Skip to main content

TPM-17: Managing Changes To Third-Party Services

TPM 8 — High Identify

Mechanisms exist to control changes to services by suppliers, taking into account the criticality of business Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) that are in scope by the third-party.

Renumbered: Formerly TPM-10 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization control changes to services by suppliers, taking into account the criticality of business Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) that are in scope by the third-party?

General (33)
US (12)
EMEA (4)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 op.ext.2
EMEA EU NIS2 2022 Article 21.3
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 5.1.7(d)
EMEA LUX CCSF 22/806 2022 14.b 40.d.ii 80.e 80.f 101.c 137.a 137.b 142.c 142.d
APAC (4)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2026 ISM-1794
APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 GV.SC.S4
APAC Japan ISMAP 15.2.1.14 15.2.1.15 15.2.2 15.2.2.1 15.2.2.2 15.2.2.3
APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 10.12(a) A10-B4(a)
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 03.16.01 03.17.02

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 changes to services by suppliers, taking into account the criticality of business TAASD that are in scope by the third-party.

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-17_A01 affected third-parties are identified through change control practices.
  2. TPM-17_A02 provided services are assessed for impact from proposed changes.
  3. TPM-17_A03 recurring reviews are performed of third-party provided services against existing contract requirements.
  4. TPM-17_A04 discrepancies in services provided and/or geolocation of provided services are evaluated for impact to the organization's operations.

Evidence Requirements

E-TPM-03 Third-Party Service Reviews

Documented evidence of a formal, annual stakeholder review of third-party services for each External Service Provider (ESP).

Third-Party Management

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

Medium

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

Large

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

Enterprise

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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.