Skip to main content

TDA-14: Product Testing & Reviews

TDA 9 — Critical Protect

Mechanisms exist to regularly review Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) for an appropriate level of security and resiliency based on applicable risks and threats.

Renumbered: Formerly TDA-02.10 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, TDA-14 was Developer Configuration Management. That control is now TDA-20.

Control Question: Does the organization regularly review Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) for an appropriate level of security and resiliency based on applicable risks and threats?

General (3)
Framework Mapping Values
CR CMM 2026 CR8.3.1
IEC 62443-4-1 2018 SM-11(a) SM-11(b) SM-11(c) SM-11(d) SM-11(e) SM-12 SUM-1 SUM-1(1) SUM-1(2) SUM-1(2)(a) SUM-1(2)(b) SUM-1(2)(c)
SCF DPMP 2026 7.1
US (1)
Framework Mapping Values
USA California CCPA 2025 7123(c)(14)
APAC (2)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 10.2(e) 10.8 10.9 A9-2(a) A9-2(b)
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 5.6.1 5.7.2
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Bermuda BMACCC 2020 5.12

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 regularly review Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) for an appropriate level of security and resiliency based on applicable risks and threats.

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-14_A01 an appropriate level of security and resiliency for products and/or services is defined.
  2. TDA-14_A02 products and/or services are regularly reviewed for an appropriate level of security and resiliency based on applicable risks and threats.

Evidence Requirements

E-TDA-04 Design and Development Plan (DDP)

Documented evidence of an engineering method to control the design process and govern the lifecycle of the product/service.

Technology Design & Acquisition

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Review developed applications for security issues before release

Small

  • Security review checklist for releases
  • Periodic review of deployed applications

Medium

  • Regular security testing and review of TAAS based on risk (SAST/DAST, configuration review)
  • Review schedule by criticality

Large

  • Product security testing program (SAST, DAST, penetration testing) with risk-based frequency
  • Resilience testing
  • Findings tracked to closure

Enterprise

  • Enterprise product security assurance program with risk-based testing cadence (SAST, DAST, IAST, pen testing, resilience/chaos testing)
  • Assurance metrics and governance

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.