BlackAether/Frameworks-and-Controls · Datasets at Hugging Face

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance Program

GOV-01

Mechanisms exist to facilitate the implementation of cybersecurity & data protection governance controls.

- Steering committee - Digital Security Program (DSP) - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP)

E-GOV-01 E-GOV-02

Does the organization facilitate the implementation of cybersecurity & data protection governance controls?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to facilitate the implementation of cybersecurity & data privacy governance controls.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends. • Compliance efforts are not tied into an enterprise-wide cybersecurity and/ or data privacy program.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for cybersecurity and data protection (e.g., data privacy) 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 organization that includes cybersecurity & data privacy governance as part of the broader operational plan. • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity & data privacy controls to facilitate the implementation of secure and compliant practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization’s applications, systems, services and data. • A GRC function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity & data privacy program. The steering committee establishes a clear and authoritative accountability structure for cybersecurity and data protection operations. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to facilitate the implementation of cybersecurity & data privacy governance controls.

CC1.2

CC1.1-POF1 CC2.3-POF5

4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5 7 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.5 8 8.1 8.2 8.4 10 10.1 10.2 10.2.1 10.2.2

null

EDM01.02 APO01.09 APO04.01 APO13.01 APO13.02

Principle 2

GRC-05 GRC-07

GVN-01 GVN-02

null

8.2.1

null

RQ-05-02.a RQ-05-02.b

5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2

4.3 4.4 5.1 6.1.1

4.4 5.1 5.1(a) 5.1(b) 5.1(c) 5.1(d) 5.1(e) 5.1(f) 5.1(g) 5.1(h) 6.1 6.1.1 6.1.1(a) 6.1.1(b) 6.1.1(c) 6.1.1(d) 6.1.1(e)(1) 6.1.1(e)(2) 8.1 10.1

5.1 5.1.1

5.1 5.4 5.37

5.1 5.1.1

null

5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.1.1 5.4.2 5.5 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 5.5.4 5.5.5 5.5.5.1 5.5.5.2 5.5.5.3 5.6.1 5.6.2 5.6.3 5.7 5.7.1 5.7.2 5.7.3 5.8 5.8.1 5.8.1 6.2 6.2.1 6.2.1.1 6.5

5.1 5.10 5.11

null

OR-1.0

Sec 4(A) Sec 4(B)(1) Sec 4(B)(2) Sec 4(B)(3) Sec 4(B)(4) Sec 4(D)(1) Sec 4(E)(1) Sec 4(G)

null

GV.PO-P1 GV.PO-P6

null

PM-1

null

PM-1

null

PM-1

null

3.15.1.a

null

GV.OC GV.RM GV.SC GV.RR GV.PO ID.RA ID.IM PR.AA PR.AT PR.DS PR.PS PR.IR DE.CM DE.AE RS.MA RS.AN RS.CO RS.MI RC.RP RC.CO

null

12.1 12.1.1

A3.1.2

null

C.7

null

1.2 1.2.1 9.1

null

7.1.2

PROGRAM-2.A.MIL1 PROGRAM-2.B.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.C.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.D.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.E.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.F.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.G.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.H.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.I.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.J.MIL3

EF:SG2.SP1 EF:SG2.SP2 OPF:SG1.SP1

null

5.1 5.1.1 5.1.1.1 5.1.1.2

null

PM-1

null

252.204-7008 252.204-7012

null

§ 1232h

null

S-P (17 CFR §248.30)

null

3.13(a) 3.13(a)(1) 3.13(a)(2) 3.13(a)(3) 314.4(a) 314.4(b) 314.4(c) 314.4(c)(2) 314.4(g)

164.306 164.306(a) 164.306(b) 164.306(c) 164.306(d) 164.306(e) 164.308(a)(1)(i) 164.530(j) 164.316 164.316(a) 164.316(b)

10.S.A

8.M.A

8.M.A 10.M.A

PM-1

null

8-100

null

5.1

null

45.48.530

null

17.03(1) 17.04 17.03(2)(b)(2)

null

500.02

Sec 4(2)(a) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(1) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(2) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(3) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(4) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(5) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(6) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(B)(1) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(B)(2) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(B)(3) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(B)(4) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(C)(1) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(C)(2) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(C)(3) Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(C)(4)

null

38-99-20(A) 38-99-20(B)(1) 38-99-20(B)(2) 38-99-20(B)(3) 38-99-20(B)(4) 38-99-20(D)(1) 38-99-20(E)(1) 38-99-20(G)

Sec. 521.052

Sec 10

PM-1

null

59.1-578.3

§ 2447(a) § 2447(a)(1) § 2447(a)(1)(A) § 2447(a)(1)(B) § 2447(a)(1)(C) § 2447(a)(1)(D) § 2447(a)(2) § 2447(b) § 2447(c) § 2447(c)(1) § 2447(c)(1)(A) § 2447(c)(1)(A)(i) § 2447(c)(1)(A)(ii) § 2447(c)(1)(A)(iii) § 2447(c)(1)(A)(iv) § 2447(c)(1)(A)(v)

null

Art 5.1 Art 16.1(a) Art 16.1(b) Art 16.1(c) Art 16.1(d) Art 16.1(e) Art 16.1(f) Art 16.1(g) Art 16.1(h)

null

Art 32.1 Art 32.2 Art 32.3 Art 32.4

Article 21.1 Article 21.2(a) Article 21.2(b) Article 21.2(c) Article 21.2(d) Article 21.2(e) Article 21.2(f) Article 21.2(g) Article 21.2(h) Article 21.2(i) Article 21.2(j)

Art 3

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

Art 13

Art 41

Sec 5 Sec 32 Sec 33 Sec 34 Sec 35

Art 34

Sec 9 Sec 9a Annex

4.1

OIS-01

Art 10

Sec 7

Sec 2

3.2 4.25

Sec 16 Sec 17

Sec 31 Sec 33 Sec 34 Sec 35

null

Art 3 Art 4

Sec 12 Sec 13 Sec 14

null

Sec 13 Sec 14

Art 1 Art 36

Art 14 Art 15 Art 16 Art 17

null

Art 7 Art 19

null

TPC-25

3.1.1

1-2-1 1-3-2

1-1

null

Sec 19 Sec 21

null

6.1 [ORG.1]

Sec 31

Art 7

Art 12

Sec 15 Sec 16

A1.a B1.a B1.b

A1

null

APP Part 1 APP Part 11

null

0888

null

13 18 19

null

Sec 4

Article 58 Article 58(1) Article 58(2) Article 58(3) Article 58(4)

Principle 4

Sec 8

Art 9 Art 10 Art 12 Art 13 Art 14 Art 15 Art 16 Art 17 Art 18 Art 19 Art 20 Art 21 Art 22 Art 23 Art 24 Art 28

Article 20

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.2.1 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.5.3 4.5 4.5.1 4.5.1.1 4.5.1.2 4.5.2 4.6 4.6.1 4.9.1 4.9.1.1 4.9.2 4.9.2.1 4.9.2.2 5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2

Sec 9

3.1 9.1

5.1.14.C.01

null

Sec 25 Sec 27 Sec 28

Sec 12 Sec 24

null

Art 3 Art 29 Art 30

Art 27

Art 9 Art 30

null

Sec 6

4 5.4

null

6.5 6.6 6.7 6.23

1.1.2 1.2 3.0

Principle 7

Art 7

Art 4

Art 10

Art 19

Art 9 Art 16 Art 17

null

x

MA 201 CMR 17 NAIC

x

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15 MT-16

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

MT-16

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Steering Committee & Program Oversight

GOV-01.1

Mechanisms exist to coordinate cybersecurity, data protection and business alignment through a steering committee or advisory board, comprised of key cybersecurity, data privacy and business executives, which meets formally and on a regular basis.

- Steering committee - Digital Security Program (DSP) - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP)

E-GOV-03

Does the organization coordinate cybersecurity, data protection and business alignment through a steering committee or advisory board, comprised of key cybersecurity, data privacy and business executives, which meets formally and on a regular basis?

7

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to coordinate cybersecurity, data privacy and business alignment through a steering committee or advisory board, comprised of key cybersecurity, data privacy and business executives, which meets formally and on a regular basis.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Quarterly Business Review (QBR), or similar status reporting, exists to provide recurring reports on the state of the cybersecurity & data privacy program. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to trends. • Procedures for important tasks are documented and assigned to individuals or teams.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Executive leadership team (e.g., corporate-level officers, board of directors, etc.) take an active role in defining and enforcing Business As Usual (BAU) practices across the organization to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy principles. • A GRC function, or similar function, tracks the efforts to determine if Business As Usual (BAU) reinforcement efforts impact metrics associated with cybersecurity & data privacy controls.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to coordinate cybersecurity, data privacy and business alignment through a steering committee or advisory board, comprised of key cybersecurity, data privacy and business executives, which meets formally and on a regular basis.

null

CC1.2-POF1 CC1.2-POF2 CC1.2-POF3 CC1.2-POF4 CC1.5-POF3 CC1.5-POF4 CC1.5-POF5 CC2.2-POF4 CC2.3-POF3

4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6 4.2 4.4 7.5 8.3 8.4

null

RQ-05-08

null

4.3 5.1 6.2 7.4 9.3 10.2

4.4 5.3 5.3(a) 5.3(b) 9.3 9.3.1 9.3.2(a) 9.3.2(b) 9.3.2(c) 9.3.2(d) 9.3.2(d)(1) 9.3.2(d)(2) 9.3.2(d)(3) 9.3.2(d)(4) 9.3.2(e) 9.3.2(f) 9.3.2(g) 9.3.3 10.1

null

5.1

null

Sec 4(B)(1) Sec 4(B)(2) Sec 4(B)(3) Sec 4(B)(4) Sec 4(D)(1) Sec 4(E)(2)(a) Sec 4(E)(2)(b)

GOVERN 2.3 MAP 3.5 MAP 5.2

null

GV.OC-02 GV.RM-03 GV.RR-03 GV.OV-01 GV.OV-02 ID.IM-01

null

C.6

null

ASSET-5.E.MIL3 ASSET-5.F.MIL3 THREAT-3.F.MIL3 RISK-1.E.MIL2 RISK-1.F.MIL2 RISK-1.H.MIL3 RISK-5.F.MIL3 ACCESS-4.D.MIL3 ACCESS-4.F.MIL3 SITUATION-4.D.MIL3 RESPONSE-5.D.MIL3 THIRD-PARTIES-3.D.MIL3 WORKFORCE-4.D.MIL3 ARCHITECTURE-5.D.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.C.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.D.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.E.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.F.MIL2 PROGRAM-2.G.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.H.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.I.MIL3 PROGRAM-2.J.MIL3 PROGRAM-3.D.MIL3

null

314.4(a)(2) 314.4(g)

null

17 CFR 229.106(C)(1) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(iii) FORM 8-K ITEM 1.05(a)

null

38-99-20(B)(1) 38-99-20(B)(2) 38-99-20(B)(3) 38-99-20(B)(4) 38-99-20(D)(1) 38-99-20(E)(2)(a) 38-99-20(E)(2)(b)

null

3.2.1(2) 3.2.1(3) 3.2.1(4)

Art 5.2 Art 5.2(a) Art 5.2(b) Art 5.2(c) Art 5.2(d) Art 5.2(e) Art 5.2(f) Art 5.2(g) Art 5.2(h) Art 5.2(i)(i) Art 5.2(i)(ii) Art 5.2(i)(iii)

null

Article 21.2(f)

null

1.1 1.2 1.2(a) 1.2(b) 1.2(c) 1.2(d) 1.2(e) 1.2(f) 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

null

3.1.1

null

A1.a A1.c D2.a

null

0725

null

20 21 22(a) 20 21 22(a) 22(b) 22(c) 23 24 25

13 19

null

4.1 4.4.1.2 4.4.1.3 4.4.2 4.4.2.1 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.5.3 4.6 4.6 4.6.1.1 4.6.1.2 4.6.2 4.6.3 4.6.3.1 4.6.3.2 4.6.2.3 4.6.2.4 4.9 4.9.1 4.9.1.1 4.9.2 4.9.2.1 4.9.2.2

null

3.2.9.C.01

null

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5 3.1.6 3.1.7(a) 3.1.7(b) 3.1.7(c) 3.1.7(d) 3.1.7(e) 3.1.7(f) 3.1.7(g) 3.1.8(a) 3.1.8(b) 3.1.8(c) 3.1.8(d) 3.1.8(e)

null

5.1 5.6

null

6.5 6.6 6.7 6.21 6.22 6.23 6.24

1.1 3.1.8

null

NAIC

null

x

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Status Reporting To Governing Body

GOV-01.2

Mechanisms exist to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data protection program.

null

E-CPL-05 E-CPL-09 E-GOV-03 E-GOV-04 E-GOV-05 E-GOV-06 E-GOV-07 E-GOV-13

Does the organization provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data protection program?

5

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data privacy program.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data privacy program.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization’s cybersecurity & data privacy program.

null

CC2.2-POF2 CC2.3-POF3 CC2.3-POF5 CC4.2-POF2

4.2 4.3 4.4 8.3 8.4

null

7.4 7.4(a) 7.4(b) 7.4(c) 7.4(d) 9.1 9.1(a) 9.1(b) 9.1(c) 9.1(d) 9.1(e) 9.1(f) 9.3 9.3.1 9.3.2(a) 9.3.2(b) 9.3.2(c) 9.3.2(d) 9.3.2(d)(1) 9.3.2(d)(2) 9.3.2(d)(3) 9.3.2(d)(4) 9.3.2(e) 9.3.2(f) 9.3.2(g) 9.3.3

null

GOVERN 2.3 MAP 3.5

null

GV.OV GV.OV-01 ID.IM-01

null

A.1.8

null

ASSET-5.E.MIL3 ASSET-5.F.MIL3 THREAT-3.F.MIL3 RISK-1.E.MIL2 RISK-1.F.MIL2 RISK-5.F.MIL3 ACCESS-4.F.MIL3 SITUATION-4.F.MIL3 RESPONSE-5.F.MIL3 THIRD-PARTIES-3.F.MIL3 WORKFORCE-4.F.MIL3 ARCHITECTURE-5.F.MIL3 PROGRAM-3.F.MIL3

null

314.4(i) 314.4(i)(1) 314.4(i)(2)

null

17 CFR 229.106(C)(1) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(iii)

null

7102(a)(1)(A) 7102(a)(1)(B) 7102(a)(1)(C) 7102(a)(1)(D) 7102(a)(1)(E) 7102(a)(1)(F) 7102(a)(2) 7102(b)

null

3.3.1(13)(e) 3.3.5(24)

Art 13.5

null

3.9 3.11 4.10 7.5

null

A1.c D2.a

null

30 58(a) 58(b) 58(c)

null

4.4.1.2 4.6 4.6.1.1 4.6.1.2 4.6.2 4.6.3 4.6.3.1 4.6.3.2 4.6.2.3 4.6.2.4 4.7 4.9 4.9.1 4.9.1.1 4.9.2 4.9.2.1 4.9.2.2

null

3.1.8

null

R-AC-1 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-GV-1 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7

R-AC-1

null

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

null

R-GV-1

null

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-8 MT-9 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

null

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Publishing Cybersecurity & Data Protection Documentation

GOV-02

Mechanisms exist to establish, maintain and disseminate cybersecurity & data protection policies, standards and procedures.

- Steering committee - Digital Security Program (DSP) - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP) - Governance, Risk and Compliance Solution (GRC) tool (SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, ZenGRC, Archer, RSAM, MetricStream, etc.) - Wiki - SharePoint

E-GOV-08 E-GOV-09 E-GOV-11

Does the organization establish, maintain and disseminate cybersecurity & data protection policies, standards and procedures?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to establish, maintain and disseminate cybersecurity & data privacy policies, standards and procedures.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to establish, maintain and disseminate cybersecurity & data privacy policies, standards and procedures.

CC5.3

CC1.4-POF1 CC2.2-POF1 CC2.2-POF4 CC2.2-POF7 CC5.3-POF1 CC7.2-POF1

4.2 7.3

null

APO01.09

Principle 12

A&A-01 AIS-01 BCR-01 CCC-01 CEK-01 DCS-01 DCS-02 DCS-03 DCS-04 DSP-01 GRC-01 GRC-02 HRS-01 HRS-02 HRS-03 HRS-04 IAM-01 IAM-02 IPY-01 IVS-01 LOG-01 SEF-01 SEF-02 STA-01 STA-12 TVM-01 TVM-02 UEM-01

GVN-01 GVN-02 POL-03

SO1

8.2.1

null

RQ-05-01.a RQ-05-01.b

5.2.1 5.2.2

4.3 5.2 7.5.1 7.5.2 7.5.3

5.1(a) 5.2 5.2(a) 5.2(b) 5.2(c) 5.2(d) 5.2(e) 5.2(f) 5.2(g) 7.5 7.5.1 7.5.1(a) 7.5.1(b) 7.5.2 7.5.2(a) 7.5.2(b) 7.5.2(c) 7.5.3 7.5.3(a) 7.5.3(b) 7.5.3(c) 7.5.3(d) 7.5.3(e) 7.5.3(f)

5.1.1 6.2.1 9.1.1

5.1 5.37

5.1.1 6.2.1 9.1.1

null

6.2 6.2.1 6.2.1.1

null

OR-1.0 OR-3.0 OP-2.0 PS-2.0 TS-2.4 TS-2.6 TS-2.8 TS-2.11 TS-3.0

null

GOVERN 1.0 GOVERN 1.2 GOVERN 1.4 GOVERN 2.2 GOVERN 3.2 GOVERN 4.1 GOVERN 5.1 GOVERN 6.0 GOVERN 6.1 MAP 3.5

GV.PO-P1 GV.PO-P6 GV.MT-P3 GV.MT-P4 GV.MT-P5 GV.MT-P6 GV.MT-P7 CT.PO-P1 CT.PO-P2 CT.PO-P3 CM.PO-P1 PR.PO-P4

null

P-5

null

PM-1

null

AC-1 AT-1 AU-1 CA-1 CM-1 CP-1 IA-1 IR-1 MA-1 MP-1 PE-1 PL-1 PM-1 PS-1 PT-1 RA-1 SA-1 SC-1 SI-1 SR-1

null

PM-1

null

3.4.9[a] 3.9.2[a]

A.03.15.01.a[01] A.03.15.01.a[02] A.03.15.01.b[01] A.03.15.01.b[02]

null

ID.GV-1

GV.PO-01

null

12.1 12.1.1

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 7.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 9.1.1 10.1.1 11.1.1 12.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 8.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

2.1.1 3.1.1 5.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 9.1.1 10.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

2.1.1 3.1.1 8.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 7.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 9.1.1 10.1.1 11.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

C.1

null

1.1 1.1.1 7.1.1

null

ASSET-5.C.MIL3 THREAT-3.C.MIL3 RISK-5.C.MIL3 ACCESS-4.C.MIL3 SITUATION-4.C.MIL3 RESPONSE-5.C.MIL3 THIRD-PARTIES-3.C.MIL3 WORKFORCE-4.C.MIL3 ARCHITECTURE-5.C.MIL3 PROGRAM-3.C.MIL3

EF:SG2.SP1 EF:SG2.SP2

null

5.8 5.9

null

PM-1

null

252.204-7008 252.204-7012

null

§ 11.10 § 11.10(j)

null

§ 1232h

D1.G.SP.B.4

S-P (17 CFR §248.30)

null

314.4(c) 314.4(c)(8) 314.4(e)

164.306 164.308 164.308(a)(1)(i) 164.312 164.316 164.316(a) 164.316(b) 164.316(b)(1) 164.316(b)(1)(i) 164.316(b)(1)(ii) 164.316(b)(2)(ii) 164.530(i) 164.530(i)(1) 164.530(i)(2) 164.530(i)(3) 164.530(j) 164.530(j)(1)

4.S.A 10.S.A

4.M.B

4.M.B 10.M.A

1.8.2 2.C.2 PM-1

null

5.1 5.2

null

III.B III.B.1.d III.C III.C.1 III.C.1.a III.C.1.b III.C.3 III.D

45.48.530

null

17.03(1) 17.04 17.03(2)(b)(2)

null

500.03

null

Sec 10

PM-1

null

Sec 11.175(b)

null

§ 2447(b)(3)

3.4.1(28) 3.4.1(29) 3.4.5(38)

Art 6.2 Art 9.4(a) Art 9.4(d) Art 9.4(e) Art 9.4(f)

null

Art 32.1 Art 32.2 Art 32.3 Art 32.4

Article 21.1 Article 21.2(a) Article 21.2(b) Article 21.2(c) Article 21.2(d) Article 21.2(e) Article 21.2(f) Article 21.2(g) Article 21.2(h) Article 21.2(i) Article 21.2(j)

Art 3

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

null

4.2 4.3 4.8

OIS-01 OIS-02 SP-01

null

1.1 4.1 4.25 5.2 5.3 9.1 10.1 11.2 12.1 13.1 14.1 15.1 17.1 18.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 24.1 25.1

null

4.1(1)

null

Article 8.4

null

TPC-25

3.1.3

1-3-1 1-3-3

1-1 1-1-1

null

6.1 [ORG.1] 6.2 [ORG.2]

null

A1.a B1.a B1.b

A1 A5

null

APP 1

0047 0888 1478 1602 1784 1785 1551

null

18 19

null

4.4.1 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.5.1 4.4.5.3 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.3.1 4.6 4.6.1 4.8.1 4.8.1.1 4.8.2 4.8.2.1 4.8.2.2 5.1.1

null

1.4.2 1.5 3.2 4.1 4.2 5.2 6.2 7.2 8.2 9.2 10.2 11.2 12.2 13.2 14.2 15.2 16.2 17.2 18.2 19.2

5.1.7.C.01 5.1.14.C.01 5.1.16.C.01 5.1.16.C.02 5.1.17.C.01 5.1.18.C.01 5.1.19.C.01 5.1.20.C.01 5.1.20.C.02 5.2.3.C.01 5.2.3.C.02

null

3.2.1

null

6.1 6.3

1.1.2

null

x

MA 201 CMR 17

null

x

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Exception Management

GOV-02.1

Mechanisms exist to prohibit exceptions to standards, except when the exception has been formally assessed for risk impact, approved and recorded.

null

Does the organization prohibit exceptions to standards, except when the exception has been formally assessed for risk impact, approved and recorded?

8

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to prohibit exceptions to standards, except when the exception has been formally assessed for risk impact, approved and recorded.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to prohibit exceptions to standards, except when the exception has been formally assessed for risk impact, approved and recorded.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to prohibit exceptions to standards, except when the exception has been formally assessed for risk impact, approved and recorded.

null

ID.RA-07

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

null

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Periodic Review & Update of Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program

GOV-03

Mechanisms exist to review the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

- Governance, Risk and Compliance Solution (GRC) tool (SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, ZenGRC, Archer, RSAM, MetricStream, etc.) - Steering committee

E-GOV-12

Does the organization review the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness?

7

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to review the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends. • Documentation change control processes do not exist or are not formal. • People affected by documentation changes are provided notification of the policy and standard changes. • Informal recommendations are leveraged to update existing policies and standards. • Unstructured review of the cybersecurity and/ or data privacy program is performed on an annual basis.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Formal documentation review process is performed on an annual basis. • Documentation review process includes the scope of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations. • Recommendations for documentation edits are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with documentation change control processes. • Updated documentation versions are published at least annually, based on the review process. • People affected by documentation changes are provided notification of the policy and standard changes.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Quarterly Business Review (QBR), or similar status reporting, exists to provide recurring reports on the state of the cybersecurity & data privacy program to the organization's Board of Directors. • Formal documentation review process is performed on an annual basis. • Documentation review process includes the scope of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations. • Recommendations for documentation edits are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with documentation change control processes. • Updated documentation versions are published at least annually, based on the review process. • People affected by documentation changes are provided notification of the policy and standard changes.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to review the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

CC5.3

CC2.2-POF4 CC2.2-POF7 CC5.3-POF6

4.3 4.4 8.3 8.4

null

EDM01.01 EDM01.03 EDM05.01 APO02.02 APO13.03

Principle 12

A&A-01 AIS-01 BCR-01 CCC-01 CEK-01 DCS-01 DCS-02 DCS-03 DCS-04 DSP-01 GRC-01 GRC-02 GRC-03 HRS-01 HRS-02 HRS-03 HRS-04 IAM-01 IAM-02 IPY-01 IVS-01 LOG-01 SEF-01 SEF-02 STA-01 TVM-01 TVM-02 UEM-01

null

SO1

8.2.1

null

RQ-05-08

null

6.1.1 7.4

7.5.2 7.5.2(a) 7.5.2(b) 7.5.2(c)

5.1.2

5.1 5.37

5.1.2

null

6.2.1.2

null

OP-2.0

Sec 4(G)

null

GV.MT-P2

null

PM-1

null

AC-1 AT-1 AU-1 CA-1 CM-1 CP-1 IA-1 IR-1 MA-1 MP-1 PE-1 PL-1 PM-1 PS-1 PT-1 RA-1 SA-1 SC-1 SI-1 SR-1

null

PM-1

null

3.15.1.b

null

A.03.15.01.b[01]

null

GV.PO-02

null

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 7.1.1 8.1.1 9.1.1 10.1.1 11.1.1 12.1 12.1.1 12.1.2

3.1.1

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 8.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

2.1.1 3.1.1 5.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 9.1.1 10.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

2.1.1 3.1.1 8.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2

1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 4.1.1 5.1.1 6.1.1 7.1.1 8.1.1 8.3.8 9.1.1 10.1.1 11.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2 12.1.3

3.1.1 9.1.1 12.1.1 12.1.2

P.2.4

null

EF:SG2.SP1 EF:SG2.SP2 OPF:SG1.SP2 OPF:SG1.SP3 OPF:SG2.SP1

null

PM-1

null

§ 1232h

null

314.4(b) 314.4(g)

164.306(e) 164.316(b) 164.316(b)(1) 164.316(b)(1)(i) 164.316(b)(1)(ii) 164.316(b)(2)(iii) 164.530(i)(2)

10.S.A

null

10.M.A

PM-1

null

CIP-003-6 R1

null

45.48.530

null

Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(6)

null

38-99-20(G)

null

Sec 10

PM-1

null

§ 2447(b)(8)(B) § 2447(b)(9) § 2447(b)(9)(A) § 2447(b)(9)(B)

3.3.1(14)

null

Art 32.1 Art 32.2 Art 32.3 Art 32.4

null

Art 3

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

null

4.2 4.8

OIS-01 SP-02

null

1.1 5.2 9.1 10.1 11.2 13.1 14.1 15.1 17.1 18.1 21.1 22.1 24.1 25.1

null

1-1-3 1-3-4 1-6-4 1-9-6 1-10-5 2-2-4 2-3-4 2-4-4 2-5-4 2-6-4 2-7-4 2-8-4 2-9-4 2-10-4 2-11-4 2-12-4 2-13-4 2-14-4 2-15-4 3-1-4 4-1-4 4-2-4 5-1-4

1-1-3

null

B1.a B1.b

null

1617

null

19

null

4.5.3 4.5.3.1 4.6 4.6.2 4.6.2.1 4.7 4.8.2 4.8.2.1 4.8.2.2 5.1.2

null

5.1.14.C.01 5.1.21.C.01 5.1.21.C.02

null

3.2.2

null

x

NAIC

null

x

R-AC-1 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-2 R-EX-5 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-3 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

null

R-EX-2

null

R-EX-5

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-3

null

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Assigned Cybersecurity & Data Protection Responsibilities

GOV-04

Mechanisms exist to assign one or more qualified individuals with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data protection program.

- NIST NICE Framework - Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)

E-HRS-01 E-HRS-05 E-HRS-06 E-HRS-07 E-HRS-08 E-HRS-09 E-HRS-10 E-HRS-13 E-HRS-15

Does the organization assign one or more qualified individuals with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data protection program?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to assign a qualified individual with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to assign a qualified individual with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data privacy program.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to assign a qualified individual with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data privacy program.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to assign a qualified individual with the mission and resources to centrally-manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain an enterprise-wide cybersecurity & data privacy program.

CC1.1 CC1.3

CC5.3-POF2

4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6

null

APO01.05

Principle 1 Principle 3

GRC-06 STA-04

null

8.2.7

null

RQ-05-03 RQ-06-04

5.1 5.3

5.3

5.1(f) 5.1(h) 5.3 5.3(a) 5.3(b)

null

5.2

6.1.1

null

Sec 4(C)(1)

GOVERN 2.3 GOVERN 5.0

ID.IM-P2 GV.PO-P3 CM.PO-P2

null

P-1

null

PL-9 PM-2 PM-6

null

PL-9 PM-2 PM-6 PM-29

PL-9

null

PM-2 PM-6 PM-29

null

PL-9 PM-2 PM-6 PM-29

null

PL-9 PM-2 PM-6 PM-29

PL-9 PM-2 PM-6

null

PO.2 PO.2.1 PO.2.2 PO.2.3

ID.AM-6

GV.RR-01

null

12.5 12.5.1 12.5.2 12.5.3 12.5.4 12.5.5

1.1.2 2.1.2 3.1.2 4.1.2 5.1.2 6.1.2 7.1.2 8.1.2 9.1.2 10.1.2 11.1.2 12.1.3 12.1.4 A3.1.1 A3.1.3

null

12.1.3 12.1.4

12.1.3

null

12.1.3

null

1.1.2 2.1.2 3.1.2 4.1.2 5.1.2 6.1.2 7.1.2 8.1.2 9.1.2 10.1.2 11.1.2 12.1.3 12.1.4 A3.1.1 A3.1.3

12.1.3

C.7

null

1.2.2

null

ASSET-5.D.MIL3 THREAT-3.D.MIL3 RISK-1.E.MIL2 RISK-1.F.MIL2 RISK-5.D.MIL3 ACCESS-4.D.MIL3 SITUATION-4.D.MIL3 RESPONSE-5.D.MIL3 THIRD-PARTIES-3.D.MIL3 WORKFORCE-4.D.MIL3 ARCHITECTURE-5.D.MIL3 PROGRAM-3.D.MIL3

EF:SG2.SP2 EF:SG4.SP2 GG2.GP1 MA:SG1.SP1 MON:SG1.SP1 MON:SG1.SP3

4.1 4.2

null

PM-2 PM-6

null

D1.R.St.B.1 D1.TC.Cu.B.1

null

314.4(a) 314.4(a)(1) 314.4(a)(2) 314.4(a)(3)

164.308(a)(2)

5.S.B 10.S.A

5.M.B 8.M.A

5.M.B 8.M.A 10.M.A

1.5 PM-2 PM-29

null

CIP-003-6 R3 & R4

8-101 8-311

null

17 CFR 229.106(B)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(B)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(B)(1)(iii) 17 CFR 229.106(B)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(iii) FORM 8-K ITEM 1.05(a)

null

17.03(2)(a)

null

500.04

Sec 4(2)(b)(ii)(A)(1)

622(2)(d)(A)(i)

38-99-20(C)(1)

null

Sec 9

PM-2 PM-6

null

Sec 11.175(d)

null

§ 2447(b)(1)

3.3.1(11) 3.3.1(12) 3.7.5(91)

Art 5.2 Art 5.2(a) Art 5.2(b) Art 5.2(c) Art 5.2(d) Art 5.2(e) Art 5.2(f) Art 5.2(g) Art 5.2(h) Art 5.2(i)(i) Art 5.2(i)(ii) Art 5.2(i)(iii) Art 5.3

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

null

4.4 4.5 4.6

OIS-03

null

3.1.4

1-2-2 1-4-1 1-4-2 1-5-2

1-2 1-2-1-2

null

A1.b A1.c

null

Article 5(2)

null

0714 0717 0718 0735

null

21 24

14 19

Article 45 Article 46

null

Article 52

null

4.3.1 4.3.1.1 4.4.1.2 6.1.1.13.PB 6.1.3.13.PB

null

1.8

3.1.8.C.01 3.1.8.C.02 3.1.8.C.03 3.1.9.C.01 3.2.8.C.01 3.2.8.C.02 3.2.8.C.03 3.2.8.C.04 3.2.8.C.05 3.2.9.C.01 3.2.10.C.01 3.2.10.C.02 3.2.10.C.03 3.2.10.C.04 3.2.11.C.01 3.2.11.C.02 3.2.11.C.03 3.2.12.C.01 3.2.12.C.02 3.2.12.C.03 3.2.13.C.01 3.2.13.C.02 3.2.14.C.01 3.2.15.C.01 3.2.16.C.01 3.2.17.C.01 3.2.18.C.01 3.2.19.C.01

null

3.1.7(a) 3.1.7(b) 3.1.7(c) 3.1.7(d) 3.1.7(e) 3.1.7(f) 3.1.7(g) 3.1.8(a) 3.1.8(b) 3.1.8(c) 3.1.8(d) 3.1.8(e)

null

5.2

null

1.1 1.2 6.2

1.1

null

x

MA 201 CMR 17 OR 6464A NAIC

null

x

R-AC-1 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Stakeholder Accountability Structure

GOV-04.1

Mechanisms exist to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

- Documented roles and responsibilities

E-HRS-15

Does the organization enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to enforce an accountability structure so that appropriate teams and individuals are empowered, responsible and trained for mapping, measuring and managing data and technology-related risks.

null

CC1.2-POF1 CC1.3-POF1 CC1.3-POF2 CC1.3-POF3 CC1.3-POF4 CC1.3-POF5 CC1.5-POF1 CC5.3-POF2

null

GOVERN 2.0 MANAGE 2.4

null

GV.OC-02 GV.RM-05 GV.RR-02

null

17 CFR 229.106(C)(1) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(iii)

null

3.3.1(11) 3.7.5(91)

null

4.5 4.6 4.10

null

A1.b A1.c B1.b

null

21

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-6 MT-9 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

null

MT-6

null

MT-9

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Authoritative Chain of Command

GOV-04.2

Mechanisms exist to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

- Organization chart

E-HRS-15

Does the organization establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks?

7

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to establish an authoritative chain of command with clear lines of communication to remove ambiguity from individuals and teams related to managing data and technology-related risks.

null

CC1.2-POF1 CC1.3-POF1 CC1.3-POF2 CC1.3-POF3 CC1.3-POF4 CC1.3-POF5 CC1.5-POF1

null

GOVERN 2.1

null

GV.RM-05 GV.RR-02

null

17 CFR 229.106(C)(1) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(2) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(i) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(ii) 17 CFR 229.106(C)(1)(iii)

null

3.7.5(91)

null

4.5 4.6 4.10

null

A1.b A1.c

null

21

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-6 MT-9 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

null

MT-6

null

MT-9

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Measures of Performance

GOV-05

Mechanisms exist to develop, report and monitor cybersecurity & data privacy program measures of performance.

- Metrics - Governance, Risk and Compliance Solution (GRC) tool (SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, ZenGRC, Archer, RSAM, MetricStream, etc.) - Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) solution

E-GOV-13

Does the organization develop, report and monitor cybersecurity & data privacy program measures of performance?

6

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to develop, report and monitor cybersecurity & data privacy program measures of performance.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Simple metrics exist to provide operational oversight of a limited scope of cybersecurity & data privacy controls.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Metrics are developed that provide management oversight to ensure processes continue to operate as designed and within define parameters. • Quarterly Business Review (QBR), or similar status reporting, exists to provide recurring reports on the state of the cybersecurity & data privacy program to the organization's Board of Directors. • Comprehensive metrics exist to provide oversight of organization-wide cybersecurity & data privacy controls.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

CC1.2 CC1.5 CC2.2 CC4.1

CC1.5-POF2

4.3 7.5 8.3 8.4

null

EDM01.03 EDM05.01 EDM05.03 APO02.02 MEA01.04

Principle 2 Principle 5 Principle 14 Principle 16 Principle 19 Principle 20

AIS-03 SEF-05 TVM-09 TVM-10

null

SO11 S12 S13 S14 S15

null

RQ-05-08

9.1

9.1 9.1(a) 9.1(b) 9.1(c) 9.1(d) 9.1(e) 9.1(f)

null

5.6

null

Sec 4(E)(1)

GOVERN 1.5 MAP 5.2 MEASURE 1.0 MEASURE 1.1 MEASURE 1.2 MEASURE 4.0 MEASURE 4.3

GV.MT-P4 PR.PO-P5 PR.PO-P6

null

M-5

null

PM-6

null

PM-6

null

PM-6

null

3.3.7 3.3.8

PM-6

null

PM-6

null

3.12.3

null

PR.IP-8

GV.RM-07 GV.OV-03

null

A.4.2

null

ASSET-5.E.MIL3 ASSET-5.F.MIL3 THREAT-3.F.MIL3 RISK-1.E.MIL2 RISK-5.F.MIL3 ACCESS-4.F.MIL3 SITUATION-4.F.MIL3 RESPONSE-5.F.MIL3 THIRD-PARTIES-3.F.MIL3 WORKFORCE-4.F.MIL3 ARCHITECTURE-5.F.MIL3 PROGRAM-3.F.MIL3

EF:SG4.SP2 EF:SG4.SP3 GG2.GP8 GG3.GP2 HRM:SG3.SP2 MA:SG1.SP1 MA:SG1.SP3 MA:SG1.SP4 MA:SG2.SP1 MA:SG2.SP2 MA:SG2.SP3 MON:SG1.SP1 MON:SG1.SP3

null

PM-6

null

D2.IS.Is.B.1 D2.IS.Is.E.2

null

10.S.A

null

10.M.A

null

8-311

null

Sec 404

5.7

null

7102(a)(1)(A) 7102(a)(1)(B) 7102(a)(1)(C) 7102(a)(1)(D) 7102(a)(1)(E) 7102(a)(1)(F) 7102(a)(2) 7102(b)

null

17.03(2)(j)

null

622(2)(d)(A)(vi) 622(2)(d)(B)(iii)

38-99-20(E)(1)

null

Sec 10 Sec 11

PM-6

null

Art 13.4

null

Article 21.2(f)

Art 3

null

COM-04

null

7.6.2 [OP.MON.2]

null

0724

null

4.6 4.6.1 4.6.2.1

null

4.5.3 7.8.3

null

5.7

null

6.9

2.8 2.8.1 2.8.2

null

x

MA 201 CMR 17 OR 6464A NAIC

null

R-AC-1 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

GOV-05.1

Mechanisms exist to develop, report and monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to assist organizational management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

- Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

null

Does the organization develop, report and monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to assist organizational management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program?

6

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to develop, report and monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to assist organizational management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to develop, report and monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to assist organizational management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to develop, report and monitor Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to assist organizational management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

CC1.2 CC1.5 CC2.2 CC4.1

null

APO02.02 MEA01.04

Principle 2 Principle 5 Principle 14 Principle 16

null

5.6

null

MEASURE 4.1 MEASURE 4.3

null

A.4

null

GG3.GP2 HRM:SG3.SP2 HRM:SG3.SP3

null

5.7

null

x

null

R-AC-1 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs)

GOV-05.2

Mechanisms exist to develop, report and monitor Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) to assist senior management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

- Key Risk Indicators (KRIs)

null

Does the organization develop, report and monitor Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) to assist senior management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program?

6

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to develop, report and monitor Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) to assist senior management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to develop, report and monitor Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) to assist senior management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to develop, report and monitor Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) to assist senior management in performance monitoring and trend analysis of the cybersecurity & data privacy program.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

CC1.2 CC1.5 CC2.2 CC4.1

null

APO02.02 MEA01.04

Principle 2 Principle 5 Principle 14 Principle 16

null

5.6

null

MEASURE 4.1 MEASURE 4.3

null

A.4

null

HRM:SG3.SP2

null

5.7

null

x

null

R-AC-1 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Contacts With Authorities

GOV-06

Mechanisms exist to identify and document appropriate contacts with relevant law enforcement and regulatory bodies.

- Threat intelligence personnel - Integrated Security Incident Response Team (ISIRT)

null

Does the organization identify and document appropriate contacts with relevant law enforcement and regulatory bodies?

5

Identify

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and document appropriate contacts with relevant law enforcement and regulatory bodies.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends. • Cybersecurity personnel identify and maintain contact information for local and national law enforcement (e.g., FBI field office) in case of cybersecurity incidents that require law enforcement involvement.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Incident response personnel identify and maintain contact information for local and national law enforcement (e.g., FBI field office) in case of cybersecurity incidents that require law enforcement involvement. • Contact information is verified and updated on at least an annual basis.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Incident response personnel identify and maintain contact information for local and national law enforcement (e.g., FBI field office) in case of cybersecurity incidents that require law enforcement involvement. • Contact information is verified and updated on at least an annual basis.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

CC2.3

null

Principle 15

null

6.1.3

5.5

6.1.3

null

6.3.1.3

null

Sec 4(D)(4)

null

IR-6

null

IR-6

null

GV.OC-02

null

C.6

null

IMC:SG2.SP1

null

IR-6

null

252.204-7019(c)(1) 252.204-7019(c)(2)

null

IR-6

null

8.M.A 8.M.C

8.M.A 8.M.C 7.L.A 8.L.B

1.8.3 IR-6

null

1-303 4-218

null

FORM 8-K ITEM 1.05(a)

null

III.F.3 VI.A VI.B VI.B.1 VI.B.2 VI.C VI.D VI.E.1 VI.E.2 VI.F

null

38-99-20(D)(4)

Sec. 521.053

Sec 5 Sec 11

IR-6

null

3.7.5(91)

null

Art 31 Art 36.1 Art 36.2 Art 36.3 Art 37.7 Art 40.1 Art 41.1 Art 42.2 Art 50

null

OIS-05

null

Article 31 Article 36(1) Article 36(2) Article 36(3)(a) Article 36(3)(b) Article 36(3)(c) Article 36(3)(d) Article 36(3)(e) Article 36(3)(f)

null

33 42 51 59(a) 59(b)

35 35(a) 35(b) 36

null

6.1.3

null

x

NAIC

null

x

R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

null

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

- updated DFARS mapping

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Contacts With Groups & Associations

GOV-07

Mechanisms exist to establish contact with selected groups and associations within the cybersecurity & data privacy communities to: ▪ Facilitate ongoing cybersecurity & data privacy education and training for organizational personnel; ▪ Maintain currency with recommended cybersecurity & data privacy practices, techniques and technologies; and ▪ Share current cybersecurity and/or data privacy-related information including threats, vulnerabilities and incidents.

- SANS - CISO Executive Network - ISACA chapters - IAPP chapters - ISAA chapters

E-THR-02

Does the organization establish contact with selected groups and associations within the cybersecurity & data privacy communities to: ▪ Facilitate ongoing cybersecurity & data privacy education and training for organizational personnel; ▪ Maintain currency with recommended cybersecurity & data privacy practices, techniques and technologies; and ▪ Share current cybersecurity and/or data privacy-related information including threats, vulnerabilities and incidents?

7

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to establish contact with selected groups and associations within the cybersecurity & data privacy communities to: ▪ Facilitate ongoing cybersecurity & data privacy education and training for organizational personnel; ▪ Maintain currency with recommended cybersecurity & data privacy practices, techniques and technologies; and ▪ Share current security-related information including threats, vulnerabilities and incidents.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel identify and maintain contact information for local, regional and national cybersecurity / data privacy groups and associations.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel identify and maintain contact information for local, regional and national cybersecurity / data privacy groups and associations. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel in supervisory positions subscribe to news feeds from groups and associations to facilitate ongoing education and training.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

null

GRC-08

null

6.1.4

5.6

6.1.4

null

6.3.1.4

null

Sec 4(D)(4)

null

PM-15

null

PM-15

null

PM-15

null

PM-15

null

PM-15

null

5.1.2 6.1

6.3.1

null

6.3.1

null

C.6

null

COMM:SG2.SP1 OTA:SG2.SP1

4.5

null

PM-15

null

8.M.A 8.M.C

8.M.A 8.M.C 9.L.D

null

8-101

null

38-99-20(D)(4)

null

Sec 5 Sec 11

PM-15

null

Art 45.1 Art 45.1(a) Art 45.1(b) Art 45.1(c) Art 45.2

null

Art 40.2 Art 41.1 Art 42.2 Art 42.3 Art 43.2

null

6.1.4

null

3.7

null

x

NAIC

null

x

R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

null

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Defining Business Context & Mission

GOV-08

Mechanisms exist to define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization.

null

E-PRM-01

Does the organization define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization?

5

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel are encouraged to attend and be involved in local groups and associations. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel identify and maintain contact information for local, regional and national cybersecurity / data privacy groups and associations. • Cybersecurity and data privacy personnel in supervisory positions subscribe to news feeds from security/data privacy-related groups and associations to facilitate ongoing education and training. • Designated incident response personnel participate in public/private information sharing organizations (e.g., InfraGard).

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define the context of its business model and document the mission of the organization.

null

CC2.2-POF10

null

EDM05.01 EDM05.02 EDM05.03 APO01.01 APO01.02 APO01.03 APO01.04 APO01.06 APO02.01 APO02.05 APO08.01 APO08.02 APO08.03 APO08.04 APO08.05

null

4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2

4.1 4.2

null

ID.IM-P5 ID.BE-P1 ID.BE-P2 GV.RM-P3

null

ID.BE-1 ID.BE-2

GV.OC-01

null

B.1

null

120.13 120.17

null

3.2.1(4)

null

1-1-1

null

A1.a

null

4.4.2 4.4.2.1 4.4.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Define Control Objectives

GOV-09

Mechanisms exist to establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system.

null

E-GOV-10

Does the organization establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system?

5

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • IT and/ or cybersecurity personnel develop control objectives to implement and manage the organization’s internal control system. • IT and/ or cybersecurity personnel develop plans to implement security-related objectives.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • A GRC function, or similar function, establishes control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system. • IT and/ or cybersecurity personnel develop control objectives to implement and manage the organization’s internal control system. • IT and/ or cybersecurity personnel develop plans to implement security-related objectives.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to establish control objectives as the basis for the selection, implementation and management of the organization’s internal control system.

null

CC2.1-POF1 CC2.2-POF1 CC2.2-POF10

7 7.1

null

APO01.04 DSS06.01

null

5.1

4.1 4.2 4.2(b) 4.2(c) 5.2(b) 6.2 6.2(a) 6.2(b) 6.2(c) 6.2(d) 6.2(e) 6.2(f) 6.2(g) 6.2(h) 6.2(i) 6.2(j) 6.2(k) 6.2(l)

null

4.2

5.1

null

GV.RM-01 GV.RM-03

null

B.1.6

null

CTRL:SG1.SP1

null

314.3(b)(1) 314.3(b)(2) 314.3(b)(3)

null

3.2.1(5)(c)

null

OIS-01 OIS-02

null

1-1

null

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4.2 4.4.2.1 4.4.5.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Data Governance

GOV-10

Mechanisms exist to facilitate data governance to oversee the organization's policies, standards and procedures so that sensitive/regulated data is effectively managed and maintained in accordance with applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations.

null

Does the organization facilitate data governance to oversee the organization's policies, standards and procedures so that sensitive/regulated data is effectively managed and maintained in accordance with applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations?

9

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to facilitate data governance to oversee the organization's policies, standards and procedures so that sensitive/regulated data is effectively managed and maintained in accordance with applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to facilitate data governance to oversee the organization's policies, standards and procedures so that sensitive/regulated data is effectively managed and maintained in accordance with applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations.

null

PM-23 PM-24

PM-24

null

PM-23

null

ID.AM-07

null

A3.2.5

null

C.1.4

null

9.1 9.3 9.4

null

2.C.5 2.C.5.1

null

Article 58 Article 58(1) Article 58(2) Article 58(3) Article 58(4)

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Purpose Validation

GOV-11

Mechanisms exist to monitor mission/business-critical services or functions to ensure those resources are being used consistent with their intended purpose.

null

Does the organization monitor mission/business-critical services or functions to ensure those resources are being used consistent with their intended purpose?

5

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to monitor mission/business-critical services or functions to ensure those resources are being used consistent with their intended purpose.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • No formal cybersecurity and/ or data privacy principles are identified for the organization. • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Governance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements. • Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/ or data privacy may exist. • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Basic cybersecurity policies and standards are documented [not based on any industry framework] • Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel. • Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to observed trends.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Cybersecurity and data privacy governance activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy governance activities. • The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function, based on business requirements. • A qualified individual is assigned the role and responsibilities to centrally manage, coordinate, develop, implement and maintain a cybersecurity & data privacy program (e.g., cybersecurity director or Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)). • No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing cybersecurity personnel. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Cybersecurity policies and standards exist that are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). • Controls are assigned to sensitive/regulated assets to comply with specific compliance requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations, but are not standardized across the organization. • Documentation is made available to internal personnel.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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 are developed that provide management insight, per a quantitative understanding of process capabilities, to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to monitor mission/business-critical services or functions to ensure those resources are being used consistent with their intended purpose.

null

PM-32

null

PM-32

null

PM-32

null

PM-32

null

C.8

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Forced Technology Transfer (FTT)

GOV-12

Mechanisms exist to avoid and/or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

- Board of Directors (Bod) Ethics Committee

null

Does the organization avoid and/or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices?

10

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to avoid and/ or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to avoid and/ or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to avoid and/ or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Instances of client or host-nation requests are formally evaluated to determine the risk impact of the request. • Instances that could lead to Forced Technology Transfer (FTT) are escalated to executive leadership for review by the Risk Committee.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to avoid and/ or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to avoid and/ or constrain the forced exfiltration of sensitive / regulated information (e.g., Intellectual Property (IP)) to the host government for purposes of market access or market management practices.

null

P.1.6.1

null

Article 7 Article 8 Article 9 Article 11 Article 14 Article 15 Article 16 Article 18 Article 19 Article 20 Article 28 Article 31 Article 32 Article 33 Article 36 Article 37 Article 38 Article 48 Article 53

null

Article 38 Article 38(4) Article 40

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

State-Sponsored Espionage

GOV-13

Mechanisms exist to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/or cyberwarfare activities.

- Board of Directors (Bod) Ethics Committee

null

Does the organization constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/or cyberwarfare activities?

10

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/ or cyberwarfare activities.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/ or cyberwarfare activities.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/ or cyberwarfare activities.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Instances of client or host-nation requests are formally evaluated to determine the risk impact of the request. • Instances that could lead to state-sponsored espionage are escalated to executive leadership for review by the Risk Committee.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/ or cyberwarfare activities.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to constrain the host government's ability to leverage the organization's technology assets for economic or political espionage and/ or cyberwarfare activities.

null

L.4.2

null

Article 7 Article 8 Article 9 Article 11 Article 14 Article 15 Article 16 Article 18 Article 19 Article 20 Article 28 Article 31 Article 32 Article 33 Article 36 Article 37 Article 38 Article 48 Article 53

null

Article 11 Article 12 Article 38(4) Article 40 Article 47(5) Article 60 Article 63(3) Article 63(4) Article 64

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Business As Usual (BAU) Secure Practices

GOV-14

Mechanisms exist to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

null

Does the organization incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement?

6

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability. • Executive leadership team (e.g., corporate-level officers, board of directors, etc.) take an active role in defining and enforcing Business As Usual (BAU) practices across the organization to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy principles. • A GRC function, or similar function, tracks the efforts to determine if Business As Usual (BAU) reinforcement efforts impact metrics associated with cybersecurity & data privacy controls.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to incorporate cybersecurity & data privacy principles into Business As Usual (BAU) practices through executive leadership involvement.

null

CC1.1-POF1 CC5.3-POF1

null

RQ-05-06 RC-05-10

null

A3.3 A3.3.3

null

K.1

null

B1.b B6.a

null

24

null

R-AC-1 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

null

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-8 MT-9 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

null

MT-8

MT-9

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Operationalizing Cybersecurity & Data Protection Practices

GOV-15

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/or service under their control.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/or service under their control?

9

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to operationalize cybersecurity & data privacy practices for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

CC5.1

CC2.1-POF1 CC2.1-POF2 CC2.1-POF3 CC2.1-POF4 CC3.1-POF5 CC5.1-POF1 CC5.1-POF2 CC5.1-POF3 CC5.1-POF4 CC5.1-POF5 CC5.1-POF6

null

OR-1.0

null

3.15.1.a 3.17.1.a

null

15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4

null

3.3.4(22) 3.4.1(30)(a) 3.4.1(30)(b) 3.4.1(30)(c) 3.4.1(30)(d) 3.4.1(30)(e) 3.4.1(30)(f) 3.4.1(30)(g)

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Article 21.1 Article 21.2(a) Article 21.2(b) Article 21.2(c) Article 21.2(d) Article 21.2(e) Article 21.2(f) Article 21.2(g) Article 21.2(h) Article 21.2(i) Article 21.2(j)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

5.1

null

Article 8.3

null

2-3 2-3-2

Article 50 Article 51

null

B1.a B1.b B6.a

A5

null

1633 1634 1635 1636

null

29

null

3.2.10.C.04 3.4.11.C.01

null

3.0 3.1 3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Select Controls

GOV-15.1

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control?

8

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to select required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

CC5.1

null

OR-1.0

null

3.15.1.a 3.15.2.a 3.17.1.a

null

252.204-7008(c)(1) 252.204-7012(b)

null

15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4

null

III.B III.C.1 III.C.1.a III.C.1.b III.C.3

null

3.3.4(22) 3.3.4(23) 3.4.1(30)(a) 3.4.1(30)(b) 3.4.1(30)(c) 3.4.1(30)(d) 3.4.1(30)(e) 3.4.1(30)(f) 3.4.1(30)(g)

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Article 21.1 Article 21.2(a) Article 21.2(b) Article 21.2(c) Article 21.2(d) Article 21.2(e) Article 21.2(f) Article 21.2(g) Article 21.2(h) Article 21.2(i) Article 21.2(j)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

5.1

null

Article 8.3 Article 11.1

null

2-3 2-3-2

Article 50 Article 51

null

B1.a B1.b

A5 A6

null

1634

null

29

null

3.2.10.C.04

null

3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

- updated DFARS mapping

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Implement Controls

GOV-15.2

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control?

9

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to implement required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control.

CC5.1

null

RQ-09-10

null

3.1.5.a 3.1.5.b 3.1.5.c 3.1.5.d 3.1.6.a 3.1.6.b 3.4.1.a 3.4.1.b 3.4.2.a 3.4.2.b 3.4.6.a 3.17.1.a

null

252.204-7008(c)(1) 252.204-7012(b)

null

15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4

null

3.4.1(30)(a) 3.4.1(30)(b) 3.4.1(30)(c) 3.4.1(30)(d) 3.4.1(30)(e) 3.4.1(30)(f) 3.4.1(30)(g)

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Article 21.1 Article 21.2(a) Article 21.2(b) Article 21.2(c) Article 21.2(d) Article 21.2(e) Article 21.2(f) Article 21.2(g) Article 21.2(h) Article 21.2(i) Article 21.2(j)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

5.2

null

Article 8.3 Article 11.3 Article 11.5 Article 11.6

null

2-3 2-3-2

Article 50 Article 51

null

B1.b

A5 A6 B4

null

1635

null

3.4.11.C.01

null

3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

- updated DFARS mapping

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Assess Controls

GOV-15.3

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended?

8

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to assess if required cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service under their control are implemented correctly and are operating as intended.

null

CC4.2-POF1

null

RQ-09-11.a RQ-09-11.b RQ-10-10.a RQ-10-10.b RQ-10-10.c RQ-10-10.d RQ-10-11 RQ-10-12 RQ-10-13 RQ-11-01.a RQ-11-01.b RQ-11-01.c RQ-11-01.d RQ-11-02

null

3.12.1 3.12.3 3.12.5.a 3.15.1.b 3.17.1.b

null

A.03.12.01

null

14.1

null

3.4.6(41) 3.4.6(42) 3.4.6(43) 3.4.6(43)(a) 3.4.6(43)(b) 3.4.6(44) 3.4.6(45) 3.4.6(46) 3.4.6(47) 3.4.6(48)

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

Article 8.3 Article 11.1 Article 11.2

null

2-3 2-3-2

Article 50 Article 51

null

A2.b

A5 A6 B4

null

1636

null

3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Authorize Systems, Applications & Services

GOV-15.4

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/or service under their control.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/or service under their control?

8

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/ or service under their control.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/ or service under their control.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/ or service under their control.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to obtain authorization for the production use of each system, application and/ or service under their control.

null

RQ-06-34.c

null

3.4.8.a 3.17.1.a

null

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

Article 8.3 Article 11.1

null

2-3 2-3-2

null

A2.b

A5

null

0027

null

23.2.16.C.03 23.2.16.C.04

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance

Monitor Controls

GOV-15.5

Mechanisms exist to compel data and/or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

null

Does the organization compel data and/or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended?

8

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel data and/ or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/ or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/ or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel data and/ or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/ or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

Cybersecurity & Privacy Governance (GOV) 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: • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides scoping guidance to determine control applicability. • Compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy controls are identified, documented and tested for adherence to internal standards or regulatory requirements. • Procedures are established for sensitive/regulated obligations and standardized across the organization. • Controls are standardized across the organization to ensure uniformity and consistent execution. • Internal policies and standards address all statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy. • Defined roles & responsibilities require data/process owners to define, implement and maintain cybersecurity & data privacy controls for each system, application and/ or service of which they have accountability.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/ or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel data and/ or process owners to monitor systems, applications and/ or services under their control on an ongoing basis for applicable threats and risks, as well as to ensure cybersecurity & data privacy controls are operating as intended.

null

RQ-10-03

null

3.3.5.a 3.3.5.b 3.3.5.c 3.12.3 3.15.1.b 3.17.1.b

null

Art 7(a) Art 7(b) Art 7(c) Art 7(d)

null

Principle 2.4.a

null

Article 8.3 Article 11.7 Article 11.8

null

2-3 2-3-2

Article 50 Article 51

null

A5

null

1526

null

30

null

23.2.18.C.01

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Artificial Intelligence (AI) & Autonomous Technologies Governance

AAT-01

Mechanisms exist to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

null

Does the organization ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively?

10

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), within the broader scope of cybersecurity and data protection operations. • 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 organization. This CONOPS for AAT may be incorporated as part of a broader operational plan for the cybersecurity & data privacy program. • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity & data privacy controls to facilitate the implementation of secure and compliant practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization’s applications, systems, services and data. Compliance requirements for AAT are identified and documented. • A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including AAT. The steering committee establishes a clear and authoritative accountability structure for AAT operations. • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust incident response and business continuity plans exist to respond to AAT-related emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to ensure policies, processes, procedures and practices related to the mapping, measuring and managing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are in place, transparent and implemented effectively.

null

GOVERN 1.0 GOVERN 4.1 MAP 3.5

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15 MT-16

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

MT-16

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies-Related Legal Requirements Definition

AAT-01.1

Mechanisms exist to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

8

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify, understand, document and manage applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

GOVERN 1.1

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Trustworthy AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-01.2

Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

null

Does the organization ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences?

10

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

null

GOVERN 1.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Value Sustainment

AAT-01.3

Mechanisms exist to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

1

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to sustain the value of deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MANAGE 2.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Situational Awareness of AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-02

Mechanisms exist to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

null

Does the organization develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party)?

9

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to develop and maintain an inventory of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) (internal and third-party).

null

GOVERN 1.6

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Risk Mapping

AAT-02.1

Mechanisms exist to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

null

Does the organization identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements?

9

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in use and map those components to potential legal risks, including statutory and regulatory compliance requirements.

null

MAP 4.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Internal Controls

AAT-02.2

Mechanisms exist to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and document internal cybersecurity & data privacy controls for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 4.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Context Definition

AAT-03

Mechanisms exist to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

null

Does the organization establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed?

8

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to establish and document the context surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including: ▪ Intended purposes; ▪ Potentially beneficial uses; ▪ Context-specific laws and regulations; ▪ Norms and expectations; and ▪ Prospective settings in which the system(s) will be deployed.

null

MAP 1.0 MAP 1.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Mission and Goals Definition

AAT-03.1

Mechanisms exist to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define and document the organization’s mission and defined goals for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 1.3 MAP 1.4

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Business Case

AAT-04

Mechanisms exist to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to benchmark capabilities, targeted usage, goals and expected benefits and costs of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 3.0

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Potential Benefits Analysis

AAT-04.1

Mechanisms exist to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

2

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to assess the potential benefits of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 3.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Potential Costs Analysis

AAT-04.2

Mechanisms exist to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

null

Does the organization assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness?

2

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to assess potential costs, including non-monetary costs, resulting from expected or realized Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related errors or system functionality and trustworthiness.

null

MAP 3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Targeted Application Scope

AAT-04.3

Mechanisms exist to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to specify and document the targeted application scope of the proposed use and operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 3.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Cost / Benefit Mapping

AAT-04.4

Mechanisms exist to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

null

Does the organization map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data?

2

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to map risks and benefits for all components of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT), including third-party software and data.

null

MAP 4.0

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Training

AAT-05

Mechanisms exist to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

5

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to ensure personnel and external stakeholders are provided with position-specific risk management training for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

GOVERN 2.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1 R-SA-2

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

R-SA-2

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Fairness & Bias

AAT-06

Mechanisms exist to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

null

Does the organization prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier?

9

Identify

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/ or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/ or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/ or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/ or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to prevent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) from unfairly identifying, profiling and/ or statistically singling out a segmented population defined by race, religion, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability or any other politically-charged identifier.

null

GOVERN 3.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Risk Management Decisions

AAT-07

Mechanisms exist to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

null

Does the organization leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to leverage decision makers from a diversity of demographics, disciplines, experience, expertise and backgrounds for mapping, measuring and managing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

null

GOVERN 3.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Impact Characterization

AAT-07.1

Mechanisms exist to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

null

Does the organization characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society?

8

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to characterize the impacts of proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) on individuals, groups, communities, organizations and society.

null

MAP 5.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Likelihood & Impact Risk Analysis

AAT-07.2

Mechanisms exist to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

null

Does the organization define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define the potential likelihood and impact of each identified risk based on expected use and past uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in similar contexts.

null

MAP 5.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Continuous Improvements

AAT-07.3

Mechanisms exist to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

null

Does the organization continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to continuously improve Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) capabilities to maximize benefits and minimize negative impacts associated with AAT.

null

RQ-05-08

null

MANAGE 2.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Assigned Responsibilities for AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-08

Mechanisms exist to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

null

Does the organization define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems?

9

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define and differentiate roles and responsibilities for human-AI configurations and oversight of AI systems.

null

GOVERN 3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Risk Profiling

AAT-09

Mechanisms exist to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

null

Does the organization document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used?

9

Identify

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to document the risks and potential impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) designed, developed, deployed, evaluated and used.

null

GOVERN 4.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV)

AAT-10

Mechanisms exist to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

null

E-IAO-02

Does the organization implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing?

10

Detect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to implement Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices to enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related testing, identification of incidents and information sharing.

null

GOVERN 4.3 MEASURE 2.7

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Trustworthiness Assessment

AAT-10.1

Mechanisms exist to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

null

Does the organization evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes?

10

Detect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) for trustworthy behavior and operation including security, anonymization and disaggregation of captured and stored data for approved purposes.

null

MEASURE 2.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Tools

AAT-10.2

Mechanisms exist to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

null

Does the organization document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices?

7

Detect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to document test sets, metrics and details about the tools used during Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) practices.

null

MAP 2.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Trustworthiness Demonstration

AAT-10.3

Mechanisms exist to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

null

Does the organization demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs?

9

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed is valid, reliable and operate as intended based on approved designs.

null

MEASURE 2.13

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Safety Demonstration

AAT-10.4

Mechanisms exist to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

null

Does the organization demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits?

10

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to demonstrate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed are safe, residual risk does not exceed the organization's risk tolerance and can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits.

null

MEASURE 2.3 MEASURE 2.7

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Resiliency Assessment

AAT-10.5

Mechanisms exist to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

Does the organization evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed?

6

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate the security and resilience of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

MANAGE 4.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Transparency & Accountability Assessment

AAT-10.6

Mechanisms exist to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

Does the organization examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed?

7

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to examine risks associated with transparency and accountability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

MANAGE 4.2

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Privacy Assessment

AAT-10.7

Mechanisms exist to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

Does the organization examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed?

9

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to examine the data privacy risk of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

MEASURE 2.1

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Fairness & Bias Assessment

AAT-10.8

Mechanisms exist to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

Does the organization examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed?

9

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to examine fairness and bias of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to be deployed.

null

MEASURE 2.5 MEASURE 2.11

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Model Validation

AAT-10.9

Mechanisms exist to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

null

Does the organization validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model?

5

Detect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to validate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) model.

null

MEASURE 2.6

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Results Evaluation

AAT-10.10

Mechanisms exist to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

10

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate the results of Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV) to determine the viability of the proposed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MANAGE 1.1

null

R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Effectiveness

AAT-10.11

Mechanisms exist to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

null

Does the organization evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV)?

5

Detect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes utilized to perform Artificial Intelligence Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (AI TEVV).

null

MEASURE 2.8

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Comparable Deployment Settings

AAT-10.12

Mechanisms exist to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

null

Does the organization evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings?

5

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related performance or the assurance criteria demonstrated for conditions similar to deployment settings.

null

MEASURE 2.10

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI TEVV Post-Deployment Monitoring

AAT-10.13

Mechanisms exist to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Detect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to proactively and continuously monitor deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MEASURE 2.6 MEASURE 2.11

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Updating AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-10.14

Mechanisms exist to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to integrate continual improvements for deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MEASURE 2.9

null

R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Robust Stakeholder Engagement for AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-11

Mechanisms exist to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

null

Does the organization compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts?

9

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to compel ongoing engagement with relevant Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholders to encourage feedback about positive, negative and unanticipated impacts.

null

CC1.4-POF3

null

GOVERN 5.0 MAP 5.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Stakeholder Feedback Integration

AAT-11.1

Mechanisms exist to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to regularly collect, consider, prioritize and integrate risk-related feedback from those external to the team that developed or deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

GOVERN 5.1 GOVERN 5.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Ongoing Assessments

AAT-11.2

Mechanisms exist to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

null

Does the organization conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT?

9

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to conduct regular assessments of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with independent assessors and stakeholders not involved in the development of the AAT.

null

MEASURE 1.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies End User Feedback

AAT-11.3

Mechanisms exist to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

null

Does the organization collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics?

7

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to collect and integrate feedback from end users and impacted communities into Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related system evaluation metrics.

null

MEASURE 3.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Incident & Error Reporting

AAT-11.4

Mechanisms exist to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

null

Does the organization communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities?

9

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/ or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/ or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/ or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust incident response and business continuity plans exist to respond to AAT-related emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/ or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to communicate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related incidents and/ or errors to relevant stakeholders, including affected communities.

null

MANAGE 4.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Intellectual Property Infringement Protections

AAT-12

Mechanisms exist to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

null

Does the organization identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement?

10

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust incident response and business continuity plans exist to respond to AAT-related emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify data sources for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to prevent third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights infringement.

null

GOVERN 6.1

null

R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Stakeholder Diversity

AAT-13

Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

null

Does the organization ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise?

8

Identify

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) stakeholder competencies, skills and capacities incorporate demographic diversity, broad domain and user experience expertise.

null

CC1.4-POF3

null

MAP 1.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Stakeholder Competencies

AAT-13.1

Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

null

Does the organization ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented?

9

Identify

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) are defined, assessed and documented.

null

CC1.4-POF2 CC5.3-POF5

null

RQ-05-07

null

MAP 3.4

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Requirements Definitions

AAT-14

Mechanisms exist to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

8

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to take socio-technical implications into account to address risks associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MAP 1.6

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Implementation Tasks Definition

AAT-14.1

Mechanisms exist to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

null

Does the organization define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders)?

8

Protect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define the tasks that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) will support (e.g., classifiers, generative models, recommenders).

null

MAP 2.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Knowledge Limits

AAT-14.2

Mechanisms exist to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

null

Does the organization identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and document knowledge limits of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) to provide sufficient information to assist relevant stakeholder decision making.

null

MAP 2.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Viability Decisions

AAT-15

Mechanisms exist to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

null

Does the organization define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define the criteria as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) achieved intended purposes and stated objectives to determine whether its development or deployment should proceed.

null

MANAGE 1.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Negative Residual Risks

AAT-15.1

Mechanisms exist to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and document negative, residual risks (defined as the sum of all unmitigated risks) to both downstream acquirers and end users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MANAGE 1.4

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Responsibility To Supersede, Deactivate and/or Disengage AI & Autonomous Technologies

AAT-15.2

Mechanisms exist to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

null

Does the organization define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust incident response and business continuity plans exist to respond to AAT-related emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define the criteria and responsible party(ies) for superseding, disengaging or deactivating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use.

null

MANAGE 2.4

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Production Monitoring

AAT-16

Mechanisms exist to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Detect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to monitor the functionality and behavior of the deployed Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MEASURE 2.4

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Measurement Approaches

AAT-16.1

Mechanisms exist to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

null

Does the organization measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users?

8

Detect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to measure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks to deployment context(s) through review and consultation with industry experts, domain specialists and end users.

null

MEASURE 4.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Measuring AI & Autonomous Technologies Effectiveness

AAT-16.2

Mechanisms exist to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

null

Does the organization regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities?

5

Detect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to regularly assess the effectiveness of existing controls, including reports of errors and potential impacts on affected communities.

null

MEASURE 1.0 MEASURE 1.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Unmeasurable AI & Autonomous Technologies Risks

AAT-16.3

Mechanisms exist to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

null

Does the organization identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics?

7

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and document unmeasurable risks or trustworthiness characteristics.

null

MEASURE 1.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Efficacy of AI & Autonomous Technologies Measurement

AAT-16.4

Mechanisms exist to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

null

Does the organization gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements?

5

Detect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to gather and assess feedback about the efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related measurements.

null

MEASURE 4.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Domain Expert Reviews

AAT-16.5

Mechanisms exist to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

null

Does the organization utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended?

8

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to utilize input from domain experts and relevant stakeholders to validate whether the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) perform consistently, as intended.

null

MEASURE 4.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Performance Changes

AAT-16.6

Mechanisms exist to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

null

Does the organization evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to evaluate performance improvements or declines with domain experts and relevant stakeholders to define context-relevant risks and trustworthiness issues.

null

MEASURE 4.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Pre-Trained AI & Autonomous Technologies Models

AAT-16.7

Mechanisms exist to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

null

Does the organization validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities?

8

Protect

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to validate the information sources and quality of pre-trained models used in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT training, maintenance and improvement-related activities.

null

MANAGE 3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Harm Prevention

AAT-17

Mechanisms exist to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

null

Does the organization proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to proactively prevent harm by regularly identifying and tracking existing, unanticipated and emergent Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks.

null

MEASURE 3.1

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Human Subject Protections

AAT-17.1

Mechanisms exist to protect human subjects from harm.

null

Does the organization protect human subjects from harm?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to protect human subjects from harm.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to protect human subjects from harm.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to protect human subjects from harm.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to protect human subjects from harm.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to protect human subjects from harm.

null

MEASURE 2.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Environmental Impact & Sustainability

AAT-17.2

Mechanisms exist to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

Does the organization assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)?

9

Protect

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to assess and document the environmental impacts and sustainability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT).

null

MEASURE 2.12

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

Previously Unknown AI & Autonomous Technologies Threats & Risks

AAT-17.3

Mechanisms exist to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

null

Does the organization respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified?

9

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to respond to and recover from a previously unknown Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risk when it is identified.

null

MANAGE 2.3

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Risk Tracking Approaches

AAT-18

Mechanisms exist to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

null

Does the organization track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available?

9

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to track Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available.

null

MEASURE 3.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Artificial & Autonomous Technologies

AI & Autonomous Technologies Risk Response

AAT-18.1

Mechanisms exist to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

null

Does the organization prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output?

10

Protect

X

There is no evidence of a capability to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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: • Legal reviews are conducted to minimize the inadvertent infringement of third-party Intellectual Property (IP) rights through the use of AAT products and/ or services. • AAT-specific compliance requirements for cybersecurity & data privacy are identified and documented. • Governance function for AAT is formally assigned with defined roles and associated responsibilities. • A Program Management Office (PMO), or similar function, tracks and reports on activities related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AAT. • Secure engineering principles are identified and implemented to ensure AAT are designed to be reliable, safe, fair, secure, resilient, transparent, explainable and data privacy-enhanced to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences. • Robust development and pre-deployment functionality, security and data privacy testing is conducted on all internal and third-party AAT projects. • Production use of AAT is closely monitored to minimize emergent properties or unintended consequences.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to prioritize, respond to and remediate Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related risks based on assessments and other analytical output.

null

MANAGE 1.0

null

R-AC-1 R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-3 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-GV-8 R-IR-1 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

null

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

R-GV-3

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

R-GV-8

R-IR-1

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

null

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

null

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

null

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Asset Governance

AST-01

Mechanisms exist to facilitate an IT Asset Management (ITAM) program to implement and manage asset management controls.

- Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) - ITIL - Configuration Management Database (CMDB) - IT Asset Management (ITAM) program

E-AST-01

Does the organization facilitate an IT Asset Management (ITAM) program to implement and manage asset management controls?

10

Identify

X

There is no evidence of a capability to facilitate an IT Asset Management (ITAM) program to implement and manage asset management controls.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • Asset management is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Asset inventories are performed in an ad hoc manner. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Data process owners maintain limited network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data that is specific to their initiative. • IT personnel work with data/process owners to help ensure secure practices are implemented throughout the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Asset management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for asset management. • Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed. • Asset management is formally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Technology assets are categorized according to data classification and business criticality. • Inventories cover technology assets in scope for statutory, regulatory and/ or contractual compliance, which includes both physical and virtual assets. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect technology assets assigned to them or under their supervision. • IT/cybersecurity personnel maintain network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data across the network. • Technologies are configured to protect data with the strength and integrity commensurate with the classification or sensitivity of the information and mostly conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides), including cryptographic protections for sensitive/regulated data.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function, analyzes the organization’s business strategy and prioritizes the objectives of the security function to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for asset management practices, within the broader scope of cybersecurity and data protection operations. • 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 organization. This CONOPS for asset management may be incorporated as part of a broader operational plan for the cybersecurity & data privacy program. • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity & data privacy controls to facilitate the implementation of secure and compliant practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization’s applications, systems, services and data. Compliance requirements for data backups are identified and documented. • A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity & data privacy program, including asset management. The steering committee establishes a clear and authoritative accountability structure for asset management operations. • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • An ITAM function, or similar function, conducts ongoing “technical debt” reviews of hardware and software technologies to remediate outdated and/ or unsupported technologies. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • Anti-theft software is installed on laptops and mobile devices to track assets removal from facilities. If possible, alerting is enabled for sensitive/regulated assets. • Technologies are configured to protect data with the strength and integrity commensurate with the classification or sensitivity of the information and conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides), including cryptographic protections for sensitive/regulated data. • The Human Resources (HR) department ensures that every user accessing a system that processes, stores, or transmits sensitive/regulated data is cleared and regularly trained in proper data handling practices.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

null

1.0 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2

2.1 2.2

1.3 2.1 2.2

BAI09.01 BAI09.02 BAI09.03 BAI09.04 BAI09.05

null

DCS-05

ASM-02

SO15

null

11.2.6

5.30 5.31 7.9

8.1 8.1.1

null

Sec 4(D)(2)(b)

GOVERN 2.0

PR.DS-P3

null

P-18

null

PM-5

null

PM-5

null

PM-5

null

PM-5

null

PM-5

null

PM-5

3.4.1

3.1.18.a 3.4.8.a 3.4.8.b 3.4.8.c

null

3.4.3e

null

ID.AM-1

ID.AM

null

12.3.3 12.3.4 12.3.7

6.3.2 9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2 11.2.2

null

9.5.1 9.5.1.1

9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2.2

null

9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2.2

9.5.1 9.5.1.1

D.1

null

1.3 1.3.1

null

ASSET-1.D.MIL2 ASSET-1.H.MIL3 ASSET-2.D.MIL2

ADM:SG1.SP1 ADM:SG3.SP2 TM:SG1.SP1

null

CM.L2-3.4.1

null

CM.L2-3.4.1

CM.L2-3.4.1 CM.L3-3.4.3e

PM-5

null

5.S.A

5.M.A

5.M.A 2.L.A

PM-5

120.45

null

8-311

1.2

null

38-99-20(D)(2)(b)

null

PM-5

null

3.5(53) 3.5(54)

null

Art 32.1 Art 32.2

Article 21.2(i)

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

null

12.2

AM-03

null

2-1 2-5

null

3.3.3

2-1-1 2-1-2 2-6-1 2-6-2 2-6-4

2-1

null

Sec 19.1 Sec 19.2

null

A3.a

A3

null

Principle 2.1 Principle 6.1

null

0285 0286 0289 0290 0292 0591 1480 1457

null

21 21(c)

null

8.1.1.6.PB 11.2.6

null

5.1

8.4.9.C.01

null

3.3.1 3.3.1(a) 3.3.1(d) 7.1.1 11.4.1 11.4.2 11.4.3

null

5.9

null

2.2.1

null

x

NAIC

x

R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-4 R-EX-6 R-EX-7 R-GV-2 R-GV-4 R-IR-1 R-SA-1

null

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

null

R-BC-4

null

R-EX-6

R-EX-7

null

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-4

null

R-IR-1

null

R-SA-1

null

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15 MT-16

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

MT-16

null

Asset Management

Asset-Service Dependencies

AST-01.1

Mechanisms exist to identify and assess the security of technology assets that support more than one critical business function.

null

E-BCM-09

Does the organization identify and assess the security of technology assets that support more than one critical business function?

5

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and assess the security of technology assets that support more than one critical business function.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to identify and assess the security of technology assets that support more than one critical business function.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Asset management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for asset management. • Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed. • Asset management is formally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Technology assets are categorized according to data classification and business criticality. • Inventories cover technology assets in scope for statutory, regulatory and/ or contractual compliance, which includes both physical and virtual assets. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect technology assets assigned to them or under their supervision. • IT/cybersecurity personnel maintain network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data across the network. • F or business-critical business services and assets, dependencies are reviewed by cybersecurity personnel for security concerns.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • The CMDB, or similar tool, is leveraged to identify asset-service dependencies that can impact the security of technology assets, as well as relevant stakeholders and data/process owners. • An IT infrastructure team, or similar function, ensures that statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity & data privacy controls are addressed to ensure secure configurations are designed, built and maintained.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and assess the security of technology assets that support more than one critical business function.

null

CC5.2-POF1

null

APO09.01 APO09.02 BAI09.01 BAI09.02

null

RQ-09-08.a

null

5.9 5.30

null

ID.IM-P8

null

GV.OC-04 ID.AM-05

null

K.12.3

null

3.1.3

null

ASSET-1.A.MIL1

ADM:SG2.SP2 EC:SG4.SP3 TM:SG5.SP4

null

III.B.1.a

null

3.3.3(17) 3.3.3(18) 3.5(54)

Art 8.5

null

12.2

null

A3.a B3.a

A4

null

21(a)

null

2.9.2

null

x

R-AC-4 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-4 R-EX-6 R-GV-2 R-IR-1 R-SA-1

null

R-AC-4

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

null

R-BC-4

null

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-2

null

R-IR-1

null

R-SA-1

null

NT-1 NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

NT-1

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Stakeholder Identification & Involvement

AST-01.2

Mechanisms exist to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.

null

E-CPL-03

Does the organization identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services to support the ongoing secure management of those assets?

5

Identify

null

X

null

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • Asset management is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Asset inventories are performed in an ad hoc manner. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Data process owners maintain limited network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data that is specific to their initiative. • IT personnel work with data/process owners to help ensure secure practices are implemented throughout the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Asset management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for asset management. • Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed. • Asset management is formally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Technology assets are categorized according to data classification and business criticality. • Inventories cover technology assets in scope for statutory, regulatory and/ or contractual compliance, which includes both physical and virtual assets. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect technology assets assigned to them or under their supervision. • IT/cybersecurity personnel maintain network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data across the network.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • Quarterly IT asset inventories are reviewed and shared with appropriate stakeholders.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.

null

EDM05.01 EDM05.02 EDM05.03 DSS06.02

null

4.2

4.2 4.2(a)

null

5.9

8.1

null

GOVERN 1.1 GOVERN 2.0 GOVERN 5.0

ID.IM-P2 ID.IM-P8

null

GV.OC-02

null

D.1

null

GG2.GP7 MON:SG1.SP2

null

III.A

null

3.3.2(16) 3.5(54)

null

2-1-1-4

null

A3.a

null

4.4.3 4.4.3.1

null

3.3.1(c)

null

R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-4 R-BC-5 R-EX-6 R-GV-2 R-GV-4 R-IR-1

null

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

null

R-BC-4

R-BC-5

null

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-4

null

R-IR-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Standardized Naming Convention

AST-01.3

Mechanisms exist to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

null

Does the organization implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts?

5

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • Standardized and scalable naming conventions for systems, applications and services are in place to avoid asset naming conflicts.

See SP-CMM3. SP-CMM4 is N/A, since a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

See SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to implement a scalable, standardized naming convention for systems, applications and services that avoids asset naming conflicts.

null

ASM-04

null

D.1.1.2

null

R-AC-1 R-AM-1 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-5 R-EX-1 R-EX-6 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-IR-2 R-IR-3 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

R-AC-1

null

R-AM-1

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

null

R-BC-5

R-EX-1

null

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-IR-2

R-IR-3

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Asset Inventories

AST-02

Mechanisms exist to perform inventories of technology assets that: ▪ Accurately reflects the current systems, applications and services in use; ▪ Identifies authorized software products, including business justification details; ▪ Is at the level of granularity deemed necessary for tracking and reporting; ▪ Includes organization-defined information deemed necessary to achieve effective property accountability; and ▪ Is available for review and audit by designated organizational personnel.

- ManageEngine AssetExplorer - LANDesk IT Asset Management Suite - ServiceNow (https://www.servicenow.com/) - SolarWinds (https://www.solarwinds.com/) - CrowdStrike - JAMF - ITIL - Configuration Management Database (CMDB)

E-AST-04 E-AST-05 E-AST-07

Does the organization perform inventories of technology assets that: ▪ Accurately reflects the current systems, applications and services in use; ▪ Identifies authorized software products, including business justification details; ▪ Is at the level of granularity deemed necessary for tracking and reporting; ▪ Includes organization-defined information deemed necessary to achieve effective property accountability; and ▪ Is available for review and audit by designated organizational personnel?

10

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to perform inventories of technology assets that: ▪ Accurately reflects the current systems, applications and services in use; ▪ Identifies authorized software products, including business justification details; ▪ Is at the level of granularity deemed necessary for tracking and reporting; ▪ Includes organization-defined information deemed necessary to achieve effective property accountability; and ▪ Is available for review and audit by designated organizational personnel.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: • Asset management is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Asset inventories are performed in an ad hoc manner. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Data process owners maintain limited network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data that is specific to their initiative. • IT personnel work with data/process owners to help ensure secure practices are implemented throughout the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects. • Inventories are manual (e.g., spreadsheets). • Assets are assigned owners and are documented. • No structured process exists to review or share the results of the inventories.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are requirements-driven and formally 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: • Asset management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure and compliant practices. • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity & data privacy controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for asset management. • Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed. • Asset management is formally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. • Technology assets are categorized according to data classification and business criticality. • Inventories cover technology assets in scope for statutory, regulatory and/ or contractual compliance, which includes both physical and virtual assets. • Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories. • Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect technology assets assigned to them or under their supervision. • IT/cybersecurity personnel maintain network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data across the network. • Maintenance of asset inventory is performed at least annually. • Inventory of physical technology assets are assigned to individual users or teams and covers common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers). • Inventories may be manual (e.g., spreadsheets) or automated. • No structured process exists to review or share the results of the inventories. • Annual IT asset inventories validate or update stakeholders /owners.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • Quarterly IT asset inventories are reviewed and shared with appropriate stakeholders. • Inventories are predominately automated, but may have some manual components (e.g., cloud-based assets that are out of scope for automated inventory scans). • Inventories processes include Indicators of Compromise (IoC) to identify evidence of physical tampering. • Inventory scans are configured to be recurring, based on ITAM tool configuration settings. • Annual IT asset inventories validate or update stakeholders / owners. • A Software Asset Management (SAM) solution is used to centrally manage deployed software. • An ITAM function, or similar function, conducts ongoing “technical debt” reviews of hardware and software technologies to remediate outdated and/ or unsupported technologies.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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.

Asset Management (AST) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

null

CC6.1-POF1

null

1.0 1.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.4 6.6

1.1 2.1 2.2

1.1 2.1 2.2 2.4 6.6

BAI09.01

null

DCS-05 DSP-03 STA-07 UEM-04

ASM-01 SNT-04

SO15

null

CR 7.8 (11.10.1)

null

8.1.1

5.9

8.1.1

null

6.5 6.5.1 6.5.1.1

null

T1011.001, T1020.001, T1021.001, T1021.003, T1021.004, T1021.005, T1021.006, T1046, T1052, T1052.001, T1053, T1053.002, T1053.005, T1059, T1059.001, T1059.005, T1059.007, T1068, T1072, T1091, T1092, T1098.004, T1119, T1127, T1127.001, T1133, T1137, T1137.001, T1189, T1190, T1195.003, T1203, T1210, T1211, T1212, T1213, T1213.001, T1213.002, T1218, T1218.003, T1218.004, T1218.005, T1218.008, T1218.009, T1218.012, T1218.013, T1218.014, T1221, T1495, T1505, T1505.001, T1505.002, T1505.004, T1530, T1542, T1542.001, T1542.003, T1542.004, T1542.005, T1546.002, T1546.006, T1546.014, T1547.007, T1548, T1548.004, T1553, T1553.006, T1557, T1557.001, T1557.002, T1559, T1559.002, T1563, T1563.001, T1563.002, T1564.006, T1564.007, T1565, T1565.001, T1565.002, T1574, T1574.004, T1574.007, T1574.008, T1574.009, T1601, T1601.001, T1601.002, T1602, T1602.001, T1602.002

TS-5.0

null

GOVERN 1.6

ID.IM-P1

null

P-10

null

CM-8 PM-5

CM-8

CM-8 PM-5

null

CM-8

PM-5

null

CM-8

null

CM-8 PM-5

CM-8

CM-8 PM-5

null

CM-8 PM-5

3.4.1

3.4.8.a 3.4.8.c 3.4.10.a 3.4.10.b

3.4.1[d] 3.4.1[e] 3.4.1[f]

A.03.04.10.a A.03.04.10.b[01] A.03.04.10.b[02]

3.4.1e 3.4.3e

null

ID.AM-1 ID.AM-2 ID.AM-4

ID.AM-01 ID.AM-02 ID.AM-07

null

1.1.2 2.4

6.3.2 9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2 11.2.2

null

9.5.1 9.5.1.1

9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2.2

null

9.5.1 9.5.1.1 11.2.2

9.5.1 9.5.1.1

D.1.1

null

1.3.1

null

ASSET-1.B.MIL2 ASSET-1.D.MIL2 ASSET-1.F.MIL3 ASSET-1.G.MIL3 ASSET-1.H.MIL3 ASSET-2.A.MIL1 ASSET-2.B.MIL2 ASSET-2.D.MIL2 ASSET-2.F.MIL3 ASSET-2.G.MIL3

ADM:SG1.SP1 TM:SG1.SP1

2.3

null

CM.L2-3.4.1

CM.L2-3.4.1 TBD - 3.4.1e

null

CM.L2-3.4.1

CM.L2-3.4.1 CM.L3-3.4.1e CM.L3-3.4.3e

CM-8 PM-5

null

252.204-7018(c)

null

CM-8

null

D1.G.IT.B.1 D4.RM.Dd.B.2 D4.C.Co.B.3

null

164.310(d)(2)(iii)

5.S.A

5.M.A 9.M.D

5.M.A 9.M.D 2.L.E

CM-8 PM-5

null

CM-8

null

CM-8 PM-5

CM-8

null

3.5(53) 3.5(54)

Art 8.4 Art 8.6

null

Sec 14 Sec 15

Art 16

null

8.2 12.2

AM-01 AM-02

null

2-1-1-1

null

2-1 2-1-1 2-1-1-3

null

7.3.1 [OP.EXP.1]

null

A3.a B3.e

null

Principle 2.1 Principle 6.1

null

0336 1643 1807

null

8.1.1 8.1.1.6.PB

null

8.4.8.C.01 8.4.9.C.01

null

3.3.1(a) 3.3.2

null

5.9

null

3.1

2.2.2 2.2.3 3.1.4

null

x

Lockton

null

x

R-AC-2 R-AC-3 R-AC-4 R-AM-2 R-AM-3 R-BC-1 R-BC-2 R-BC-3 R-BC-4 R-EX-6 R-GV-1 R-GV-2 R-GV-4 R-GV-5 R-GV-6 R-GV-7 R-IR-1 R-IR-3

null

R-AC-2

R-AC-3

R-AC-4

null

R-AM-2

R-AM-3

R-BC-1

R-BC-2

R-BC-3

R-BC-4

null

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-1

R-GV-2

null

R-GV-4

R-GV-5

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

R-IR-1

null

R-IR-3

null

NT-2 NT-3 NT-4 NT-5 NT-6 NT-7 NT-8 NT-9 NT-10 NT-11 NT-12 NT-13 NT-14 MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 MT-4 MT-5 MT-6 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-2

NT-3

NT-4

NT-5

NT-6

NT-7

NT-8

NT-9

NT-10

NT-11

NT-12

NT-13

NT-14

MT-1

MT-2

MT-3

MT-4

MT-5

MT-6

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Updates During Installations / Removals

AST-02.1

Mechanisms exist to update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades.

- CrowdStrike - JAMF - ITIL - Configuration Management Database (CMDB)

null

Does the organization update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades?

7

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • The process of purchasing, updating, repairing and disposing of assets is integrated into ITAM processes.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to update asset inventories as part of component installations, removals and asset upgrades.

null

CR 7.8 (11.10.1)

null

ID.IM-P1

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

3.4.10.c

3.4.1[f]

null

D.1.1.1

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

164.310(d)(2)(iii)

5.S.A

5.M.A 9.M.D

5.M.A 9.M.D 2.L.A

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

CM-8(1)

null

Art 8.6

null

AM-01 AM-02

null

2-1-1-1

null

x

R-AC-4 R-AM-3 R-BC-2 R-BC-4 R-GV-2 R-IR-1 R-SA-1

null

R-AC-4

null

R-AM-3

null

R-BC-2

null

R-BC-4

null

R-GV-2

null

R-IR-1

null

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null

Asset Management

Automated Unauthorized Component Detection

AST-02.2

Automated mechanisms exist to detect and alert upon the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components.

- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://www.cimcor.com/cimtrak/) - DHCP logging - Active discovery tools - NNT Change Tracker (https://www.newnettechnologies.com) - Vectra - Tripwire Enterprise (https://www.tripwire.com/products/tripwire-enterprise/) - Puppet (https://puppet.com/) - Chef (https://www.chef.io/) (https://www.chef.io/) - Microsoft SCCM - CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://www.cimcor.com/cimtrak/)

null

Does the organization use automated mechanisms to detect and alert upon the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components?

3

Detect

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to detect and alert up on the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to detect and alert up on the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to detect and alert up on the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data. • The ITAM tool is configured to detect and alert on instances of duplication, unauthorized components and unauthorized software. • Unauthorized configuration changes are responded to in accordance with an Incident Response Plan (IRP) to determine if the change is malicious in nature.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to detect and alert up on the detection of unauthorized hardware, software and firmware components.

null

CC7.1-POF4

null

1.2 1.3 1.5 2.2 2.3 2.4

1.2 2.2 2.3

1.2 1.3 2.2 2.3 2.4

1.2 1.3 1.5 2.2 2.3 2.4

null

CCM-06 SNT-04

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

A.03.04.10.c[01] A.03.04.10.c[02] A.03.04.10.c[03]

3.4.3e 3.5.3e

null

N.2.4

null

TBD - 3.5.3e

null

CM.L3-3.4.3e IA.L3-3.5.3e

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

5.L.A 5.L.B

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

CM-8(3)

null

AM-02

null

2-3-1-11

null

1807

null

x

null

x

R-AM-3 R-BC-4 R-EX-6 R-GV-2 R-IR-1 R-IR-4 R-SA-1

null

R-AM-3

null

R-BC-4

null

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-2

null

R-IR-1

null

R-IR-4

R-SA-1

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

null

Asset Management

Component Duplication Avoidance

AST-02.3

Mechanisms exist to establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories.

- ITIL - Configuration Management Database (CMDB) - Manual or automated process

null

Does the organization establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories?

2

Identify

null

X

There is no evidence of a capability to establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories.

SP-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories.

SP-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories.

Asset Management (AST) 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: • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management. • An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments. • Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria. • A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body. • Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data.

Asset Management (AST) 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. ▪ 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 & data privacy 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 SP-CMM4. SP-CMM5 is N/A, since a continuously-improving process is not necessary to establish and maintain an authoritative source and repository to provide a trusted source and accountability for approved and implemented system components that prevents assets from being duplicated in other asset inventories.

null

1.3

null

1.3

null

T1011.001, T1020.001, T1021.001, T1021.003, T1021.004, T1021.005, T1021.006, T1046, T1052, T1052.001, T1053, T1053.002, T1053.005, T1059, T1059.001, T1059.005, T1059.007, T1068, T1072, T1091, T1092, T1098.004, T1119, T1127, T1127.001, T1133, T1137, T1137.001, T1189, T1190, T1195.003, T1203, T1210, T1211, T1212, T1213, T1213.001, T1213.002, T1218, T1218.003, T1218.004, T1218.005, T1218.008, T1218.009, T1218.012, T1218.013, T1218.014, T1221, T1495, T1505, T1505.001, T1505.002, T1505.004, T1530, T1542, T1542.001, T1542.003, T1542.004, T1542.005, T1546.002, T1546.006, T1546.014, T1547.007, T1548, T1548.004, T1553, T1553.006, T1557, T1557.001, T1557.002, T1559, T1559.002, T1563, T1563.001, T1563.002, T1564.006, T1564.007, T1565, T1565.001, T1565.002, T1574, T1574.004, T1574.007, T1574.008, T1574.009, T1601, T1601.001, T1601.002, T1602, T1602.001, T1602.002

null

CM-8(5)

null

CM-8(5)

CM-8

null

CM-8

null

CM-8

null

CM-8

null

CM-8

NFO - CM-8(5)

null

D.1.1

null

CM-8(5)

null

CM-8(5)

null

CM-8(5)

null

5.L.A

CM-8

null

CM-8(5)

null

CM-8

null

CM-8(5)

null

x

R-AM-3 R-BC-2 R-EX-1 R-EX-2 R-EX-3 R-EX-4 R-EX-5 R-EX-6 R-GV-6 R-GV-7

null

R-AM-3

null

R-BC-2

null

R-EX-1

R-EX-2

R-EX-3

R-EX-4

R-EX-5

R-EX-6

null

R-GV-6

R-GV-7

null

NT-7 MT-1 MT-2 MT-7 MT-8 MT-9 MT-10 MT-11 MT-12 MT-13 MT-14 MT-15

null

NT-7

null

MT-1

MT-2

null

MT-7

MT-8

MT-9

MT-10

MT-11

MT-12

MT-13

MT-14

MT-15

null