Skip to main content

TPM-13: Third-Party Personnel Security

TPM 9 — Critical Identify

Mechanisms exist to control personnel security requirements including security roles and responsibilities for third-party providers.

Renumbered: Formerly TPM-06 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization control personnel security requirements including security roles and responsibilities for third-party providers?

General (11)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC1.1-POF5 CC9.1
COBIT 2019 APO10.03
CSA IoT SCF 2 POL-02
ISO 27002 2022 5.2 5.19 8.30
ISO 27017 2015 6.1 6.1.1
ISO 27018 2025 5.2 5.19 8.30
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 OR-3.4
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) GV.SC-06 ID.AM
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 GV.PO-P3 GV.PO-P4 GV.AT-P4
UN R155 7.2.2.5
UN ECE WP.29 7.2.2.5
US (3)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal FCA CRM 2023 609.930(c)(4)
USA California CCPA 2025 7123(c)(15)
USA New York DFS 23 NYCRR500 2023 Amd 2 500.10(b)
EMEA (6)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2026 AM-12.01B.10 DEV-02.02B.3
EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 org.4 op.ext.1
EMEA Spain Royal Decree 311 2022 Article 13(5)
EMEA EU NIS2 2022 Article 21.3
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 5.1.4(c) 10.2.1
EMEA LUX CCSF 22/806 2022 24
APAC (4)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2026 ISM-1569
APAC India RBI PA 2025 IV.15.b
APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 PR.AT.S3
APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 A8-2(e) A8-3(a)

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

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor management 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 TPM 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 control personnel security requirements including security roles and responsibilities for third-party providers.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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. TPM-13_A01 roles and responsibilities for third-party provider personnel are documented.

Evidence Requirements

E-TPM-01 Third-Party Contracts

Documented evidence of third-party contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy protections.

Third-Party Management

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Medium

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Large

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Enterprise

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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.