Skip to main content

TDA-10: Customized Development of Critical Components

TDA 8 — High Protect

Mechanisms exist to custom-develop critical system components, when Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) solutions are unavailable.

Renumbered: Formerly TDA-12 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, TDA-10 was Use of Live Data. That control is now TDA-18.

Control Question: Does the organization custom-develop critical system components, when Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) solutions are unavailable?

General (14)
Framework Mapping Values
CIS CSC 8.1 16.7 16.11
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 16.7 16.11
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 16.7 16.11
CSA IoT SCF 2 SDV-03 SDV-05
NIST 800-53 R4 SA-20
NIST 800-53 R5.2 PM-30(01) SA-20 SA-23
NIST 800-82 R3 PM-30(01) SA-20 SA-23
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay PM-30(01)
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay PM-30(01)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay PM-30(01)
NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 PM-30(01) SA-20 SA-23
NIST 800-161 R1 SA-20
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 SA-20
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 SA-20

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 custom-develop critical system components, when Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) solutions are unavailable.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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

  1. TDA-10_A01 suppliers of critical or mission-essential technologies, products and services are identified.
  2. TDA-10_A02 suppliers of critical or mission-essential technologies, products and services are prioritized.
  3. TDA-10_A03 suppliers of critical or mission-essential technologies, products and services are assessed.
  4. TDA-10_A04 critical system components to be reimplemented or custom-developed are defined.
  5. TDA-10_A05 critical systems are reimplemented or custom-developed.
  6. TDA-10_A06 systems or system components supporting mission-essential services or functions are defined.
  7. TDA-10_A07 organization-defined criteria are employed on systems or system components supporting essential services or functions to increase the trustworthiness in those systems or components.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Note: Typically not required at this size

Small

  • Note: Typically not required at this size

Medium

  • Evaluate COTS availability before custom development of critical components
  • Documented build-vs-buy decisions

Large

  • Custom development standards for critical components when COTS unavailable
  • Enhanced assurance for custom critical components

Enterprise

  • Enterprise engineering governance for custom-developed critical components
  • Assurance requirements aligned with NIST SP 800-160
  • Supply chain analysis of COTS alternatives

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.