Policy vs Standard vs Control vs Procedure

Cybersecurity, IT professionals and legal professionals routinely abuse the terms “policy” and “standard” as if these words were synonymous. In reality, these terms have quite different implications, and those differences should be kept in mind since the use of improper terminology has cascading effects that can negatively impact the internal controls of an organization. The information below is meant to help get everyone on the same sheet of music, since words do have meanings and it is important to understand cybersecurity and privacy requirements. In the context of good cybersecurity & privacy documentation, policies and standards are key components that are intended to be hierarchical and build on each other to build a strong governance structure that utilizes an integrated approach to managing requirements. 

A common question is “What is the difference between a policy vs a standard?”

In simple terms, a policy is a high-level statement of management intent that formally establishes requirements to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes. A policy is intended to come from the CEO or board of directors that has strategic implications. However, a standard is a formally-established requirement in regard to a process, action or configuration that is meant to be an objective, quantifiable expectation to be met (e.g., 8 character password, change passwords every 90 days, etc.).

In reality, no one should ever ask for an exception to a policy. Exceptions should only be for standards when there is a legitimate business reason or technical limitation that precludes a standard from being followed (e.g., vulnerability scanning exception for a "fragile" application that breaks when scanned by the default scanning profile). It is important that if a standard is granted an exception, there should be a compensating control placed to reduce that increased risk from the lack of the required standard (e.g., segment off the application that cannot be scanned for vulnerabilities).

Documentation Should Be Hierarchical: Policy > Standard 

In an effort to help clarify this concept, ComplianceForge Hierarchical Cybersecurity Governance Framework™ (HCGF) takes a comprehensive view towards the necessary documentation components that are key to being able to demonstrate evidence of due diligence and due care. This framework addresses the interconnectivity of policies, control objectives, standards, guidelines, controls, risks, procedures & metrics. The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) fits into this model by providing the necessary cybersecurity and privacy controls an organization needs to implement to stay both secure and compliant.

ComplianceForge has simplified the concept of the hierarchical nature of cybersecurity and privacy documentation in the following downloadable diagram to demonstrate the unique nature of these components, as well as the dependencies that exist:

One of the most important things to keep in mind with procedures is that the "ownership" is different than that of policies and standards:

• Policies, standards and controls are designed to be centrally-managed at the corporate level (e.g., governance, risk & compliance team, CISO, etc.)
• Controls are assigned to stakeholders, based on applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations
• Procedures are by their very nature de-centralized, where control implementation at the control level is defined to explain how the control is addressed. 

Given this approach to how documentation is structured, based on "ownership" of the documentation components:

• Policies, standards and controls are expected to be published for anyone within the organization to have access to, since it applies organization-wide. This may be centrally-managed by a GRC/IRM platform or published as a PDF on a file share, since they are relatively static with infrequent changes.
• Procedures are "living documents" that require frequent updates based on changes to technologies and staffing. Procedures are often documented in "team share" repositories, such as a wiki, SharePoint page, workflow management tool, etc.

Why Should You Care?

Governance is built on words. Beyond just using terminology properly, understanding the meaning of these concepts is crucial in being able to properly implement cybersecurity and privacy governance within an organization. An indicator of a well-run governance program is the implementation of hierarchical documentation since it involves bringing together the right individuals to provide appropriate direction based on the scope of their job function.

To help visualize that concept, imagine the board of directors of your organization publishing procedural process guidance for how a security analyst performs daily log review activities. Most would agree that such a scenario is absurd since the board of directors should be focused on the strategic direction of the company and not day-to-day procedures.

However, in many organizations, the inverse occurs where the task of publishing the entire range of cybersecurity documentation is delegated down to individuals who might be competent technicians but do not have insights into the strategic direction of the organization. This is where the concept of hierarchical documentation is vitally important since there are strategic, operational, and tactical documentation components that have to be addressed to support governance functions.

Understanding the hierarchy of cybersecurity documentation can lead to well-informed risk decisions, which influence technology purchases, staffing resources, and management involvement. That is why it serves both cybersecurity and IT professionals well to understand the cybersecurity governance landscape for their benefit, as it is relatively easy to present issues of non-compliance in a compelling business context to get the resources you need to do your job.

What Wrong Looks Like

All too often, documentation is not scoped properly, and this leads to the governance function being more of an obstacle as compared to an asset. A multiple-page “policy” document that blends high-level security concepts (e.g., policies), configuration requirements (e.g., standards), and work assignments (e.g., procedures) is an example of poor governance documentation that leads to confusion and inefficiencies across technology, cybersecurity, and privacy operations. Several reasons why this form of documentation is considered poorly-architected documentation include:

• Human nature is always the mortal enemy of unclear documentation, as people will not take the time to read it. An ignorant or ill-informed workforce entirely defeats the premise of having the documentation in the first place.
• If the goal is to be “audit ready” with documentation, having excessively-wordy documentation is misguided. Excessive prose that explains concepts ad nauseum in paragraph after paragraph makes it very hard to understand the exact requirements, and that can lead to gaps in compliance.

What Right Looks Like

In the context of good cybersecurity documentation, these components are hierarchical and build on each other to build a strong governance structure that utilizes an integrated approach to managing requirements. 

Well-designed documentation is comprised of five (5) core components:

1. Policies are established by an organization’s corporate leadership establishes “management’s intent” for cybersecurity and data protection requirements that are necessary to support the organization’s overall strategy and mission;
2. Controls / Control Objectives identify the technical, administrative and physical protections that are generally tied to a law, regulation, industry framework or contractual obligation;
3. Standards provide organization-specific, quantifiable requirements for cybersecurity and data protection;
4. Procedures (also known as Control Activities) establish the defined practices or steps that are performed to meet to implement standards and satisfy controls / control objectives; and
5. Guidelines are additional guidance that is recommended, but not mandatory.

Understanding Basic Cybersecurity & Data Protection Documentation Components

Since words have meanings, it is important to provide examples from industry-recognized sources for the proper use of these terms that make up cybersecurity & privacy documentation:

Policy

Policies are high-level statements of management intent from an organization’s executive leadership that are designed to influence decisions and guide the organization to achieve the desired outcomes. Policies are enforced by standards and further implemented by procedures to establish actionable and accountable requirements. Policies are a business decision, not a technical one. Technology determines how policies are implemented. Policies usually exist to satisfy an external requirement (e.g., law, regulation and/or contract).

• ISACA Glossary:
• A document that records a high-level principle or course of action that has been decided on.
• The intended purpose is to influence and guide both present and future decision making to be in line with the philosophy, objectives and strategic plans established by the enterprise’s management teams.
• Overall intention and direction as formally expressed by management.
• ISO 704:2009:
• Any general statement of direction and purpose designed to promote the coordinated planning, practical acquisition, effective development, governance, security practices, or efficient use of information technology resources.
• ISO 27000:2016:
• Intention and direction of an organization as formally expressed by its top management.
• NIST Glossary:
• Statements, rules or assertions that specify the correct or expected behavior of an entity.
• A statement of objectives, rules, practices or regulations governing the activities of people within a certain context.

Control Objective

Control Objectives are targets or desired conditions to be met. These are statements describing what is to be achieved as a result of the organization implementing a control, which is what a Standard is intended to address. Where applicable, Control Objectives are directly linked to an industry-recognized secure practice to align cybersecurity and privacy with accepted practices. The intent is to establish sufficient evidence of due diligence and due care to withstand scrutiny.

• ISACA Glossary:
• A statement of the desired result or purpose to be achieved by implementing control procedures in a particular process.
• ISO 27000:2016:
• Statement describing what is to be achieved as a result of implementing controls.

Standard

Standards are mandatory requirements regarding processes, actions and configurations that are designed to satisfy Control Objectives. Standards are intended to be granular and prescriptive to ensure systems, applications and processes are designed and operated to include appropriate cybersecurity and privacy protections.

• ISACA Glossary:
• A mandatory requirement.
• NIST Glossary:
• A published statement on a topic specifying the characteristics, usually measurable, that must be satisfied or achieved to comply with the standard.
• A rule, condition, or requirement describing the following information for products, systems, services or practices:
• Classification of components.
• Specification of materials, performance, or operations; or
• Delineation of procedures. 

Guideline / Supplemental Guidance

Guidelines are recommended practices that are based on industry-recognized secure practices. Guidelines help augment Standards when discretion is permissible. Unlike Standards, Guidelines allow users to apply discretion or leeway in their interpretation, implementation, or use.

• ISACA Glossary:
• A description of a particular way of accomplishing something that is less prescriptive than a procedure.
• ISO 704:2009:
• Recommendations suggesting, but not requiring, practices that produce similar, but not identical, results.
• A documented recommendation of how an organization should implement something.
• NIST Glossary:
• Statements used to provide additional explanatory information for security controls or security control enhancements.

Control

Controls are technical, administrative or physical safeguards. Controls are the nexus used to manage risks through preventing, detecting or lessening the ability of a particular threat from negatively impacting business processes. Controls directly map to standards, since control testing is designed to measure specific aspects of how standards are actually implemented.

• ISACA Glossary:
• The means of managing risk, including policies, procedures, guidelines, practices or organizational structures, which can be of an administrative, technical, management, or legal nature.
• ISO 27000:2016:
• The policies, procedures, practices and organizational structures designed to provide reasonable assurance that business objectives will be achieved and undesired events will be prevented or detected and corrected.
• Measure that is modifying risk:
• Controls include any process, policy, device, practice, or other actions which modify risk.
• Controls may not always exert the intended or assumed modifying effect.
• NIST Glossary:
• Measure that is modifying risk. (Note: controls include any process, policy, device, practice, or other actions which modify risk.)
• NIST SP 800-53 R5:
• The safeguards or countermeasures prescribed for an information system or an organization to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system and its information [security control].
• The administrative, technical, and physical safeguards employed within an agency to ensure compliance with applicable privacy requirements and manage privacy risks [privacy control].

Procedure

Procedures are a documented set of steps necessary to perform a specific task or process in conformance with an applicable standard. Procedures help address the question of how the organization actually operationalizes a policy, standard or control. Without documented procedures, there can be defendable evidence of due care practices. Procedures are generally the responsibility of the process owner / asset custodian to build and maintain but are expected to include stakeholder oversight to ensure applicable compliance requirements are addressed. The result of a procedure is intended to satisfy a specific control. Procedures are also commonly referred to as “control activities.”

• ISACA Glossary:
• A document containing a detailed description of the steps necessary to perform specific operations in conformance with applicable standards. Procedures are defined as part of processes.
• ISO 704:2009:
• A detailed description of the steps necessary to perform specific operations in conformance with applicable standards.
• A group of instructions in a program designed to perform a specific set of operations.
• NIST Glossary:
• A set of instructions used to describe a process or procedure that performs an explicit operation or explicit reaction to a given event.

Risk

Risks represents a potential exposure to harm or loss. Risk is often calculated by a formula of Threat x Vulnerability x Consequence in an attempt to quantify the potential magnitude of a risk instance occurring. While it is not possible to have a totally risk-free environment, it may be possible to manage risks by avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks.

• ISACA Glossary:
• The combination of the probability of an event and its consequence.
• ISO 704:2009:
• The level of impact on organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, or the Nation resulting from the operation of an information system given the potential impact of a threat and the likelihood of that threat occurring.
• NIST SP 800-53 R5:
• A measure of the extent to which an entity is threatened by a potential circumstance or event, and typically is a function of:
• The adverse impact, or magnitude of harm, that would arise if the circumstance or event occurs; and
• The likelihood of occurrence.
• NIST Glossary:
• A measure of the extent to which an entity is threatened by a potential circumstance or event, and typically a function of:
• The adverse impacts that would arise if the circumstance or event occurs; and
• The likelihood of occurrence. Information system-related security risks are those risks that arise from the loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information or information systems and reflect the potential adverse impacts to organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation.

Metric

Metrics provide a “point in time” view of specific, discrete measurements, unlike trending and analytics that are derived by comparing a baseline of two or more measurements taken over a period of time. Analytics are generated from the analysis of metrics. Analytics are designed to facilitate decision-making, evaluate performance and improve accountability through the collection, analysis and reporting of relevant performance related data. Good metrics are those that are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Repeatable, and Time-dependent)

• ISACA Glossary:
• A quantifiable entity that allows the measurement of the achievement of a process goal.
• ISO 704:2009:
• A thing that is measured and reported to help with the management of processes, services, or activities.
• NIST Glossary:
• Tools designed to facilitate decision making and improve performance and accountability through collection, analysis, and reporting of relevant performance-related data.

 

Questions? Please contact us for clarification so that we can help you find the right solution for your cybersecurity and privacy compliance needs.