bmad-plus 0.9.0 → 0.9.1

package/src/bmad-plus/packs/pack-shield/references/soc2/controls.md

@@ -1,241 +1,241 @@
-# SOC 2 Control Matrix Reference
-
-## Table of Contents
-1. [Security — Common Criteria (CC1–CC9)](#security--common-criteria)
-2. [Availability (A1)](#availability-a1)
-3. [Confidentiality (C1)](#confidentiality-c1)
-4. [Processing Integrity (PI1)](#processing-integrity-pi1)
-5. [Privacy (P1–P8)](#privacy-p1p8)
-6. [Control Statement Template](#control-statement-template)
-
----
-
-## Security — Common Criteria
-
-### CC1 — Control Environment
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC1.1 | COSO principles demonstrated; commitment to integrity and ethical values | No code of conduct or ethics policy; leadership not visibly engaged |
-| CC1.2 | Board or equivalent oversight of security program | No documented board/executive security oversight; no meeting minutes |
-| CC1.3 | Org structure, reporting lines, authorities defined | Org chart not current; security roles undefined |
-| CC1.4 | Competent personnel; HR lifecycle controls | No background checks; no security training program |
-| CC1.5 | Accountability for security responsibilities | Performance goals don't include security; no enforcement |
-
-**Example control (CC1.4):**
-```
-Control ID:    CC1.4-001
-Title:         Security Awareness Training
-Type:          Preventive
-Owner:         HR / Security
-Frequency:     Annual (+ onboarding)
-Description:   All employees complete annual security awareness training covering
-               phishing, data handling, and incident reporting. Completion is tracked
-               and non-completions escalated to managers.
-Evidence:      Training completion report from LMS, onboarding checklist sign-offs
-Test:          Inspect training platform report; confirm >95% completion within period;
-               sample 5 employees to verify completion dates within 12 months.
-```
-
----
-
-### CC2 — Communication and Information
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC2.1 | Quality information available to support control objectives | Policies inaccessible or not distributed; no intranet/wiki |
-| CC2.2 | Internal communication about security responsibilities | Security updates not communicated; no all-hands or newsletter |
-| CC2.3 | External communication with customers, regulators, vendors | No process to notify customers of security incidents; SLA terms vague |
-
----
-
-### CC3 — Risk Assessment
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC3.1 | Defined risk objectives; risk tolerance stated | No written risk appetite or tolerance statement |
-| CC3.2 | Risk identification and analysis process | No formal risk assessment; informal or ad hoc only |
-| CC3.3 | Fraud risk considered | No fraud risk assessment or controls |
-| CC3.4 | Technology change risks assessed | Changes don't trigger risk reassessment |
-
-**Example control (CC3.2):**
-```
-Control ID:    CC3.2-001
-Title:         Annual Risk Assessment
-Type:          Detective
-Owner:         CISO / Security Manager
-Frequency:     Annual + event-driven
-Description:   A formal risk assessment is performed annually, identifying threats,
-               vulnerabilities, and likelihood/impact ratings. A risk register is
-               maintained and reviewed quarterly by the security committee.
-Evidence:      Risk register (dated), risk assessment report with sign-off,
-               security committee meeting minutes
-Test:          Inspect risk register; confirm dated within 12 months; verify
-               management sign-off; confirm high risks have remediation owners.
-```
-
----
-
-### CC4 — Monitoring Controls
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC4.1 | Ongoing and separate evaluations of controls | No internal audits; no continuous monitoring program |
-| CC4.2 | Deficiencies evaluated and communicated | No deficiency tracking; findings not escalated |
-
----
-
-### CC5 — Control Activities
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC5.1 | Controls selected to mitigate risks | Controls not mapped to risks; no controls matrix |
-| CC5.2 | Technology controls deployed | No MFA, no endpoint protection, no SIEM |
-| CC5.3 | Policies and procedures deployed | Policies exist but not enforced; no procedures for key processes |
-
----
-
-### CC6 — Logical and Physical Access Controls
-
-This is typically the most heavily tested area.
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC6.1 | Logical access security measures | No MFA on critical systems; no SSO; shared accounts |
-| CC6.2 | New access provisioning authorized | No formal access request/approval process |
-| CC6.3 | Termination / role change access removal | Terminated employees not promptly de-provisioned (>24hr is a flag) |
-| CC6.4 | Access credentials protected | Passwords stored in plaintext; no PAM for privileged accounts |
-| CC6.5 | Logical access reviewed | No periodic user access reviews (quarterly/annual) |
-| CC6.6 | Logical access restricted from threats | No IDS/IPS; no network segmentation |
-| CC6.7 | Data transmission protected | Unencrypted data in transit; no TLS enforcement |
-| CC6.8 | Unauthorized software prevented | No application whitelisting or MDM; shadow IT uncontrolled |
-
-**Example control (CC6.3):**
-```
-Control ID:    CC6.3-001
-Title:         Access Termination — Employee Offboarding
-Type:          Preventive
-Owner:         IT / HR
-Frequency:     Event-driven (each termination)
-Description:   Upon employee termination, IT disables all system access within 24 hours
-               of the HR-initiated offboarding ticket. A checklist confirms: AD account
-               disabled, SaaS app access revoked, VPN certificate revoked, hardware
-               returned. HR confirms completion in the HRIS.
-Evidence:      Offboarding tickets, access revocation logs, HRIS termination records
-Test:          Select sample of 10–25 terminations in audit period; verify access was
-               revoked within 24 hours using AD logs and ticket timestamps.
-```
-
----
-
-### CC7 — System Operations
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC7.1 | Vulnerability and malware detection | No vulnerability scanning; no EDR on endpoints |
-| CC7.2 | Monitoring for security events | No SIEM or log aggregation; alerts not reviewed |
-| CC7.3 | Security incidents evaluated and responded to | No incident response plan; incidents not documented |
-| CC7.4 | Security incidents contained and resolved | No IR runbook; no post-incident review process |
-| CC7.5 | Identified vulnerabilities remediated | No SLA for patching critical vulns; no patch cadence |
-
----
-
-### CC8 — Change Management
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC8.1 | Authorized, tested, and approved changes | Changes deployed without tickets or approval; no testing in staging |
-
-**Example control (CC8.1):**
-```
-Control ID:    CC8.1-001
-Title:         Production Change Approval
-Type:          Preventive
-Owner:         Engineering / DevOps
-Frequency:     Event-driven
-Description:   All production changes require a change request ticket approved by
-               an authorized reviewer (tech lead or manager) before deployment.
-               Emergency changes require retroactive approval within 24 hours.
-               Changes are tested in staging/QA before production promotion.
-Evidence:      Change tickets with approvals, deployment logs, PR approvals in
-               version control (GitHub/GitLab), JIRA/Linear ticket history
-Test:          Sample 20–30 changes in audit period; verify each has prior
-               approval, tester other than developer, and ticket closure with
-               deployment confirmation.
-```
-
----
-
-### CC9 — Risk Mitigation
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| CC9.1 | Business disruption risk mitigation | No BCP; BCP untested |
-| CC9.2 | Vendor and business partner risk managed | No vendor inventory; no vendor assessments performed |
-
----
-
-## Availability (A1)
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| A1.1 | Capacity monitored and managed | No capacity monitoring; no alerting on resource thresholds |
-| A1.2 | Environmental threats managed; backups tested | No backup verification; no restore testing |
-| A1.3 | Recovery tested; RTO/RPO defined | RTO/RPO not defined; no DR test records |
-
----
-
-## Confidentiality (C1)
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| C1.1 | Confidential information identified and protected | No data classification; no data inventory |
-| C1.2 | Confidential information disposed of appropriately | No data retention/disposal policy; no certificate of destruction |
-
----
-
-## Processing Integrity (PI1)
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| PI1.1 | Processing complete, valid, accurate, timely, authorized | No input/output validation; no reconciliation controls |
-| PI1.2 | System inputs authorized | No authorization checks; no separation of duties |
-| PI1.3 | System outputs complete and accurate | No output verification or reconciliation |
-| PI1.4 | Processing errors detected and corrected | No error handling or alerting; errors silently discarded |
-| PI1.5 | Stored items protected | No integrity monitoring; no checksums |
-
----
-
-## Privacy (P1–P8)
-
-| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
-|---|---|---|
-| P1 | Privacy notice provided to individuals | No privacy notice; notice doesn't match actual practices |
-| P2 | Choice and consent obtained | No consent mechanism; opt-out not honored |
-| P3 | Personal information collected only as stated | Collecting more data than disclosed; no data minimization |
-| P4 | Personal information used only as stated | Using PII for undisclosed purposes |
-| P5 | Personal information retained and disposed per policy | No retention schedule; PII kept indefinitely |
-| P6 | Personal information disclosed only as authorized | No data sharing agreements; unauthorized third-party access |
-| P7 | Personal information quality maintained | No process to update/correct inaccurate data |
-| P8 | Privacy complaints and inquiries handled | No DSR (Data Subject Request) process; no privacy contact |
-
----
-
-## Control Statement Template
-
-```
-Control ID:    [TSC-criterion-sequence, e.g., CC6.1-002]
-TSC Criterion: [e.g., CC6.1 – Logical Access Security Measures]
-Control Title: [Short descriptive name]
-Control Type:  [Preventive | Detective | Corrective]
-Control Owner: [Role/team]
-Frequency:     [Continuous | Daily | Weekly | Monthly | Quarterly | Annual | Event-driven]
-Description:   [What the control does, who performs it, how it works, and what
-               systems/processes are covered. 2–5 sentences.]
-Evidence:      [Artifacts produced by this control that prove it operates:
-               logs, reports, tickets, sign-offs, screenshots, exports.]
-Test Procedure:[How an auditor would test this: sample size, data sources,
-               pass/fail criteria. Match Type 1 (design) vs Type 2 (operating).]
-Related Policies: [Which policy governs this control]
-Linked Risks:  [Which risks from risk register this control mitigates]
-```
+# SOC 2 Control Matrix Reference
+
+## Table of Contents
+1. [Security — Common Criteria (CC1–CC9)](#security--common-criteria)
+2. [Availability (A1)](#availability-a1)
+3. [Confidentiality (C1)](#confidentiality-c1)
+4. [Processing Integrity (PI1)](#processing-integrity-pi1)
+5. [Privacy (P1–P8)](#privacy-p1p8)
+6. [Control Statement Template](#control-statement-template)
+
+---
+
+## Security — Common Criteria
+
+### CC1 — Control Environment
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC1.1 | COSO principles demonstrated; commitment to integrity and ethical values | No code of conduct or ethics policy; leadership not visibly engaged |
+| CC1.2 | Board or equivalent oversight of security program | No documented board/executive security oversight; no meeting minutes |
+| CC1.3 | Org structure, reporting lines, authorities defined | Org chart not current; security roles undefined |
+| CC1.4 | Competent personnel; HR lifecycle controls | No background checks; no security training program |
+| CC1.5 | Accountability for security responsibilities | Performance goals don't include security; no enforcement |
+
+**Example control (CC1.4):**
+```
+Control ID:    CC1.4-001
+Title:         Security Awareness Training
+Type:          Preventive
+Owner:         HR / Security
+Frequency:     Annual (+ onboarding)
+Description:   All employees complete annual security awareness training covering
+               phishing, data handling, and incident reporting. Completion is tracked
+               and non-completions escalated to managers.
+Evidence:      Training completion report from LMS, onboarding checklist sign-offs
+Test:          Inspect training platform report; confirm >95% completion within period;
+               sample 5 employees to verify completion dates within 12 months.
+```
+
+---
+
+### CC2 — Communication and Information
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC2.1 | Quality information available to support control objectives | Policies inaccessible or not distributed; no intranet/wiki |
+| CC2.2 | Internal communication about security responsibilities | Security updates not communicated; no all-hands or newsletter |
+| CC2.3 | External communication with customers, regulators, vendors | No process to notify customers of security incidents; SLA terms vague |
+
+---
+
+### CC3 — Risk Assessment
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC3.1 | Defined risk objectives; risk tolerance stated | No written risk appetite or tolerance statement |
+| CC3.2 | Risk identification and analysis process | No formal risk assessment; informal or ad hoc only |
+| CC3.3 | Fraud risk considered | No fraud risk assessment or controls |
+| CC3.4 | Technology change risks assessed | Changes don't trigger risk reassessment |
+
+**Example control (CC3.2):**
+```
+Control ID:    CC3.2-001
+Title:         Annual Risk Assessment
+Type:          Detective
+Owner:         CISO / Security Manager
+Frequency:     Annual + event-driven
+Description:   A formal risk assessment is performed annually, identifying threats,
+               vulnerabilities, and likelihood/impact ratings. A risk register is
+               maintained and reviewed quarterly by the security committee.
+Evidence:      Risk register (dated), risk assessment report with sign-off,
+               security committee meeting minutes
+Test:          Inspect risk register; confirm dated within 12 months; verify
+               management sign-off; confirm high risks have remediation owners.
+```
+
+---
+
+### CC4 — Monitoring Controls
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC4.1 | Ongoing and separate evaluations of controls | No internal audits; no continuous monitoring program |
+| CC4.2 | Deficiencies evaluated and communicated | No deficiency tracking; findings not escalated |
+
+---
+
+### CC5 — Control Activities
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC5.1 | Controls selected to mitigate risks | Controls not mapped to risks; no controls matrix |
+| CC5.2 | Technology controls deployed | No MFA, no endpoint protection, no SIEM |
+| CC5.3 | Policies and procedures deployed | Policies exist but not enforced; no procedures for key processes |
+
+---
+
+### CC6 — Logical and Physical Access Controls
+
+This is typically the most heavily tested area.
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC6.1 | Logical access security measures | No MFA on critical systems; no SSO; shared accounts |
+| CC6.2 | New access provisioning authorized | No formal access request/approval process |
+| CC6.3 | Termination / role change access removal | Terminated employees not promptly de-provisioned (>24hr is a flag) |
+| CC6.4 | Access credentials protected | Passwords stored in plaintext; no PAM for privileged accounts |
+| CC6.5 | Logical access reviewed | No periodic user access reviews (quarterly/annual) |
+| CC6.6 | Logical access restricted from threats | No IDS/IPS; no network segmentation |
+| CC6.7 | Data transmission protected | Unencrypted data in transit; no TLS enforcement |
+| CC6.8 | Unauthorized software prevented | No application whitelisting or MDM; shadow IT uncontrolled |
+
+**Example control (CC6.3):**
+```
+Control ID:    CC6.3-001
+Title:         Access Termination — Employee Offboarding
+Type:          Preventive
+Owner:         IT / HR
+Frequency:     Event-driven (each termination)
+Description:   Upon employee termination, IT disables all system access within 24 hours
+               of the HR-initiated offboarding ticket. A checklist confirms: AD account
+               disabled, SaaS app access revoked, VPN certificate revoked, hardware
+               returned. HR confirms completion in the HRIS.
+Evidence:      Offboarding tickets, access revocation logs, HRIS termination records
+Test:          Select sample of 10–25 terminations in audit period; verify access was
+               revoked within 24 hours using AD logs and ticket timestamps.
+```
+
+---
+
+### CC7 — System Operations
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC7.1 | Vulnerability and malware detection | No vulnerability scanning; no EDR on endpoints |
+| CC7.2 | Monitoring for security events | No SIEM or log aggregation; alerts not reviewed |
+| CC7.3 | Security incidents evaluated and responded to | No incident response plan; incidents not documented |
+| CC7.4 | Security incidents contained and resolved | No IR runbook; no post-incident review process |
+| CC7.5 | Identified vulnerabilities remediated | No SLA for patching critical vulns; no patch cadence |
+
+---
+
+### CC8 — Change Management
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC8.1 | Authorized, tested, and approved changes | Changes deployed without tickets or approval; no testing in staging |
+
+**Example control (CC8.1):**
+```
+Control ID:    CC8.1-001
+Title:         Production Change Approval
+Type:          Preventive
+Owner:         Engineering / DevOps
+Frequency:     Event-driven
+Description:   All production changes require a change request ticket approved by
+               an authorized reviewer (tech lead or manager) before deployment.
+               Emergency changes require retroactive approval within 24 hours.
+               Changes are tested in staging/QA before production promotion.
+Evidence:      Change tickets with approvals, deployment logs, PR approvals in
+               version control (GitHub/GitLab), JIRA/Linear ticket history
+Test:          Sample 20–30 changes in audit period; verify each has prior
+               approval, tester other than developer, and ticket closure with
+               deployment confirmation.
+```
+
+---
+
+### CC9 — Risk Mitigation
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| CC9.1 | Business disruption risk mitigation | No BCP; BCP untested |
+| CC9.2 | Vendor and business partner risk managed | No vendor inventory; no vendor assessments performed |
+
+---
+
+## Availability (A1)
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| A1.1 | Capacity monitored and managed | No capacity monitoring; no alerting on resource thresholds |
+| A1.2 | Environmental threats managed; backups tested | No backup verification; no restore testing |
+| A1.3 | Recovery tested; RTO/RPO defined | RTO/RPO not defined; no DR test records |
+
+---
+
+## Confidentiality (C1)
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| C1.1 | Confidential information identified and protected | No data classification; no data inventory |
+| C1.2 | Confidential information disposed of appropriately | No data retention/disposal policy; no certificate of destruction |
+
+---
+
+## Processing Integrity (PI1)
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| PI1.1 | Processing complete, valid, accurate, timely, authorized | No input/output validation; no reconciliation controls |
+| PI1.2 | System inputs authorized | No authorization checks; no separation of duties |
+| PI1.3 | System outputs complete and accurate | No output verification or reconciliation |
+| PI1.4 | Processing errors detected and corrected | No error handling or alerting; errors silently discarded |
+| PI1.5 | Stored items protected | No integrity monitoring; no checksums |
+
+---
+
+## Privacy (P1–P8)
+
+| Criterion | What auditors look for | Common gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| P1 | Privacy notice provided to individuals | No privacy notice; notice doesn't match actual practices |
+| P2 | Choice and consent obtained | No consent mechanism; opt-out not honored |
+| P3 | Personal information collected only as stated | Collecting more data than disclosed; no data minimization |
+| P4 | Personal information used only as stated | Using PII for undisclosed purposes |
+| P5 | Personal information retained and disposed per policy | No retention schedule; PII kept indefinitely |
+| P6 | Personal information disclosed only as authorized | No data sharing agreements; unauthorized third-party access |
+| P7 | Personal information quality maintained | No process to update/correct inaccurate data |
+| P8 | Privacy complaints and inquiries handled | No DSR (Data Subject Request) process; no privacy contact |
+
+---
+
+## Control Statement Template
+
+```
+Control ID:    [TSC-criterion-sequence, e.g., CC6.1-002]
+TSC Criterion: [e.g., CC6.1 – Logical Access Security Measures]
+Control Title: [Short descriptive name]
+Control Type:  [Preventive | Detective | Corrective]
+Control Owner: [Role/team]
+Frequency:     [Continuous | Daily | Weekly | Monthly | Quarterly | Annual | Event-driven]
+Description:   [What the control does, who performs it, how it works, and what
+               systems/processes are covered. 2–5 sentences.]
+Evidence:      [Artifacts produced by this control that prove it operates:
+               logs, reports, tickets, sign-offs, screenshots, exports.]
+Test Procedure:[How an auditor would test this: sample size, data sources,
+               pass/fail criteria. Match Type 1 (design) vs Type 2 (operating).]
+Related Policies: [Which policy governs this control]
+Linked Risks:  [Which risks from risk register this control mitigates]
+```