Around this time a year ago, I was engaging the New York
Department of Financial Services on its then-recently released
Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies.
The
rules were the first of their kind in the nation and they had been
launched in September 2016 to take effect in March this year.
More
recently I found myself in a similar situation with regulators in
Kenya. This time I was talking to the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK)
regarding its August 2017 Guidance Note on Cybersecurity. In the heat of
Kenya’s landmark political season, the CBK released game-changing
cybersecurity rules that put the country at par with Wall Street.
The two sets of regulations, in Kenya and New York, have several similarities but they also have significant divergences.
Both
regimes have a three-pronged approach to governance of cybersecurity
compliance by holding board of directors and senior management directly
responsible and introducing the role of the Chief Information Security
Officer (CISO).
Because corporate governance of
cybersecurity tends to be IT-centered, the inclusion of the board and
senior management is likely to strengthen cybersecurity governance by
promoting a more holistic approach to managing cyber risk.
The
Guidance Note goes further than the New York regulations by enumerating
the responsibilities of the board and senior management.
Specifically, the CBK note gives a bank’s board the specific
mandate to understand the nature of cyber threats and maintain robust
oversight and engagement on cyber risk matters.
The
board is expected to approve and continuously review the cybersecurity
strategy, governance charter, policy and framework. Moreover, the board
is required to allocate adequate cybersecurity budget and ensure that
the cybersecurity policy applies to “all of the bank’s operating
entities, including subsidiaries, joint ventures and geographic
regions.”
Senior management employees are responsible
for implementing the board-approved cybersecurity strategy, policy and
framework, and providing regular reports of the bank’s cybersecurity
state to the board.
They
are obligated to continuously improve collection, analysis and
reporting of cybercrime information, and to collaborate with “other
institutions and the security agencies to share the latest cyber
threats/attacks encountered by the institution.”
In
addition, they are expected to provide sufficient skilled staff for the
management of cybersecurity, establish a board-approved cybersecurity
benchmarking framework, and oversee analysis and management of third
party risks.
The Guidance Note introduces the CISO as
part of the senior management team, with the role of overseeing and
implementing a bank’s cybersecurity programme and enforcing
cybersecurity policy.
Moreover, the CISO is to design
cybersecurity controls that take into account internal and external user
levels, and ensure sufficient mechanisms to monitor “IT systems to
detect cybersecurity events and incidents in a timely manner.”
Other
more specific responsibilities of the CISO include staff training,
overseeing comprehensive cyber risk assessments, and maintaining
incident response mechanisms and Business Continuity Plans. Among other
things, the CISO is to report to the CEO not less than once per quarter
on the assessment of information systems used by the bank.
The
New York regulation similarly requires that the CISO be responsible for
overseeing and implementing the cybersecurity programme and enforcing
cybersecurity policy.
In addition, the CISO of New
York-based financial institutions has to appoint senior personnel to
manage third party service providers and provide at least an annual
report to the board of directors.
The report covers the
company’s cybersecurity programme and cybersecurity risks that take
into account the confidentiality of certain defined nonpublic
information, the integrity and security of information systems, and
“material Cybersecurity Events” among other things.
The
two regulations differ in scope of application with the Guidance Note
covering banks while while the New York regulations apply to banks,
insurance companies and other financial institutions.
The
covered entities in both cases include foreign entities domiciled in
the respective jurisdictions. Unlike the Kenyan requirements, the New
York rules do provide limited exemptions to compliance: entities with
less than 10 employees, $5M in gross annual revenue and $10M in year-end
total assets.
Whereas the Guidance Note calls for
reporting of cybersecurity events within 24 hours to the CBK, New York
requires that the Superintendent of Financial Services be notified no
later than 72 hours after a cybersecurity event is determined to have
occurred.
This difference is significant and places
Kenya-based banks under greater scrutiny to have robust incident
discovery, assessment and management mechanisms that account for
internal and external risks.
It is worth noting that
New York’s 72-hour timeline is in step with the European Union’s breach
notification period under the General Data Protection Regulation--one of
the most rigorous data protection regimes.
The outstanding question in both frameworks is the (absence of) enforcement mechanisms.
Okwara specialises in cybersecurity, data protection and privacy and defence.
No comments :
Post a Comment