Skip to main content

TDA-06.3: Ongoing Product Security Support

TDA 9 — Critical Protect

Mechanisms exist to deliver security updates to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS), where applicable, through: (1) Automatic updates; and (2) Notification of available updates to affected users.

Renumbered: Formerly TDA-02.9 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, TDA-06.3 was Software Assurance Maturity Model (SAMM). That control is now TDA-03.1.

Control Question: Does the organization deliver security updates to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS), where applicable, through: (1) Automatic updates; and (2) Notification of available updates to affected users?

General (2)
Framework Mapping Values
IEC 62443-4-1 2018 SUM-2 SUM-2(a) SUM-2(b) SUM-2(c) SUM-2(d) SUM-2(e) SUM-4 SUM-5 SUM-5(a) SUM-5(b) SUM-5(c) SUM-5(d) SUM-5(e)
SCF DPMP 2026 7.1
US (1)
Framework Mapping Values
USA California CCPA 2025 7123(c)(14)
EMEA (3)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany BAIT 2017 7.12
EMEA EU Cyber Resiliency Act 2024 Article 13(8) Article 13(9) Article 13(11)
EMEA EU Cyber Resiliency Act Annex I 2024 Annex I, Part I(2)(c) Annex I, Part I(2)(l) Annex I, Part II(2) Annex I, Part II(3) Annex I, Part II(4) Annex I, Part II(5) Annex I, Part II(6) Annex I, Part II(7) Annex I, Part II(8)

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

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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 TDA domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TDA 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 TDA domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Technology development and acquisition-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Technology development and acquisition management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Secure development practices mostly conform to industry-recognized standards for secure engineering of Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) (e.g., OWASP, NIST SP 800-218 and NIST SP 800-160). ▪ An application development team, or similar function, uses a structured process to design, build and maintain secure configurations for test, development, staging and production environments.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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 TDA 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 TDA domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A software development team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TDA domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of technology development and acquisition management (e.g., project management software, software escrow solution and software testing 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 TDA 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 deliver security updates to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS), where applicable, through: (1) Automatic updates; and (2) Notification of available updates to affected users.

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. TDA-06.3_A01 security updates are delivered to products and/or services, where applicable, through automatic updates.
  2. TDA-06.3_A02 security updates are delivered to products and/or services, where applicable, through notification of available updates to affected users.

Evidence Requirements

E-TDA-15 Updateability / Patchability View

Documented evidence of a description of the end-to-end process permitting software updates and patches to be deployed to the device/service.

Technology Design & Acquisition

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Deliver security updates for any developed products; publish update notices

Small

  • Defined support period and update channel for developed products
  • Security advisories to customers

Medium

  • Product security update process with automatic updates where feasible
  • Published support lifecycle
  • Security advisory process

Large

  • Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT) delivering updates and advisories
  • Automatic update mechanisms with integrity verification
  • Defined end-of-support policy

Enterprise

  • Enterprise PSIRT and product security update program (e.g., aligned with ISO/IEC 30111, EU CRA)
  • Secure automatic update infrastructure
  • Customer notification and support lifecycle management

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.