Skip to main content

IRO-04: Incident Response Plan (IRP)

IRO 9 — Critical Respond

Mechanisms exist to maintain and make available a current and viable Incident Response Plan (IRP) to all stakeholders.

Control Question: Does the organization maintain and make available a current and viable Incident Response Plan (IRP) to all stakeholders?

General (62)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC2.2-POF10 CC2.3-POF8 CC7.3 CC7.3-POF1 CC7.4 CC7.4-POF1 CC7.4-POF10 CC7.4-POF11 CC7.4-POF12 CC7.4-POF13 CC7.4-POF2 CC7.4-POF3 CC7.4-POF4 CC7.4-POF5 CC7.4-POF6 CC7.4-POF7 CC7.4-POF8 CC7.4-POF9
CIS CSC 8.1 17.1 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.9
CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 17.1
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 17.1 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 17.1 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7 17.9
COBIT 2019 DSS02.01 DSS02.05
CSA CCM 4 LOG-05 SEF-03
CSA IoT SCF 2 IAM-09 IMT-01
ENISA 2.0 SO16
Generally Accepted Privacy Principles (GAPP) 1.2.7
GovRAMP Core IR-08
GovRAMP Low IR-08
GovRAMP Low+ IR-08
GovRAMP Moderate IR-08
GovRAMP High IR-08
IMO Maritime Cyber Risk Management 3.5.3.7
ISO/SAE 21434 2021 RQ-13-02
ISO 27002 2022 5.24 5.26
ISO 27017 2015 16.1.5
MPA Content Security Program 5.1 OR-4.0
NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) 4.H(1) 4.H(2) 4.H(2)(a) 4.H(2)(b) 4.H(2)(c) 4.H(2)(d) 4.H(2)(e) 4.H(2)(f) 4.H(2)(g)
NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 GOVERN 6.2 MANAGE 4.0
NIST AI 600-1 GV-6.2-003 MG-2.3-001 MG-4.2-002
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 PR.PO-P7
NIST 800-53 R4 IR-8
NIST 800-53 R4 (low) IR-8
NIST 800-53 R4 (moderate) IR-8
NIST 800-53 R4 (high) IR-8
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) IR-8
NIST 800-53B R5 (privacy) (source) IR-8
NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) IR-8
NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) IR-8
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) IR-8
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay IR-8
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay IR-8
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay IR-8
NIST 800-161 R1 IR-8
NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline IR-8
NIST 800-161 R1 Flow Down IR-8
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 IR-8
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 IR-8
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) NFO-IR-8
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.06.01 03.06.05.a 03.06.05.a.01 03.06.05.a.02 03.06.05.a.03 03.06.05.a.04 03.06.05.a.05 03.06.05.a.06 03.06.05.b
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.06.02.ODP[01] A.03.06.02.ODP[02] A.03.06.05.a.01 A.03.06.05.a.02 A.03.06.05.a.03 A.03.06.05.a.04 A.03.06.05.a.05 A.03.06.05.a.06 A.03.06.05.b[01] A.03.06.05.b[02]
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) DE.AE-06 ID.IM-04 RS RS.MA RS.MA-01 RS.MA-02 RS.MA-04 RS.MI
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 12.10 12.10.1 12.10.5 12.10.7
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C-VT (source) 12.10.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 12.10.1 12.10.5 12.10.7
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 12.10.1 12.10.5 12.10.7
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ P2PE (source) 12.10.1
SWIFT CSF 2023 7.1
TISAX ISA 6 1.6.3 9.6.2
SCF CORE Fundamentals IRO-04
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) IRO-04
SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational IRO-04
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure IRO-04
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats IRO-04
US (35)
Framework Mapping Values
US C2M2 2.1 SITUATION-3.G.MIL3 RESPONSE-1.A.MIL1 RESPONSE-1.B.MIL2 RESPONSE-1.C.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.A.MIL1 RESPONSE-2.B.MIL1 RESPONSE-2.C.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.D.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.E.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.F.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.G.MIL2 RESPONSE-2.H.MIL3 RESPONSE-2.I.MIL3 RESPONSE-3.A.MIL1 RESPONSE-3.B.MIL1 RESPONSE-3.C.MIL1 RESPONSE-3.D.MIL2 RESPONSE-3.E.MIL2 RESPONSE-3.F.MIL2 RESPONSE-1.I.MIL3
US CERT RMM 1.2 IMC:SG1.SP1 IMC:SG1.SP2
US CISA CPG 2022 2.S
US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) IR-8
US CMS MARS-E 2.0 IR-8
US DoD Zero Trust Execution Roadmap 6.7.1
US DHS CISA TIC 3.0 3.UNI.IRPIH
US DHS ZTCF SEC-02
US FCA CRM 609.930(c)(3)
US FedRAMP R4 IR-8
US FedRAMP R4 (low) IR-8
US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) IR-8
US FedRAMP R4 (high) IR-8
US FedRAMP R4 (LI-SaaS) IR-8
US FedRAMP R5 (source) IR-8
US FedRAMP R5 (low) (source) IR-8
US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) IR-8
US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) IR-8
US FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) (source) IR-8
US GLBA CFR 314 2023 (source) 314.4(h) 314.4(h)(1) 314.4(h)(2) 314.4(h)(3) 314.4(h)(4) 314.4(h)(5) 314.4(h)(6) 314.4(h)(7)
US HIPAA HICP Small Practice 8.S.A
US HIPAA HICP Medium Practice 8.M.A 8.M.B
US HIPAA HICP Large Practice 8.M.A 8.M.B
US IRS 1075 1.8.4 1.8.5 IR-8
US NERC CIP 2024 (source) CIP-008-6 1.1 CIP-008-6 1.4 CIP-008-6 2.2 CIP-008-6 R1 CIP-008-6 R2 CIP-008-6 R3
US NISPOM 2020 8-103 1-302
US NNPI (unclass) 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4
US SSA EIESR 8.0 5.9
US - CA CCPA 2025 7123(c)(17)(B)(i)
US - NY DFS 23 NYCRR500 2023 Amd 2 500.16(a) 500.16(a)(1) 500.16(a)(1)(i) 500.16(a)(1)(ii) 500.16(a)(1)(iii) 500.16(a)(1)(iv) 500.16(a)(1)(v) 500.16(a)(1)(vi) 500.16(a)(1)(vii) 500.16(a)(1)(viii) 500.16(b)
US - OR 646A 622(2)(d)(B)(iii)
US - TX DIR Control Standards 2.0 IR-8
US - TX TX-RAMP Level 1 IR-8
US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 IR-8
US - VT Act 171 of 2018 2447(b)(10) 2447(b)(10)(A)
EMEA (12)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 3.5.1(59) 3.5.1(60) 3.5.1(60)(a) 3.5.1(60)(b) 3.5.1(60)(c) 3.5.1(60)(d) 3.5.1(60)(d)(i) 3.5.1(60)(d)(ii) 3.5.1(60)(e) 3.5.1(60)(f) 3.5.1(60)(f)(i) 3.5.1(60)(f)(ii)
EMEA EU DORA 17.1 17.2 17.3(a) 17.3(b) 17.3(c) 17.3(d) 17.3(e) 17.3(f)
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 3.1.1 3.1.2(b) 3.1.2(d) 3.5.1 6.10.2(d)
EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 7.2 24.2 24.3 24.8 24.9
EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 2-12-1 2-12-2
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 2-13-3-1 2-13-3-2
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 2-12-2-2 2-12-2-3 2-12-2-4 2-12-2-5
EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 TPC-23 TPC-88
EMEA Spain BOE-A-2022-7191 25.1 25.2
EMEA Spain 311/2022 25.1 25.2
EMEA UK CAF 4.0 D1.a
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 4101 4102
APAC (11)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-0043 ISM-0576 ISM-0917 ISM-1784
APAC Australia Prudential Standard CPS234 23 24 25(a) 25(b)
APAC China Cybersecurity Law 25
APAC China Privacy Law 57 57(1) 57(2) 57(3)
APAC India SEBI CSCRF DE.DP.S2 GV.RM.S3 RS.MA.S1 RS.MA.S3
APAC Japan ISMAP 16.1.5
APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 HHSP07 HML07 HMS20 HSUP07
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP07
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 5.1.12.C.01 5.1.12.C.02 5.6.3.C.01 5.6.3.C.02 7.2.18.C.01 7.3.5.C.01 7.3.9.C.01 7.3.10.C.01 16.1.47.C.01
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 7.7.3(a) 7.7.3(b) 7.7.3(c) 12.3.1 12.3.2 12.3.3
APAC South Korea 34
Americas (4)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Bermuda BMACCC 6.4
Americas Canada CSAG 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8
Americas Canada OSFI B-13 2.7.1 2.7.2 3.4.3
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.06.01 03.06.05.A 03.06.05.A.01 03.06.05.A.02 03.06.05.A.03 03.06.05.A.04 03.06.05.A.05 03.06.05.A.06 03.06.05.B

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to maintain and make available a current and viable Incident Response Plan (IRP) to all stakeholders.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to maintain and make available a current and viable Incident Response Plan (IRP) to all stakeholders.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Incident Response (IRO) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for incident response operations. o Implement and maintain an incident response capability using a documented and tested Incident Response Plan (IRP) to facilitate incident management operations that cover preparation, detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery.

  • Incident response operations are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
  • IT/cybersecurity personnel:
  • IT/cybersecurity personnel update the IRP, based on lessons learned from incidents / exercises.
Level 3 — Well Defined

Incident Response (IR) processes 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:

  • An Integrated Security Incident Response Team (ISIRT), or similar function, exists to form an on-demand, scalable and integrated team of formally-assigned cybersecurity, IT, data privacy and business function representatives that can perform coordinated incident response.
  • The ISIRT, or similar function, develops and maintains a documented, program-level Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP) that provides operational and tactical-level guidance for cybersecurity and data privacy response operations.
  • A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, facilitates incident management operations that includes preparation, detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery.
  • Business Process Owners (BPOs), in conjunction with the SOC and ISIRT functions, develop and maintain a documented Incident Response Plan (IRP) specific to the business process / business unit but inclusive of the organization's larger approach to incident response operations.
  • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, categorizes endpoint devices according to the data the asset stores, transmits and/ or processes and provides that information to the SOC for Incident Response Operations (IRO).
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Incident Response (IR) is metrics driven and provides sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • 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.
  • Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
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 maintain and make available a current and viable Incident Response Plan (IRP) to all stakeholders.

Assessment Objectives

  1. IRO-04_A01 personnel or roles that review and approve the incident response plan is/are identified.
  2. IRO-04_A02 entities, personnel or roles with designated responsibility for incident response are defined.
  3. IRO-04_A03 an incident response plan is developed that provides the organization with a roadmap for implementing its incident response capability.
  4. IRO-04_A04 an incident response plan is developed that describes the structure and organization of the incident response capability.
  5. IRO-04_A05 an incident response plan is developed that provides a high-level approach for how the incident response capability fits into the overall organization.
  6. IRO-04_A06 an incident response plan is developed that meets the unique requirements of the organization with regard to mission, size, structure and functions.
  7. IRO-04_A07 an incident response plan is developed that defines reportable incidents.
  8. IRO-04_A08 an incident response plan is developed that provides metrics for measuring the incident response capability within the organization.
  9. IRO-04_A09 an incident response plan is developed that defines the resources and management support needed to effectively maintain and mature an incident response capability.
  10. IRO-04_A10 an incident response plan is developed that addresses the sharing of incident information.
  11. IRO-04_A11 an incident response plan is developed that is reviewed and approved by personnel or roles frequency.
  12. IRO-04_A12 an incident response plan is developed that designates responsibilities to organizational entities, personnel, or roles.
  13. IRO-04_A13 copies of the incident response plan are distributed to designated incident response personnel (identified by name or by role).
  14. IRO-04_A14 incident response personnel (identified by name and/or by role) to whom copies of the incident response plan are to be distributed is/are defined.
  15. IRO-04_A15 organizational elements to which copies of the incident response plan are to be distributed are defined.
  16. IRO-04_A16 incident response personnel (identified by name and/or by role) to whom changes to the incident response plan is/are communicated are defined.
  17. IRO-04_A17 organizational elements to which changes to the incident response plan are communicated are defined.
  18. IRO-04_A18 copies of the incident response plan are distributed to organizational elements.
  19. IRO-04_A19 the frequency at which to review and approve the incident response plan is defined.
  20. IRO-04_A20 the incident response plan is updated to address system and organizational changes or problems encountered during plan implementation, execution or testing.
  21. IRO-04_A21 incident response plan changes are communicated to incident response personnel.
  22. IRO-04_A22 incident response plan changes are communicated to organizational elements.
  23. IRO-04_A23 the incident response plan is protected from unauthorized disclosure.
  24. IRO-04_A24 the incident response plan is protected from unauthorized modification.
  25. IRO-04_A25 the time period to report suspected incidents to the organizational incident response capability is defined.
  26. IRO-04_A26 authorities to whom incident information is to be reported are defined.

Evidence Requirements

E-IRO-01 Incident Response Program (IRP)

Documented evidence of a Incident Response Plan (IRP). This is program-level documentation in the form of a runbook, playbook or a similar format provides guidance on organizational practices that support existing policies and standards.

Incident Response

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Incident Response Plan (IRP)

Small

  • Incident Response Plan (IRP)

Medium

  • Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)

Large

  • Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)

Enterprise

  • Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)

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.