THR-01: Threat Intelligence Program

There is no evidence of a capability to implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.

Threat Management (THR) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

• Threat management is decentralized.
• IT personnel subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.

Threat Management (THR) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for threat management. o Subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.

• Threat management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
• The HR department, in conjunction with cybersecurity personnel, helps ensure secure practices are implemented in personnel management operations to help manage threats.
• IT/cybersecurity personnel:

Threat Management (THR) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Subscribes to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats. o Develops Indicators of Exposure (IOE) to better understand potential attack vectors that attackers could use to attack the organization. o Implements a Threat Awareness Program (TAP) that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability. o Implements a “threat hunting” capability to actively identify internal threats.

• The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function with technical competence to address cybersecurity concerns, analyzes the organization's business strategy to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for Thread Management (TM) practices.
• The CISO, or similar function, develops a security-focused Concept of Operations (CONOPS) that documents management, operational and technical measures to apply defense-in-depth techniques across the enterprise for TM.
• A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity and data protection controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's applications, systems, services and data with regards to TM.
• A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity and data privacy program, including TM.
• A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function:
• An Integrated Security Incident Response Team (ISIRT), or similar function, exists to form an on-demand, integrated team of cybersecurity, IT, data privacy and business function representatives that can execute coordinated incident response operations, including a cross-discipline incident handling capability.
• Cybersecurity personnel enable security awareness training on recognizing and reporting potential indicators of insider threat.

Threat Management (THR) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

• 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.
• Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.

See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.