스를 규정 준수 프로그램의 범위에 포함시키기 위해 노력하고 있습니다. SOC 규정 준수에 대한 질문이나 피드백이 있는 경우 AWS 계정 팀에 문의하시기 바랍니다.

규정 준수 및 보안 프로그램에 대한 자세한 내용은 AWS 규정 준수 프로그램을 참조하세요. 언제나 그렇듯이 AWS는 여러분의 피드백과 질문을 소중히 여깁니다. 문의하기 페이지를 통해 AWS 규정 준수 팀에 문의하시기 바랍니다.

이 게시물에 대한 피드백이 있는 경우, 아래의 의견 섹션에 의견을 제출해 주세요.

더 많은 AWS 보안 방법 콘텐츠, 뉴스 및 기능 발표를 원하시나요? X 에서 팔로우하세요.
 


Spanish version

El informe SOC 1 invierno 2023 se encuentra disponible actualmente en japonés, coreano y español

Seguimos escuchando a nuestros clientes, reguladores y partes interesadas para comprender sus necesidades en relación con los programas de auditoría, garantía, certificación y acreditación en Amazon Web Services (AWS). Nos enorgullece anunciar que, por primera vez, un informe de controles de sistema y organización (SOC) 1 de AWS se encuentra disponible en japonés y coreano, junto con la versión en español. Estos informes traducidos ayudarán a impulsar un mayor compromiso y alineación con los requisitos normativos y de los clientes en Japón, Corea, Latinoamérica y España.

Estas versiones del informe en japonés, coreano y español no contienen la opinión independiente emitida por los auditores, pero se puede acceder a esta información en la versión en inglés del documento. Las partes interesadas deben usar la versión en inglés como complemento de las versiones en japonés, coreano y español.

De aquí en adelante, los siguientes informes trimestrales estarán traducidos. Dado que los controles SOC 1 se incluyen en los informes de primavera y otoño de SOC 2, esta programación brinda una cobertura anual para todos los idiomas traducidos cuando se la combina con las versiones en inglés.

  • SOC 1 invierno (del 1/1 al 31/12)
  • SOC 2 primavera (del 1/4 al 31/3)
  • SOC 1 verano (del 1/7 al 30/6)
  • SOC 2 otoño (del 1/10 al 30/9)

Los clientes pueden descargar los informes SOC 1 invierno 2023 traducidos al japonés, coreano y español a través de AWS Artifact, un portal de autoservicio para el acceso bajo demanda a los informes de conformidad de AWS. Inicie sesión en AWS Artifact mediante la Consola de administración de AWS u obtenga más información en Introducción a AWS Artifact.

El informe SOC 1 invierno 2023 incluye un total de 171 servicios que se encuentran dentro del alcance. Para acceder a información actualizada, que incluye novedades sobre cuándo se agregan nuevos servicios, consulte los Servicios de AWS en el ámbito del programa de conformidad y seleccione SOC.

AWS se esfuerza de manera continua por añadir servicios dentro del alcance de sus programas de conformidad para ayudarlo a cumplir con sus necesidades de arquitectura y regulación. Si tiene alguna pregunta o sugerencia sobre la conformidad de los SOC, no dude en comunicarse con su equipo de cuenta de AWS.

Para obtener más información sobre los programas de conformidad y seguridad, consulte los Programas de conformidad de AWS. Como siempre, valoramos sus comentarios y preguntas; de modo que no dude en comunicarse con el equipo de conformidad de AWS a través de la página Contacte con nosotros.

Si tiene comentarios sobre esta publicación, envíelos a través de la sección de comentarios que se encuentra a continuación.

¿Quiere acceder a más contenido instructivo, novedades y anuncios de características de seguridad de AWS? Síganos en X.

Brownell Combs

Brownell Combs

Brownell is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Brownell holds a master’s degree in computer science from the University of Virginia and a bachelor’s degree in computer science from Centre College. He has over 20 years of experience in information technology risk management and CISSP, CISA, CRISC, and GIAC GCLD certifications.

Author

Rodrigo Fiuza

Rodrigo is a Security Audit Manager at AWS, based in São Paulo. He leads audits, attestations, certifications, and assessments across Latin America, the Caribbean, and Europe. Rodrigo has worked in risk management, security assurance, and technology audits for the past 12 years.

Paul Hong

Paul Hong

Paul is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security, compliance, and training initiatives within AWS and has 9 years of experience in security assurance. Paul is a CISSP, CEH, and CPA, and holds a master’s degree in Accounting Information Systems and a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from James Madison University, Virginia.

Hwee Hwang

Hwee Hwang

Hwee is an Audit Specialist at AWS based in Seoul, South Korea. Hwee is responsible for third-party and customer audits, certifications, and assessments in Korea. Hwee previously worked in security governance, risk, and compliance. Hwee is laser focused on building customers’ trust and providing them assurance in the cloud.

Tushar Jain

Tushar Jain

Tushar is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security, compliance, and training initiatives within AWS and holds a master’s degree in Business Administration from the Indian Institute of Management, Shillong, India and a bachelor’s degree in Technology in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from Marathwada University, India. He also holds CCSK and CSXF certifications.

Eun Jin Kim

Eun Jin Kim

Eun Jin is a security assurance professional working as the Audit Program Manager at AWS. She mainly leads compliance programs in South Korea, in particular for the financial sector. She has more than 25 years of experience and holds a master’s degree in Management Information Systems from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and a master’s degree in law from George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia.

Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

Michael is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS, where he leads multiple security and privacy initiatives. Michael has 12 years of experience in information security. He holds a master’s degree and bachelor’s degree in computer engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology. He also holds CISSP, CRISC, CISA, and CISM certifications.

Nathan Samuel

Nathan Samuel

Nathan is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS, where he leads multiple security and privacy initiatives. Nathan has a bachelor’s degree in Commerce from the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa and has 21 years’ experience in security assurance. He holds the CISA, CRISC, CGEIT, CISM, CDPSE, and Certified Internal Auditor certifications.

Author

Seulun Sung

Seul Un is a Security Assurance Audit Program Manager at AWS. Seul Un has been leading South Korea audit programs, including K-ISMS and RSEFT, for the past 4 years in AWS. She has a bachelor’s degree in Information Communication and Electronic Engineering degree from Ewha Womans University. She has 14 years of experience in IT risk, compliance, governance, and audit and holds the CISA certification.

Hidetoshi Takeuchi

Hidetoshi Takeuchi

Hidetoshi is a Senior Audit Program Manager, leading the Japan and India security certification and authorization programs, based in Japan. Hidetoshi has been leading information technology, cybersecurity, risk management, compliance, security assurance, and technology audits for the past 28 years and holds the CISSP certifications.

ryan wilks

Ryan Wilks

Ryan is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Ryan has 13 years of experience in information security. He has a bachelor of arts degree from Rutgers University and holds ITIL, CISM, and CISA certifications.

The curious case of faster AWS KMS symmetric key rotation

Post Syndicated from Jeremy Stieglitz original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/the-curious-case-of-faster-aws-kms-symmetric-key-rotation/

Today, AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) is introducing faster options for automatic symmetric key rotation. We’re also introducing rotate on-demand, rotation visibility improvements, and a new limit on the price of all symmetric keys that have had two or more rotations (including existing keys). In this post, I discuss all those capabilities and changes. I also present a broader overview of how symmetric cryptographic key rotation came to be, and cover our recommendations on when you might need rotation and how often to rotate your keys. If you’ve ever been curious about AWS KMS automatic key rotation—why it exists, when to enable it, and when to use it on-demand—read on.

How we got here

There are longstanding reasons for cryptographic key rotation. If you were Caesar in Roman times and you needed to send messages with sensitive information to your regional commanders, you might use keys and ciphers to encrypt and protect your communications. There are well-documented examples of using cryptography to protect communications during this time, so much so that the standard substitution cipher, where you swap each letter for a different letter that is a set number of letters away in the alphabet, is referred to as Caesar’s cipher. The cipher is the substitution mechanism, and the key is the number of letters away from the intended letter you go to find the substituted letter for the ciphertext.

The challenge for Caesar in relying on this kind of symmetric key cipher is that both sides (Caesar and his field generals) needed to share keys and keep those keys safe from prying eyes. What happens to Caesar’s secret invasion plans if the key used to encipher his attack plan was secretly intercepted in transmission down the Appian Way? Caesar had no way to know. But if he rotated keys, he could limit the scope of which messages could be read, thus limiting his risk. Messages sent under a key created in the year 52 BCE wouldn’t automatically work for messages sent the following year, provided that Caesar rotated his keys yearly and the newer keys weren’t accessible to the adversary. Key rotation can reduce the scope of data exposure (what a threat actor can see) when some but not all keys are compromised. Of course, every time the key changed, Caesar had to send messengers to his field generals to communicate the new key. Those messengers had to ensure that no enemies intercepted the new keys without their knowledge – a daunting task.

Illustration of Roman solider on horseback riding through countryside on cobblestone trail.

Figure 1: The state of the art for secure key rotation and key distribution in 52 BC.

Fast forward to the 1970s–2000s

In modern times, cryptographic algorithms designed for digital computer systems mean that keys no longer travel down the Appian Way. Instead, they move around digital systems, are stored in unprotected memory, and sometimes are printed for convenience. The risk of key leakage still exists, therefore there is a need for key rotation. During this period, more significant security protections were developed that use both software and hardware technology to protect digital cryptographic keys and reduce the need for rotation. The highest-level protections offered by these techniques can limit keys to specific devices where they can never leave as plaintext. In fact, the US National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) has published a specific security standard, FIPS 140, that addresses the security requirements for these cryptographic modules.

Modern cryptography also has the risk of cryptographic key wear-out

Besides addressing risks from key leakage, key rotation has a second important benefit that becomes more pronounced in the digital era of modern cryptography—cryptographic key wear-out. A key can become weaker, or “wear out,” over time just by being used too many times. If you encrypt enough data under one symmetric key, and if a threat actor acquires enough of the resulting ciphertext, they can perform analysis against your ciphertext that will leak information about the key. Current cryptographic recommendations to protect against key wear-out can vary depending on how you’re encrypting data, the cipher used, and the size of your key. However, even a well-designed AES-GCM implementation with robust initialization vectors (IVs) and large key size (256 bits) should be limited to encrypting no more than 4.3 billion messages (232), where each message is limited to about 64 GiB under a single key.

Figure 2: Used enough times, keys can wear out.

Figure 2: Used enough times, keys can wear out.

During the early 2000s, to help federal agencies and commercial enterprises navigate key rotation best practices, NIST formalized several of the best practices for cryptographic key rotation in the NIST SP 800-57 Recommendation for Key Management standard. It’s an excellent read overall and I encourage you to examine Section 5.3 in particular, which outlines ways to determine the appropriate length of time (the cryptoperiod) that a specific key should be relied on for the protection of data in various environments. According to the guidelines, the following are some of the benefits of setting cryptoperiods (and rotating keys within these periods):

5.3 Cryptoperiods

A cryptoperiod is the time span during which a specific key is authorized for use by legitimate entities or the keys for a given system will remain in effect. A suitably defined cryptoperiod:

  1. Limits the amount of information that is available for cryptanalysis to reveal the key (e.g. the number of plaintext and ciphertext pairs encrypted with the key);
  2. Limits the amount of exposure if a single key is compromised;
  3. Limits the use of a particular algorithm (e.g., to its estimated effective lifetime);
  4. Limits the time available for attempts to penetrate physical, procedural, and logical access mechanisms that protect a key from unauthorized disclosure;
  5. Limits the period within which information may be compromised by inadvertent disclosure of a cryptographic key to unauthorized entities; and
  6. Limits the time available for computationally intensive cryptanalysis.

Sometimes, cryptoperiods are defined by an arbitrary time period or maximum amount of data protected by the key. However, trade-offs associated with the determination of cryptoperiods involve the risk and consequences of exposure, which should be carefully considered when selecting the cryptoperiod (see Section 5.6.4).

(Source: NIST SP 800-57 Recommendation for Key Management, page 34).

One of the challenges in applying this guidance to your own use of cryptographic keys is that you need to understand the likelihood of each risk occurring in your key management system. This can be even harder to evaluate when you’re using a managed service to protect and use your keys.

Fast forward to the 2010s: Envisioning a key management system where you might not need automatic key rotation

When we set out to build a managed service in AWS in 2014 for cryptographic key management and help customers protect their AWS encryption workloads, we were mindful that our keys needed to be as hardened, resilient, and protected against external and internal threat actors as possible. We were also mindful that our keys needed to have long-term viability and use built-in protections to prevent key wear-out. These two design constructs—that our keys are strongly protected to minimize the risk of leakage and that our keys are safe from wear out—are the primary reasons we recommend you limit key rotation or consider disabling rotation if you don’t have compliance requirements to do so. Scheduled key rotation in AWS KMS offers limited security benefits to your workloads.

Specific to key leakage, AWS KMS keys in their unencrypted, plaintext form cannot be accessed by anyone, even AWS operators. Unlike Caesar’s keys, or even cryptographic keys in modern software applications, keys generated by AWS KMS never exist in plaintext outside of the NIST FIPS 140-2 Security Level 3 fleet of hardware security modules (HSMs) in which they are used. See the related post AWS KMS is now FIPS 140-2 Security Level 3. What does this mean for you? for more information about how AWS KMS HSMs help you prevent unauthorized use of your keys. Unlike many commercial HSM solutions, AWS KMS doesn’t even allow keys to be exported from the service in encrypted form. Why? Because an external actor with the proper decryption key could then expose the KMS key in plaintext outside the service.

This hardened protection of your key material is salient to the principal security reason customers want key rotation. Customers typically envision rotation as a way to mitigate a key leaking outside the system in which it was intended to be used. However, since KMS keys can be used only in our HSMs and cannot be exported, the possibility of key exposure becomes harder to envision. This means that rotating a key as protection against key exposure is of limited security value. The HSMs are still the boundary that protects your keys from unauthorized access, no matter how many times the keys are rotated.

If we decide the risk of plaintext keys leaking from AWS KMS is sufficiently low, don’t we still need to be concerned with key wear-out? AWS KMS mitigates the risk of key wear-out by using a key derivation function (KDF) that generates a unique, derived AES 256-bit key for each individual request to encrypt or decrypt under a 256-bit symmetric KMS key. Those derived encryption keys are different every time, even if you make an identical call for encrypt with the same message data under the same KMS key. The cryptographic details for our key derivation method are provided in the AWS KMS Cryptographic Details documentation, and KDF operations use the KDF in counter mode, using HMAC with SHA256. These KDF operations make cryptographic wear-out substantially different for KMS keys than for keys you would call and use directly for encrypt operations. A detailed analysis of KMS key protections for cryptographic wear-out is provided in the Key Management at the Cloud Scale whitepaper, but the important take-away is that a single KMS key can be used for more than a quadrillion (250) encryption requests without wear-out risk.

In fact, within the NIST 800-57 guidelines is consideration that when the KMS key (key-wrapping key in NIST language) is used with unique data keys, KMS keys can have longer cryptoperiods:

“In the case of these very short-term key-wrapping keys, an appropriate cryptoperiod (i.e., which includes both the originator and recipient-usage periods) is a single communication session. It is assumed that the wrapped keys will not be retained in their wrapped form, so the originator-usage period and recipient-usage period of a key-wrapping key is the same. In other cases, a key-wrapping key may be retained so that the files or messages encrypted by the wrapped keys may be recovered later. In such cases, the recipient-usage period may be significantly longer than the originator-usage period of the key-wrapping key, and cryptoperiods lasting for years may be employed.

Source: NIST 800-57 Recommendations for Key Management, section 5.3.6.7.

So why did we build key rotation in AWS KMS in the first place?

Although we advise that key rotation for KMS keys is generally not necessary to improve the security of your keys, you must consider that guidance in the context of your own unique circumstances. You might be required by internal auditors, external compliance assessors, or even your own customers to provide evidence of regular rotation of all keys. A short list of regulatory and standards groups that recommend key rotation includes the aforementioned NIST 800-57, Center for Internet Security (CIS) benchmarks, ISO 27001, System and Organization Controls (SOC) 2, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), COBIT 5, HIPAA, and the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) Handbook, just to name a few.

Customers in regulated industries must consider the entirety of all the cryptographic systems used across their organizations. Taking inventory of which systems incorporate HSM protections, which systems do or don’t provide additional security against cryptographic wear-out, or which programs implement encryption in a robust and reliable way can be difficult for any organization. If a customer doesn’t have sufficient cryptographic expertise in the design and operation of each system, it becomes a safer choice to mandate a uniform scheduled key rotation.

That is why we offer an automatic, convenient method to rotate symmetric KMS keys. Rotation allows customers to demonstrate this key management best practice to their stakeholders instead of having to explain why they chose not to.

Figure 3 details how KMS appends new key material within an existing KMS key during each key rotation.

Figure 3: KMS key rotation process

Figure 3: KMS key rotation process

We designed the rotation of symmetric KMS keys to have low operational impact to both key administrators and builders using those keys. As shown in Figure 3, a keyID configured to rotate will append new key material on each rotation while still retaining and keeping the existing key material of previous versions. This append method achieves rotation without having to decrypt and re-encrypt existing data that used a previous version of a key. New encryption requests under a given keyID will use the latest key version, while decrypt requests under that keyID will use the appropriate version. Callers don’t have to name the version of the key they want to use for encrypt/decrypt, AWS KMS manages this transparently.

Some customers assume that a key rotation event should forcibly re-encrypt any data that was ever encrypted under the previous key version. This is not necessary when AWS KMS automatically rotates to use a new key version for encrypt operations. The previous versions of keys required for decrypt operations are still safe within the service.

We’ve offered the ability to automatically schedule an annual key rotation event for many years now. Lately, we’ve heard from some of our customers that they need to rotate keys more frequently than the fixed period of one year. We will address our newly launched capabilities to help meet these needs in the final section of this blog post.

More options for key rotation in AWS KMS (with a price reduction)

After learning how we think about key rotation in AWS KMS, let’s get to the new options we’ve launched in this space:

  • Configurable rotation periods: Previously, when using automatic key rotation, your only option was a fixed annual rotation period. You can now set a rotation period from 90 days to 2,560 days (just over seven years). You can adjust this period at any point to reset the time in the future when rotation will take effect. Existing keys set for rotation will continue to rotate every year.
  • On-demand rotation for KMS keys: In addition to more flexible automatic key rotation, you can now invoke on-demand rotation through the AWS Management Console for AWS KMS, the AWS Command Line Interface (AWS CLI), or the AWS KMS API using the new RotateKeyOnDemand API. You might occasionally need to use on-demand rotation to test workloads, or to verify and prove key rotation events to internal or external stakeholders. Invoking an on-demand rotation won’t affect the timeline of any upcoming rotation scheduled for this key.

    Note: We’ve set a default quota of 10 on-demand rotations for a KMS key. Although the need for on-demand key rotation should be infrequent, you can ask to have this quota raised. If you have a repeated need for testing or validating instant key rotation, consider deleting the test keys and repeating this operation for RotateKeyOnDemand on new keys.

  • Improved visibility: You can now use the AWS KMS console or the new ListKeyRotations API to view previous key rotation events. One of the challenges in the past is that it’s been hard to validate that your KMS keys have rotated. Now, every previous rotation for a KMS key that has had a scheduled or on-demand rotation is listed in the console and available via API.
     
    Figure 4: Key rotation history showing date and type of rotation

    Figure 4: Key rotation history showing date and type of rotation

  • Price cap for keys with more than two rotations: We’re also introducing a price cap for automatic key rotation. Previously, each annual rotation of a KMS key added $1 per month to the price of the key. Now, for KMS keys that you rotate automatically or on-demand, the first and second rotation of the key adds $1 per month in cost (prorated hourly), but this price increase is capped at the second rotation. Rotations after your second rotation aren’t billed. Existing customers that have keys with three or more annual rotations will see a price reduction for those keys to $3 per month (prorated) per key starting in the month of May, 2024.

Summary

In this post, I highlighted the more flexible options that are now available for key rotation in AWS KMS and took a broader look into why key rotation exists. We know that many customers have compliance needs to demonstrate key rotation everywhere, and increasingly, to demonstrate faster or immediate key rotation. With the new reduced pricing and more convenient ways to verify key rotation events, we hope these new capabilities make your job easier.

Flexible key rotation capabilities are now available in all AWS Regions, including the AWS GovCloud (US) Regions. To learn more about this new capability, see the Rotating AWS KMS keys topic in the AWS KMS Developer Guide.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Author

Jeremy Stieglitz

Jeremy is the Principal Product Manager for AWS KMS, where he drives global product strategy and roadmap. Jeremy has more than 25 years of experience defining security products and platforms across large companies (RSA, Entrust, Cisco, and Imperva) and start-up environments (Dataguise, Voltage, and Centrify). Jeremy is the author or co-author of 23 patents in network security, user authentication, and network automation and control.

NIS2, DORA, CER and GDPR: A Comparative Overview of Crucial EU Compliance Directives and Regulations

Post Syndicated from Editor original https://nebosystems.eu/comparative-guide-dora-gdpr-nis2-cer/

In the evolving regulatory landscape, organizations operating within the EU must navigate through a complex web of regulations and directives, including NIS2 (Network & Information System) Directive, CER (Critical Entities Resilience) Directive, DORA (Digital Operational Resilience Act) and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation). Each of these frameworks has a distinct focus, from enhancing cybersecurity and operational resilience to protecting personal data and ensuring the resilience of critical entities.

This guide outlines the essential aspects of DORA (EU) 2022/2554, GDPR (EU) 2016/679, NIS2 (EU) 2022/2555 directive and the CER/RCE (EU) 2022/2557 directive, including their scope, objectives, key requirements, sanctions for non-compliance, implementation deadlines, technical and organizational measures, key differences and compliance intersections.

Scope and Applicability

  • NIS2 (Network & Information System) Directive : Applies to essential and important entities across various sectors expanding the scope of its predecessor, the NIS Directive.
  • Essential entities include sectors such as energy (including electricity, oil, and gas), transport (air, rail, water and road), banking, financial market infrastructures, health care, drinking water, wastewater, and digital infrastructure. Essential entities are those whose disruption would cause significant impacts on public safety, security, or economic or societal activities.
  • Important Entities covers postal and courier services, waste management, manufacture, production and distribution of chemicals, food production, distribution and sale, manufacturing of medical devices, computers and electronics, machinery equipment, motor vehicles, digital providers such as online marketplaces, online search engines, and social networking services platforms, and certain entities within the public administration sector.
  • DORA (Digital Operational Resilience Act): Specifically focuses on the resilience of the financial sector to ICT risks, encompassing a wide range of entities that play pivotal roles in the financial ecosystem. This includes credit institutions, investment firms, insurance and reinsurance companies, payment institutions, electronic money institutions, crypto-asset service providers, central securities depositories, central counterparties, trading venues, managers of alternative investment funds and management companies of undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS). Additionally, it covers ICT third-party service providers to these financial entities, emphasizing the importance of digital operational resilience not just within financial entities themselves but also within their extended digital supply chains.
  • GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation): Has a global reach, affecting any organization that processes personal data of EU citizens, focusing on data protection and privacy regardless of the sector.
  • CER (Critical Entities Resilience) Directive: Aims to enhance the resilience of critical entities operating in vital sectors such as energy, transport, banking, financial market infrastructure, health, drinking water, waste water, public administration, space, digital infrastructure, production, processing and distribution of food sector within the EU.

Objectives

  • NIS2 Directive: Seeks to significantly raise cybersecurity standards and improve incident response capabilities across the EU.
  • DORA: Ensures that the financial sector can withstand, respond to, and recover from ICT-related disruptions and threats.
  • GDPR: Protects EU citizens’ personal data, ensuring privacy and giving individuals control over their personal information.
  • CER Directive: Focuses on enhancing the overall resilience of entities that are critical to the maintenance of vital societal or economic activities against a range of non-cyber and cyber threats.

Key Requirements

  • NIS2 Directive: Mandates robust risk management measures, timely incident reporting, supply chain security and resilience testing among affected entities.
  • DORA: Requires financial entities to establish comprehensive ICT risk management frameworks, report significant ICT-related incidents, conduct resilience testing and manage risks related to third-party ICT service providers.
  • GDPR: Enforces principles such as lawful processing, data minimization and transparency; upholds data subjects’ rights; mandates data breach notifications; and requires data protection measures to be embedded in business processes.
  • CER Directive: Calls for national risk assessments, enhanced security measures, incident notification, and crisis management for critical entities, ensuring they can maintain essential services under adverse conditions.

Sanctions and Penalties

  • NIS2 Directive: The directive suggests Member States ensure that penalties for non-compliance are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive, but does not specify amounts, leaving it to individual Member States to set.
  • DORA: Specific sanctions and penalties are not detailed, implying that penalties would be defined at the Member State level or in subsequent regulatory guidance.
  • GDPR: Known for its strict penalties, organizations can face fines up to €20 million or 4% of their total global turnover, whichever is higher.
  • CER Directive: Similar to NIS2, the CER Directive leaves the specifics of sanctions and penalties to Member States, emphasizing the need for them to be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive.

Implementation Deadline Date

  • NIS2 Directive: Member States are required to transpose and apply the measures of the NIS2 Directive by 18 October 2024 .
  • DORA: The regulation will become applicable from 17 January 2025, marking the deadline for entities within the financial sector to comply with its requirements .
  • GDPR: This regulation has been in effect since 25 May 2018, requiring immediate compliance from the effective date.
  • CER Directive: Similar to NIS2, the CER Directive must be transposed and applied by Member States by 18 October 2024 .

Key Differences

While NIS2, DORA, GDPR and CER directives and regulations share common goals related to security and privacy, they differ significantly in their primary focus and applicability:

  • NIS2 Directive primarily enhances cybersecurity across various critical sectors, emphasizing sector-specific risk management and incident reporting.
  • DORA focuses on the financial sector’s digital operational resilience, detailing ICT risk management and third-party risk, specific to financial services.
  • GDPR is dedicated to personal data protection, granting extensive rights to individuals regarding their data, applicable across all sectors.
  • CER Directive aims to ensure the resilience of entities vital for societal and economic well-being, focusing on both cyber and physical resilience measures.

Overlapping Areas

Despite their differences, these frameworks overlap in several key areas, allowing for synergistic compliance efforts:

  • Risk Management: NIS2, DORA and the CER Directive all emphasize robust risk management, albeit with different focal points (cybersecurity, ICT and critical entity resilience, respectively).
  • Incident Reporting: NIS2 and DORA require incident reporting within their respective domains, which can streamline processes for entities covered by both.
  • Data Protection Measures: GDPR’s data protection principles can complement the cybersecurity measures under NIS2 and CER, enhancing overall data security.

Incident Response and Recovery

  • NIS2 Directive: Requires entities to have incident response capabilities in place, ensuring timely detection, analysis, and response to incidents. It emphasizes the need for recovery plans to restore services after an incident.
  • DORA: Mandates financial entities to establish and implement an incident management process capable of responding swiftly to ICT-related incidents, including recovery objectives, restoration of systems, and lessons learned activities.
  • GDPR: While not explicitly detailing incident response processes, GDPR mandates notification of personal data breaches to supervisory authorities and, in certain cases, to the affected individuals, highlighting the need for an effective response mechanism.
  • CER Directive: Stresses the importance of having incident response plans, ensuring critical entities can quickly respond to and recover from disruptive incidents, maintaining essential services.

Technical and Organizational Measures

  • NIS2 Directive: Entities should incorporate state-of-the-art cybersecurity solutions like advanced threat detection systems, comprehensive data encryption, secure network configurations and regular security assessments to safeguard sensitive information. Additional technical measures might include continuous monitoring and anomaly detection systems to identify suspicious activities in real time, and the implementation of Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems and next-generation firewalls (NGFWs). Organizational strategies involve establishing a robust cybersecurity governance framework, conducting frequent cybersecurity awareness training, and formulating clear policies for effective incident response and thorough business continuity planning.
  • DORA: For compliance with DORA, financial entities are advised to utilize secure communication protocols and robust encryption for protecting data during transmission and storage, supplemented by multi-factor authentication systems to enhance access security. Additional technical measures could involve the deployment of advanced cybersecurity tools like Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems for integrated threat analysis and response, and next-generation firewalls (NGFWs). On the organizational front, setting up a dedicated ICT risk management team, clearly defining cybersecurity roles, and embedding cybersecurity risk considerations into the overarching risk management framework are essential.
  • GDPR: In alignment with GDPR, technical safeguards such as strong data encryption, pseudonymization of personal data where feasible, and stringent access control mechanisms are pivotal. Expanding on these, additional technical measures may include the use of Data Loss Prevention (DLP) tools to prevent unauthorized data disclosure or loss and employing regular penetration testing to identify and rectify vulnerabilities. Organizational measures encompass the implementation of comprehensive data protection policies, conducting DPIAs for high-risk data processing activities, and appointing a Data Protection Officer in specific scenarios to oversee data protection strategies and compliance.
  • CER Directive: Adhering to the CER Directive involves applying network segmentation to isolate and protect critical systems, utilizing intrusion detection and prevention systems, and ensuring resilient data backup and recovery strategies. Enhancing these measures, technical strategies could also include the deployment of next-generation firewalls (NGFWs) and the use of automated patch management systems to ensure timely application of security updates. Organizational approaches include developing a detailed incident management plan, establishing a dedicated crisis management team, and conducting regular resilience testing and drills to validate and improve recovery processes.

Compliance Intersections and Synergies

While each framework has its unique focus, there are notable intersections, particularly in the areas of risk management, incident reporting, and the overarching emphasis on security and resilience. For instance, the risk management strategies advocated by NIS2 and the CER Directive can complement the ICT risk management framework of DORA. GDPR’s requirement for data protection by design and default can also support the cybersecurity measures outlined in NIS2 and CER, promoting a secure and privacy-focused operational environment. Furthermore, the incident reporting mechanisms mandated by both NIS2 and DORA underscore a shared commitment to transparency and accountability in the face of security incidents, which can drive improvements in organizational responses to breaches, including those involving personal data under GDPR. This alignment not only streamlines compliance processes but also fortifies the organization’s overall security framework, enhancing its ability to protect against and respond to cyber threats and operational disruptions. By recognizing and acting upon these synergies, organizations can more effectively allocate resources, avoid duplicative efforts, and foster a culture of continuous improvement in cybersecurity and data protection practices.

Conclusion

Understanding the nuances and requirements of NIS2, DORA, GDPR, and the CER Directive is crucial for organizations operating within the EU, especially those that fall under the scope of multiple frameworks. By recognizing the overlaps and leveraging synergies between these regulations and directives, organizations can streamline their compliance efforts, enhance their operational resilience and data protection measures, and contribute to a safer, more secure digital and physical environment within the EU. This integrated approach not only ensures regulatory compliance but also builds a strong foundation of trust with customers, stakeholders, and regulatory bodies.

For streamlined compliance with EU directives like NIS2, DORA and GDPR, Nebosystems offers expert services tailored to your needs. Learn more about our cybersecurity solutions or get in touch directly.


References:

NIS2 (Network & Information System) Directive (EU) 2022/2555. EUR-Lex.

General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679. EUR-Lex.

Digital Operational Resilience Act (EU) 2022/2554. EUR-Lex.

Critical Entities Resilience Directive (EU) 2022/2557. EUR-Lex.

DORA Regulation: Essential Requirements for Compliance

Post Syndicated from Editor original https://nebosystems.eu/dora-regulation-compliance-requirements/

What is DORA?

The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) is a EU regulation that entered into force on 16 January 2023 and will apply as of 17 January 2025. DORA (EU) 2022/2554 is a regulatory framework established by the European Union to enhance the digital operational resilience of the financial sector. It aims to ensure that all participants in the financial system have the necessary safeguards and measures in place to withstand, respond to, and recover from ICT (Information and Communication Technology) related disruptions and threats.

Who is Affected?

DORA affects a wide range of entities within the EU financial sector, including:

  1. Credit Institutions and Banks: These are financial institutions that have the authority to accept deposits from the public and provide credit to individuals and businesses. Their services may include offering checking and savings accounts, loans, mortgages, and financial advice.
  2. Investment Firms: Firms that engage in various investment services such as portfolio management, investment advice, and trading in financial instruments on behalf of clients. They play a crucial role in securities markets and can range from brokerage firms to asset management companies.
  3. Insurance and Reinsurance Companies: Insurance companies provide risk management to individuals and entities by offering insurance policies. Reinsurance companies, in turn, provide insurance to other insurance companies, helping to manage and mitigate risks across the insurance industry.
  4. Payment and Electronic Money Institutions: These entities facilitate payment services and transactions, including transfers, direct debits, and credit transfers. Electronic money institutions issue electronic money, which is a digital alternative to cash used for making electronic transactions.
  5. Crypto-Asset Service Providers: These providers offer services related to cryptocurrencies and other digital assets, including exchange platforms, wallet services, and financial services involving digital tokens.
  6. Central Securities Depositories (CSDs): CSDs are institutions that hold financial instruments like stocks and bonds in electronic form and enable their transfer through book-entry. They play a pivotal role in the settlement and safekeeping of securities in financial markets.
  7. Central Counterparties (CCPs): CCPs are entities that act as intermediaries between buyers and sellers in derivative and securities markets, guaranteeing the terms of a trade even if one party defaults, thus reducing counterparty risk.
  8. Trading Venues: This term encompasses various platforms where financial instruments are traded, including regulated markets, Multilateral Trading Facilities (MTFs), and Organized Trading Facilities (OTFs).
  9. Managers of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) and UCITS (Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities): These managers operate investment funds not covered by traditional banking regulations. Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) include hedge funds, private equity, and real estate funds, while UCITS are mutual funds that are regulated at the European level, designed for retail investors.
  10. Data Reporting Service Providers: Entities that provide reporting and data services related to financial transactions, ensuring transparency and regulatory compliance in financial markets. This includes trade repositories and approved reporting mechanisms.
  11. Crowdfunding Service Providers: Platforms that connect individuals or businesses seeking to fund projects or ventures with people willing to contribute small amounts of money, typically via the internet.
  12. ICT Third-Party Service Providers to Financial Entities: These include providers offering critical ICT services such as cloud computing, data analytics, cybersecurity solutions, and software development, which are essential for the digital operations of financial entities.

These entities encompass a broad spectrum of the financial sector within the EU, each playing a critical role in maintaining the stability and integrity of financial markets, and are thus subject to DORA’s regulatory framework aimed at enhancing their operational resilience against ICT risks.

Sanctions and Penalties:

DORA, the Digital Operational Resilience Act empowers competent authorities to impose administrative penalties and remedial measures for breaches of its regulations. This includes issuing orders to cease breaches, requiring the cessation of practices contrary to DORA provisions, adopting measures to ensure ongoing compliance with legal requirements, requiring existing data traffic records from telecommunication operators under suspicion of a breach, and issuing public notices or statements about the breach and responsible parties . The imposition of penalties considers the breach’s materiality, gravity, duration, the responsible party’s degree of responsibility, financial strength, profits gained or losses avoided due to the breach, losses caused to third parties, and the level of cooperation with the competent authority.

Key Requirements of DORA:

  1. ICT Risk Management: Entities must implement and maintain an effective and comprehensive ICT risk management framework, including policies, procedures and measures to identify, protect, detect, respond and recover from ICT-related incidents.
  2. Incident Reporting: Financial entities are required to establish and maintain mechanisms for the timely detection and reporting of significant ICT-related incidents to relevant authorities.
  3. Digital Operational Resilience Testing: Financial entities must regularly test their digital resilience capabilities through various means, including threat-led penetration testing, to identify vulnerabilities and address them proactively.
  4. ICT Third-Party Risk: Entities must manage and monitor the ICT risks stemming from their reliance on third-party service providers, including cloud computing services, ensuring that these relationships do not undermine their digital operational resilience.
  5. Information Sharing: The framework encourages financial entities to share information related to cyber threats and vulnerabilities to enhance collective defense mechanisms and resilience across the financial sector.
  6. Oversight of Critical ICT Third-Party Service Providers: DORA introduces a framework for the oversight of critical ICT third-party service providers to the financial sector, aiming to mitigate systemic risk and ensure the stability of the financial system.
  7. Compliance and Enforcement: DORA establishes mechanisms for supervisory oversight, compliance and enforcement, including the potential for sanctions in cases of non-compliance with the regulation’s requirements.

By adhering to these requirements, financial entities and their ICT third-party service providers will contribute to a more resilient and stable financial system capable of withstanding and responding effectively to digital disruptions and threats.

Navigating DORA’s requirements can be complex, but you don’t have to do it alone. Nebosystems offers tailored cybersecurity measures and consulting to ensure your compliance. Ready to secure your digital resilience? Contact us today.


Reference: Digital Operational Resilience Act (EU) 2022/2554. EUR-Lex.

Understanding GDPR: A Definitive Guide on Key Requirements and Compliance

Post Syndicated from Editor original https://nebosystems.eu/what-is-gdpr-key-requirements-guide/

In the digital landscape where data breaches and privacy concerns are increasingly prevalent, understanding the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is essential for businesses and individuals alike. Implemented on May 25, 2018, GDPR represents a significant overhaul of data protection laws, setting a new global benchmark for privacy rights, security, and compliance.

What is GDPR?

The GDPR is a comprehensive data protection law that came into effect in the European Union (EU) but has far-reaching implications for companies worldwide. It represents a significant shift in the way personal data of individuals within these regions is collected, stored, processed, and protected by organizations worldwide. It aims to give individuals more control over their personal data and to unify data protection regulations across the EU, thereby simplifying the regulatory environment for international business

Who is Affected?

The GDPR affects:

  • Organizations within the EU: All entities operating within the EU, regardless of their size, that process personal data are subject to the GDPR.
  • Organizations outside the EU: Non-EU organizations that offer goods or services to individuals in the EU or monitor the behavior of individuals within the EU are also subject to the GDPR.
  • Individuals within the EU: The GDPR enhances the rights of EU residents, offering them greater control over their personal data.

Key Requirements of GDPR

The GDPR is built around several key principles that dictate how personal data should be handled, processed, and protected. Understanding these requirements is crucial for any organization striving for compliance:

  1. Lawfulness, Fairness, and Transparency: Processing must be lawful, fair and transparent to the data subject.
  2. Purpose Limitation: Data must be collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes, and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes.
  3. Data Minimization: The collection of data should be limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed.
  4. Accuracy: Personal data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.
  5. Storage Limitation: Data should be retained only as long as necessary for the purposes for which they are processed.
  6. Integrity and Confidentiality (Security): Personal data must be processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security, including protection against unauthorized or unlawful processing, accidental loss, destruction or damage.
  7. Accountability: The data controller is responsible for, and must be able to demonstrate, compliance with all the principles mentioned above.

Rights of Data Subjects

The GDPR enhances and introduces new rights for data subjects, including:

  • The right to be informed: Individuals have the right to be informed about the collection and use of their personal data.
  • The right of access: Individuals can access their data and ask how their data is being used.
  • The right to rectification: Individuals have the right to have inaccurate data corrected.
  • The right to erasure (Right to be Forgotten): Individuals can request the deletion of their data under certain conditions.
  • The right to restrict processing: Individuals can request the restriction of processing of their personal data.
  • The right to data portability: Individuals have the right to receive their personal data in a structured, commonly used, and machine-readable format.
  • The right to object: Individuals can object to the processing of their personal data in certain circumstances, including for direct marketing.

Additional Requirements:

  • Consent: When processing is based on consent, it must be freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous, with a clear affirmative action by the data subject.
  • Data Protection by Design and by Default: Organizations must implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to meet the principles of data protection effectively and safeguard individual rights. Integrating privacy considerations into the design of systems and processes, known as ‘Privacy by Design,’ is a GDPR principle that emphasizes proactive privacy measures from the outset of any project or process involving personal data.
  • Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs): DPIAs are required where data processing is likely to result in high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals, particularly with the use of new technologies.
  • Data Breach Notification: Organizations must notify the appropriate data protection authority of a data breach within 72 hours, unless the breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals. Affected individuals must also be notified if there is a high risk to their rights and freedoms.
  • Data Protection Officers (DPOs): Organizations must appoint a DPO if they are a public authority, their core activities require large scale, regular and systematic monitoring of individuals, or their core activities consist of large scale processing of special categories of data or data relating to criminal convictions and offences.
  • One-Stop-Shop: The GDPR introduces a one-stop-shop mechanism for organizations operating in multiple EU countries, meaning they only have to deal with a single supervisory authority.
  • Cross-Border Data Transfers: The GDPR imposes restrictions on the transfer of personal data outside the EU, ensuring that such transfers only occur to countries or entities providing an adequate level of data protection.
  • Processors Obligations: Processors are directly responsible for processing personal data in accordance with the GDPR’s mandates, including processing data based on the controller’s documented instructions, ensuring the confidentiality of the processed data, and aiding controllers in meeting their GDPR obligations .
  • Record Keeping: Controllers and processors must keep detailed records of processing activities.
  • Security of Processing: Controllers and processors must implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk.
  • Cooperation Among Supervisory Authorities: Supervisory authorities must cooperate with each other to ensure consistent application of the GDPR across the EU.
  • Certification Mechanisms, Seals, and Marks: The GDPR encourages the use of certification mechanisms, seals, and marks as evidence of compliance with its provisions, including for controllers or processors not directly subject to the regulation due to their geographical location .

By adhering to these requirements, organizations can ensure compliance with the GDPR, thereby enhancing the protection of personal data and potentially avoiding significant penalties for non-compliance. Non-compliance with the GDPR can result in hefty fines, with penalties reaching up to €20 million or 4% of the annual worldwide turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is greater, for the most serious infringements.

The GDPR’s impact extends beyond the borders of the EU and EEA, affecting any organization worldwide that processes the personal data of individuals within these regions. Its implementation marks a significant step towards enhancing individuals’ privacy rights and setting a new global standard for data protection.

For organizations seeking to fortify their data protection measures in line with GDPR standards, our Comprehensive GDPR Compliance Cybersecurity Solutions provide a robust framework tailored to meet the unique challenges of your business.

Whether you’re looking to enhance your cybersecurity measures or seeking expert consulting to navigate GDPR compliance, reach out Nebosystems today. Let us help you transform GDPR compliance from a daunting obligation into an opportunity for enhanced data security and trust building.


Reference: General Data Protection Regulation (2016/679). EUR-Lex.

NIS2 Directive Compliance: A 10-Step Comprehensive Guide for Organizations

Post Syndicated from Editor original https://nebosystems.eu/nis2-directive-compliance-10-step-guide/

The Network & Information System (NIS2) Directive represents a significant shift in the European Union’s approach to bolstering digital infrastructure security, aiming to strengthen the defenses of network and information systems across key sectors. This directive, building upon the foundations laid by the original NIS Directive, introduces more stringent compliance requirements to combat the escalating cyber threats that pose risks to essential societal and economic services. This guide provides a succinct overview for businesses navigating the intricacies of the NIS2 Directive, ensuring readiness and compliance through a structured 10-step process.

Understanding the NIS2 Directive

Adopted on December 14, 2022, as Directive (EU) 2022/2555, the NIS2 Directive embodies a significant advancement in the EU’s cybersecurity efforts. It aims to bolster the resilience and reliability of essential network and information systems against cyber threats, which are integral to daily life and economic stability. By 17 October 2024, EU member states will have to transpose NIS2 into their national legislation. The directive’s development reflects a response to both current and anticipated cybersecurity challenges, emphasizing the vital role these systems play in maintaining societal and economic well-being.

Key Objectives and Broadened Scope

The primary aim of the NIS2 Directive is to reduce the risks posed to entities deemed ‘essential’ and ‘important’ within crucial network and information systems. These systems are pivotal for the smooth functioning of societal and economic activities. The directive seeks innovative and coordinated measures to counter the increasingly frequent, sophisticated, and impactful cyber threats. Notably, the NIS2 Directive widens its purview to include additional sectors, enforcing stringent requirements to achieve a uniformly high level of cybersecurity throughout the EU.

Applicability and Classification of Entities

The NIS2 Directive categorizes entities as either ‘essential’ or ‘important’, considering their significance to the economy and society as well as their size. This classification extends the directive’s applicability to a broader range of sectors critical to key societal functions and economic activities, aiming for a more inclusive coverage than what was provided by the original NIS Directive.

Steps Toward NIS2 Directive Compliance

To align with the NIS2 Directive and enhance cybersecurity frameworks, businesses could follow a systematic 10-step approach, ensuring compliance and strengthening defenses.

Step 1: Assessing Applicability

Assess whether your company falls within the scope of the sectors outlined by the NIS2 Directive to determine its relevance. Consider the potential impact of operational disruptions on societal and economic stability. For a detailed understanding, refer to our NIS2 Directive Compliance Checklist for Companies, which is intended to assist in determining if your business is impacted.

Step 2: Conducting Risk Assessments

A cornerstone of compliance is the execution of detailed risk assessments. This process entails identifying the vital components of your network and information systems and scrutinizing them for vulnerabilities that could be exploited by cyber threats. Assessing the severity and probability of these risks is crucial for prioritizing security measures. It’s not just about finding weaknesses but understanding their potential impact on your operations and the broader network, guiding a targeted approach to mitigating the most critical threats.

Step 3: Developing Cybersecurity Policies

The foundation of a resilient cybersecurity posture lies in the establishment of robust policies. These policies should encompass critical security domains, including but not limited to, access control mechanisms, data protection protocols and structured incident response strategies. The success of these policies depends on transparent communication and thorough training across the organization, guaranteeing that each member recognizes their part in maintaining cybersecurity standards

Step 4: Implementing Robust Cybersecurity Measures

Achieving NIS2 compliance requires the deployment of both technical and organizational measures, such as firewalls, encryption and access control, supplemented by organizational strategies like employee training and clear communication protocols. Explore our cybersecurity solutions to find the right strategies and tools to enhance your cybersecurity posture.

Step 5: Enhancing Supply Chain Security

The security of your supply chain is integral to your overall cybersecurity health. Evaluating the security practices of your suppliers and ensuring that cybersecurity expectations are explicitly stated in contracts with third-party vendors are essential steps. This not only protects your company but also contributes to the elevation of security standards across your entire supply network.

Step 6: Fostering Cybersecurity Awareness

Building a strong culture of cybersecurity awareness is crucial. Implementing consistent and interactive training programs, along with awareness initiatives, is key to ensuring staff are up-to-date on emerging threats and best practices. Equipping your employees with the necessary understanding and resources to identify and respond to security challenges can greatly reduce vulnerabilities.

Step 7: Establishing Incident Response Plans

Preparedness for potential cybersecurity incidents involves setting up clear, actionable response protocols. These plans should detail the steps to be taken in the event of a breach, including containment, eradication, and recovery processes. Equally important is establishing procedures for notifying the relevant authorities in a timely manner, in accordance with the Directive’s stipulations.

Step 8: Documentation and Reporting

Comprehensive record-keeping is a critical aspect of demonstrating compliance. Detailed documentation of risk assessments, policy updates, training sessions, and incident responses not only serves as evidence of compliance but also as a valuable resource for continuous improvement. Regular compliance reporting, as mandated by the NIS2 Directive, must be integrated into your organizational processes.

Step 9: Regular Review and Updates

The cybersecurity landscape is perpetually evolving, necessitating the ongoing evaluation and refinement of your cybersecurity strategies. This entails regularly revisiting your risk assessments, policies, and defensive measures to ensure they remain effective against emerging threats and align with the latest technological advancements.

Step 10: Engaging with Authorities

Active engagement with national and sector-specific cybersecurity authorities provides valuable insights and guidance. Participation in industry forums and information-sharing platforms facilitates a collaborative approach to cybersecurity, keeping you abreast of regulatory developments, best practices and sector-specific threats.

Conclusion

The NIS2 Directive offers an extensive framework for enhancing EU cybersecurity, addressing the dynamic digital threat landscape. By adhering to the outlined 10-step guide, companies could ensure compliance with the directive, contributing to the EU’s digital infrastructure’s resilience and security and safeguarding critical societal and economic functions against cyber threats.

Navigate the complexities of NIS2 compliance with confidence alongside Nebosystems. Let our seasoned cybersecurity experts lead the way, ensuring your company not only adheres to compliance mandates but also builds a strong cybersecurity infrastructure. Reach out to us now to enhance your defenses and protect your business from the ever-changing cyber threats.


Reference: NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555). EUR-Lex.

NIS2 Directive Compliance Checklist for Companies

Post Syndicated from Editor original https://nebosystems.eu/nis2-compliance-checklist-guide/

NIS2 Directive Compliance Checklist for Companies

In response to the evolving cybersecurity threats, the European Union has introduced the Network & Information System (NIS2) Directive, setting a new standard for cybersecurity measures across member states. Understanding and complying with these requirements is crucial for organizations operating within the EU.

This checklist is designed to help companies understand whether they are affected by the NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555) and need to comply with its cybersecurity requirements. Answering these questions will provide an initial assessment of your company’s obligations under the Directive.

Section 1: Company Size and Type

  1. Is your company considered a medium-sized enterprise or larger according to the EU definition? (More than 50 employees and an annual turnover or balance sheet exceeding €10 million)
  • Yes
  • No
  1. Does your company operate in the digital infrastructure, including as a DNS service provider, TLD name registry, or cloud computing service provider?
  • Yes
  • No
  1. Is your company a small enterprise or micro-enterprise that plays a key role in society, the economy, or within specific sectors or types of service? (Consider if your services are critical even if your company is small.)
  • Yes
  • No

Section 2: Sector-Specific Questions

  1. Is your company involved in any of the following sectors?
  • Energy
  • Transport
  • Banking
  • Financial Market Infrastructure
  • Health sector
  • Drinking water
  • Digital infrastructure
  • Public administration
  • Space
  • None of the above
  1. Does your company provide essential services within these sectors that, if disrupted, would have a significant impact on societal or economic activities?
  • Yes
  • No

Section 3: Operational Impact

  1. Does your company rely heavily on network and information systems for the provision of your services?
  • Yes
  • No
  1. In the event of a cybersecurity incident, could your company’s services be significantly disrupted, leading to substantial financial loss or societal impact?
  • Yes
  • No

Section 4: Exclusions

  1. Is your company’s primary activity related to national security, public security, defense, or law enforcement? (Note: If only marginally related, you might still fall under the Directive.)
  • Yes
  • No
  1. Is your company a public administration entity that predominantly carries out activities in the areas of national security, public security, defense, or law enforcement?
  • Yes
  • No

Section 5: Additional Considerations

  1. Has your company been previously identified as an operator of essential services under the NIS Directive or any national legislation related to cybersecurity?
  • Yes
  • No
  1. Is your company part of the supply chain for critical services in any of the sectors identified in question 4?
  • Yes
  • No

Conclusion

  • Questions 1, 2, or 3 (Company Size and Type): If you answered “Yes” to any of these, your company falls within the scope of the NIS2 Directive due to its size, operation within digital infrastructure, or significant role despite being a small or microenterprise. Next Steps: Assess specific obligations under the NIS2 Directive and begin implementing necessary cybersecurity measures and reporting mechanisms.
  • Question 4 (Sector Involvement): A “Yes” response indicates your company operates in a sector directly affected by the NIS2 Directive. Next Steps: Identify sector-specific cybersecurity requirements and engage with sector regulators or national cybersecurity authorities for guidance.
  • Question 5 (Provision of Essential Services): If “Yes,” your services are crucial, making compliance with the NIS2 Directive imperative to ensure service continuity and security. Next Steps: Prioritize establishing a comprehensive risk management framework and incident response plan as per NIS2 requirements.
  • Questions 6 and 7 (Operational Impact): Affirmative answers highlight your reliance on network and information systems and potential significant impacts from cybersecurity incidents. Next Steps: Strengthen your cybersecurity infrastructure, focusing on resilience and rapid incident response capabilities.
  • Questions 8 and 9 (Exclusions): If you answered “Yes,” your company might be excluded due to its primary focus on national security or law enforcement. However, marginal involvement doesn’t grant exclusion. Next Steps: Clarify your exclusion status with legal experts and, if applicable, review your cybersecurity practices to ensure they’re adequate for your operational needs.
  • Question 10 (Previous Identification as Essential Service Operator): A “Yes” answer suggests your company was already under obligations similar to those in the NIS2 Directive, which will likely continue or expand under the new directive. Next Steps: Update your cybersecurity and compliance strategies to align with NIS2 enhancements and consult with authorities for transitional requirements.
  • Question 11 (Part of the Supply Chain for Critical Services): Answering “Yes” indicates your role in the supply chain could bring you under the NIS2 Directive’s purview, especially with its increased focus on supply chain security. Next Steps: Evaluate your cybersecurity practices in the context of supply chain integrity, collaborate with your partners to understand your shared responsibilities, and implement any necessary security and reporting enhancements.

Please note that this checklist provides a preliminary assessment, and the specific obligations under the NIS2 Directive may vary based on national transposition and interpretation by regulatory authorities.

Download the NIS2 Compliance Checklist

General Advice

Regardless of your answers, it’s advisable for all companies, especially those operating within or closely related to critical sectors, to adopt robust cybersecurity measures. The evolving cybersecurity landscape and the interconnected nature of digital services mean that comprehensive security practices are essential for resilience against cyber threats.

For companies potentially falling under the NIS2 Directive, consider the following steps:

  1. Review and Update Security Policies: Ensure that your cybersecurity policies are up-to-date and align with the best practices.
  2. Engage with Regulatory Authorities: Reach out to your national cybersecurity authority or sector-specific regulatory bodies to clarify your status under the NIS2 Directive and to obtain guidance on compliance.
  3. Consult Legal and Cybersecurity Experts: Seek advice from professionals specializing in cybersecurity law and technical security measures to ensure that your company meets all legal obligations and effectively mitigates cyber risks.
  4. Implement a Compliance Plan: Develop or update your cybersecurity compliance plan to address the requirements of the NIS2 Directive, focusing on risk management, incident reporting, supply chain security, and other relevant areas.

Remember, even if your company is not directly affected by the NIS2 Directive, adopting its principles can enhance your cybersecurity posture and potentially offer a competitive advantage by demonstrating a commitment to security to your clients and partners.

Ready to ensure your company is NIS2 compliant? Contact Nebosystems today for expert NIS2 compliance consulting. Our team is dedicated to helping you navigate these regulations, ensuring your cybersecurity measures are robust and compliant. Explore our NIS2 Compliance Cybersecurity Solutions for more information on how we can assist.


Reference: NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555). EUR-Lex.

AWS completes the annual Dubai Electronic Security Centre certification audit to operate as a Tier 1 cloud service provider in the Emirate of Dubai

Post Syndicated from Vishal Pabari original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-completes-the-annual-dubai-electronic-security-centre-certification-audit-to-operate-as-a-tier-1-cloud-service-provider-in-the-emirate-of-dubai/

We’re excited to announce that Amazon Web Services (AWS) has completed the annual Dubai Electronic Security Centre (DESC) certification audit to operate as a Tier 1 cloud service provider (CSP) for the AWS Middle East (UAE) Region.

This alignment with DESC requirements demonstrates our continuous commitment to adhere to the heightened expectations for CSPs. Government customers of AWS can run their applications in AWS Cloud-certified Regions with confidence.

The independent third-party auditor BSI evaluated AWS on behalf of DESC on January 23, 2024. The Certificate of Compliance that illustrates the compliance status of AWS is available through AWS Artifact. AWS Artifact is a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

The certification includes 25 additional services in scope, for a total of 87 services. This is a 40% increase in the number of services in the Middle East (UAE) Region that are in scope of the DESC CSP certification. For up-to-date information, including when additional services are added, see the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program webpage and choose DESC CSP.

AWS strives to continuously bring services into the scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural and regulatory needs. If you have questions or feedback about DESC compliance, reach out to your AWS account team.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Vishal Pabari

Vishal Pabari

Vishal is a Security Assurance Program Manager at AWS, based in London, UK. Vishal is responsible for third-party and customer audits, attestations, certifications, and assessments across EMEA. Vishal previously worked in risk and control, and technology in the financial services industry.

AWS completes the annual UAE Information Assurance Regulation compliance assessment

Post Syndicated from Vishal Pabari original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-completes-the-annual-uae-information-assurance-regulation-compliance-assessment/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is pleased to announce the publication of our annual compliance assessment report on the Information Assurance Regulation (IAR) established by the Telecommunications and Digital Government Regulatory Authority (TDRA) of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The report covers the AWS Middle East (UAE) Region.

The IAR provides management and technical information security controls to help establish, implement, maintain, and continuously improve information assurance. AWS alignment with IAR requirements demonstrates our ongoing commitment to adhere to the heightened expectations for cloud service providers. As such, IAR-regulated customers can continue to use AWS services with confidence.

Independent third-party auditors from BDO evaluated AWS for the period of November 1, 2022, to October 31, 2023. The assessment report that illustrates the status of AWS compliance is available through AWS Artifact. AWS Artifact is a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

AWS strives to continuously bring services into the scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural and regulatory needs. If you have questions or feedback about IAR compliance, reach out to your AWS account team.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Vishal Pabari

Vishal Pabari

Vishal is a Security Assurance Program Manager at AWS, based in London, UK. Vishal is responsible for third-party and customer audits, attestations, certifications, and assessments across EMEA. Vishal previously worked in risk and control, and technology in the financial services industry.

New AWS whitepaper: AWS User Guide for Federally Regulated Financial Institutions in Canada

Post Syndicated from Dan MacKay original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/new-aws-whitepaper-aws-user-guide-for-federally-regulated-financial-institutions-in-canada/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) has released a new whitepaper to help financial services customers in Canada accelerate their use of the AWS Cloud.

The new AWS User Guide for Federally Regulated Financial Institutions in Canada helps AWS customers navigate the regulatory expectations of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) in a shared responsibility environment. It is intended for OSFI-regulated institutions that are looking to run material workloads in the AWS Cloud, and is particularly useful for leadership, security, risk, and compliance teams that need to understand OSFI requirements and guidance applicable to the use of AWS services.

This whitepaper summarizes OSFI’s expectations with respect to Technology and Cyber Risk Management (OSFI Guideline B-13). It also gives OSFI-regulated institutions information that they can use to commence their due diligence and assess how to implement the appropriate programs for their use of AWS Cloud services. In subsequent versions of the whitepaper, we will provide considerations for other OSFI guidelines as applicable.

In addition to this whitepaper, AWS provides updates on the evolving Canadian regulatory landscape on the AWS Security Blog and the AWS Compliance page. Customers looking for more information on cloud-related regulatory compliance in different countries around the world can refer to the AWS Compliance Center. For additional resources or support, reach out to your AWS account manager or contact us here.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Dan MacKay

Dan MacKay

Dan is the Financial Services Compliance Specialist for AWS Canada. He advises financial services customers on best practices and practical solutions for cloud-related governance, risk, and compliance. Dan specializes in helping AWS customers navigate financial services and privacy regulations applicable to the use of cloud technology in Canada with a focus on third-party risk management and operational resilience.

Dave Trieu

Dave Trieu

Dave is an AWS Solutions Architect Manager with over two decades in the tech industry. He excels in guiding organizations through modernization and using cloud technologies for transformation. Dave helps businesses navigate the digital landscape and maintain a competitive edge by crafting and implementing cutting-edge solutions that address immediate business needs while anticipating future trends.

AWS Payment Cryptography is PCI PIN and P2PE certified

Post Syndicated from Tim Winston original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-payment-cryptography-is-pci-pin-and-p2pe-certified/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is pleased to announce that AWS Payment Cryptography is certified for Payment Card Industry Personal Identification Number (PCI PIN) version 3.1 and as a PCI Point-to-Point Encryption (P2PE) version 3.1 Decryption Component.

With Payment Cryptography, your payment processing applications can use payment hardware security modules (HSMs) that are PCI PIN Transaction Security (PTS) HSM certified and fully managed by AWS, with PCI PIN and P2PE-compliant key management. These attestations give you the flexibility to deploy your regulated workloads with reduced compliance overhead.

The PCI P2PE Decryption Component enables PCI P2PE Solutions to use AWS to decrypt credit card transactions from payment terminals, and PCI PIN attestation is required for applications that process PIN-based debit transactions. According to PCI, “Use of a PCI P2PE Solution can also allow merchants to reduce where and how the PCI DSS applies within their retail environment, increasing security of customer data while simplifying compliance with the PCI DSS”.

Coalfire, a third-party Qualified PIN Assessor (QPA) and Qualified Security Assessor (P2PE), evaluated Payment Cryptography. Customers can access the PCI PIN Attestation of Compliance (AOC) report, the PCI PIN Shared Responsibility Summary, and the PCI P2PE Attestation of Validation through AWS Artifact.

To learn more about our PCI program and other compliance and security programs, see the AWS Compliance Programs page. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Author

Tim Winston

Tim is a Principal Payments Industry Specialist for AWS Payment Cryptography. He focuses on compliance for the service and its customers.

Author

Nivetha Chandran

Nivetha is a Security Assurance Manager at AWS. She leads multiple security and compliance initiatives within AWS. Nivetha has over 10 years of experience in security assurance and holds a master’s degree in information management from University of Washington.

2023 H2 IRAP report is now available on AWS Artifact for Australian customers

Post Syndicated from Patrick Chang original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/2023-h2-irap-report-is-now-available-on-aws-artifact-for-australian-customers/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is excited to announce that a new Information Security Registered Assessors Program (IRAP) report (2023 H2) is now available through AWS Artifact. An independent Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) certified IRAP assessor completed the IRAP assessment of AWS in December 2023.

The new IRAP report includes an additional seven AWS services that are now assessed at the PROTECTED level under IRAP. This brings the total number of services assessed at the PROTECTED level to 151.

The following are the seven newly assessed services:

For the full list of services, see the IRAP tab on the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program page.

AWS has developed an IRAP documentation pack to assist Australian government agencies and their partners to plan, architect, and assess risk for their workloads when they use AWS Cloud services.

We developed this pack in accordance with the Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) Cloud Security Guidance and Cloud Assessment and Authorisation framework, which addresses guidance within the Australian Government’s Information Security Manual (ISM, September 2023 version), the Department of Home Affairs’ Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF), and the Digital Transformation Agency’s Secure Cloud Strategy.

The IRAP pack on AWS Artifact also includes newly updated versions of the AWS Consumer Guide and the whitepaper Reference Architectures for ISM PROTECTED Workloads in the AWS Cloud.

Reach out to your AWS representatives to let us know which additional services you would like to see in scope for upcoming IRAP assessments. We strive to bring more services into scope at the PROTECTED level under IRAP to support your requirements.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Patrick Chang

Patrick Chang

Patrick is the Asia Pacific and Japan (APJ) Audit Lead at AWS. He leads security audits, certifications, and compliance programs across the APJ region. Patrick is a technology risk and audit professional with over a decade of experience. He is passionate about delivering assurance programs that build trust with customers and provide them assurance on cloud security.

Winter 2023 SOC 1 report now available for the first time

Post Syndicated from Brownell Combs original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/winter-2023-soc-1-report-now-available-for-the-first-time/

We continue to expand the scope of our assurance programs at Amazon Web Services (AWS) and are pleased to announce the first ever Winter 2023 AWS System and Organization Controls (SOC) 1 report. The new Winter SOC report demonstrates our continuous commitment to adhere to the heightened expectations for cloud service providers.

The report covers the period January 1–December 31, 2023, and specifically addresses requests from customers that require coverage over the fourth quarter, but have a fiscal year-end that necessitates obtaining a SOC 1 report before the issuance of the Spring AWS SOC 1 report, which is typically published in mid-May.

Customers can download the Winter 2023 SOC 1 report through AWS Artifact, a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

The Winter 2023 SOC 1 report includes a total of 171 services in scope. For up-to-date information, including when additional services are added, see the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program and choose SOC.

AWS strives to continuously bring services into the scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural and regulatory needs. If you have questions or feedback about SOC compliance, reach out to your AWS account team.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Brownell Combs

Brownell Combs

Brownell is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Brownell holds a master of science degree in computer science from the University of Virginia and a bachelor of science degree in computer science from Centre College. He has over 20 years of experience in IT risk management and CISSP, CISA, CRISC, and GIAC GCLD certifications.

Paul Hong

Paul Hong

Paul is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security, compliance, and training initiatives within AWS, and has 10 years of experience in security assurance. Paul holds CISSP, CEH, and CPA certifications, and a master’s degree in accounting information systems and a bachelor’s degree in business administration from James Madison University, Virginia.

Tushar Jain

Tushar Jain

Tushar is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security, compliance, and training initiatives within AWS. Tushar holds a master of business administration from Indian Institute of Management, Shillong, and a bachelor of technology in electronics and telecommunication engineering from Marathwada University. He has over 12 years of experience in information security and holds CCSK and CSXF certifications.

Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

Michael is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Michael has 12 years of experience in information security. He holds a master’s degree in information and data engineering and a bachelor’s degree in computer engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology. He also holds CISSP, CRISC, CISA and CISM certifications.

Nathan Samuel

Nathan Samuel

Nathan is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Nathan has a bachelor of commerce degree from the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, and has over 21 years of experience in security assurance. He holds the CISA, CRISC, CGEIT, CISM, CDPSE, and Certified Internal Auditor certifications.

ryan wilks

Ryan Wilks

Ryan is a Compliance Program Manager at AWS. He leads multiple security and privacy initiatives within AWS. Ryan has 13 years of experience in information security. He has a bachelor of arts degree from Rutgers University and holds ITIL, CISM, and CISA certifications.

AWS Customer Compliance Guides now publicly available

Post Syndicated from Kevin Donohue original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-customer-compliance-guides-now-publicly-available/

The AWS Global Security & Compliance Acceleration (GSCA) Program has released AWS Customer Compliance Guides (CCGs) on the AWS Compliance Resources page to help customers, AWS Partners, and assessors quickly understand how industry-leading compliance frameworks map to AWS service documentation and security best practices.

CCGs offer security guidance mapped to 16 different compliance frameworks for more than 130 AWS services and integrations. Customers can select from the frameworks and services available to see how security “in the cloud” applies to AWS services through the lens of compliance.

CCGs focus on security topics and technical controls that relate to AWS service configuration options. The guides don’t cover security topics or controls that are consistent across AWS services or those specific to customer organizations, such as policies or governance. As a result, the guides are shorter and are focused on the unique security and compliance considerations for each AWS service.

We value your feedback on the guides. Take our CCG survey to tell us about your experience, request new services or frameworks, or suggest improvements.

CCGs provide summaries of the user guides for AWS services and map configuration guidance to security control requirements from the following frameworks:

  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 800-53
  • NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF)
  • NIST 800-171
  • System and Organization Controls (SOC) II
  • Center for Internet Security (CIS) Critical Controls v8.0
  • ISO 27001
  • NERC Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP)
  • Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS) v4.0
  • Department of Defense Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC)
  • HIPAA
  • Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (CCCS)
  • New York’s Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
  • Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC)
  • Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4
  • Information Security Manual (ISM-IRAP) (Australia)
  • Information System Security Management and Assessment Program (ISMAP) (Japan)

CCGs can help customers in the following ways:

  • Shorten the process of manually searching the AWS user guides to understand security “in the cloud” details and align configuration guidance to compliance requirements
  • Determine the scope of controls applicable in risk assessments or audits based on which AWS services are running in customer workloads
  • Assist customers who perform due diligence assessments on new AWS services under consideration for use in their organization
  • Provide assessors or risk teams with resources to identify which security areas are handled by AWS services and which are the customer’s responsibility to implement, which might influence the scope of evidence required for assessments or internal security checks
  • Provide a basis for developing security documentation such as control responses or procedures that might be required to meet various compliance documentation requirements or fulfill assessment evidence requests

The AWS Global Security & Compliance Acceleration (GSCA) Program connects customers with AWS partners that can help them navigate, automate, and accelerate building compliant workloads on AWS by helping to reduce time and cost. GSCA supports businesses globally that need to meet security, privacy, and compliance requirements for healthcare, privacy, national security, and financial sectors. To connect with a GSCA compliance specialist, complete the GSCA Program questionnaire.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Kevin Donohue

Kevin Donohue

Kevin is a Senior Security Partner Strategist in AWS World Wide Public Sector, specializing in helping customers meet their compliance goals. Kevin began his tenure with AWS in 2019 supporting U.S. government customers in AWS Security Assurance. He is based in Northern Virginia and enjoys spending time outdoors with his wife and daughter outside of work.

AWS completes the 2023 South Korea CSP Safety Assessment Program

Post Syndicated from Andy Hsia original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-completes-the-2023-south-korea-csp-safety-assessment-program/

We’re excited to announce that Amazon Web Services (AWS) has completed the 2023 South Korea Cloud Service Providers (CSP) Safety Assessment Program, also known as the Regulation on Supervision on Electronic Financial Transactions (RSEFT) Audit Program. The financial sector in South Korea is required to abide by a variety of cybersecurity standards and regulations. Key regulatory requirements include RSEFT and the Guidelines on the Use of Cloud Computing Services in the Financial Industry (FSIGUC). Prior to 2019, the RSEFT guidance didn’t permit the use of cloud computing. The guidance was amended on January 1, 2019, to allow financial institutions to use the public cloud to store and process data, subject to compliance with security measures applicable to financial companies.

AWS is committed to helping our customers adhere to applicable regulations and guidelines, and we help ensure that our financial customers have a hassle-free experience using the cloud. Since 2019, our RSEFT compliance program has aimed to provide a scalable approach to support South Korean financial services customers’ adherence to RSEFT and FSIGUC. Financial services customers can annually either perform an individual audit by using publicly available AWS resources and visiting on-site, or request the South Korea Financial Security Institute (FSI) to conduct the primary audit on their behalf and use the FSI-produced audit reports. In 2023, we worked again with FSI and completed the annual RSEFT primary audit with the participation of 59 customers.

The audit scope of the 2023 assessment covered data center facilities in four Availability Zones (AZ) of the AWS Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region and the services that are available in that Region. The audit program assessed different security domains including security policies, personnel security, risk management, business continuity, incident management, access control, encryption, and physical security.

Completion of this audit program helps our customers use the results and audit report for their annual submission to the South Korea Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) for their adoption and continued use of our cloud services and infrastructure. To learn more about the RSEFT program, see the AWS South Korea Compliance Page. If you have questions, contact your AWS account manager.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in th Comments section below.

Andy Hsia

Andy Hsia

Andy is the Customer Audit Lead for APJ, based in Singapore. He is responsible for all customer audits in the Asia Pacific region. Andy has been with Security Assurance since 2020 and has delivered key audit programs in Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, South Korea, and Taiwan.

AWS renews K-ISMS certificate for the AWS Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region

Post Syndicated from Joseph Goh original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-renews-k-isms-certificate-for-the-asia-pacific/

We’re excited to announce that Amazon Web Services (AWS) has successfully renewed certification under the Korea Information Security Management System (K-ISMS) standard (effective from December 16, 2023, to December 15, 2026).

The certification assessment covered the operation of infrastructure (including compute, storage, networking, databases, and security) in the AWS Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region. AWS was the first global cloud service provider (CSP) to obtain the K-ISMS certification back in 2017 and has held that certification longer than any other global CSP. In this year’s audit, 144 services running in the Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region were included.

Sponsored by the Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA) and affiliated with the Korean Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), K-ISMS serves as a standard for evaluating whether enterprises and organizations operate and manage their information security management systems consistently and securely, such that they thoroughly protect their information assets.

This certification helps enterprises and organizations across South Korea, regardless of industry, meet KISA compliance requirements more efficiently. Achieving this certification demonstrates the AWS commitment on cloud security adoption, adhering to compliance requirements set by the South Korean government and delivering secure AWS services to customers.

The Operational Best Practices (conformance pack) page provides customers with a compliance framework that they can use for their K-ISMS compliance needs. Enterprises and organizations can use the toolkit and AWS certification to reduce the effort and cost of getting their own K-ISMS certification.

Customers can download the AWS K-ISMS certification from AWS Artifact. To learn more about the AWS K-ISMS certification, see the AWS K-ISMS page. If you have questions, contact your AWS account manager.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Joseph Goh

Joseph Goh

Joseph is the APJ ASEAN Lead at AWS based in Singapore. He leads security audits, certifications, and compliance programs across the Asia Pacific region. Joseph is passionate about delivering programs that build trust with customers and provide them assurance on cloud security.

Hwee Hwang

Hwee Hwang

Hwee is an Audit Specialist at AWS based in Seoul, South Korea. Hwee is responsible for third-party and customer audits, certifications, and assessments in Korea. Hwee previously worked in security governance, risk, and compliance consulting in the Big Four. Hwee is laser focused on building customers’ trust and providing them assurance in the cloud.