Skip to main content

QTS-04.2: Compensating Controls for Quantum-Vulnerable Systems

QTS 7 — High Protect

Mechanisms exist to implement short-term compensating measures for Technology Assets, Applications and Services (TAAS) that cannot be migrated to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) on the planned schedule, (e.g., network segmentation, additional pre-shared-key layers, reduced key lifetimes, out-of-band key transport and data minimization).

Control Question: Does the organization implement short-term compensating measures for Technology Assets, Applications and Services (TAAS) that cannot be migrated to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) on the planned schedule, (e.g., network segmentation, additional pre-shared-key layers, reduced key lifetimes, out-of-band key transport and data minimization)?

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

Quantum Security (QTS) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with QTS domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Risk management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel use an informal process to identify, assess, remediate and report on quantum security-related risk. ▪ Data/process owners are expected to self-manage risks associated with their Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), based on the organization's published policies and standards, including the identification, remediation and reporting of risks.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).

Level 3 — Well Defined

Quantum Security (QTS) 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 QTS 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 QTS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A risk management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain QTS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of risk management operations (e.g., risk management solution, GRC platform and TPRM tool). ▪ 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 QTS 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 implement short-term compensating measures for Technology Assets, Applications and Services (TAAS) that cannot be migrated to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) on the planned schedule, (e.g., network segmentation, additional pre-shared-key layers, reduced key lifetimes, out-of-band key transport and data minimization).

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. QTS-04.2_A01 short-term compensating measures are implemented for Technology Assets, Applications and Services (TAAS) that cannot be migrated to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) on the planned schedule (e.g., network segmentation, additional pre-shared-key layers, reduced key lifetimes, out-of-band key transport and data minimization).

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Network isolation of legacy systems using quantum-vulnerable algorithms
  • Shorten certificate validity periods

Small

  • Network segmentation of quantum-vulnerable systems
  • Reduce key lifetimes for quantum-vulnerable certificates

Medium

  • Network segmentation and additional authentication for quantum-vulnerable systems
  • Shortened key validity periods
  • Out-of-band key transport where applicable

Large

  • Network micro-segmentation of quantum-vulnerable systems
  • Shortened key lifetimes and certificate validity periods
  • Pre-shared key (PSK) layers on quantum-vulnerable links
  • Data minimization on quantum-vulnerable paths

Enterprise

  • Automated micro-segmentation of quantum-vulnerable systems
  • Enterprise PSK and data minimization controls
  • Continuous monitoring of quantum-vulnerable system exposure
  • Integration with PQC migration prioritization

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.