IRO-06: Incident Handling
Mechanisms exist to cover: (1) Preparation; (2) Automated event detection or manual incident report intake; (3) Analysis; (4) Containment; (5) Eradication; and (6) Recovery.
Renumbered: Formerly IRO-02 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, IRO-06 was Incident Response Testing. That control is now IRO-09.
Control Question: Does the organization cover: (1) Preparation; (2) Automated event detection or manual incident report intake; (3) Analysis; (4) Containment; (5) Eradication; and (6) Recovery?
General (50)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF) | M1.3-POF3 |
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | A1.2-POF5 CC2.2-POF3 CC2.2-POF6 CC2.2-POF10 CC2.3-POF8 CC7.3 CC7.3-POF1 CC7.3-POF3 CC7.3-POF4 CC7.3-POF5 CC7.3-POF6 CC7.3-POF7 CC7.4 CC7.4-POF1 CC7.4-POF2 CC7.4-POF3 CC7.4-POF4 CC7.4-POF5 CC7.4-POF6 CC7.4-POF7 CC7.4-POF8 CC7.4-POF9 CC7.4-POF10 CC7.4-POF11 CC7.4-POF12 CC7.4-POF13 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 2.3 17 17.1 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.9 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 | 2.3 17.1 17.3 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 2.3 17.1 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 2.3 17.1 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.9 |
| COBIT 2019 | DSS02.01 DSS02.02 DSS02.03 DSS02.04 DSS02.05 DSS02.06 DSS03.02 |
| CSA CCM 4.1.0 | SEF-03 SEF-06 SEF-07 |
| CSA IoT SCF 2 | IAM-08 IAM-09 IMT-01 MON-02 |
| GovRAMP | IR-04 |
| GovRAMP Core | IR-04 |
| GovRAMP Low | IR-04 |
| GovRAMP Low+ | IR-04 |
| GovRAMP Moderate | IR-04 |
| GovRAMP High | IR-04 |
| IEC 62443-2-1 2024 | EVENT 1.8 |
| IMO Maritime Cyber Risk Management | 3.5.4 |
| ISO 27002 2022 | 5.24 5.25 5.26 6.8 |
| ISO 27017 2015 | 16.1.3 16.1.4 16.1.5 |
| ISO 27018 2025 | 5.24 5.25 5.26 6.8 |
| ISO 42001 2023 | A.3.3 |
| MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 | OR-4.0 TS-1.4 |
| NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) | 5.A 5.B(1) 5.B(2) 5.B(3) 5.B(4) 5.C 5.D 6.D(1) 6.D(2) |
| NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 | GOVERN 6.2 MANAGE 2.3 MANAGE 2.4 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | IR-4 |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (privacy) (source) | IR-04 |
| NIST SP 800-66 R2 | 164.308(a)(6) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | IR-04 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | IR-4 |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.6.1 3.6.2 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.03.04.b 03.06.01 03.06.02.a 03.06.02.b 03.06.02.c 03.06.02.d 03.06.05.b |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.6.1[a] 3.6.1[b] 3.6.1[c] 3.6.1[d] 3.6.1[e] 3.6.1[f] 3.6.1[g] 3.6.2[a] 3.6.2[b] 3.6.2[c] 3.6.2[d] 3.6.2[e] 3.6.2[f] |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.03.04.b A.03.06.01[02] A.03.06.01[03] A.03.06.01[04] A.03.06.01[05] A.03.06.01[06] A.03.06.02.a[01] A.03.06.02.a[02] A.03.06.02.b A.03.06.02.c A.03.06.02.d A.03.06.05.b[01] |
| NIST 800-172 R3 | 03.17.03E |
| NIST 800-172A R3 | A.03.17.03E.ODP[02] |
| NIST CSF 2.0 (source) | GV.SC-08 DE.AE DE.AE-02 DE.AE-03 DE.AE-04 DE.AE-06 DE.AE-08 RS RS.MA RS.MA-01 RS.MA-02 RS.MA-04 RS.AN RS.AN-06 RS.CO RS.CO-02 RS.CO-03 RS.MI RS.MI-01 RS.MI-02 RC.RP-06 |
| NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 | GV.MT-P5 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) | 12.10 12.10.5 A3.3.1.2 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) | 12.10.5 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) | 12.10.5 |
| SCF DPMP 2026 | 8.0 8.1 |
| SWIFT CSF 2025 | 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.1 |
| TISAX ISA 6.0.3 | 1.6.1 1.6.2 1.6.3 9.6.2 |
US (33)
EMEA (23)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA CHE FINMA Circular 2023/1 | IV.B.d-58 IV.B.d-59 IV.C.d-66 IV.C.e-67 |
| EMEA Germany BAIT 2017 | 4.7 |
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | OPS-07.02B OPS-13.03AC OPS-18.01B.6 OPS-19.01B.2 OPS-20.01B OPS-21.01B OPS-30.01B.4 IAM-01.02B.16 SIM-02.01B SIM-03.03AC |
| EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 | op.exp.7 op.exp.9 |
| EMEA Spain Royal Decree 311 2022 | Article 25(2) Article 34(1)(a) |
| EMEA EU DORA 2023 | Article 9.4(b) Article 14.1 Article 14.2 Article 14.3 Article 18.1 Article 18.1(a) Article 18.1(b) Article 18.1(c) Article 18.1(d) Article 18.1(e) Article 18.1(f) Article 18.2 |
| EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 | Article 22.1(c) Article 23.5 Article 31.4 |
| 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 NIS2 2022 | Article 21.2(b) Article 23.1 |
| EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 | 3.1.2(b) 3.4.1 3.4.2(e) 3.5.2(a) 3.5.2(b) 3.5.2(c) 3.5.3(b) |
| EMEA UK CAF 4.0 | D1.b |
| EMEA UK CAP 1850 2020 | D1 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 | 3105 4104 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L1 2024 | 4104 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 | 3105 4104 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 | 3105 4104 |
| EMEA Israel CDMO 2.0 | Appendix A, 12.1 |
| EMEA LUX CCSF 20/750 2020 | 3.5.1-60.e |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 | 2-12-2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-12-1-3 2-12-1-4 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 2022 | VII.B.TPC-89 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia SAMA CSF 1.0 2017 | 3.3.15.3 3.3.15.4 3.3.15.4.a 3.3.15.4.b 3.3.15.4.c 3.3.15.4.d 3.3.15.4.e 3.3.15.4.f 3.3.15.4.g 3.3.15.4.h 3.3.15.4.i 3.3.15.4.j |
| EMEA UAE NIAF 2023 | 3.3.1 3.3.2 |
APAC (17)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia CCM 2026 | RES-03 |
| APAC Australia Essential 8 2024 | ISM-0123 ISM-1819 |
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-0123 ISM-0141 ISM-0917 ISM-1618 ISM-1803 ISM-1819 |
| APAC Australia Prudential Standard CPS234 2019 | 23.0 |
| APAC China Data Security Law 2021 | Article 29 |
| APAC China Privacy Law 2021 | Article 57 |
| APAC India RBI Digital Payments 2021 | 72.0 |
| APAC India RBI PPI 2025 | 15.7 17.4.f |
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 | RS.MA.S2 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 16.1.1 16.1.1.1 16.1.1.3 16.1.2 16.1.2.1 16.1.2.2 16.1.2.3 16.1.2.4 16.1.2.5 16.1.2.6 16.1.2.7 16.1.2.8 16.1.2.9 16.1.2.10 16.1.2.11.P 16.1.2.12.P 16.1.2.13.P 16.1.3 16.1.3.1 16.1.3.2 16.1.5.9 |
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | 9.2(k) 10.35 11.3(f) 11.11 11.13(b) 11.13(c) 11.13(d) 12.3(d) 12.9 A5-C2(b) |
| APAC New Zealand HISF MLHSP 2023 | HHSP07 HML07 |
| APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 | HSUP07 |
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 | 5.7.4.C.01 7.2.18.C.01 7.2.18.C.02 7.2.19.C.01 7.3.9.C.01 7.3.10.C.01 20.1.25.C.02 |
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 6.3.3 7.1.1(c) 7.1.1(g) A.6.3 |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 7.7.2 7.7.3 7.7.3(a) 7.7.3(b) 7.7.3(c) |
| APAC Singapore PDPA 2012 | 6A.26C(2) |
Americas (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Argentina Reg 132 2018 | E.1.2-10 E.1.2-11 G.1.1-1 |
| Americas Bermuda BMACCC 2020 | 6.4 |
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.03.04.B 03.06.01 03.06.02.A 03.06.02.B 03.06.02.C 03.06.02.D 03.06.05.B |
| Americas Canada OSFI B-13 2022 | 2.7 2.7.1 2.7.2 3.3 3.3.3 3.4.1 3.4.3 3.4.4 |
| Americas Canada OSFI Self-Assessment Guidance | 2.7.1 2.7.2 2.7.3 3.0 3.4.1 |
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
Incident Response (IRO) 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 IRO domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with DCH 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 IRO domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Incident response-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Incident response management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel operate 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. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel facilitate prompt response to suspected or confirmed security incidents, including timely notification to affected stakeholders. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel operate facilitate basic forensic investigations in the event of a suspected or confirmed security incident. ▪ The IRP contains eDiscovery processes to support Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) requirements for eDiscovery practices. ▪ IT personnel support incident response operations by provisioning and deprovisioning incident responders with temporary emergency accounts.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Incident Response (IRO) 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 IRO domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Cybersecurity personnel operate 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. ▪ An incident response team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IRO domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of incident response operations (e.g., incident management software). ▪ 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 IRO 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 cover: (1) Preparation; (2) Automated event detection or manual incident report intake; (3) Analysis; (4) Containment; (5) Eradication; and (6) Recovery.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Incident Response (IRO) 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
- IRO-06_A01 an incident handling capability for incidents is implemented that is consistent with the incident response plan.
- IRO-06_A02 the incident handling capability includes preparation.
- IRO-06_A03 the incident handling capability includes detection and analysis.
- IRO-06_A04 the incident handling capability includes containment.
- IRO-06_A05 the incident handling capability includes eradication.
- IRO-06_A06 the incident handling capability includes recovery.
- IRO-06_A07 incident handling activities are coordinated with contingency planning activities.
- IRO-06_A08 the operational incident-handling capability includes user response activities.
- IRO-06_A09 authorities to whom incidents are to be reported are identified.
- IRO-06_A10 organizational officials to whom incidents are to be reported are identified.
- IRO-06_A11 identified authorities are notified of incidents.
- IRO-06_A12 identified organizational officials are notified of incidents.
- IRO-06_A13 incidents are tracked.
- IRO-06_A14 incidents are documented.
- IRO-06_A15 lessons learned from ongoing incident handling activities are incorporated into incident response procedures, training and testing.
- IRO-06_A16 the changes resulting from the incorporated lessons learned are implemented accordingly.
- IRO-06_A17 the rigor of incident handling activities is comparable and predictable across the organization.
- IRO-06_A18 the intensity of incident handling activities is comparable and predictable across the organization.
- IRO-06_A19 the scope of incident handling activities is comparable and predictable across the organization.
- IRO-06_A20 the results of incident handling activities are comparable and predictable across the organization.
- IRO-06_A21 suspected incidents are reported to the organizational incident response capability within an organization-defined time period.
- IRO-06_A22 suspected incidents are reported to the organizational incident response capability within <A.03.06.02.ODP[01]: time period>.
Evidence Requirements
- E-IRO-01 Incident Response Plan (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)
- ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) - Incident and problem management
Large
- Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)
- ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) - Incident and problem management
Enterprise
- Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)
- ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) - Incident and problem management