Skip to main content

GOV-15: Operationalizing Cybersecurity & Data Protection Practices

GOV 9 — Critical Govern

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each Technology Asset, Application and/or Service (TAAS) under their control.

Control Question: Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each Technology Asset, Application and/or Service (TAAS) under their control?

General (18)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC2.1-POF1 CC2.1-POF2 CC2.1-POF3 CC2.1-POF4 CC3.1-POF5 CC5.1 CC5.1-POF1 CC5.1-POF2 CC5.1-POF3 CC5.1-POF4 CC5.1-POF5 CC5.1-POF6
IEC TR 60601-4-5 2021 4.1 4.6.1 5.1
IMO Maritime Cyber Risk Management 3.5
ISO 27701 2025 5.1
ISO 29100 2024 6.12
ISO 42001 2023 5.1 8.1
MPA Content Security Program 5.1 OR-1.0
NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) 4.D(2)(g)
NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 GOVERN 4.0
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.15.01.a 03.17.01.a
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.16.01
TISAX ISA 6 1.2.1 5.3.1 5.3.2
SCF CORE Fundamentals GOV-15
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) GOV-15
SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational GOV-15
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure GOV-15
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats GOV-15
SCF CORE AI Model Deployment GOV-15
US (11)
Framework Mapping Values
US Data Privacy Framework (DPF) II.4.a
US DHS CISA SSDAF 1.f
US EO 14028 4e(i)(F)
US FCA CRM 609.930(a)
US FIPPS 2
US HHS 45 CFR 155.260 155.260(a)(3)(viii) 155.260(a)(4) 155.260(a)(4)(i) 155.260(a)(4)(iii) 155.260(c)
US HIPAA Administrative Simplification 2013 (source) 164.306(a)(1) 164.306(b)(1)
US HIPAA Security Rule / NIST SP 800-66 R2 (source) 164.306(a)(1) 164.306(b)(1)
US NNPI (unclass) 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4
US SEC Cybersecurity Rule 17 CFR 229.106(b)(1)(i)
US - CA CCPA 2025 7123(b)(3)
EMEA (14)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA EU AI Act 17.2
EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 3.3.4(22) 3.4.1(30)(a) 3.4.1(30)(b) 3.4.1(30)(c) 3.4.1(30)(d) 3.4.1(30)(e) 3.4.1(30)(f) 3.4.1(30)(g)
EMEA EU DORA 7 7(a) 7(b) 7(c) 7(d) 9.3
EMEA EU NIS2 21.1 21.2(a) 21.2(b) 21.2(c) 21.2(d) 21.2(e) 21.2(f) 21.2(g) 21.2(h) 21.2(i) 21.2(j)
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 6.2.1 6.7.1
EMEA Germany Banking Supervisory Requirements for IT (BAIT) 5.1
EMEA Qatar PDPPL 8.3
EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 1-6-1
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 2-3 2-3-2
EMEA Serbia 87/2018 50 51
EMEA Spain BOE-A-2022-7191 5 5(a) 5(b) 5(c) 5(d) 5(e) 5(f) 5(g) 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 28.1 37
EMEA Spain 311/2022 28.1 37 5 5(a) 5(b) 5(c) 5(d) 5(e) 5(f) 5(g) 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5
EMEA UK CAF 4.0 B4.a
EMEA UK CAP 1850 A5
APAC (6)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-1633 ISM-1634 ISM-1635 ISM-1636
APAC Australia Prudential Standard CPS230 29
APAC India SEBI CSCRF GV.RM.S2
APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 HHSP11 HHSP16 HHSP28 HML11 HML16 HML28 HSUP14 HSUP24
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP14 HSUP24
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 3.2.10.C.04 3.4.11.C.01
Americas (2)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada OSFI B-13 1.1.1 2.1.1 3.2.1
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.15.01.A 03.17.01.A

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

C|P-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Statutory, regulatory and contractual compliance requirements for cybersecurity and data protection are identified and documented. Recurring testing is utilized to assess adherence to internal standards and/or external compliance requirements.
  • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability.
  • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity and data protection.
  • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution.
  • Corporate governance (executive oversight) exists for the cybersecurity and data protection, which includes regular briefings to ensure executives have sufficient situational awareness to properly govern the organization.
  • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated compliance obligations that are standardized across the organization.
  • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity and data protection controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.
  • The organization designates one or more qualified individuals to govern the cybersecurity and data protection programs (e.g., Chief Information Security Officer or Chief Privacy Officer).
  • Risk management processes are defined, to include materiality considerations.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

See C|P-CMM3. There are no defined C|P-CMM4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Level 5 — Continuously Improving

See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity and data protection practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Assessment Objectives

  1. GOV-15_A01 roles and responsibilities exist to compel data and/or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity / data privacy practices for each system, application and/or service under their control.
  2. GOV-15_A02 Individual Contributor (IC) performance reviews cover how data and/or process owners operationalized cybersecurity / data privacy practices for each system, application and/or service under their control.
  3. GOV-15_A03 organization-defined systems security engineering principles are applied to the development or modification of the system and system components.
  4. GOV-15_A04 <A.03.16.01.ODP[01]: systems security engineering principles> are applied to the development or modification of the system and system components.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP) (https://complianceforge.com)

Small

  • ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP) (https://complianceforge.com)

Medium

  • ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP) (https://complianceforge.com)

Large

  • ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP) (https://complianceforge.com)

Enterprise

  • ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP) (https://complianceforge.com)

The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) is maintained by SCF Council. Use of SCF content is subject to the SCF Terms & Conditions.

Manage this control in SCF Connect

Track implementation status, collect evidence, and map controls to your compliance frameworks automatically.