OPS-07: Security Operations Center (SOC)
Mechanisms exist to establish and maintain a Security Operations Center (SOC) that facilitates a 24x7 response capability.
Renumbered: Formerly OPS-04 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, OPS-07 was Shadow Information Technology Detection. That control is now OPS-09.
Control Question: Does the organization establish and maintain a Security Operations Center (SOC) that facilitates a 24x7 response capability?
General (8)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SC-38 |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | IR-04(14) SC-38 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | IR-04(14) SC-38 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | SC-38 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | SC-38 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | SC-38 |
| NIST 800-172 R3 | 03.06.01E |
| NIST 800-172A R3 | DS-A.03.06.01E[01] DS-A.03.06.01E[02] |
US (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 3 | IR.L3-3.6.1E |
| USA Federal DoD Zero Trust Execution Roadmap v1.1 | 6.7 7.3 7.5 |
APAC (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India RBI PPI 2025 | 18.3.b |
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 | DE.CM.S1 |
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | 11.9(a) A5-C1 A5-C2 A5-C5 A5-C5(b) A5-C5(c) A10-B13(a) |
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
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Security operations management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Security operations 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 create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the organization's TAASD.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain OPS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of security operations management (e.g., SIEM solution and EDR/XDR 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 OPS 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). ▪ Cybersecurity personnel create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations. ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to establish and maintain a Security Operations Center (SOC) that facilitates a 24x7 response capability.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Security Operations (OPS) 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
- OPS-07_A01 a Security Operations Center (SOC) capability is established and maintained.
- OPS-07_A02 a time period to operate a Security Operations Center (SOC) capability is defined.
- OPS-07_A03 the Security Operations Center (SOC) capability operates according to an organization-defined time period.
Evidence Requirements
- E-OPS-01 Security Operations Center (SOC)
-
Documented evidence of a Security Operations Center (SOC).
Security Operations
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Outsourced 24x7 Security Operations Center (SOC) through a Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP).
Small
- Outsourced 24x7 Security Operations Center (SOC) through a Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP).
Medium
- Outsourced 24x7 Security Operations Center (SOC) through a Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP).
- Internal 8x5 staff augmentation
Large
- In-house 24x7 Security Operations Center (SOC)
Enterprise
- In-house 24x7 Security Operations Center (SOC)