BCD-32.1: Test Restoration Using Sampling
Mechanisms exist to utilize sampling of available data backups to test recovery capabilities as part of business continuity plan testing.
Renumbered: Formerly BCD-11.5 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization utilize sampling of available backups to test recovery capabilities as part of business continuity plan testing?
General (16)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF) | S7.5-POF4 |
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | A1.3-POF2 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 11.5 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 11.5 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 11.5 |
| CSA CCM 4.1.0 | BCR-06 BCR-08 |
| GovRAMP | CP-09(02) |
| GovRAMP High | CP-09(02) |
| IEC 62443-2-1 2024 | AVAIL 2.3 |
| IEC 62443-3-3 2013 | SR 7.3 RE 1 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | CP-9(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | CP-09(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | CP-09(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | CP-09(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | CP-09(02) |
| NIST CSF 2.0 (source) | PR.DS-11 |
US (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | CP-09(02) |
| USA Texas DIR SCSC 2.2 2025 | CP-09(2) |
EMEA (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU DORA 2023 | Article 12.2 Article 12.7 |
| EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 | Article 25.2(c) |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 | 2505 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 | 2505 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 | 2505 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 | 2-8-3 |
APAC (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-1515 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 12.3.1.8 12.3.1.9 12.3.1.10 12.3.1.20.P 12.3.1.22.P |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 8.4.3 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Bermuda BMACCC 2020 | 6.14 |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with BCD domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery (BC/DR)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ BC/DR may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ IT personnel perform a random sampling of backups is tested at least semi-annually to verify integrity and recoverability of backed up data.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BC/DR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain BCD domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of BC/DR operations (e.g., BC/DR planning software, Disaster Recovery as a Service (DRaaS), Orchestration and Automation Tools). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with BCD domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to utilize sampling of available backups to test recovery capabilities as part of business continuity plan testing.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). ▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs). ▪ Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties. ▪ Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review). ▪ Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes. ▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Assessment Objectives
- BCD-32.1_A01 a sample of available data backups is used to test the restoration of selected functions as part of business continuity plan testing.
Evidence Requirements
- E-BCD-15 Restoration Events
-
Documented evidence of system, application and/or data recovery events. This can include random testing of data backups to ensure recovery methods are viable.
Business Continuity
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Randomized data recovery testing
Small
- Randomized data recovery testing
Medium
- Randomized data recovery testing
Large
- Randomized data recovery testing
Enterprise
- Randomized data recovery testing