THR-03: Threat Intelligence Feeds
Mechanisms exist to maintain situational awareness of vulnerabilities and evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls.
Control Question: Does the organization maintain situational awareness of vulnerabilities and evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls?
General (49)
US (31)
EMEA (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 | 3.3.3(21) |
| EMEA EU DORA | 13.1 |
| EMEA EU NIS2 Annex | 6.10.2(a) |
| EMEA Germany Banking Supervisory Requirements for IT (BAIT) | 5.3 |
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 23.2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 | 2-12-4 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 | 2-10-3-5 2-13-3-5 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 1-8-3 2-12-2-8 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 | 1204 3110 |
APAC (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF | EV.ST.S1 EV.ST.S4 ID.RA.S3 RS.AN.S1 |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3 |
Americas (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada CSAG | 3.7 |
| Americas Canada OSFI B-13 | 3.0 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.5 |
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.02.01.A.02 03.02.01.A.03 03.02.01.B 03.02.02.B 03.11.02.A 03.14.03.A |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to maintain situational awareness of evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
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.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
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:
Level 3 — Well Defined
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.
- 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.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
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.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
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 maintain situational awareness of evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls.
Assessment Objectives
- THR-03_A01 external organizations from whom system security alerts, advisories and directives are to be received on an ongoing basis are defined.
- THR-03_A02 personnel or roles to whom security alerts, advisories and directives are to be disseminated is/are defined.
- THR-03_A03 elements within the organization to whom security alerts, advisories and directives are to be disseminated are defined.
- THR-03_A04 external organizations to whom security alerts, advisories and directives are to be disseminated are defined.
- THR-03_A05 system security alerts, advisories, and directives from external organizations are received on an ongoing basis.
- THR-03_A06 threat indicator information is identified.
- THR-03_A07 effective mitigations are identified.
- THR-03_A08 intrusion detection approaches are identified.
- THR-03_A09 threat hunting activities are identified.
- THR-03_A10 internal security alerts, advisories and directives are generated as deemed necessary.
- THR-03_A11 security alerts, advisories and directives are disseminated per organization-defined criteria.
- THR-03_A12 security directives are implemented in accordance with established time frames or if the issuing organization is notified of the degree of noncompliance.
- THR-03_A13 external organizations from which to obtain threat indicator information and effective mitigations are defined.
- THR-03.1_A03 automated mechanisms used to broadcast security alert and advisory information throughout the organization are defined.
- THR-03.1_A04 automated mechanisms are used to broadcast security alerts and advisory information throughout the organization.
- THR-03.1_A05 automated mechanisms are employed to maximize the effectiveness of sharing threat intelligence information.
Evidence Requirements
- E-THR-03 Threat Intelligence Feeds (TIF)
-
Documented evidence of threat intelligence feeds.
Threat Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
- Internal newsletters
Small
- US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
- Internal newsletters
Medium
- US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
- Internal newsletters
- InfraGard (https://infragard.org)
Large
- US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
- Internal newsletters
- InfraGard (https://infragard.org)
Enterprise
- US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
- Internal newsletters
- InfraGard (https://infragard.org)