< Previous standard ^ Up a level ^ Next standard >

ISO/IEC TR 27103:2018 — Information technology — Security techniques — Cybersecurity and ISO and IEC standards (first edition)

Abstract

“[ISO/IEC TR 27103:2018] provides guidance on how to leverage existing standards in a cybersecurity framework.”

[Source: ISO/IEC TR 27103:2018]

Introduction

If “cybersecurity” is simply that part of information security concerned with IT, then existing information risk and security standards are directly relevant to cyber risk and security.

An Information Security Management System as specified in ISO/IEC 27001 and other ISO27k standards is generally accepted as a comprehensive management system, governance framework or structure with which to manage information risks, including “cyber” risks pertaining to IT and the Internet among others.

Scope of the standard

The standard offers guidance on using existing ISO and IEC standards (not just ISO27k) in a ‘cybersecurity framework’.

Content of the standard

Using an arbitrary structure, the standard references relevant ISO and IEC standards down to the first-level subclauses (e.g. ISO/IEC 27001:2013 clause 9.3) where they are deemed relevant to various aspects of cybersecurity.

Status

The first edition of this standard was published as a Technical Report in 2018.

It was confirmed unchanged in 2022.

The TR is now being updated to reflect ISO/IEC 27002:2022. It is intended to explain how to manage cybersecurity risk in a comprehensive and structured manner drawing on processes, governance and controls from current ISO and IEC standards (not just ISO27k!).

Despite little apparent interest/involvement from the committee, the update project has somehow reached Draft Technical Specification stage. Publication is planned for 2026. Following a clarification/change of ISO policy, it is set to become a Technical Specification rather than a Technical Report.

The title may become ISO/IEC TS 27103 “Cybersecurity - Guidance on using ISO and IEC standards in a Cybersecurity Framework”. It is a

Personal comments

The original project set out to develop an internal SC 27 Standing Document explaining how various ISO and IEC standards can usefully be applied to cybersecurity. Somehow, it ended up producing a Technical Report in the ISO27k series that singularly failed to define “cybersecurity” and related terms such as “cyber risk”, “cybersecurity risk” and “cybersecurity framework” (as did ISO/IEC 27032), despite the introduction acknowledging the likelihood of confusion due to unclear terminology and differing ‘perspectives’:

“Perspectives, and consequent approaches, to risk management are affected by the terminology used, e.g. “cybersecurity” versus “information security€”. Where similar risks are addressed, this different perspective can result in “cybersecurity” approaches focusing on external threats and the need to use information for organizational purposes, while, in contrast, “€information security” approaches consider all risks whether from internal or external sources. There can also be a perception that cybersecurity risks are primarily related to antagonistic threats, and that a lack of “cybersecurity” can create worse consequences to the organization than a lack of “information security”€. Thus, cybersecurity can be perceived as more relevant to the organization than information security. This perception can cause confusion and also reduces the effectiveness of risk assessment and treatment.”

[ISO/IEC TR 27103:2018]

Vague and indistinct terminology makes this standard decidedly unhelpful and problematic. It perpetuates and even accentuates the myth that ‘cyber’ means something different, new and special, for example baldly asserting that “Cybersecurity is a relatively new discipline”. Relative to what - the abacus? Stone tablets? Balls and chains?

It seems to me ‘cyber’ is a hot potato that nobody is willing to grasp, a solid gold buzzword.

In revising this standard, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27 had the opportunity to:

Establish a consensus definition for ‘cyber’ and related terms, clarifying the differences from existing well-established terms such as information security (and, ideally, information risk), and defining the scope (e.g. is ‘cyber’ IT, systems, networks, technology, the Internet, external threats, a marketing term, something to do with war, or what? We still don’t know);
Explain the fundamental principles for managing (identifying, assessing and treating) cyber risks, again clarifying any differences from conventional information risk management (personally, I’m not convinced there are any material differences);
Provide a strategic view on the extent to which existing ISO27k standards cover this area, identifying any weaknesses or gaps where additional guidance might be justified (which sounds like an internal SC 27 document to me).

Alternatively, SC 27 could have followed the lead of the ISO/IEC 27029 project by reverting to a freely-available and more readily and cheaply maintained Standing Document - internal guidance for SC 27 - instead of revising the formal standard. But no, the revised TR/TS will, once again, leave key terms undefined. I despair.

< Previous standard ^ Up a level ^ Next standard >