Skip to main content

HRS-07: Access Agreements

HRS 10 — Critical Identify

Mechanisms exist to require internal and third-party users to sign appropriate access agreements prior to being granted access.

Renumbered: Formerly HRS-06 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, HRS-07 was Personnel Sanctions. That control is now HRS-10.

Control Question: Does the organization require internal and third-party users to sign appropriate access agreements prior to being granted access?

General (33)
US (13)
EMEA (3)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2026 HR-06.03B
EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 mp.s.1
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 1-9-3-1
APAC (1)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 GV.RR.S5
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 03.01.18.A 03.12.05.A 03.15.03.C

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

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization. ▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization. ▪ HR defines terms of employment, including acceptable and unacceptable rules of behavior for the use of technologies, including consequences for unacceptable behavior. ▪ HR maintains formal Terms of Employment (ToE) and/or Rules of Behavior (RoB) that stipulates acceptable and unacceptable employee activities.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software solution). ▪ 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 HRS 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 require internal and third-party users to sign appropriate access agreements prior to being granted access.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

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

  1. HRS-07_A01 access agreements are developed and documented for organizational systems.
  2. HRS-07_A02 individuals requiring access to organizational information and systems sign appropriate access agreements prior to being granted access.
  3. HRS-07_A03 individuals requiring access to organizational information and systems re-sign access agreements to maintain access to organizational systems when access agreements have been updated or frequency.
  4. HRS-07_A04 the frequency at which to review / update access agreements is defined.
  5. HRS-07_A05 the frequency at which to re-sign access agreements to maintain access to organizational information is defined.
  6. HRS-07_A06 the access agreements are reviewed / updated frequently.

Evidence Requirements

E-HRS-16 Access Agreements

Documented evidence of personnel management practices protecting sensitive/regulated data through formal access agreements.

Human Resources

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Access agreement
  • Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

Small

  • Access agreement
  • Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

Medium

  • Access agreement
  • Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

Large

  • Access agreement
  • Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

Enterprise

  • Access agreement
  • Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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.