THR-03: Dynamic Threat Awareness
Mechanisms exist to determine and maintain ongoing awareness of the current cyber threat environment.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, THR-03 was Threat Intelligence Feeds. That control is now THR-04.
Control Question: Does the organization determine and maintain ongoing awareness of the current cyber threat environment?
General (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| NIST 800-172 R3 | 03.11.08E |
| NIST 800-172A R3 | DS-A.03.11.08E A.03.11.08E.ODP[01] |
US (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal FFIEC ITEH 2016 | III.B |
APAC (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | A5-C2(f) |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 14.1.6 |
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
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
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR 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 THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty solution). ▪ 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 THR 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 determine and maintain ongoing awareness of the current cyber threat environment.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Threat Management (THR) 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
Threat Management (THR) 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. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes. ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
Assessment Objectives
- THR-03_A01 ongoing awareness of the current cyber threat environment is maintained as part of the Threat Intelligence Program (TIP).
Evidence Requirements
- E-THR-04 Threat Intelligence Program (TIP)
-
Documented evidence of a formal capability that intakes and analysis threat information to determine specific threat to the organization and necessary actions to mitigate the threat(s).
Threat Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Subscribe to CISA alerts
- MS-ISAC free membership
Small
- CISA and MS-ISAC alerts
- Industry-specific threat intelligence feeds
- Basic threat awareness program
Medium
- Threat intelligence feeds (CISA, industry ISACs)
- Regular threat landscape reviews
- Integration with security awareness program
Large
- Threat intelligence program with dedicated analyst
- ISAC membership and information sharing
- Regular executive threat briefings
Enterprise
- Enterprise threat intelligence program
- Automated threat intelligence feeds and analysis
- ISAC and government information sharing partnerships
- Threat intelligence integrated with SIEM and SOC operations