Digital Omnibus — September Presidency compromise

In order to achieve a high common level of digital operational resilience, this Regulation lays down uniform requirements concerning the security of network and information systems supporting the business processes of financial entities as follows:

1. (a)

   requirements applicable to financial entities in relation to:

   1. (i)

      information and communication technology (ICT) risk management;

   2. (ii)

      reporting of major ICT-related incidents and notifying, on a voluntary basis, significant cyber threats to the competent authorities;

   3. (iii)

      reporting of major operational or security payment-related incidents to the competent authorities by financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) to (d);

   4. (iv)

      digital operational resilience testing;

   5. (v)

      information and intelligence sharing in relation to cyber threats and vulnerabilities;

   6. (vi)

      measures for the sound management of ICT third-party risk;

2. (b)

   requirements in relation to the contractual arrangements concluded between ICT third-party service providers and financial entities;

3. (c)

   rules for the establishment and conduct of the Oversight Framework for critical ICT third-party service providers when providing services to financial entities;

4. (d)

   rules on cooperation among competent authorities, and rules on supervision and enforcement by competent authorities in relation to all matters covered by this Regulation.

In relation to financial entities identified as essential or important entities pursuant to national rules transposing Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2022/2555, this Regulation shall be considered a sector-specific Union legal act for the purposes of Article 4 of that Directive.

This Regulation is without prejudice to the responsibility of Member States’ regarding essential State functions concerning public security, defence and national security in accordance with Union law.

In order to achieve a high common level of digital operational resilience, this Regulation lays down uniform requirements concerning the security of network and information systems supporting the business processes of financial entities as follows:

1. (a)

   requirements applicable to financial entities in relation to:

   1. (i)

      information and communication technology (ICT) risk management;

   2. (ii)

      reporting of major ICT-related incidents and notifying, on a voluntary basis, significant cyber threats to the competent authorities;

   3. (iii)

      reporting of major operational or security payment-related incidents to the competent authorities by financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) to (d);

   4. (iv)

      digital operational resilience testing;

   5. (v)

      information and intelligence sharing in relation to cyber threats and vulnerabilities;

   6. (vi)

      measures for the sound management of ICT third-party risk;

2. (b)

   requirements in relation to the contractual arrangements concluded between ICT third-party service providers and financial entities;

3. (c)

   rules for the establishment and conduct of the Oversight Framework for critical ICT third-party service providers when providing services to financial entities;

4. (d)

   rules on cooperation among competent authorities, and rules on supervision and enforcement by competent authorities in relation to all matters covered by this Regulation.

In relation to financial entities identified as essential or important entities pursuant to national rules transposing Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2022/2555, this Regulation shall be considered a sector-specific Union legal act for the purposes of Article 4 of that Directive.

This Regulation is without prejudice to the responsibility of Member States’ regarding essential State functions concerning public security, defence and national security in accordance with Union law.

Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4, this Regulation applies to the following entities:

1. (a)

   credit institutions;

2. (b)

   payment institutions, including payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

3. (c)

   account information service providers;

4. (d)

   electronic money institutions, including electronic money institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC;

5. (e)

   investment firms;

6. (f)

   crypto-asset service providers as authorised under a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in crypto-assets, and amending Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 and Directives 2013/36/EU and (EU) 2019/1937 (‘the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets’) and issuers of asset-referenced tokens;

7. (g)

   central securities depositories;

8. (h)

   central counterparties;

9. (i)

   trading venues;

10. (j)

    trade repositories;

11. (k)

    managers of alternative investment funds;

12. (l)

    management companies;

13. (m)

    data reporting service providers;

14. (n)

    insurance and reinsurance undertakings;

15. (o)

    insurance intermediaries, reinsurance intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries;

16. (p)

    institutions for occupational retirement provision;

17. (q)

    credit rating agencies;

18. (r)

    administrators of critical benchmarks;

19. (s)

    crowdfunding service providers;

20. (t)

    securitisation repositories;

21. (u)

    ICT third-party service providers.

For the purposes of this Regulation, entities referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) to (t), shall collectively be referred to as ‘financial entities’.

This Regulation does not apply to:

1. (a)

   managers of alternative investment funds as referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2011/61/EU;

2. (b)

   insurance and reinsurance undertakings as referred to in Article 4 of Directive 2009/138/EC;

3. (c)

   institutions for occupational retirement provision which operate pension schemes which together do not have more than 15 members in total;

4. (d)

   natural or legal persons exempted pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2014/65/EU;

5. (e)

   insurance intermediaries, reinsurance intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries which are microenterprises or small or medium-sized enterprises;

6. (f)

   post office giro institutions as referred to in Article 2(5), point (3), of Directive 2013/36/EU.

Member States may exclude from the scope of this Regulation entities referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to (23), of Directive 2013/36/EU that are located within their respective territories. Where a Member State makes use of such option, it shall inform the Commission thereof as well as of any subsequent changes thereto. The Commission shall make that information publicly available on its website or other easily accessible means.

Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4, this Regulation applies to the following entities:

1. (a)

   credit institutions;

2. (b)

   payment institutions, including payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

3. (c)

   account information service providers;

4. (d)

   electronic money institutions, including electronic money institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC;

5. (e)

   investment firms;

6. (f)

   crypto-asset service providers as authorised under a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in crypto-assets, and amending Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 and Directives 2013/36/EU and (EU) 2019/1937 (‘the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets’) and issuers of asset-referenced tokens;

7. (g)

   central securities depositories;

8. (h)

   central counterparties;

9. (i)

   trading venues;

10. (j)

    trade repositories;

11. (k)

    managers of alternative investment funds;

12. (l)

    management companies;

13. (m)

    data reporting service providers;

14. (n)

    insurance and reinsurance undertakings;

15. (o)

    insurance intermediaries, reinsurance intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries;

16. (p)

    institutions for occupational retirement provision;

17. (q)

    credit rating agencies;

18. (r)

    administrators of critical benchmarks;

19. (s)

    crowdfunding service providers;

20. (t)

    securitisation repositories;

21. (u)

    ICT third-party service providers.

For the purposes of this Regulation, entities referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) to (t), shall collectively be referred to as ‘financial entities’.

This Regulation does not apply to:

1. (a)

   managers of alternative investment funds as referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2011/61/EU;

2. (b)

   insurance and reinsurance undertakings as referred to in Article 4 of Directive 2009/138/EC;

3. (c)

   institutions for occupational retirement provision which operate pension schemes which together do not have more than 15 members in total;

4. (d)

   natural or legal persons exempted pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2014/65/EU;

5. (e)

   insurance intermediaries, reinsurance intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries which are microenterprises or small or medium-sized enterprises;

6. (f)

   post office giro institutions as referred to in Article 2(5), point (3), of Directive 2013/36/EU.

Member States may exclude from the scope of this Regulation entities referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to (23), of Directive 2013/36/EU that are located within their respective territories. Where a Member State makes use of such option, it shall inform the Commission thereof as well as of any subsequent changes thereto. The Commission shall make that information publicly available on its website or other easily accessible means.

‘digital operational resilience’ means the ability of a financial entity to build, assure and review its operational integrity and reliability by ensuring, either directly or indirectly through the use of services provided by ICT third-party service providers, the full range of ICT-related capabilities needed to address the security of the network and information systems which a financial entity uses, and which support the continued provision of financial services and their quality, including throughout disruptions;

‘network and information system’ means a network and information system as defined in Article 6, point 1, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

‘legacy ICT system’ means an ICT system that has reached the end of its lifecycle (end-of-life), that is not suitable for upgrades or fixes, for technological or commercial reasons, or is no longer supported by its supplier or by an ICT third-party service provider, but that is still in use and supports the functions of the financial entity;

‘security of network and information systems’ means security of network and information systems as defined in Article 6, point 2, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

‘ICT risk’ means any reasonably identifiable circumstance in relation to the use of network and information systems which, if materialised, may compromise the security of the network and information systems, of any technology dependent tool or process, of operations and processes, or of the provision of services by producing adverse effects in the digital or physical environment;

‘information asset’ means a collection of information, either tangible or intangible, that is worth protecting;

‘ICT asset’ means a software or hardware asset in the network and information systems used by the financial entity;

‘ICT-related incident’ means a single event or a series of linked events unplanned by the financial entity that compromises the security of the network and information systems, and have an adverse impact on the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data, or on the services provided by the financial entity;

‘operational or security payment-related incident’ means a single event or a series of linked events unplanned by the financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) to (d), whether ICT-related or not, that has an adverse impact on the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of payment-related data, or on the payment-related services provided by the financial entity;

‘major ICT-related incident’ means an ICT-related incident that has a high adverse impact on the network and information systems that support critical or important functions of the financial entity;

‘major operational or security payment-related incident’ means an operational or security payment-related incident that has a high adverse impact on the payment-related services provided;

‘cyber threat’ means ‘cyber threat’ as defined in Article 2, point (8), of Regulation (EU) 2019/881;

‘significant cyber threat’ means a cyber threat the technical characteristics of which indicate that it could have the potential to result in a major ICT-related incident or a major operational or security payment-related incident;

‘cyber-attack’ means a malicious ICT-related incident caused by means of an attempt perpetrated by any threat actor to destroy, expose, alter, disable, steal or gain unauthorised access to, or make unauthorised use of, an asset;

‘threat intelligence’ means information that has been aggregated, transformed, analysed, interpreted or enriched to provide the necessary context for decision-making and to enable relevant and sufficient understanding in order to mitigate the impact of an ICT-related incident or of a cyber threat, including the technical details of a cyber-attack, those responsible for the attack and their modus operandi and motivations;

‘vulnerability’ means a weakness, susceptibility or flaw of an asset, system, process or control that can be exploited;

‘threat-led penetration testing (TLPT)’ means a framework that mimics the tactics, techniques and procedures of real-life threat actors perceived as posing a genuine cyber threat, that delivers a controlled, bespoke, intelligence-led (red team) test of the financial entity’s critical live production systems;

‘ICT third-party risk’ means an ICT risk that may arise for a financial entity in relation to its use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers or by subcontractors of the latter, including through outsourcing arrangements;

‘ICT third-party service provider’ means an undertaking providing ICT services;

‘ICT intra-group service provider’ means an undertaking that is part of a financial group and that provides predominantly ICT services to financial entities within the same group or to financial entities belonging to the same institutional protection scheme, including to their parent undertakings, subsidiaries, branches or other entities that are under common ownership or control;

‘ICT services’ means digital and data services provided through ICT systems to one or more internal or external users on an ongoing basis, including hardware as a service and hardware services which includes the provision of technical support via software or firmware updates by the hardware provider, excluding traditional analogue telephone services;

‘critical or important function’ means a function, the disruption of which would materially impair the financial performance of a financial entity, or the soundness or continuity of its services and activities, or the discontinued, defective or failed performance of that function would materially impair the continuing compliance of a financial entity with the conditions and obligations of its authorisation, or with its other obligations under applicable financial services law;

‘critical ICT third-party service provider’ means an ICT third-party service provider designated as critical in accordance with Article 31;

‘ICT third-party service provider established in a third country’ means an ICT third-party service provider that is a legal person established in a third-country and that has entered into a contractual arrangement with a financial entity for the provision of ICT services;

‘subsidiary’ means a subsidiary undertaking within the meaning of Article 2, point (10), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘group’ means a group as defined in Article 2, point (11), of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘parent undertaking’ means a parent undertaking within the meaning of Article 2, point (9), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘ICT subcontractor established in a third country’ means an ICT subcontractor that is a legal person established in a third-country and that has entered into a contractual arrangement either with an ICT third-party service provider, or with an ICT third-party service provider established in a third country;

‘ICT concentration risk’ means an exposure to individual or multiple related critical ICT third-party service providers creating a degree of dependency on such providers so that the unavailability, failure or other type of shortfall of such provider may potentially endanger the ability of a financial entity to deliver critical or important functions, or cause it to suffer other types of adverse effects, including large losses, or endanger the financial stability of the Union as a whole;

‘management body’ means a management body as defined in Article 4(1), point (36), of Directive 2014/65/EU, Article 3(1), point (7), of Directive 2013/36/EU, Article 2(1), point (s), of Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (31), Article 2(1), point (45), of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014, Article 3(1), point (20), of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011, and in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets, or the equivalent persons who effectively run the entity or have key functions in accordance with relevant Union or national law;

‘credit institution’ means a credit institution as defined in Article 4(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (32);

‘institution exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU’ means an entity as referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to (23), of Directive 2013/36/EU;

‘investment firm’ means an investment firm as defined in Article 4(1), point (1), of Directive 2014/65/EU;

‘small and non-interconnected investment firm’ means an investment firm that meets the conditions laid out in Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2033 of the European Parliament and of the Council (33);

‘payment institution’ means a payment institution as defined in Article 4, point (4), of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘payment institution exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366’ means a payment institution exempted pursuant to Article 32(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘account information service provider’ means an account information service provider as referred to in Article 33(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘electronic money institution’ means an electronic money institution as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council;

‘electronic money institution exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC’ means an electronic money institution benefitting from a waiver as referred to in Article 9(1) of Directive 2009/110/EC;

‘central counterparty’ means a central counterparty as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;

‘trade repository’ means a trade repository as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;

‘central securities depository’ means a central securities depository as defined in Article 2(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014;

‘trading venue’ means a trading venue as defined in Article 4(1), point (24), of Directive 2014/65/EU;

‘manager of alternative investment funds’ means a manager of alternative investment funds as defined in Article 4(1), point (b), of Directive 2011/61/EU;

‘management company’ means a management company as defined in Article 2(1), point (b), of Directive 2009/65/EC;

‘data reporting service provider’ means a data reporting service provider within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014, as referred to in Article 2(1), points (34) to (36) thereof;

‘insurance undertaking’ means an insurance undertaking as defined in Article 13, point (1), of Directive 2009/138/EC;

‘reinsurance undertaking’ means a reinsurance undertaking as defined in Article 13, point (4), of Directive 2009/138/EC;

‘insurance intermediary’ means an insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (3), of Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council (34);

‘ancillary insurance intermediary’ means an ancillary insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (4), of Directive (EU) 2016/97;

‘reinsurance intermediary’ means a reinsurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (5), of Directive (EU) 2016/97;

‘institution for occupational retirement provision’ means an institution for occupational retirement provision as defined in Article 6, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2016/2341;

‘small institution for occupational retirement provision’ means an institution for occupational retirement provision which operates pension schemes which together have less than 100 members in total;

‘credit rating agency’ means a credit rating agency as defined in Article 3(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009;

‘crypto-asset service provider’ means a crypto-asset service provider as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets;

‘issuer of asset-referenced tokens’ means an issuer of asset-referenced tokens as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets;

‘administrator of critical benchmarks’ means an administrator of ‘critical benchmarks’ as defined in Article 3(1), point (25), of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011;

‘crowdfunding service provider’ means a crowdfunding service provider as defined in Article 2(1), point (e), of Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 of the European Parliament and of the Council (35);

‘securitisation repository’ means a securitisation repository as defined in Article 2, point (23), of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 of the European Parliament and of the Council (36);

‘microenterprise’ means a financial entity, other than a trading venue, a central counterparty, a trade repository or a central securities depository, which employs fewer than 10 persons and has an annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total that does not exceed EUR 2 million;

‘Lead Overseer’ means the European Supervisory Authority appointed in accordance with Article 31(1), point (b) of this Regulation;

‘Joint Committee’ means the committee referred to in Article 54 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010;

‘small enterprise’ means a financial entity that employs 10 or more persons, but fewer than 50 persons, and has an annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total that exceeds EUR 2 million, but does not exceed EUR 10 million;

‘medium-sized enterprise’ means a financial entity that is not a small enterprise and employs fewer than 250 persons and has an annual turnover that does not exceed EUR 50 million and/or an annual balance sheet that does not exceed EUR 43 million;

‘public authority’ means any government or other public administration entity, including national central banks.

‘digital operational resilience’ means the ability of a financial entity to build, assure and review its operational integrity and reliability by ensuring, either directly or indirectly through the use of services provided by ICT third-party service providers, the full range of ICT-related capabilities needed to address the security of the network and information systems which a financial entity uses, and which support the continued provision of financial services and their quality, including throughout disruptions;

‘network and information system’ means a network and information system as defined in Article 6, point 1, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

‘legacy ICT system’ means an ICT system that has reached the end of its lifecycle (end-of-life), that is not suitable for upgrades or fixes, for technological or commercial reasons, or is no longer supported by its supplier or by an ICT third-party service provider, but that is still in use and supports the functions of the financial entity;

‘security of network and information systems’ means security of network and information systems as defined in Article 6, point 2, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

‘ICT risk’ means any reasonably identifiable circumstance in relation to the use of network and information systems which, if materialised, may compromise the security of the network and information systems, of any technology dependent tool or process, of operations and processes, or of the provision of services by producing adverse effects in the digital or physical environment;

‘information asset’ means a collection of information, either tangible or intangible, that is worth protecting;

‘ICT asset’ means a software or hardware asset in the network and information systems used by the financial entity;

‘ICT-related incident’ means a single event or a series of linked events unplanned by the financial entity that compromises the security of the network and information systems, and have an adverse impact on the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data, or on the services provided by the financial entity;

‘operational or security payment-related incident’ means a single event or a series of linked events unplanned by the financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) to (d), whether ICT-related or not, that has an adverse impact on the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of payment-related data, or on the payment-related services provided by the financial entity;

‘major ICT-related incident’ means an ICT-related incident that has a high adverse impact on the network and information systems that support critical or important functions of the financial entity;

‘major operational or security payment-related incident’ means an operational or security payment-related incident that has a high adverse impact on the payment-related services provided;

‘cyber threat’ means ‘cyber threat’ as defined in Article 2, point (8), of Regulation (EU) 2019/881;

‘significant cyber threat’ means a cyber threat the technical characteristics of which indicate that it could have the potential to result in a major ICT-related incident or a major operational or security payment-related incident;

‘cyber-attack’ means a malicious ICT-related incident caused by means of an attempt perpetrated by any threat actor to destroy, expose, alter, disable, steal or gain unauthorised access to, or make unauthorised use of, an asset;

‘threat intelligence’ means information that has been aggregated, transformed, analysed, interpreted or enriched to provide the necessary context for decision-making and to enable relevant and sufficient understanding in order to mitigate the impact of an ICT-related incident or of a cyber threat, including the technical details of a cyber-attack, those responsible for the attack and their modus operandi and motivations;

‘vulnerability’ means a weakness, susceptibility or flaw of an asset, system, process or control that can be exploited;

‘threat-led penetration testing (TLPT)’ means a framework that mimics the tactics, techniques and procedures of real-life threat actors perceived as posing a genuine cyber threat, that delivers a controlled, bespoke, intelligence-led (red team) test of the financial entity’s critical live production systems;

‘ICT third-party risk’ means an ICT risk that may arise for a financial entity in relation to its use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers or by subcontractors of the latter, including through outsourcing arrangements;

‘ICT third-party service provider’ means an undertaking providing ICT services;

‘ICT intra-group service provider’ means an undertaking that is part of a financial group and that provides predominantly ICT services to financial entities within the same group or to financial entities belonging to the same institutional protection scheme, including to their parent undertakings, subsidiaries, branches or other entities that are under common ownership or control;

‘ICT services’ means digital and data services provided through ICT systems to one or more internal or external users on an ongoing basis, including hardware as a service and hardware services which includes the provision of technical support via software or firmware updates by the hardware provider, excluding traditional analogue telephone services;

‘critical or important function’ means a function, the disruption of which would materially impair the financial performance of a financial entity, or the soundness or continuity of its services and activities, or the discontinued, defective or failed performance of that function would materially impair the continuing compliance of a financial entity with the conditions and obligations of its authorisation, or with its other obligations under applicable financial services law;

‘critical ICT third-party service provider’ means an ICT third-party service provider designated as critical in accordance with Article 31;

‘ICT third-party service provider established in a third country’ means an ICT third-party service provider that is a legal person established in a third-country and that has entered into a contractual arrangement with a financial entity for the provision of ICT services;

‘subsidiary’ means a subsidiary undertaking within the meaning of Article 2, point (10), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘group’ means a group as defined in Article 2, point (11), of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘parent undertaking’ means a parent undertaking within the meaning of Article 2, point (9), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;

‘ICT subcontractor established in a third country’ means an ICT subcontractor that is a legal person established in a third-country and that has entered into a contractual arrangement either with an ICT third-party service provider, or with an ICT third-party service provider established in a third country;

‘ICT concentration risk’ means an exposure to individual or multiple related critical ICT third-party service providers creating a degree of dependency on such providers so that the unavailability, failure or other type of shortfall of such provider may potentially endanger the ability of a financial entity to deliver critical or important functions, or cause it to suffer other types of adverse effects, including large losses, or endanger the financial stability of the Union as a whole;

‘management body’ means a management body as defined in Article 4(1), point (36), of Directive 2014/65/EU, Article 3(1), point (7), of Directive 2013/36/EU, Article 2(1), point (s), of Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (31), Article 2(1), point (45), of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014, Article 3(1), point (20), of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011, and in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets, or the equivalent persons who effectively run the entity or have key functions in accordance with relevant Union or national law;

‘credit institution’ means a credit institution as defined in Article 4(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (32);

‘institution exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU’ means an entity as referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to (23), of Directive 2013/36/EU;

‘investment firm’ means an investment firm as defined in Article 4(1), point (1), of Directive 2014/65/EU;

‘small and non-interconnected investment firm’ means an investment firm that meets the conditions laid out in Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2033 of the European Parliament and of the Council (33);

‘payment institution’ means a payment institution as defined in Article 4, point (4), of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘payment institution exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366’ means a payment institution exempted pursuant to Article 32(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘account information service provider’ means an account information service provider as referred to in Article 33(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;

‘electronic money institution’ means an electronic money institution as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council;

‘electronic money institution exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC’ means an electronic money institution benefitting from a waiver as referred to in Article 9(1) of Directive 2009/110/EC;

‘central counterparty’ means a central counterparty as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;

‘trade repository’ means a trade repository as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;

‘central securities depository’ means a central securities depository as defined in Article 2(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014;

‘trading venue’ means a trading venue as defined in Article 4(1), point (24), of Directive 2014/65/EU;

‘manager of alternative investment funds’ means a manager of alternative investment funds as defined in Article 4(1), point (b), of Directive 2011/61/EU;

‘management company’ means a management company as defined in Article 2(1), point (b), of Directive 2009/65/EC;

‘data reporting service provider’ means a data reporting service provider within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014, as referred to in Article 2(1), points (34) to (36) thereof;

‘insurance undertaking’ means an insurance undertaking as defined in Article 13, point (1), of Directive 2009/138/EC;

‘reinsurance undertaking’ means a reinsurance undertaking as defined in Article 13, point (4), of Directive 2009/138/EC;

‘insurance intermediary’ means an insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (3), of Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council (34);

‘ancillary insurance intermediary’ means an ancillary insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (4), of Directive (EU) 2016/97;

‘reinsurance intermediary’ means a reinsurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (5), of Directive (EU) 2016/97;

‘institution for occupational retirement provision’ means an institution for occupational retirement provision as defined in Article 6, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2016/2341;

‘small institution for occupational retirement provision’ means an institution for occupational retirement provision which operates pension schemes which together have less than 100 members in total;

‘credit rating agency’ means a credit rating agency as defined in Article 3(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009;

‘crypto-asset service provider’ means a crypto-asset service provider as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets;

‘issuer of asset-referenced tokens’ means an issuer of asset-referenced tokens as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation on markets in crypto-assets;

‘administrator of critical benchmarks’ means an administrator of ‘critical benchmarks’ as defined in Article 3(1), point (25), of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011;

‘crowdfunding service provider’ means a crowdfunding service provider as defined in Article 2(1), point (e), of Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 of the European Parliament and of the Council (35);

‘securitisation repository’ means a securitisation repository as defined in Article 2, point (23), of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 of the European Parliament and of the Council (36);

‘microenterprise’ means a financial entity, other than a trading venue, a central counterparty, a trade repository or a central securities depository, which employs fewer than 10 persons and has an annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total that does not exceed EUR 2 million;

‘Lead Overseer’ means the European Supervisory Authority appointed in accordance with Article 31(1), point (b) of this Regulation;

‘Joint Committee’ means the committee referred to in Article 54 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010;

‘small enterprise’ means a financial entity that employs 10 or more persons, but fewer than 50 persons, and has an annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total that exceeds EUR 2 million, but does not exceed EUR 10 million;

‘medium-sized enterprise’ means a financial entity that is not a small enterprise and employs fewer than 250 persons and has an annual turnover that does not exceed EUR 50 million and/or an annual balance sheet that does not exceed EUR 43 million;

‘public authority’ means any government or other public administration entity, including national central banks.

Financial entities shall implement the rules laid down in Chapter II in accordance with the principle of proportionality, taking into account their size and overall risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity of their services, activities and operations.

In addition, the application by financial entities of Chapters III, IV and V, Section I, shall be proportionate to their size and overall risk profile, and to the nature, scale and complexity of their services, activities and operations, as specifically provided for in the relevant rules of those Chapters.

The competent authorities shall consider the application of the proportionality principle by financial entities when reviewing the consistency of the ICT risk management framework on the basis of the reports submitted upon the request of competent authorities pursuant to Article 6(5) and Article 16(2).

Financial entities shall implement the rules laid down in Chapter II in accordance with the principle of proportionality, taking into account their size and overall risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity of their services, activities and operations.

In addition, the application by financial entities of Chapters III, IV and V, Section I, shall be proportionate to their size and overall risk profile, and to the nature, scale and complexity of their services, activities and operations, as specifically provided for in the relevant rules of those Chapters.

The competent authorities shall consider the application of the proportionality principle by financial entities when reviewing the consistency of the ICT risk management framework on the basis of the reports submitted upon the request of competent authorities pursuant to Article 6(5) and Article 16(2).

Financial entities shall have in place an internal governance and control framework that ensures an effective and prudent management of ICT risk, in accordance with Article 6(4), in order to achieve a high level of digital operational resilience.

The management body of the financial entity shall define, approve, oversee and be responsible for the implementation of all arrangements related to the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1).

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the management body shall:

1. (a)

   bear the ultimate responsibility for managing the financial entity’s ICT risk;

2. (b)

   put in place policies that aim to ensure the maintenance of high standards of availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality, of data;

3. (c)

   set clear roles and responsibilities for all ICT-related functions and establish appropriate governance arrangements to ensure effective and timely communication, cooperation and coordination among those functions;

4. (d)

   bear the overall responsibility for setting and approving the digital operational resilience strategy as referred to in Article 6(8), including the determination of the appropriate risk tolerance level of ICT risk of the financial entity, as referred to in Article 6(8), point (b);

5. (e)

   approve, oversee and periodically review the implementation of the financial entity’s ICT business continuity policy and ICT response and recovery plans, referred to, respectively, in Article 11(1) and (3), which may be adopted as a dedicated specific policy forming an integral part of the financial entity’s overall business continuity policy and response and recovery plan;

6. (f)

   approve and periodically review the financial entity’s ICT internal audit plans, ICT audits and material modifications to them;

7. (g)

   allocate and periodically review the appropriate budget to fulfil the financial entity’s digital operational resilience needs in respect of all types of resources, including relevant ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training referred to in Article 13(6), and ICT skills for all staff;

8. (h)

   approve and periodically review the financial entity’s policy on arrangements regarding the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers;

9. (i)

   put in place, at corporate level, reporting channels enabling it to be duly informed of the following:

   1. (i)

      arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services,

   2. (ii)

      any relevant planned material changes regarding the ICT third-party service providers,

   3. (iii)

      the potential impact of such changes on the critical or important functions subject to those arrangements, including a risk analysis summary to assess the impact of those changes, and at least major ICT-related incidents and their impact, as well as response, recovery and corrective measures.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall establish a role in order to monitor the arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services, or shall designate a member of senior management as responsible for overseeing the related risk exposure and relevant documentation.

Members of the management body of the financial entity shall actively keep up to date with sufficient knowledge and skills to understand and assess ICT risk and its impact on the operations of the financial entity, including by following specific training on a regular basis, commensurate to the ICT risk being managed.

Financial entities shall have in place an internal governance and control framework that ensures an effective and prudent management of ICT risk, in accordance with Article 6(4), in order to achieve a high level of digital operational resilience.

The management body of the financial entity shall define, approve, oversee and be responsible for the implementation of all arrangements related to the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1).

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the management body shall:

1. (a)

   bear the ultimate responsibility for managing the financial entity’s ICT risk;

2. (b)

   put in place policies that aim to ensure the maintenance of high standards of availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality, of data;

3. (c)

   set clear roles and responsibilities for all ICT-related functions and establish appropriate governance arrangements to ensure effective and timely communication, cooperation and coordination among those functions;

4. (d)

   bear the overall responsibility for setting and approving the digital operational resilience strategy as referred to in Article 6(8), including the determination of the appropriate risk tolerance level of ICT risk of the financial entity, as referred to in Article 6(8), point (b);

5. (e)

   approve, oversee and periodically review the implementation of the financial entity’s ICT business continuity policy and ICT response and recovery plans, referred to, respectively, in Article 11(1) and (3), which may be adopted as a dedicated specific policy forming an integral part of the financial entity’s overall business continuity policy and response and recovery plan;

6. (f)

   approve and periodically review the financial entity’s ICT internal audit plans, ICT audits and material modifications to them;

7. (g)

   allocate and periodically review the appropriate budget to fulfil the financial entity’s digital operational resilience needs in respect of all types of resources, including relevant ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training referred to in Article 13(6), and ICT skills for all staff;

8. (h)

   approve and periodically review the financial entity’s policy on arrangements regarding the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers;

9. (i)

   put in place, at corporate level, reporting channels enabling it to be duly informed of the following:

   1. (i)

      arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services,

   2. (ii)

      any relevant planned material changes regarding the ICT third-party service providers,

   3. (iii)

      the potential impact of such changes on the critical or important functions subject to those arrangements, including a risk analysis summary to assess the impact of those changes, and at least major ICT-related incidents and their impact, as well as response, recovery and corrective measures.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall establish a role in order to monitor the arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services, or shall designate a member of senior management as responsible for overseeing the related risk exposure and relevant documentation.

Members of the management body of the financial entity shall actively keep up to date with sufficient knowledge and skills to understand and assess ICT risk and its impact on the operations of the financial entity, including by following specific training on a regular basis, commensurate to the ICT risk being managed.

Financial entities shall have a sound, comprehensive and well-documented ICT risk management framework as part of their overall risk management system, which enables them to address ICT risk quickly, efficiently and comprehensively and to ensure a high level of digital operational resilience.

The ICT risk management framework shall include at least strategies, policies, procedures, ICT protocols and tools that are necessary to duly and adequately protect all information assets and ICT assets, including computer software, hardware, servers, as well as to protect all relevant physical components and infrastructures, such as premises, data centres and sensitive designated areas, to ensure that all information assets and ICT assets are adequately protected from risks including damage and unauthorised access or usage.

In accordance with their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall minimise the impact of ICT risk by deploying appropriate strategies, policies, procedures, ICT protocols and tools. They shall provide complete and updated information on ICT risk and on their ICT risk management framework to the competent authorities upon their request.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall assign the responsibility for managing and overseeing ICT risk to a control function and ensure an appropriate level of independence of such control function in order to avoid conflicts of interest. Financial entities shall ensure appropriate segregation and independence of ICT risk management functions, control functions, and internal audit functions, according to the three lines of defence model, or an internal risk management and control model.

The ICT risk management framework shall be documented and reviewed at least once a year, or periodically in the case of microenterprises, as well as upon the occurrence of major ICT-related incidents, and following supervisory instructions or conclusions derived from relevant digital operational resilience testing or audit processes. It shall be continuously improved on the basis of lessons derived from implementation and monitoring. A report on the review of the ICT risk management framework shall be submitted to the competent authority upon its request.

The ICT risk management framework of financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall be subject to internal audit by auditors on a regular basis in line with the financial entities’ audit plan. Those auditors shall possess sufficient knowledge, skills and expertise in ICT risk, as well as appropriate independence. The frequency and focus of ICT audits shall be commensurate to the ICT risk of the financial entity.

Based on the conclusions from the internal audit review, financial entities shall establish a formal follow-up process, including rules for the timely verification and remediation of critical ICT audit findings.

The ICT risk management framework shall include a digital operational resilience strategy setting out how the framework shall be implemented. To that end, the digital operational resilience strategy shall include methods to address ICT risk and attain specific ICT objectives, by:

1. (a)

   explaining how the ICT risk management framework supports the financial entity’s business strategy and objectives;

2. (b)

   establishing the risk tolerance level for ICT risk, in accordance with the risk appetite of the financial entity, and analysing the impact tolerance for ICT disruptions;

3. (c)

   setting out clear information security objectives, including key performance indicators and key risk metrics;

4. (d)

   explaining the ICT reference architecture and any changes needed to reach specific business objectives;

5. (e)

   outlining the different mechanisms put in place to detect ICT-related incidents, prevent their impact and provide protection from it;

6. (f)

   evidencing the current digital operational resilience situation on the basis of the number of major ICT-related incidents reported and the effectiveness of preventive measures;

7. (g)

   implementing digital operational resilience testing, in accordance with Chapter IV of this Regulation;

8. (h)

   outlining a communication strategy in the event of ICT-related incidents the disclosure of which is required in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities may, in the context of the digital operational resilience strategy referred to in paragraph 8, define a holistic ICT multi-vendor strategy, at group or entity level, showing key dependencies on ICT third-party service providers and explaining the rationale behind the procurement mix of ICT third-party service providers.

Financial entities may, in accordance with Union and national sectoral law, outsource the tasks of verifying compliance with ICT risk management requirements to intra-group or external undertakings. In case of such outsourcing, the financial entity remains fully responsible for the verification of compliance with the ICT risk management requirements.

Financial entities shall have a sound, comprehensive and well-documented ICT risk management framework as part of their overall risk management system, which enables them to address ICT risk quickly, efficiently and comprehensively and to ensure a high level of digital operational resilience.

The ICT risk management framework shall include at least strategies, policies, procedures, ICT protocols and tools that are necessary to duly and adequately protect all information assets and ICT assets, including computer software, hardware, servers, as well as to protect all relevant physical components and infrastructures, such as premises, data centres and sensitive designated areas, to ensure that all information assets and ICT assets are adequately protected from risks including damage and unauthorised access or usage.

In accordance with their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall minimise the impact of ICT risk by deploying appropriate strategies, policies, procedures, ICT protocols and tools. They shall provide complete and updated information on ICT risk and on their ICT risk management framework to the competent authorities upon their request.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall assign the responsibility for managing and overseeing ICT risk to a control function and ensure an appropriate level of independence of such control function in order to avoid conflicts of interest. Financial entities shall ensure appropriate segregation and independence of ICT risk management functions, control functions, and internal audit functions, according to the three lines of defence model, or an internal risk management and control model.

The ICT risk management framework shall be documented and reviewed at least once a year, or periodically in the case of microenterprises, as well as upon the occurrence of major ICT-related incidents, and following supervisory instructions or conclusions derived from relevant digital operational resilience testing or audit processes. It shall be continuously improved on the basis of lessons derived from implementation and monitoring. A report on the review of the ICT risk management framework shall be submitted to the competent authority upon its request.

The ICT risk management framework of financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall be subject to internal audit by auditors on a regular basis in line with the financial entities’ audit plan. Those auditors shall possess sufficient knowledge, skills and expertise in ICT risk, as well as appropriate independence. The frequency and focus of ICT audits shall be commensurate to the ICT risk of the financial entity.

Based on the conclusions from the internal audit review, financial entities shall establish a formal follow-up process, including rules for the timely verification and remediation of critical ICT audit findings.

The ICT risk management framework shall include a digital operational resilience strategy setting out how the framework shall be implemented. To that end, the digital operational resilience strategy shall include methods to address ICT risk and attain specific ICT objectives, by:

1. (a)

   explaining how the ICT risk management framework supports the financial entity’s business strategy and objectives;

2. (b)

   establishing the risk tolerance level for ICT risk, in accordance with the risk appetite of the financial entity, and analysing the impact tolerance for ICT disruptions;

3. (c)

   setting out clear information security objectives, including key performance indicators and key risk metrics;

4. (d)

   explaining the ICT reference architecture and any changes needed to reach specific business objectives;

5. (e)

   outlining the different mechanisms put in place to detect ICT-related incidents, prevent their impact and provide protection from it;

6. (f)

   evidencing the current digital operational resilience situation on the basis of the number of major ICT-related incidents reported and the effectiveness of preventive measures;

7. (g)

   implementing digital operational resilience testing, in accordance with Chapter IV of this Regulation;

8. (h)

   outlining a communication strategy in the event of ICT-related incidents the disclosure of which is required in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities may, in the context of the digital operational resilience strategy referred to in paragraph 8, define a holistic ICT multi-vendor strategy, at group or entity level, showing key dependencies on ICT third-party service providers and explaining the rationale behind the procurement mix of ICT third-party service providers.

Financial entities may, in accordance with Union and national sectoral law, outsource the tasks of verifying compliance with ICT risk management requirements to intra-group or external undertakings. In case of such outsourcing, the financial entity remains fully responsible for the verification of compliance with the ICT risk management requirements.

appropriate to the magnitude of operations supporting the conduct of their activities, in accordance with the proportionality principle as referred to in Article 4;

reliable;

equipped with sufficient capacity to accurately process the data necessary for the performance of activities and the timely provision of services, and to deal with peak orders, message or transaction volumes, as needed, including where new technology is introduced;

technologically resilient in order to adequately deal with additional information processing needs as required under stressed market conditions or other adverse situations.

appropriate to the magnitude of operations supporting the conduct of their activities, in accordance with the proportionality principle as referred to in Article 4;

reliable;

equipped with sufficient capacity to accurately process the data necessary for the performance of activities and the timely provision of services, and to deal with peak orders, message or transaction volumes, as needed, including where new technology is introduced;

technologically resilient in order to adequately deal with additional information processing needs as required under stressed market conditions or other adverse situations.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall identify, classify and adequately document all ICT supported business functions, roles and responsibilities, the information assets and ICT assets supporting those functions, and their roles and dependencies in relation to ICT risk. Financial entities shall review as needed, and at least yearly, the adequacy of this classification and of any relevant documentation.

Financial entities shall, on a continuous basis, identify all sources of ICT risk, in particular the risk exposure to and from other financial entities, and assess cyber threats and ICT vulnerabilities relevant to their ICT supported business functions, information assets and ICT assets. Financial entities shall review on a regular basis, and at least yearly, the risk scenarios impacting them.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall perform a risk assessment upon each major change in the network and information system infrastructure, in the processes or procedures affecting their ICT supported business functions, information assets or ICT assets.

Financial entities shall identify all information assets and ICT assets, including those on remote sites, network resources and hardware equipment, and shall map those considered critical. They shall map the configuration of the information assets and ICT assets and the links and interdependencies between the different information assets and ICT assets.

Financial entities shall identify and document all processes that are dependent on ICT third-party service providers, and shall identify interconnections with ICT third-party service providers that provide services that support critical or important functions.

For the purposes of paragraphs 1, 4 and 5, financial entities shall maintain relevant inventories and update them periodically and every time any major change as referred to in paragraph 3 occurs.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall on a regular basis, and at least yearly, conduct a specific ICT risk assessment on all legacy ICT systems and, in any case before and after connecting technologies, applications or systems.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall identify, classify and adequately document all ICT supported business functions, roles and responsibilities, the information assets and ICT assets supporting those functions, and their roles and dependencies in relation to ICT risk. Financial entities shall review as needed, and at least yearly, the adequacy of this classification and of any relevant documentation.

Financial entities shall, on a continuous basis, identify all sources of ICT risk, in particular the risk exposure to and from other financial entities, and assess cyber threats and ICT vulnerabilities relevant to their ICT supported business functions, information assets and ICT assets. Financial entities shall review on a regular basis, and at least yearly, the risk scenarios impacting them.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall perform a risk assessment upon each major change in the network and information system infrastructure, in the processes or procedures affecting their ICT supported business functions, information assets or ICT assets.

Financial entities shall identify all information assets and ICT assets, including those on remote sites, network resources and hardware equipment, and shall map those considered critical. They shall map the configuration of the information assets and ICT assets and the links and interdependencies between the different information assets and ICT assets.

Financial entities shall identify and document all processes that are dependent on ICT third-party service providers, and shall identify interconnections with ICT third-party service providers that provide services that support critical or important functions.

For the purposes of paragraphs 1, 4 and 5, financial entities shall maintain relevant inventories and update them periodically and every time any major change as referred to in paragraph 3 occurs.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall on a regular basis, and at least yearly, conduct a specific ICT risk assessment on all legacy ICT systems and, in any case before and after connecting technologies, applications or systems.

For the purposes of adequately protecting ICT systems and with a view to organising response measures, financial entities shall continuously monitor and control the security and functioning of ICT systems and tools and shall minimise the impact of ICT risk on ICT systems through the deployment of appropriate ICT security tools, policies and procedures.

Financial entities shall design, procure and implement ICT security policies, procedures, protocols and tools that aim to ensure the resilience, continuity and availability of ICT systems, in particular for those supporting critical or important functions, and to maintain high standards of availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, whether at rest, in use or in transit.

In order to achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph 2, financial entities shall use ICT solutions and processes that are appropriate in accordance with Article 4. Those ICT solutions and processes shall:

1. (a)

   ensure the security of the means of transfer of data;

2. (b)

   minimise the risk of corruption or loss of data, unauthorised access and technical flaws that may hinder business activity;

3. (c)

   prevent the lack of availability, the impairment of the authenticity and integrity, the breaches of confidentiality and the loss of data;

4. (d)

   ensure that data is protected from risks arising from data management, including poor administration, processing-related risks and human error.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall:

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (b), financial entities shall design the network connection infrastructure in a way that allows it to be instantaneously severed or segmented in order to minimise and prevent contagion, especially for interconnected financial processes.

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (e), the ICT change management process shall be approved by appropriate lines of management and shall have specific protocols in place.

1. (a)

   develop and document an information security policy defining rules to protect the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, information assets and ICT assets, including those of their customers, where applicable;

2. (b)

   following a risk-based approach, establish a sound network and infrastructure management structure using appropriate techniques, methods and protocols that may include implementing automated mechanisms to isolate affected information assets in the event of cyber-attacks;

3. (c)

   implement policies that limit the physical or logical access to information assets and ICT assets to what is required for legitimate and approved functions and activities only, and establish to that end a set of policies, procedures and controls that address access rights and ensure a sound administration thereof;

4. (d)

   implement policies and protocols for strong authentication mechanisms, based on relevant standards and dedicated control systems, and protection measures of cryptographic keys whereby data is encrypted based on results of approved data classification and ICT risk assessment processes;

5. (e)

   implement documented policies, procedures and controls for ICT change management, including changes to software, hardware, firmware components, systems or security parameters, that are based on a risk assessment approach and are an integral part of the financial entity’s overall change management process, in order to ensure that all changes to ICT systems are recorded, tested, assessed, approved, implemented and verified in a controlled manner;

6. (f)

   have appropriate and comprehensive documented policies for patches and updates.

For the purposes of adequately protecting ICT systems and with a view to organising response measures, financial entities shall continuously monitor and control the security and functioning of ICT systems and tools and shall minimise the impact of ICT risk on ICT systems through the deployment of appropriate ICT security tools, policies and procedures.

Financial entities shall design, procure and implement ICT security policies, procedures, protocols and tools that aim to ensure the resilience, continuity and availability of ICT systems, in particular for those supporting critical or important functions, and to maintain high standards of availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, whether at rest, in use or in transit.

In order to achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph 2, financial entities shall use ICT solutions and processes that are appropriate in accordance with Article 4. Those ICT solutions and processes shall:

1. (a)

   ensure the security of the means of transfer of data;

2. (b)

   minimise the risk of corruption or loss of data, unauthorised access and technical flaws that may hinder business activity;

3. (c)

   prevent the lack of availability, the impairment of the authenticity and integrity, the breaches of confidentiality and the loss of data;

4. (d)

   ensure that data is protected from risks arising from data management, including poor administration, processing-related risks and human error.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall:

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (b), financial entities shall design the network connection infrastructure in a way that allows it to be instantaneously severed or segmented in order to minimise and prevent contagion, especially for interconnected financial processes.

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (e), the ICT change management process shall be approved by appropriate lines of management and shall have specific protocols in place.

1. (a)

   develop and document an information security policy defining rules to protect the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, information assets and ICT assets, including those of their customers, where applicable;

2. (b)

   following a risk-based approach, establish a sound network and infrastructure management structure using appropriate techniques, methods and protocols that may include implementing automated mechanisms to isolate affected information assets in the event of cyber-attacks;

3. (c)

   implement policies that limit the physical or logical access to information assets and ICT assets to what is required for legitimate and approved functions and activities only, and establish to that end a set of policies, procedures and controls that address access rights and ensure a sound administration thereof;

4. (d)

   implement policies and protocols for strong authentication mechanisms, based on relevant standards and dedicated control systems, and protection measures of cryptographic keys whereby data is encrypted based on results of approved data classification and ICT risk assessment processes;

5. (e)

   implement documented policies, procedures and controls for ICT change management, including changes to software, hardware, firmware components, systems or security parameters, that are based on a risk assessment approach and are an integral part of the financial entity’s overall change management process, in order to ensure that all changes to ICT systems are recorded, tested, assessed, approved, implemented and verified in a controlled manner;

6. (f)

   have appropriate and comprehensive documented policies for patches and updates.

Financial entities shall have in place mechanisms to promptly detect anomalous activities, in accordance with Article 17, including ICT network performance issues and ICT-related incidents, and to identify potential material single points of failure.

All detection mechanisms referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regularly tested in accordance with Article 25.

The detection mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall enable multiple layers of control, define alert thresholds and criteria to trigger and initiate ICT-related incident response processes, including automatic alert mechanisms for relevant staff in charge of ICT-related incident response.

Financial entities shall devote sufficient resources and capabilities to monitor user activity, the occurrence of ICT anomalies and ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks.

Data reporting service providers shall, in addition, have in place systems that can effectively check trade reports for completeness, identify omissions and obvious errors, and request re-transmission of those reports.

Financial entities shall have in place mechanisms to promptly detect anomalous activities, in accordance with Article 17, including ICT network performance issues and ICT-related incidents, and to identify potential material single points of failure.

All detection mechanisms referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regularly tested in accordance with Article 25.

The detection mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall enable multiple layers of control, define alert thresholds and criteria to trigger and initiate ICT-related incident response processes, including automatic alert mechanisms for relevant staff in charge of ICT-related incident response.

Financial entities shall devote sufficient resources and capabilities to monitor user activity, the occurrence of ICT anomalies and ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks.

Data reporting service providers shall, in addition, have in place systems that can effectively check trade reports for completeness, identify omissions and obvious errors, and request re-transmission of those reports.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1) and based on the identification requirements set out in Article 8, financial entities shall put in place a comprehensive ICT business continuity policy, which may be adopted as a dedicated specific policy, forming an integral part of the overall business continuity policy of the financial entity.

Financial entities shall implement the ICT business continuity policy through dedicated, appropriate and documented arrangements, plans, procedures and mechanisms aiming to:

1. (a)

   ensure the continuity of the financial entity’s critical or important functions;

2. (b)

   quickly, appropriately and effectively respond to, and resolve, all ICT-related incidents in a way that limits damage and prioritises the resumption of activities and recovery actions;

3. (c)

   activate, without delay, dedicated plans that enable containment measures, processes and technologies suited to each type of ICT-related incident and prevent further damage, as well as tailored response and recovery procedures established in accordance with Article 12;

4. (d)

   estimate preliminary impacts, damages and losses;

5. (e)

   set out communication and crisis management actions that ensure that updated information is transmitted to all relevant internal staff and external stakeholders in accordance with Article 14, and report to the competent authorities in accordance with Article 19.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall implement associated ICT response and recovery plans which, in the case of financial entities other than microenterprises, shall be subject to independent internal audit reviews.

Financial entities shall put in place, maintain and periodically test appropriate ICT business continuity plans, notably with regard to critical or important functions outsourced or contracted through arrangements with ICT third-party service providers.

As part of the overall business continuity policy, financial entities shall conduct a business impact analysis (BIA) of their exposures to severe business disruptions. Under the BIA, financial entities shall assess the potential impact of severe business disruptions by means of quantitative and qualitative criteria, using internal and external data and scenario analysis, as appropriate. The BIA shall consider the criticality of identified and mapped business functions, support processes, third-party dependencies and information assets, and their interdependencies. Financial entities shall ensure that ICT assets and ICT services are designed and used in full alignment with the BIA, in particular with regard to adequately ensuring the redundancy of all critical components.

As part of their comprehensive ICT risk management, financial entities shall:

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (a), financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall include in the testing plans scenarios of cyber-attacks and switchovers between the primary ICT infrastructure and the redundant capacity, backups and redundant facilities necessary to meet the obligations set out in Article 12.

Financial entities shall regularly review their ICT business continuity policy and ICT response and recovery plans, taking into account the results of tests carried out in accordance with the first subparagraph and recommendations stemming from audit checks or supervisory reviews.

1. (a)

   test the ICT business continuity plans and the ICT response and recovery plans in relation to ICT systems supporting all functions at least yearly, as well as in the event of any substantive changes to ICT systems supporting critical or important functions;

2. (b)

   test the crisis communication plans established in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall have a crisis management function, which, in the event of activation of their ICT business continuity plans or ICT response and recovery plans, shall, inter alia, set out clear procedures to manage internal and external crisis communications in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities shall keep readily accessible records of activities before and during disruption events when their ICT business continuity plans and ICT response and recovery plans are activated.

Central securities depositories shall provide the competent authorities with copies of the results of the ICT business continuity tests, or of similar exercises.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall report to the competent authorities, upon their request, an estimation of aggregated annual costs and losses caused by major ICT-related incidents.

In accordance with Article 16 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, the ESAs, through the Joint Committee, shall by 17 July 2024 develop common guidelines on the estimation of aggregated annual costs and losses referred to in paragraph 10.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1) and based on the identification requirements set out in Article 8, financial entities shall put in place a comprehensive ICT business continuity policy, which may be adopted as a dedicated specific policy, forming an integral part of the overall business continuity policy of the financial entity.

Financial entities shall implement the ICT business continuity policy through dedicated, appropriate and documented arrangements, plans, procedures and mechanisms aiming to:

1. (a)

   ensure the continuity of the financial entity’s critical or important functions;

2. (b)

   quickly, appropriately and effectively respond to, and resolve, all ICT-related incidents in a way that limits damage and prioritises the resumption of activities and recovery actions;

3. (c)

   activate, without delay, dedicated plans that enable containment measures, processes and technologies suited to each type of ICT-related incident and prevent further damage, as well as tailored response and recovery procedures established in accordance with Article 12;

4. (d)

   estimate preliminary impacts, damages and losses;

5. (e)

   set out communication and crisis management actions that ensure that updated information is transmitted to all relevant internal staff and external stakeholders in accordance with Article 14, and report to the competent authorities in accordance with Article 19.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall implement associated ICT response and recovery plans which, in the case of financial entities other than microenterprises, shall be subject to independent internal audit reviews.

Financial entities shall put in place, maintain and periodically test appropriate ICT business continuity plans, notably with regard to critical or important functions outsourced or contracted through arrangements with ICT third-party service providers.

As part of the overall business continuity policy, financial entities shall conduct a business impact analysis (BIA) of their exposures to severe business disruptions. Under the BIA, financial entities shall assess the potential impact of severe business disruptions by means of quantitative and qualitative criteria, using internal and external data and scenario analysis, as appropriate. The BIA shall consider the criticality of identified and mapped business functions, support processes, third-party dependencies and information assets, and their interdependencies. Financial entities shall ensure that ICT assets and ICT services are designed and used in full alignment with the BIA, in particular with regard to adequately ensuring the redundancy of all critical components.

As part of their comprehensive ICT risk management, financial entities shall:

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (a), financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall include in the testing plans scenarios of cyber-attacks and switchovers between the primary ICT infrastructure and the redundant capacity, backups and redundant facilities necessary to meet the obligations set out in Article 12.

Financial entities shall regularly review their ICT business continuity policy and ICT response and recovery plans, taking into account the results of tests carried out in accordance with the first subparagraph and recommendations stemming from audit checks or supervisory reviews.

1. (a)

   test the ICT business continuity plans and the ICT response and recovery plans in relation to ICT systems supporting all functions at least yearly, as well as in the event of any substantive changes to ICT systems supporting critical or important functions;

2. (b)

   test the crisis communication plans established in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall have a crisis management function, which, in the event of activation of their ICT business continuity plans or ICT response and recovery plans, shall, inter alia, set out clear procedures to manage internal and external crisis communications in accordance with Article 14.

Financial entities shall keep readily accessible records of activities before and during disruption events when their ICT business continuity plans and ICT response and recovery plans are activated.

Central securities depositories shall provide the competent authorities with copies of the results of the ICT business continuity tests, or of similar exercises.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall report to the competent authorities, upon their request, an estimation of aggregated annual costs and losses caused by major ICT-related incidents.

In accordance with Article 16 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, the ESAs, through the Joint Committee, shall by 17 July 2024 develop common guidelines on the estimation of aggregated annual costs and losses referred to in paragraph 10.

For the purpose of ensuring the restoration of ICT systems and data with minimum downtime, limited disruption and loss, as part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall develop and document:

1. (a)

   backup policies and procedures specifying the scope of the data that is subject to the backup and the minimum frequency of the backup, based on the criticality of information or the confidentiality level of the data;

2. (b)

   restoration and recovery procedures and methods.

Financial entities shall set up backup systems that can be activated in accordance with the backup policies and procedures, as well as restoration and recovery procedures and methods. The activation of backup systems shall not jeopardise the security of the network and information systems or the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data. Testing of the backup procedures and restoration and recovery procedures and methods shall be undertaken periodically.

When restoring backup data using own systems, financial entities shall use ICT systems that are physically and logically segregated from the source ICT system. The ICT systems shall be securely protected from any unauthorised access or ICT corruption and allow for the timely restoration of services making use of data and system backups as necessary.

For central counterparties, the recovery plans shall enable the recovery of all transactions at the time of disruption to allow the central counterparty to continue to operate with certainty and to complete settlement on the scheduled date.

Data reporting service providers shall additionally maintain adequate resources and have back-up and restoration facilities in place in order to offer and maintain their services at all times.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall maintain redundant ICT capacities equipped with resources, capabilities and functions that are adequate to ensure business needs. Microenterprises shall assess the need to maintain such redundant ICT capacities based on their risk profile.

Central securities depositories shall maintain at least one secondary processing site endowed with adequate resources, capabilities, functions and staffing arrangements to ensure business needs.

The secondary processing site shall be:

1. (a)

   located at a geographical distance from the primary processing site to ensure that it bears a distinct risk profile and to prevent it from being affected by the event which has affected the primary site;

2. (b)

   capable of ensuring the continuity of critical or important functions identically to the primary site, or providing the level of services necessary to ensure that the financial entity performs its critical operations within the recovery objectives;

3. (c)

   immediately accessible to the financial entity’s staff to ensure continuity of critical or important functions in the event that the primary processing site has become unavailable.

In determining the recovery time and recovery point objectives for each function, financial entities shall take into account whether it is a critical or important function and the potential overall impact on market efficiency. Such time objectives shall ensure that, in extreme scenarios, the agreed service levels are met.

When recovering from an ICT-related incident, financial entities shall perform necessary checks, including any multiple checks and reconciliations, in order to ensure that the highest level of data integrity is maintained. These checks shall also be performed when reconstructing data from external stakeholders, in order to ensure that all data is consistent between systems.

For the purpose of ensuring the restoration of ICT systems and data with minimum downtime, limited disruption and loss, as part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall develop and document:

1. (a)

   backup policies and procedures specifying the scope of the data that is subject to the backup and the minimum frequency of the backup, based on the criticality of information or the confidentiality level of the data;

2. (b)

   restoration and recovery procedures and methods.

Financial entities shall set up backup systems that can be activated in accordance with the backup policies and procedures, as well as restoration and recovery procedures and methods. The activation of backup systems shall not jeopardise the security of the network and information systems or the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data. Testing of the backup procedures and restoration and recovery procedures and methods shall be undertaken periodically.

When restoring backup data using own systems, financial entities shall use ICT systems that are physically and logically segregated from the source ICT system. The ICT systems shall be securely protected from any unauthorised access or ICT corruption and allow for the timely restoration of services making use of data and system backups as necessary.

For central counterparties, the recovery plans shall enable the recovery of all transactions at the time of disruption to allow the central counterparty to continue to operate with certainty and to complete settlement on the scheduled date.

Data reporting service providers shall additionally maintain adequate resources and have back-up and restoration facilities in place in order to offer and maintain their services at all times.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall maintain redundant ICT capacities equipped with resources, capabilities and functions that are adequate to ensure business needs. Microenterprises shall assess the need to maintain such redundant ICT capacities based on their risk profile.

Central securities depositories shall maintain at least one secondary processing site endowed with adequate resources, capabilities, functions and staffing arrangements to ensure business needs.

The secondary processing site shall be:

1. (a)

   located at a geographical distance from the primary processing site to ensure that it bears a distinct risk profile and to prevent it from being affected by the event which has affected the primary site;

2. (b)

   capable of ensuring the continuity of critical or important functions identically to the primary site, or providing the level of services necessary to ensure that the financial entity performs its critical operations within the recovery objectives;

3. (c)

   immediately accessible to the financial entity’s staff to ensure continuity of critical or important functions in the event that the primary processing site has become unavailable.

In determining the recovery time and recovery point objectives for each function, financial entities shall take into account whether it is a critical or important function and the potential overall impact on market efficiency. Such time objectives shall ensure that, in extreme scenarios, the agreed service levels are met.

When recovering from an ICT-related incident, financial entities shall perform necessary checks, including any multiple checks and reconciliations, in order to ensure that the highest level of data integrity is maintained. These checks shall also be performed when reconstructing data from external stakeholders, in order to ensure that all data is consistent between systems.

Financial entities shall have in place capabilities and staff to gather information on vulnerabilities and cyber threats, ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, and analyse the impact they are likely to have on their digital operational resilience.

Financial entities shall put in place post ICT-related incident reviews after a major ICT-related incident disrupts their core activities, analysing the causes of disruption and identifying required improvements to the ICT operations or within the ICT business continuity policy referred to in Article 11.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall, upon request, communicate to the competent authorities, the changes that were implemented following post ICT-related incident reviews as referred to in the first subparagraph.

The post ICT-related incident reviews referred to in the first subparagraph shall determine whether the established procedures were followed and the actions taken were effective, including in relation to the following:

1. (a)

   the promptness in responding to security alerts and determining the impact of ICT-related incidents and their severity;

2. (b)

   the quality and speed of performing a forensic analysis, where deemed appropriate;

3. (c)

   the effectiveness of incident escalation within the financial entity;

4. (d)

   the effectiveness of internal and external communication.

Lessons derived from the digital operational resilience testing carried out in accordance with Articles 26 and 27 and from real life ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, along with challenges faced upon the activation of ICT business continuity plans and ICT response and recovery plans, together with relevant information exchanged with counterparts and assessed during supervisory reviews, shall be duly incorporated on a continuous basis into the ICT risk assessment process. Those findings shall form the basis for appropriate reviews of relevant components of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1).

Financial entities shall monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of their digital operational resilience strategy set out in Article 6(8). They shall map the evolution of ICT risk over time, analyse the frequency, types, magnitude and evolution of ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks and their patterns, with a view to understanding the level of ICT risk exposure, in particular in relation to critical or important functions, and enhance the cyber maturity and preparedness of the financial entity.

Senior ICT staff shall report at least yearly to the management body on the findings referred to in paragraph 3 and put forward recommendations.

Financial entities shall develop ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training as compulsory modules in their staff training schemes. Those programmes and training shall be applicable to all employees and to senior management staff, and shall have a level of complexity commensurate to the remit of their functions. Where appropriate, financial entities shall also include ICT third-party service providers in their relevant training schemes in accordance with Article 30(2), point (i).

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall monitor relevant technological developments on a continuous basis, also with a view to understanding the possible impact of the deployment of such new technologies on ICT security requirements and digital operational resilience. They shall keep up-to-date with the latest ICT risk management processes, in order to effectively combat current or new forms of cyber-attacks.

Financial entities shall have in place capabilities and staff to gather information on vulnerabilities and cyber threats, ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, and analyse the impact they are likely to have on their digital operational resilience.

Financial entities shall put in place post ICT-related incident reviews after a major ICT-related incident disrupts their core activities, analysing the causes of disruption and identifying required improvements to the ICT operations or within the ICT business continuity policy referred to in Article 11.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall, upon request, communicate to the competent authorities, the changes that were implemented following post ICT-related incident reviews as referred to in the first subparagraph.

The post ICT-related incident reviews referred to in the first subparagraph shall determine whether the established procedures were followed and the actions taken were effective, including in relation to the following:

1. (a)

   the promptness in responding to security alerts and determining the impact of ICT-related incidents and their severity;

2. (b)

   the quality and speed of performing a forensic analysis, where deemed appropriate;

3. (c)

   the effectiveness of incident escalation within the financial entity;

4. (d)

   the effectiveness of internal and external communication.

Lessons derived from the digital operational resilience testing carried out in accordance with Articles 26 and 27 and from real life ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, along with challenges faced upon the activation of ICT business continuity plans and ICT response and recovery plans, together with relevant information exchanged with counterparts and assessed during supervisory reviews, shall be duly incorporated on a continuous basis into the ICT risk assessment process. Those findings shall form the basis for appropriate reviews of relevant components of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1).

Financial entities shall monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of their digital operational resilience strategy set out in Article 6(8). They shall map the evolution of ICT risk over time, analyse the frequency, types, magnitude and evolution of ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks and their patterns, with a view to understanding the level of ICT risk exposure, in particular in relation to critical or important functions, and enhance the cyber maturity and preparedness of the financial entity.

Senior ICT staff shall report at least yearly to the management body on the findings referred to in paragraph 3 and put forward recommendations.

Financial entities shall develop ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training as compulsory modules in their staff training schemes. Those programmes and training shall be applicable to all employees and to senior management staff, and shall have a level of complexity commensurate to the remit of their functions. Where appropriate, financial entities shall also include ICT third-party service providers in their relevant training schemes in accordance with Article 30(2), point (i).

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall monitor relevant technological developments on a continuous basis, also with a view to understanding the possible impact of the deployment of such new technologies on ICT security requirements and digital operational resilience. They shall keep up-to-date with the latest ICT risk management processes, in order to effectively combat current or new forms of cyber-attacks.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall have in place crisis communication plans enabling a responsible disclosure of, at least, major ICT-related incidents or vulnerabilities to clients and counterparts as well as to the public, as appropriate.

As part of the ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall implement communication policies for internal staff and for external stakeholders. Communication policies for staff shall take into account the need to differentiate between staff involved in ICT risk management, in particular the staff responsible for response and recovery, and staff that needs to be informed.

At least one person in the financial entity shall be tasked with implementing the communication strategy for ICT-related incidents and fulfil the public and media function for that purpose.

As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(1), financial entities shall have in place crisis communication plans enabling a responsible disclosure of, at least, major ICT-related incidents or vulnerabilities to clients and counterparts as well as to the public, as appropriate.

As part of the ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall implement communication policies for internal staff and for external stakeholders. Communication policies for staff shall take into account the need to differentiate between staff involved in ICT risk management, in particular the staff responsible for response and recovery, and staff that needs to be informed.

At least one person in the financial entity shall be tasked with implementing the communication strategy for ICT-related incidents and fulfil the public and media function for that purpose.

specify further elements to be included in the ICT security policies, procedures, protocols and tools referred to in Article 9(2), with a view to ensuring the security of networks, enable adequate safeguards against intrusions and data misuse, preserve the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, including cryptographic techniques, and guarantee an accurate and prompt data transmission without major disruptions and undue delays;

develop further components of the controls of access management rights referred to in Article 9(4), point (c), and associated human resource policy specifying access rights, procedures for granting and revoking rights, monitoring anomalous behaviour in relation to ICT risk through appropriate indicators, including for network use patterns, hours, IT activity and unknown devices;

develop further the mechanisms specified in Article 10(1) enabling a prompt detection of anomalous activities and the criteria set out in Article 10(2) triggering ICT-related incident detection and response processes;

specify further the components of the ICT business continuity policy referred to in Article 11(1);

specify further the testing of ICT business continuity plans referred to in Article 11(6) to ensure that such testing duly takes into account scenarios in which the quality of the provision of a critical or important function deteriorates to an unacceptable level or fails, and duly considers the potential impact of the insolvency, or other failures, of any relevant ICT third-party service provider and, where relevant, the political risks in the respective providers’ jurisdictions;

specify further the components of the ICT response and recovery plans referred to in Article 11(3);

specifying further the content and format of the report on the review of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(5);

specify further elements to be included in the ICT security policies, procedures, protocols and tools referred to in Article 9(2), with a view to ensuring the security of networks, enable adequate safeguards against intrusions and data misuse, preserve the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data, including cryptographic techniques, and guarantee an accurate and prompt data transmission without major disruptions and undue delays;

develop further components of the controls of access management rights referred to in Article 9(4), point (c), and associated human resource policy specifying access rights, procedures for granting and revoking rights, monitoring anomalous behaviour in relation to ICT risk through appropriate indicators, including for network use patterns, hours, IT activity and unknown devices;

develop further the mechanisms specified in Article 10(1) enabling a prompt detection of anomalous activities and the criteria set out in Article 10(2) triggering ICT-related incident detection and response processes;

specify further the components of the ICT business continuity policy referred to in Article 11(1);

specify further the testing of ICT business continuity plans referred to in Article 11(6) to ensure that such testing duly takes into account scenarios in which the quality of the provision of a critical or important function deteriorates to an unacceptable level or fails, and duly considers the potential impact of the insolvency, or other failures, of any relevant ICT third-party service provider and, where relevant, the political risks in the respective providers’ jurisdictions;

specify further the components of the ICT response and recovery plans referred to in Article 11(3);

specifying further the content and format of the report on the review of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(5);

Articles 5 to 15 of this Regulation shall not apply to small and non-interconnected investment firms, payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366; institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU in respect of which Member States have decided not to apply the option referred to in Article 2(4) of this Regulation; electronic money institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC; and small institutions for occupational retirement provision.

Without prejudice to the first subparagraph, the entities listed in the first subparagraph shall:

1. (a)

   put in place and maintain a sound and documented ICT risk management framework that details the mechanisms and measures aimed at a quick, efficient and comprehensive management of ICT risk, including for the protection of relevant physical components and infrastructures;

2. (b)

   continuously monitor the security and functioning of all ICT systems;

3. (c)

   minimise the impact of ICT risk through the use of sound, resilient and updated ICT systems, protocols and tools which are appropriate to support the performance of their activities and the provision of services and adequately protect availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data in the network and information systems;

4. (d)

   allow sources of ICT risk and anomalies in the network and information systems to be promptly identified and detected and ICT-related incidents to be swiftly handled;

5. (e)

   identify key dependencies on ICT third-party service providers;

6. (f)

   ensure the continuity of critical or important functions, through business continuity plans and response and recovery measures, which include, at least, back-up and restoration measures;

7. (g)

   test, on a regular basis, the plans and measures referred to in point (f), as well as the effectiveness of the controls implemented in accordance with points (a) and (c);

8. (h)

   implement, as appropriate, relevant operational conclusions resulting from the tests referred to in point (g) and from post-incident analysis into the ICT risk assessment process and develop, according to needs and ICT risk profile, ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training for staff and management.

The ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (a), shall be documented and reviewed periodically and upon the occurrence of major ICT-related incidents in compliance with supervisory instructions. It shall be continuously improved on the basis of lessons derived from implementation and monitoring. A report on the review of the ICT risk management framework shall be submitted to the competent authority upon its request.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, in consultation with the ENISA, develop common draft regulatory technical standards in order to:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

1. (a)

   specify further the elements to be included in the ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (a);

2. (b)

   specify further the elements in relation to systems, protocols and tools to minimise the impact of ICT risk referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (c), with a view to ensuring the security of networks, enabling adequate safeguards against intrusions and data misuse and preserving the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data;

3. (c)

   specify further the components of the ICT business continuity plans referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (f);

4. (d)

   specify further the rules on the testing of business continuity plans and ensure the effectiveness of the controls referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (g) and ensure that such testing duly takes into account scenarios in which the quality of the provision of a critical or important function deteriorates to an unacceptable level or fails;

5. (e)

   specify further the content and format of the report on the review of the ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 2.

Articles 5 to 15 of this Regulation shall not apply to small and non-interconnected investment firms, payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366; institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU in respect of which Member States have decided not to apply the option referred to in Article 2(4) of this Regulation; electronic money institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC; and small institutions for occupational retirement provision.

Without prejudice to the first subparagraph, the entities listed in the first subparagraph shall:

1. (a)

   put in place and maintain a sound and documented ICT risk management framework that details the mechanisms and measures aimed at a quick, efficient and comprehensive management of ICT risk, including for the protection of relevant physical components and infrastructures;

2. (b)

   continuously monitor the security and functioning of all ICT systems;

3. (c)

   minimise the impact of ICT risk through the use of sound, resilient and updated ICT systems, protocols and tools which are appropriate to support the performance of their activities and the provision of services and adequately protect availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data in the network and information systems;

4. (d)

   allow sources of ICT risk and anomalies in the network and information systems to be promptly identified and detected and ICT-related incidents to be swiftly handled;

5. (e)

   identify key dependencies on ICT third-party service providers;

6. (f)

   ensure the continuity of critical or important functions, through business continuity plans and response and recovery measures, which include, at least, back-up and restoration measures;

7. (g)

   test, on a regular basis, the plans and measures referred to in point (f), as well as the effectiveness of the controls implemented in accordance with points (a) and (c);

8. (h)

   implement, as appropriate, relevant operational conclusions resulting from the tests referred to in point (g) and from post-incident analysis into the ICT risk assessment process and develop, according to needs and ICT risk profile, ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training for staff and management.

The ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (a), shall be documented and reviewed periodically and upon the occurrence of major ICT-related incidents in compliance with supervisory instructions. It shall be continuously improved on the basis of lessons derived from implementation and monitoring. A report on the review of the ICT risk management framework shall be submitted to the competent authority upon its request.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, in consultation with the ENISA, develop common draft regulatory technical standards in order to:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

1. (a)

   specify further the elements to be included in the ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (a);

2. (b)

   specify further the elements in relation to systems, protocols and tools to minimise the impact of ICT risk referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (c), with a view to ensuring the security of networks, enabling adequate safeguards against intrusions and data misuse and preserving the availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data;

3. (c)

   specify further the components of the ICT business continuity plans referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (f);

4. (d)

   specify further the rules on the testing of business continuity plans and ensure the effectiveness of the controls referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (g) and ensure that such testing duly takes into account scenarios in which the quality of the provision of a critical or important function deteriorates to an unacceptable level or fails;

5. (e)

   specify further the content and format of the report on the review of the ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 2.

Financial entities shall define, establish and implement an ICT-related incident management process to detect, manage and notify ICT-related incidents.

Financial entities shall record all ICT-related incidents and significant cyber threats. Financial entities shall establish appropriate procedures and processes to ensure a consistent and integrated monitoring, handling and follow-up of ICT-related incidents, to ensure that root causes are identified, documented and addressed in order to prevent the occurrence of such incidents.

The ICT-related incident management process referred to in paragraph 1 shall:

1. (a)

   put in place early warning indicators;

2. (b)

   establish procedures to identify, track, log, categorise and classify ICT-related incidents according to their priority and severity and according to the criticality of the services impacted, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 18(1);

3. (c)

   assign roles and responsibilities that need to be activated for different ICT-related incident types and scenarios;

4. (d)

   set out plans for communication to staff, external stakeholders and media in accordance with Article 14 and for notification to clients, for internal escalation procedures, including ICT-related customer complaints, as well as for the provision of information to financial entities that act as counterparts, as appropriate;

5. (e)

   ensure that at least major ICT-related incidents are reported to relevant senior management and inform the management body of at least major ICT-related incidents, explaining the impact, response and additional controls to be established as a result of such ICT-related incidents;

6. (f)

   establish ICT-related incident response procedures to mitigate impacts and ensure that services become operational and secure in a timely manner.

Financial entities shall define, establish and implement an ICT-related incident management process to detect, manage and notify ICT-related incidents.

Financial entities shall record all ICT-related incidents and significant cyber threats. Financial entities shall establish appropriate procedures and processes to ensure a consistent and integrated monitoring, handling and follow-up of ICT-related incidents, to ensure that root causes are identified, documented and addressed in order to prevent the occurrence of such incidents.

The ICT-related incident management process referred to in paragraph 1 shall:

1. (a)

   put in place early warning indicators;

2. (b)

   establish procedures to identify, track, log, categorise and classify ICT-related incidents according to their priority and severity and according to the criticality of the services impacted, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 18(1);

3. (c)

   assign roles and responsibilities that need to be activated for different ICT-related incident types and scenarios;

4. (d)

   set out plans for communication to staff, external stakeholders and media in accordance with Article 14 and for notification to clients, for internal escalation procedures, including ICT-related customer complaints, as well as for the provision of information to financial entities that act as counterparts, as appropriate;

5. (e)

   ensure that at least major ICT-related incidents are reported to relevant senior management and inform the management body of at least major ICT-related incidents, explaining the impact, response and additional controls to be established as a result of such ICT-related incidents;

6. (f)

   establish ICT-related incident response procedures to mitigate impacts and ensure that services become operational and secure in a timely manner.

Financial entities shall classify ICT-related incidents and shall determine their impact based on the following criteria:

1. (a)

   the number and/or relevance of clients or financial counterparts affected and, where applicable, the amount or number of transactions affected by the ICT-related incident, and whether the ICT-related incident has caused reputational impact;

2. (b)

   the duration of the ICT-related incident, including the service downtime;

3. (c)

   the geographical spread with regard to the areas affected by the ICT-related incident, particularly if it affects more than two Member States;

4. (d)

   the data losses that the ICT-related incident entails, in relation to availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data;

5. (e)

   the criticality of the services affected, including the financial entity’s transactions and operations;

6. (f)

   the economic impact, in particular direct and indirect costs and losses, of the ICT-related incident in both absolute and relative terms.

Financial entities shall classify cyber threats as significant based on the criticality of the services at risk, including the financial entity’s transactions and operations, number and/or relevance of clients or financial counterparts targeted and the geographical spread of the areas at risk.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee and in consultation with the ECB and ENISA, develop common draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the following:

1. (a)

   the criteria set out in paragraph 1, including materiality thresholds for determining major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, that are subject to the reporting obligation laid down in Article 19(1);

2. (b)

   the criteria to be applied by competent authorities for the purpose of assessing the relevance of major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to relevant competent authorities in other Member States’, and the details of reports of major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to be shared with other competent authorities pursuant to Article 19(6) and (7);

3. (c)

   the criteria set out in paragraph 2 of this Article, including high materiality thresholds for determining significant cyber threats.

When developing the common draft regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, the ESAs shall take into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), as well as international standards, guidance and specifications developed and published by ENISA, including, where appropriate, specifications for other economic sectors. For the purposes of applying the criteria set out in Article 4(2), the ESAs shall duly consider the need for microenterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises to mobilise sufficient resources and capabilities to ensure that ICT-related incidents are managed swiftly.

The ESAs shall submit those common draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 3 in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

Financial entities shall classify ICT-related incidents and shall determine their impact based on the following criteria:

1. (a)

   the number and/or relevance of clients or financial counterparts affected and, where applicable, the amount or number of transactions affected by the ICT-related incident, and whether the ICT-related incident has caused reputational impact;

2. (b)

   the duration of the ICT-related incident, including the service downtime;

3. (c)

   the geographical spread with regard to the areas affected by the ICT-related incident, particularly if it affects more than two Member States;

4. (d)

   the data losses that the ICT-related incident entails, in relation to availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data;

5. (e)

   the criticality of the services affected, including the financial entity’s transactions and operations;

6. (f)

   the economic impact, in particular direct and indirect costs and losses, of the ICT-related incident in both absolute and relative terms.

Financial entities shall classify cyber threats as significant based on the criticality of the services at risk, including the financial entity’s transactions and operations, number and/or relevance of clients or financial counterparts targeted and the geographical spread of the areas at risk.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee and in consultation with the ECB and ENISA, develop common draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the following:

1. (a)

   the criteria set out in paragraph 1, including materiality thresholds for determining major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, that are subject to the reporting obligation laid down in Article 19(1);

2. (b)

   the criteria to be applied by competent authorities for the purpose of assessing the relevance of major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to relevant competent authorities in other Member States’, and the details of reports of major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to be shared with other competent authorities pursuant to Article 19(6) and (7);

3. (c)

   the criteria set out in paragraph 2 of this Article, including high materiality thresholds for determining significant cyber threats.

When developing the common draft regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, the ESAs shall take into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), as well as international standards, guidance and specifications developed and published by ENISA, including, where appropriate, specifications for other economic sectors. For the purposes of applying the criteria set out in Article 4(2), the ESAs shall duly consider the need for microenterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises to mobilise sufficient resources and capabilities to ensure that ICT-related incidents are managed swiftly.

The ESAs shall submit those common draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 3 in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

Financial entities shall report major ICT-related incidents to the relevant competent authority as referred to in Article 46 in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article.

Where a financial entity is subject to supervision by more than one national competent authority referred to in Article 46, Member States shall designate a single competent authority as the relevant competent authority responsible for carrying out the functions and duties provided for in this Article.

Credit institutions classified as significant, in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, shall report major ICT-related incidents to the relevant national competent authority designated in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2013/36/EU, which shall immediately transmit that report to the ECB.

For the purpose of the first subparagraph, financial entities shall produce, after collecting and analysing all relevant information, the initial notification and reports referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article using the templates referred to in Article 20 and submit them to the competent authority. In the event that a technical impossibility prevents the submission of the initial notification using the template, financial entities shall notify the competent authority about it via alternative means.

The initial notification and reports referred to in paragraph 4 shall include all information necessary for the competent authority to determine the significance of the major ICT-related incident and assess possible cross-border impacts.

Without prejudice to the reporting pursuant to the first subparagraph by the financial entity to the relevant competent authority, Member States may additionally determine that some or all financial entities shall also provide the initial notification and each report referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article using the templates referred to in Article 20 to the competent authorities or the computer security incident response teams (CSIRTs) designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555.

Financial entities may, on a voluntary basis, notify significant cyber threats to the relevant competent authority when they deem the threat to be of relevance to the financial system, service users or clients. The relevant competent authority may provide such information to other relevant authorities referred to in paragraph 6.

Credit institutions classified as significant, in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, may, on a voluntary basis, notify significant cyber threats to relevant national competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2013/36/EU, which shall immediately transmit the notification to the ECB.

Member States may determine that those financial entities that on a voluntary basis notify in accordance with the first subparagraph may also transmit that notification to the CSIRTs designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555.

Where a major ICT-related incident occurs and has an impact on the financial interests of clients, financial entities shall, without undue delay as soon as they become aware of it, inform their clients about the major ICT-related incident and about the measures that have been taken to mitigate the adverse effects of such incident.

In the case of a significant cyber threat, financial entities shall, where applicable, inform their clients that are potentially affected of any appropriate protection measures which the latter may consider taking.

Financial entities shall, within the time limits to be laid down in accordance with Article 20, first paragraph, point (a), point (ii), submit the following to the relevant competent authority:

1. (a)

   an initial notification;

2. (b)

   an intermediate report after the initial notification referred to in point (a), as soon as the status of the original incident has changed significantly or the handling of the major ICT-related incident has changed based on new information available, followed, as appropriate, by updated notifications every time a relevant status update is available, as well as upon a specific request of the competent authority;

3. (c)

   a final report, when the root cause analysis has been completed, regardless of whether mitigation measures have already been implemented, and when the actual impact figures are available to replace estimates.

Financial entities may outsource, in accordance with Union and national sectoral law, the reporting obligations under this Article to a third-party service provider. In case of such outsourcing, the financial entity remains fully responsible for the fulfilment of the incident reporting requirements.

Upon receipt of the initial notification and of each report referred to in paragraph 4, the competent authority shall, in a timely manner, provide details of the major ICT-related incident to the following recipients based, as applicable, on their respective competences:

1. (a)

   EBA, ESMA or EIOPA;

2. (b)

   the ECB, in the case of financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (d);

3. (c)

   the competent authorities, single points of contact or CSIRTs designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

4. (d)

   the resolution authorities, as referred to in Article 3 of Directive 2014/59/EU, and the Single Resolution Board (SRB) with respect to entities referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37), and with respect to entities and groups referred to in Article 7(4)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 if such details concern incidents that pose a risk to ensuring critical functions within the meaning of Article 2(1), point (35), of Directive 2014/59/EU; and

5. (e)

   other relevant public authorities under national law.

Following receipt of information in accordance with paragraph 6, EBA, ESMA or EIOPA and the ECB, in consultation with ENISA and in cooperation with the relevant competent authority, shall assess whether the major ICT-related incident is relevant for competent authorities in other Member States. Following that assessment, EBA, ESMA or EIOPA shall, as soon as possible, notify relevant competent authorities in other Member States accordingly. The ECB shall notify the members of the European System of Central Banks on issues relevant to the payment system. Based on that notification, the competent authorities shall, where appropriate, take all of the necessary measures to protect the immediate stability of the financial system.

The notification to be done by ESMA pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article shall be without prejudice to the responsibility of the competent authority to urgently transmit the details of the major ICT-related incident to the relevant authority in the host Member State, where a central securities depository has significant cross-border activity in the host Member State, the major ICT-related incident is likely to have severe consequences for the financial markets of the host Member State and where there are cooperation arrangements among competent authorities related to the supervision of financial entities.

Where a major ICT-related incident occurs and has an impact on the financial interests of clients, financial entities shall, without undue delay as soon as they become aware of it, inform their clients about the major ICT-related incident and about the measures that have been taken to mitigate the adverse effects of such incident.

In the case of a significant cyber threat, financial entities shall, where applicable, inform their clients that are potentially affected of any appropriate protection measures which the latter may consider taking.

Financial entities shall, within the time limits to be laid down in accordance with Article 20, first paragraph, point (a), point (ii), submit the following to the relevant competent authority:

1. (a)

   an initial notification;

2. (b)

   an intermediate report after the initial notification referred to in point (a), as soon as the status of the original incident has changed significantly or the handling of the major ICT-related incident has changed based on new information available, followed, as appropriate, by updated notifications every time a relevant status update is available, as well as upon a specific request of the competent authority;

3. (c)

   a final report, when the root cause analysis has been completed, regardless of whether mitigation measures have already been implemented, and when the actual impact figures are available to replace estimates.

Financial entities may outsource, in accordance with Union and national sectoral law, the reporting obligations under this Article to a third-party service provider. In case of such outsourcing, the financial entity remains fully responsible for the fulfilment of the incident reporting requirements.

Upon receipt of the initial notification and of each report referred to in paragraph 4, the competent authority shall, in a timely manner, provide details of the major ICT-related incident to the following recipients based, as applicable, on their respective competences:

1. (a)

   EBA, ESMA or EIOPA;

2. (b)

   the ECB, in the case of financial entities referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (d);

3. (c)

   the competent authorities, single points of contact or CSIRTs designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555;

4. (d)

   the resolution authorities, as referred to in Article 3 of Directive 2014/59/EU, and the Single Resolution Board (SRB) with respect to entities referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37), and with respect to entities and groups referred to in Article 7(4)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 if such details concern incidents that pose a risk to ensuring critical functions within the meaning of Article 2(1), point (35), of Directive 2014/59/EU; and

5. (e)

   other relevant public authorities under national law.

Following receipt of information in accordance with paragraph 6, EBA, ESMA or EIOPA and the ECB, in consultation with ENISA and in cooperation with the relevant competent authority, shall assess whether the major ICT-related incident is relevant for competent authorities in other Member States. Following that assessment, EBA, ESMA or EIOPA shall, as soon as possible, notify relevant competent authorities in other Member States accordingly. The ECB shall notify the members of the European System of Central Banks on issues relevant to the payment system. Based on that notification, the competent authorities shall, where appropriate, take all of the necessary measures to protect the immediate stability of the financial system.

The notification to be done by ESMA pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article shall be without prejudice to the responsibility of the competent authority to urgently transmit the details of the major ICT-related incident to the relevant authority in the host Member State, where a central securities depository has significant cross-border activity in the host Member State, the major ICT-related incident is likely to have severe consequences for the financial markets of the host Member State and where there are cooperation arrangements among competent authorities related to the supervision of financial entities.

common draft regulatory technical standards in order to:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations, and in particular, with a view to ensuring that, for the purposes of this paragraph, point (a), point (ii), different time limits may reflect, as appropriate, specificities of financial sectors, without prejudice to maintaining a consistent approach to ICT-related incident reporting pursuant to this Regulation and to Directive (EU) 2022/2555. The ESAs shall, as applicable, provide justification when deviating from the approaches taken in the context of that Directive;

1. (i)

   establish the content of the reports for major ICT-related incidents in order to reflect the criteria laid down in Article 18(1) and incorporate further elements, such as details for establishing the relevance of the reporting for other Member States and whether it constitutes a major operational or security payment-related incident or not;

2. (ii)

   determine the time limits for the initial notification and for each report referred to in Article 19(4);

3. (iii)

   establish the content of the notification for significant cyber threats.

common draft implementing technical standards in order to establish the standard forms, templates and procedures for financial entities to report a major ICT-related incident and to notify a significant cyber threat.

common draft regulatory technical standards in order to:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations, and in particular, with a view to ensuring that, for the purposes of this paragraph, point (a), point (ii), different time limits may reflect, as appropriate, specificities of financial sectors, without prejudice to maintaining a consistent approach to ICT-related incident reporting pursuant to this Regulation and to Directive (EU) 2022/2555. The ESAs shall, as applicable, provide justification when deviating from the approaches taken in the context of that Directive;

1. (i)

   establish the content of the reports for major ICT-related incidents in order to reflect the criteria laid down in Article 18(1) and incorporate further elements, such as details for establishing the relevance of the reporting for other Member States and whether it constitutes a major operational or security payment-related incident or not;

2. (ii)

   determine the time limits for the initial notification and for each report referred to in Article 19(4);

3. (iii)

   establish the content of the notification for significant cyber threats.

common draft implementing technical standards in order to establish the standard forms, templates and procedures for financial entities to report a major ICT-related incident and to notify a significant cyber threat.

The ESAs, through the Joint Committee, and in consultation with the ECB and ENISA, shall prepare a joint report assessing the feasibility of further centralisation of incident reporting through the establishment of a single EU Hub for major ICT-related incident reporting by financial entities. The joint report shall explore ways to facilitate the flow of ICT-related incident reporting, reduce associated costs and underpin thematic analyses with a view to enhancing supervisory convergence.

The joint report referred to in paragraph 1 shall comprise at least the following elements:

1. (a)

   prerequisites for the establishment of a single EU Hub;

2. (b)

   benefits, limitations and risks, including risks associated with the high concentration of sensitive information;

3. (c)

   the necessary capability to ensure interoperability with regard to other relevant reporting schemes;

4. (d)

   elements of operational management;

5. (e)

   conditions of membership;

6. (f)

   technical arrangements for financial entities and national competent authorities to access the single EU Hub;

7. (g)

   a preliminary assessment of financial costs incurred by setting-up the operational platform supporting the single EU Hub, including the requisite expertise.

The ESAs shall submit the report referred to in paragraph 1 to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the Commission by 17 January 2025.

The ESAs, through the Joint Committee, and in consultation with the ECB and ENISA, shall prepare a joint report assessing the feasibility of further centralisation of incident reporting through the establishment of a single EU Hub for major ICT-related incident reporting by financial entities. The joint report shall explore ways to facilitate the flow of ICT-related incident reporting, reduce associated costs and underpin thematic analyses with a view to enhancing supervisory convergence.

The joint report referred to in paragraph 1 shall comprise at least the following elements:

1. (a)

   prerequisites for the establishment of a single EU Hub;

2. (b)

   benefits, limitations and risks, including risks associated with the high concentration of sensitive information;

3. (c)

   the necessary capability to ensure interoperability with regard to other relevant reporting schemes;

4. (d)

   elements of operational management;

5. (e)

   conditions of membership;

6. (f)

   technical arrangements for financial entities and national competent authorities to access the single EU Hub;

7. (g)

   a preliminary assessment of financial costs incurred by setting-up the operational platform supporting the single EU Hub, including the requisite expertise.

The ESAs shall submit the report referred to in paragraph 1 to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the Commission by 17 January 2025.

Without prejudice to the technical input, advice or remedies and subsequent follow-up which may be provided, where applicable, in accordance with national law, by the CSIRTs under Directive (EU) 2022/2555, the competent authority shall, upon receipt of the initial notification and of each report as referred to in Article 19(4), acknowledge receipt and may, where feasible, provide in a timely manner relevant and proportionate feedback or high-level guidance to the financial entity, in particular by making available any relevant anonymised information and intelligence on similar threats, and may discuss remedies applied at the level of the financial entity and ways to minimise and mitigate adverse impact across the financial sector. Without prejudice to the supervisory feedback received, financial entities shall remain fully responsible for the handling and for consequences of the ICT-related incidents reported pursuant to Article 19(1).

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, on an anonymised and aggregated basis, report yearly on major ICT-related incidents, the details of which shall be provided by competent authorities in accordance with Article 19(6), setting out at least the number of major ICT-related incidents, their nature and their impact on the operations of financial entities or clients, remedial actions taken and costs incurred.

The ESAs shall issue warnings and produce high-level statistics to support ICT threat and vulnerability assessments.

Without prejudice to the technical input, advice or remedies and subsequent follow-up which may be provided, where applicable, in accordance with national law, by the CSIRTs under Directive (EU) 2022/2555, the competent authority shall, upon receipt of the initial notification and of each report as referred to in Article 19(4), acknowledge receipt and may, where feasible, provide in a timely manner relevant and proportionate feedback or high-level guidance to the financial entity, in particular by making available any relevant anonymised information and intelligence on similar threats, and may discuss remedies applied at the level of the financial entity and ways to minimise and mitigate adverse impact across the financial sector. Without prejudice to the supervisory feedback received, financial entities shall remain fully responsible for the handling and for consequences of the ICT-related incidents reported pursuant to Article 19(1).

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, on an anonymised and aggregated basis, report yearly on major ICT-related incidents, the details of which shall be provided by competent authorities in accordance with Article 19(6), setting out at least the number of major ICT-related incidents, their nature and their impact on the operations of financial entities or clients, remedial actions taken and costs incurred.

The ESAs shall issue warnings and produce high-level statistics to support ICT threat and vulnerability assessments.

For the purpose of assessing preparedness for handling ICT-related incidents, of identifying weaknesses, deficiencies and gaps in digital operational resilience, and of promptly implementing corrective measures, financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall, taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), establish, maintain and review a sound and comprehensive digital operational resilience testing programme as an integral part of the ICT risk-management framework referred to in Article 6.

The digital operational resilience testing programme shall include a range of assessments, tests, methodologies, practices and tools to be applied in accordance with Articles 25 and 26.

When conducting the digital operational resilience testing programme referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall follow a risk-based approach taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2) duly considering the evolving landscape of ICT risk, any specific risks to which the financial entity concerned is or might be exposed, the criticality of information assets and of services provided, as well as any other factor the financial entity deems appropriate.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall ensure that tests are undertaken by independent parties, whether internal or external. Where tests are undertaken by an internal tester, financial entities shall dedicate sufficient resources and ensure that conflicts of interest are avoided throughout the design and execution phases of the test.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall establish procedures and policies to prioritise, classify and remedy all issues revealed throughout the performance of the tests and shall establish internal validation methodologies to ascertain that all identified weaknesses, deficiencies or gaps are fully addressed.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall ensure, at least yearly, that appropriate tests are conducted on all ICT systems and applications supporting critical or important functions.

For the purpose of assessing preparedness for handling ICT-related incidents, of identifying weaknesses, deficiencies and gaps in digital operational resilience, and of promptly implementing corrective measures, financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall, taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), establish, maintain and review a sound and comprehensive digital operational resilience testing programme as an integral part of the ICT risk-management framework referred to in Article 6.

The digital operational resilience testing programme shall include a range of assessments, tests, methodologies, practices and tools to be applied in accordance with Articles 25 and 26.

When conducting the digital operational resilience testing programme referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall follow a risk-based approach taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2) duly considering the evolving landscape of ICT risk, any specific risks to which the financial entity concerned is or might be exposed, the criticality of information assets and of services provided, as well as any other factor the financial entity deems appropriate.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall ensure that tests are undertaken by independent parties, whether internal or external. Where tests are undertaken by an internal tester, financial entities shall dedicate sufficient resources and ensure that conflicts of interest are avoided throughout the design and execution phases of the test.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall establish procedures and policies to prioritise, classify and remedy all issues revealed throughout the performance of the tests and shall establish internal validation methodologies to ascertain that all identified weaknesses, deficiencies or gaps are fully addressed.

Financial entities, other than microenterprises, shall ensure, at least yearly, that appropriate tests are conducted on all ICT systems and applications supporting critical or important functions.

The digital operational resilience testing programme referred to in Article 24 shall provide, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 4(2), for the execution of appropriate tests, such as vulnerability assessments and scans, open source analyses, network security assessments, gap analyses, physical security reviews, questionnaires and scanning software solutions, source code reviews where feasible, scenario-based tests, compatibility testing, performance testing, end-to-end testing and penetration testing.

Central securities depositories and central counterparties shall perform vulnerability assessments before any deployment or redeployment of new or existing applications and infrastructure components, and ICT services supporting critical or important functions of the financial entity.

Microenterprises shall perform the tests referred to in paragraph 1 by combining a risk-based approach with a strategic planning of ICT testing, by duly considering the need to maintain a balanced approach between the scale of resources and the time to be allocated to the ICT testing provided for in this Article, on the one hand, and the urgency, type of risk, criticality of information assets and of services provided, as well as any other relevant factor, including the financial entity’s ability to take calculated risks, on the other hand.

The digital operational resilience testing programme referred to in Article 24 shall provide, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 4(2), for the execution of appropriate tests, such as vulnerability assessments and scans, open source analyses, network security assessments, gap analyses, physical security reviews, questionnaires and scanning software solutions, source code reviews where feasible, scenario-based tests, compatibility testing, performance testing, end-to-end testing and penetration testing.

Central securities depositories and central counterparties shall perform vulnerability assessments before any deployment or redeployment of new or existing applications and infrastructure components, and ICT services supporting critical or important functions of the financial entity.

Microenterprises shall perform the tests referred to in paragraph 1 by combining a risk-based approach with a strategic planning of ICT testing, by duly considering the need to maintain a balanced approach between the scale of resources and the time to be allocated to the ICT testing provided for in this Article, on the one hand, and the urgency, type of risk, criticality of information assets and of services provided, as well as any other relevant factor, including the financial entity’s ability to take calculated risks, on the other hand.

Financial entities, other than entities referred to in Article 16(1), first subparagraph, and other than microenterprises, which are identified in accordance with paragraph 8, third subparagraph, of this Article, shall carry out at least every 3 years advanced testing by means of TLPT. Based on the risk profile of the financial entity and taking into account operational circumstances, the competent authority may, where necessary, request the financial entity to reduce or increase this frequency.

Each threat-led penetration test shall cover several or all critical or important functions of a financial entity, and shall be performed on live production systems supporting such functions.

Financial entities shall identify all relevant underlying ICT systems, processes and technologies supporting critical or important functions and ICT services, including those supporting the critical or important functions which have been outsourced or contracted to ICT third-party service providers.

Financial entities shall assess which critical or important functions need to be covered by the TLPT. The result of this assessment shall determine the precise scope of TLPT and shall be validated by the competent authorities.

Where ICT third-party service providers are included in the scope of TLPT, the financial entity shall take the necessary measures and safeguards to ensure the participation of such ICT third-party service providers in the TLPT and shall retain at all times full responsibility for ensuring compliance with this Regulation.

Without prejudice to paragraph 2, first and second subparagraphs, where the participation of an ICT third-party service provider in the TLPT, referred to in paragraph 3, is reasonably expected to have an adverse impact on the quality or security of services delivered by the ICT third-party service provider to customers that are entities falling outside the scope of this Regulation, or on the confidentiality of the data related to such services, the financial entity and the ICT third-party service provider may agree in writing that the ICT third-party service provider directly enters into contractual arrangements with an external tester, for the purpose of conducting, under the direction of one designated financial entity, a pooled TLPT involving several financial entities (pooled testing) to which the ICT third-party service provider provides ICT services.

That pooled testing shall cover the relevant range of ICT services supporting critical or important functions contracted to the respective ICT third-party service provider by the financial entities. The pooled testing shall be considered TLPT carried out by the financial entities participating in the pooled testing.

The number of financial entities participating in the pooled testing shall be duly calibrated taking into account the complexity and types of services involved.

Financial entities shall, with the cooperation of ICT third-party service providers and other parties involved, including the testers but excluding the competent authorities, apply effective risk management controls to mitigate the risks of any potential impact on data, damage to assets, and disruption to critical or important functions, services or operations at the financial entity itself, its counterparts or to the financial sector.

At the end of the testing, after reports and remediation plans have been agreed, the financial entity and, where applicable, the external testers shall provide to the authority, designated in accordance with paragraph 9 or 10, a summary of the relevant findings, the remediation plans and the documentation demonstrating that the TLPT has been conducted in accordance with the requirements.

Authorities shall provide financial entities with an attestation confirming that the test was performed in accordance with the requirements as evidenced in the documentation in order to allow for mutual recognition of threat led penetration tests between competent authorities. The financial entity shall notify the relevant competent authority of the attestation, the summary of the relevant findings and the remediation plans.

Without prejudice to such attestation, financial entities shall remain at all times fully responsible for the impact of the tests referred to in paragraph 4.

Financial entities shall contract testers for the purposes of undertaking TLPT in accordance with Article 27. When financial entities use internal testers for the purposes of undertaking TLPT, they shall contract external testers every three tests.

Credit institutions that are classified as significant in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, shall only use external testers in accordance with Article 27(1), points (a) to (e).

Competent authorities shall identify financial entities that are required to perform TLPT taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), based on an assessment of the following:

1. (a)

   impact-related factors, in particular the extent to which the services provided and activities undertaken by the financial entity impact the financial sector;

2. (b)

   possible financial stability concerns, including the systemic character of the financial entity at Union or national level, as applicable;

3. (c)

   specific ICT risk profile, level of ICT maturity of the financial entity or technology features involved.

Member States may designate a single public authority in the financial sector to be responsible for TLPT-related matters in the financial sector at national level and shall entrust it with all competences and tasks to that effect.

In the absence of a designation in accordance with paragraph 9 of this Article, and without prejudice to the power to identify the financial entities that are required to perform TLPT, a competent authority may delegate the exercise of some or all of the tasks referred to in this Article and Article 27 to another national authority in the financial sector.

The ESAs shall, in agreement with the ECB, develop joint draft regulatory technical standards in accordance with the TIBER-EU framework in order to specify further:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall give due consideration to any specific feature arising from the distinct nature of activities across different financial services sectors.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 July 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

1. (a)

   the criteria used for the purpose of the application of paragraph 8, second subparagraph;

2. (b)

   the requirements and standards governing the use of internal testers;

3. (c)

   the requirements in relation to:

   1. (i)

      the scope of TLPT referred to in paragraph 2;

   2. (ii)

      the testing methodology and approach to be followed for each specific phase of the testing process;

   3. (iii)

      the results, closure and remediation stages of the testing;

4. (d)

   the type of supervisory and other relevant cooperation which are needed for the implementation of TLPT, and for the facilitation of mutual recognition of that testing, in the context of financial entities that operate in more than one Member State, to allow an appropriate level of supervisory involvement and a flexible implementation to cater for specificities of financial sub-sectors or local financial markets.

Financial entities, other than entities referred to in Article 16(1), first subparagraph, and other than microenterprises, which are identified in accordance with paragraph 8, third subparagraph, of this Article, shall carry out at least every 3 years advanced testing by means of TLPT. Based on the risk profile of the financial entity and taking into account operational circumstances, the competent authority may, where necessary, request the financial entity to reduce or increase this frequency.

Each threat-led penetration test shall cover several or all critical or important functions of a financial entity, and shall be performed on live production systems supporting such functions.

Financial entities shall identify all relevant underlying ICT systems, processes and technologies supporting critical or important functions and ICT services, including those supporting the critical or important functions which have been outsourced or contracted to ICT third-party service providers.

Financial entities shall assess which critical or important functions need to be covered by the TLPT. The result of this assessment shall determine the precise scope of TLPT and shall be validated by the competent authorities.

Where ICT third-party service providers are included in the scope of TLPT, the financial entity shall take the necessary measures and safeguards to ensure the participation of such ICT third-party service providers in the TLPT and shall retain at all times full responsibility for ensuring compliance with this Regulation.

Without prejudice to paragraph 2, first and second subparagraphs, where the participation of an ICT third-party service provider in the TLPT, referred to in paragraph 3, is reasonably expected to have an adverse impact on the quality or security of services delivered by the ICT third-party service provider to customers that are entities falling outside the scope of this Regulation, or on the confidentiality of the data related to such services, the financial entity and the ICT third-party service provider may agree in writing that the ICT third-party service provider directly enters into contractual arrangements with an external tester, for the purpose of conducting, under the direction of one designated financial entity, a pooled TLPT involving several financial entities (pooled testing) to which the ICT third-party service provider provides ICT services.

That pooled testing shall cover the relevant range of ICT services supporting critical or important functions contracted to the respective ICT third-party service provider by the financial entities. The pooled testing shall be considered TLPT carried out by the financial entities participating in the pooled testing.

The number of financial entities participating in the pooled testing shall be duly calibrated taking into account the complexity and types of services involved.

Financial entities shall, with the cooperation of ICT third-party service providers and other parties involved, including the testers but excluding the competent authorities, apply effective risk management controls to mitigate the risks of any potential impact on data, damage to assets, and disruption to critical or important functions, services or operations at the financial entity itself, its counterparts or to the financial sector.

At the end of the testing, after reports and remediation plans have been agreed, the financial entity and, where applicable, the external testers shall provide to the authority, designated in accordance with paragraph 9 or 10, a summary of the relevant findings, the remediation plans and the documentation demonstrating that the TLPT has been conducted in accordance with the requirements.

Authorities shall provide financial entities with an attestation confirming that the test was performed in accordance with the requirements as evidenced in the documentation in order to allow for mutual recognition of threat led penetration tests between competent authorities. The financial entity shall notify the relevant competent authority of the attestation, the summary of the relevant findings and the remediation plans.

Without prejudice to such attestation, financial entities shall remain at all times fully responsible for the impact of the tests referred to in paragraph 4.

Financial entities shall contract testers for the purposes of undertaking TLPT in accordance with Article 27. When financial entities use internal testers for the purposes of undertaking TLPT, they shall contract external testers every three tests.

Credit institutions that are classified as significant in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, shall only use external testers in accordance with Article 27(1), points (a) to (e).

Competent authorities shall identify financial entities that are required to perform TLPT taking into account the criteria set out in Article 4(2), based on an assessment of the following:

1. (a)

   impact-related factors, in particular the extent to which the services provided and activities undertaken by the financial entity impact the financial sector;

2. (b)

   possible financial stability concerns, including the systemic character of the financial entity at Union or national level, as applicable;

3. (c)

   specific ICT risk profile, level of ICT maturity of the financial entity or technology features involved.

Member States may designate a single public authority in the financial sector to be responsible for TLPT-related matters in the financial sector at national level and shall entrust it with all competences and tasks to that effect.

In the absence of a designation in accordance with paragraph 9 of this Article, and without prejudice to the power to identify the financial entities that are required to perform TLPT, a competent authority may delegate the exercise of some or all of the tasks referred to in this Article and Article 27 to another national authority in the financial sector.

The ESAs shall, in agreement with the ECB, develop joint draft regulatory technical standards in accordance with the TIBER-EU framework in order to specify further:

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall give due consideration to any specific feature arising from the distinct nature of activities across different financial services sectors.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 July 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

1. (a)

   the criteria used for the purpose of the application of paragraph 8, second subparagraph;

2. (b)

   the requirements and standards governing the use of internal testers;

3. (c)

   the requirements in relation to:

   1. (i)

      the scope of TLPT referred to in paragraph 2;

   2. (ii)

      the testing methodology and approach to be followed for each specific phase of the testing process;

   3. (iii)

      the results, closure and remediation stages of the testing;

4. (d)

   the type of supervisory and other relevant cooperation which are needed for the implementation of TLPT, and for the facilitation of mutual recognition of that testing, in the context of financial entities that operate in more than one Member State, to allow an appropriate level of supervisory involvement and a flexible implementation to cater for specificities of financial sub-sectors or local financial markets.

Financial entities shall only use testers for the carrying out of TLPT, that:

1. (a)

   are of the highest suitability and reputability;

2. (b)

   possess technical and organisational capabilities and demonstrate specific expertise in threat intelligence, penetration testing and red team testing;

3. (c)

   are certified by an accreditation body in a Member State or adhere to formal codes of conduct or ethical frameworks;

4. (d)

   provide an independent assurance, or an audit report, in relation to the sound management of risks associated with the carrying out of TLPT, including the due protection of the financial entity’s confidential information and redress for the business risks of the financial entity;

5. (e)

   are duly and fully covered by relevant professional indemnity insurances, including against risks of misconduct and negligence.

When using internal testers, financial entities shall ensure that, in addition to the requirements in paragraph 1, the following conditions are met:

1. (a)

   such use has been approved by the relevant competent authority or by the single public authority designated in accordance with Article 26(9) and (10);

2. (b)

   the relevant competent authority has verified that the financial entity has sufficient dedicated resources and ensured that conflicts of interest are avoided throughout the design and execution phases of the test; and

3. (c)

   the threat intelligence provider is external to the financial entity.

Financial entities shall ensure that contracts concluded with external testers require a sound management of the TLPT results and that any data processing thereof, including any generation, store, aggregation, draft, report, communication or destruction, do not create risks to the financial entity.

Financial entities shall only use testers for the carrying out of TLPT, that:

1. (a)

   are of the highest suitability and reputability;

2. (b)

   possess technical and organisational capabilities and demonstrate specific expertise in threat intelligence, penetration testing and red team testing;

3. (c)

   are certified by an accreditation body in a Member State or adhere to formal codes of conduct or ethical frameworks;

4. (d)

   provide an independent assurance, or an audit report, in relation to the sound management of risks associated with the carrying out of TLPT, including the due protection of the financial entity’s confidential information and redress for the business risks of the financial entity;

5. (e)

   are duly and fully covered by relevant professional indemnity insurances, including against risks of misconduct and negligence.

When using internal testers, financial entities shall ensure that, in addition to the requirements in paragraph 1, the following conditions are met:

1. (a)

   such use has been approved by the relevant competent authority or by the single public authority designated in accordance with Article 26(9) and (10);

2. (b)

   the relevant competent authority has verified that the financial entity has sufficient dedicated resources and ensured that conflicts of interest are avoided throughout the design and execution phases of the test; and

3. (c)

   the threat intelligence provider is external to the financial entity.

Financial entities shall ensure that contracts concluded with external testers require a sound management of the TLPT results and that any data processing thereof, including any generation, store, aggregation, draft, report, communication or destruction, do not create risks to the financial entity.

Financial entities shall manage ICT third-party risk as an integral component of ICT risk within their ICT risk management framework as referred to in Article 6(1), and in accordance with the following principles:

1. (a)

   financial entities that have in place contractual arrangements for the use of ICT services to run their business operations shall, at all times, remain fully responsible for compliance with, and the discharge of, all obligations under this Regulation and applicable financial services law;

2. (b)

   financial entities’ management of ICT third-party risk shall be implemented in light of the principle of proportionality, taking into account:

   1. (i)

      the nature, scale, complexity and importance of ICT-related dependencies,

   2. (ii)

      the risks arising from contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services concluded with ICT third-party service providers, taking into account the criticality or importance of the respective service, process or function, and the potential impact on the continuity and availability of financial services and activities, at individual and at group level.

As part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities, other than entities referred to in Article 16(1), first subparagraph, and other than microenterprises, shall adopt, and regularly review, a strategy on ICT third-party risk, taking into account the multi-vendor strategy referred to in Article 6(9), where applicable. The strategy on ICT third-party risk shall include a policy on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provided by ICT third-party service providers and shall apply on an individual basis and, where relevant, on a sub-consolidated and consolidated basis. The management body shall, on the basis of an assessment of the overall risk profile of the financial entity and the scale and complexity of the business services, regularly review the risks identified in respect to contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions.

As part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall maintain and update at entity level, and at sub-consolidated and consolidated levels, a register of information in relation to all contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers.

The contractual arrangements referred to in the first subparagraph shall be appropriately documented, distinguishing between those that cover ICT services supporting critical or important functions and those that do not.

Financial entities shall report at least yearly to the competent authorities on the number of new arrangements on the use of ICT services, the categories of ICT third-party service providers, the type of contractual arrangements and the ICT services and functions which are being provided.

Financial entities shall make available to the competent authority, upon its request, the full register of information or, as requested, specified sections thereof, along with any information deemed necessary to enable the effective supervision of the financial entity.

Financial entities shall inform the competent authority in a timely manner about any planned contractual arrangement on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions as well as when a function has become critical or important.

Before entering into a contractual arrangement on the use of ICT services, financial entities shall:

1. (a)

   assess whether the contractual arrangement covers the use of ICT services supporting a critical or important function;

2. (b)

   assess if supervisory conditions for contracting are met;

3. (c)

   identify and assess all relevant risks in relation to the contractual arrangement, including the possibility that such contractual arrangement may contribute to reinforcing ICT concentration risk as referred to in Article 29;

4. (d)

   undertake all due diligence on prospective ICT third-party service providers and ensure throughout the selection and assessment processes that the ICT third-party service provider is suitable;

5. (e)

   identify and assess conflicts of interest that the contractual arrangement may cause.

Financial entities may only enter into contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers that comply with appropriate information security standards. When those contractual arrangements concern critical or important functions, financial entities shall, prior to concluding the arrangements, take due consideration of the use, by ICT third-party service providers, of the most up-to-date and highest quality information security standards.

In exercising access, inspection and audit rights over the ICT third-party service provider, financial entities shall, on the basis of a risk-based approach, pre-determine the frequency of audits and inspections as well as the areas to be audited through adhering to commonly accepted audit standards in line with any supervisory instruction on the use and incorporation of such audit standards.

Where contractual arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services entail high technical complexity, the financial entity shall verify that auditors, whether internal or external, or a pool of auditors, possess appropriate skills and knowledge to effectively perform the relevant audits and assessments.

Financial entities shall ensure that contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services may be terminated in any of the following circumstances:

1. (a)

   significant breach by the ICT third-party service provider of applicable laws, regulations or contractual terms;

2. (b)

   circumstances identified throughout the monitoring of ICT third-party risk that are deemed capable of altering the performance of the functions provided through the contractual arrangement, including material changes that affect the arrangement or the situation of the ICT third-party service provider;

3. (c)

   ICT third-party service provider’s evidenced weaknesses pertaining to its overall ICT risk management and in particular in the way it ensures the availability, authenticity, integrity and, confidentiality, of data, whether personal or otherwise sensitive data, or non-personal data;

4. (d)

   where the competent authority can no longer effectively supervise the financial entity as a result of the conditions of, or circumstances related to, the respective contractual arrangement.

For ICT services supporting critical or important functions, financial entities shall put in place exit strategies. The exit strategies shall take into account risks that may emerge at the level of ICT third-party service providers, in particular a possible failure on their part, a deterioration of the quality of the ICT services provided, any business disruption due to inappropriate or failed provision of ICT services or any material risk arising in relation to the appropriate and continuous deployment of the respective ICT service, or the termination of contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers under any of the circumstances listed in paragraph 7.

Financial entities shall ensure that they are able to exit contractual arrangements without:

Exit plans shall be comprehensive, documented and, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 4(2), shall be sufficiently tested and reviewed periodically.

Financial entities shall identify alternative solutions and develop transition plans enabling them to remove the contracted ICT services and the relevant data from the ICT third-party service provider and to securely and integrally transfer them to alternative providers or reincorporate them in-house.

Financial entities shall have appropriate contingency measures in place to maintain business continuity in the event of the circumstances referred to in the first subparagraph.

1. (a)

   disruption to their business activities,

2. (b)

   limiting compliance with regulatory requirements,

3. (c)

   detriment to the continuity and quality of services provided to clients.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft implementing technical standards to establish the standard templates for the purposes of the register of information referred to in paragraph 3, including information that is common to all contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services. The ESAs shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory technical standards to further specify the detailed content of the policy referred to in paragraph 2 in relation to the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provided by ICT third-party service providers.

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations. The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

Financial entities shall manage ICT third-party risk as an integral component of ICT risk within their ICT risk management framework as referred to in Article 6(1), and in accordance with the following principles:

1. (a)

   financial entities that have in place contractual arrangements for the use of ICT services to run their business operations shall, at all times, remain fully responsible for compliance with, and the discharge of, all obligations under this Regulation and applicable financial services law;

2. (b)

   financial entities’ management of ICT third-party risk shall be implemented in light of the principle of proportionality, taking into account:

   1. (i)

      the nature, scale, complexity and importance of ICT-related dependencies,

   2. (ii)

      the risks arising from contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services concluded with ICT third-party service providers, taking into account the criticality or importance of the respective service, process or function, and the potential impact on the continuity and availability of financial services and activities, at individual and at group level.

As part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities, other than entities referred to in Article 16(1), first subparagraph, and other than microenterprises, shall adopt, and regularly review, a strategy on ICT third-party risk, taking into account the multi-vendor strategy referred to in Article 6(9), where applicable. The strategy on ICT third-party risk shall include a policy on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provided by ICT third-party service providers and shall apply on an individual basis and, where relevant, on a sub-consolidated and consolidated basis. The management body shall, on the basis of an assessment of the overall risk profile of the financial entity and the scale and complexity of the business services, regularly review the risks identified in respect to contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions.

As part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall maintain and update at entity level, and at sub-consolidated and consolidated levels, a register of information in relation to all contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers.

The contractual arrangements referred to in the first subparagraph shall be appropriately documented, distinguishing between those that cover ICT services supporting critical or important functions and those that do not.

Financial entities shall report at least yearly to the competent authorities on the number of new arrangements on the use of ICT services, the categories of ICT third-party service providers, the type of contractual arrangements and the ICT services and functions which are being provided.

Financial entities shall make available to the competent authority, upon its request, the full register of information or, as requested, specified sections thereof, along with any information deemed necessary to enable the effective supervision of the financial entity.

Financial entities shall inform the competent authority in a timely manner about any planned contractual arrangement on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions as well as when a function has become critical or important.

Before entering into a contractual arrangement on the use of ICT services, financial entities shall:

1. (a)

   assess whether the contractual arrangement covers the use of ICT services supporting a critical or important function;

2. (b)

   assess if supervisory conditions for contracting are met;

3. (c)

   identify and assess all relevant risks in relation to the contractual arrangement, including the possibility that such contractual arrangement may contribute to reinforcing ICT concentration risk as referred to in Article 29;

4. (d)

   undertake all due diligence on prospective ICT third-party service providers and ensure throughout the selection and assessment processes that the ICT third-party service provider is suitable;

5. (e)

   identify and assess conflicts of interest that the contractual arrangement may cause.

Financial entities may only enter into contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers that comply with appropriate information security standards. When those contractual arrangements concern critical or important functions, financial entities shall, prior to concluding the arrangements, take due consideration of the use, by ICT third-party service providers, of the most up-to-date and highest quality information security standards.

In exercising access, inspection and audit rights over the ICT third-party service provider, financial entities shall, on the basis of a risk-based approach, pre-determine the frequency of audits and inspections as well as the areas to be audited through adhering to commonly accepted audit standards in line with any supervisory instruction on the use and incorporation of such audit standards.

Where contractual arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services entail high technical complexity, the financial entity shall verify that auditors, whether internal or external, or a pool of auditors, possess appropriate skills and knowledge to effectively perform the relevant audits and assessments.

Financial entities shall ensure that contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services may be terminated in any of the following circumstances:

1. (a)

   significant breach by the ICT third-party service provider of applicable laws, regulations or contractual terms;

2. (b)

   circumstances identified throughout the monitoring of ICT third-party risk that are deemed capable of altering the performance of the functions provided through the contractual arrangement, including material changes that affect the arrangement or the situation of the ICT third-party service provider;

3. (c)

   ICT third-party service provider’s evidenced weaknesses pertaining to its overall ICT risk management and in particular in the way it ensures the availability, authenticity, integrity and, confidentiality, of data, whether personal or otherwise sensitive data, or non-personal data;

4. (d)

   where the competent authority can no longer effectively supervise the financial entity as a result of the conditions of, or circumstances related to, the respective contractual arrangement.

For ICT services supporting critical or important functions, financial entities shall put in place exit strategies. The exit strategies shall take into account risks that may emerge at the level of ICT third-party service providers, in particular a possible failure on their part, a deterioration of the quality of the ICT services provided, any business disruption due to inappropriate or failed provision of ICT services or any material risk arising in relation to the appropriate and continuous deployment of the respective ICT service, or the termination of contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers under any of the circumstances listed in paragraph 7.

Financial entities shall ensure that they are able to exit contractual arrangements without:

Exit plans shall be comprehensive, documented and, in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 4(2), shall be sufficiently tested and reviewed periodically.

Financial entities shall identify alternative solutions and develop transition plans enabling them to remove the contracted ICT services and the relevant data from the ICT third-party service provider and to securely and integrally transfer them to alternative providers or reincorporate them in-house.

Financial entities shall have appropriate contingency measures in place to maintain business continuity in the event of the circumstances referred to in the first subparagraph.

1. (a)

   disruption to their business activities,

2. (b)

   limiting compliance with regulatory requirements,

3. (c)

   detriment to the continuity and quality of services provided to clients.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft implementing technical standards to establish the standard templates for the purposes of the register of information referred to in paragraph 3, including information that is common to all contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services. The ESAs shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory technical standards to further specify the detailed content of the policy referred to in paragraph 2 in relation to the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provided by ICT third-party service providers.

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into account the size and the overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations. The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

When performing the identification and assessment of risks referred to in Article 28(4), point (c), financial entities shall also take into account whether the envisaged conclusion of a contractual arrangement in relation to ICT services supporting critical or important functions would lead to any of the following:

Financial entities shall weigh the benefits and costs of alternative solutions, such as the use of different ICT third-party service providers, taking into account if and how envisaged solutions match the business needs and objectives set out in their digital resilience strategy.

1. (a)

   contracting an ICT third-party service provider that is not easily substitutable; or

2. (b)

   having in place multiple contractual arrangements in relation to the provision of ICT services supporting critical or important functions with the same ICT third-party service provider or with closely connected ICT third-party service providers.

Where the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions include the possibility that an ICT third-party service provider further subcontracts ICT services supporting a critical or important function to other ICT third-party service providers, financial entities shall weigh benefits and risks that may arise in connection with such subcontracting, in particular in the case of an ICT subcontractor established in a third-country.

Where contractual arrangements concern ICT services supporting critical or important functions, financial entities shall duly consider the insolvency law provisions that would apply in the event of the ICT third-party service provider’s bankruptcy as well as any constraint that may arise in respect to the urgent recovery of the financial entity’s data.

Where contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions are concluded with an ICT third-party service provider established in a third country, financial entities shall, in addition to the considerations referred to in the second subparagraph, also consider the compliance with Union data protection rules and the effective enforcement of the law in that third country.

Where the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provide for subcontracting, financial entities shall assess whether and how potentially long or complex chains of subcontracting may impact their ability to fully monitor the contracted functions and the ability of the competent authority to effectively supervise the financial entity in that respect.

When performing the identification and assessment of risks referred to in Article 28(4), point (c), financial entities shall also take into account whether the envisaged conclusion of a contractual arrangement in relation to ICT services supporting critical or important functions would lead to any of the following:

Financial entities shall weigh the benefits and costs of alternative solutions, such as the use of different ICT third-party service providers, taking into account if and how envisaged solutions match the business needs and objectives set out in their digital resilience strategy.

1. (a)

   contracting an ICT third-party service provider that is not easily substitutable; or

2. (b)

   having in place multiple contractual arrangements in relation to the provision of ICT services supporting critical or important functions with the same ICT third-party service provider or with closely connected ICT third-party service providers.

Where the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions include the possibility that an ICT third-party service provider further subcontracts ICT services supporting a critical or important function to other ICT third-party service providers, financial entities shall weigh benefits and risks that may arise in connection with such subcontracting, in particular in the case of an ICT subcontractor established in a third-country.

Where contractual arrangements concern ICT services supporting critical or important functions, financial entities shall duly consider the insolvency law provisions that would apply in the event of the ICT third-party service provider’s bankruptcy as well as any constraint that may arise in respect to the urgent recovery of the financial entity’s data.

Where contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions are concluded with an ICT third-party service provider established in a third country, financial entities shall, in addition to the considerations referred to in the second subparagraph, also consider the compliance with Union data protection rules and the effective enforcement of the law in that third country.

Where the contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions provide for subcontracting, financial entities shall assess whether and how potentially long or complex chains of subcontracting may impact their ability to fully monitor the contracted functions and the ability of the competent authority to effectively supervise the financial entity in that respect.

The rights and obligations of the financial entity and of the ICT third-party service provider shall be clearly allocated and set out in writing. The full contract shall include the service level agreements and be documented in one written document which shall be available to the parties on paper, or in a document with another downloadable, durable and accessible format.

The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services shall include at least the following elements:

1. (a)

   a clear and complete description of all functions and ICT services to be provided by the ICT third-party service provider, indicating whether subcontracting of an ICT service supporting a critical or important function, or material parts thereof, is permitted and, when that is the case, the conditions applying to such subcontracting;

2. (b)

   the locations, namely the regions or countries, where the contracted or subcontracted functions and ICT services are to be provided and where data is to be processed, including the storage location, and the requirement for the ICT third-party service provider to notify the financial entity in advance if it envisages changing such locations;

3. (c)

   provisions on availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality in relation to the protection of data, including personal data;

4. (d)

   provisions on ensuring access, recovery and return in an easily accessible format of personal and non-personal data processed by the financial entity in the event of the insolvency, resolution or discontinuation of the business operations of the ICT third-party service provider, or in the event of the termination of the contractual arrangements;

5. (e)

   service level descriptions, including updates and revisions thereof;

6. (f)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to provide assistance to the financial entity at no additional cost, or at a cost that is determined ex-ante, when an ICT incident that is related to the ICT service provided to the financial entity occurs;

7. (g)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to fully cooperate with the competent authorities and the resolution authorities of the financial entity, including persons appointed by them;

8. (h)

   termination rights and related minimum notice periods for the termination of the contractual arrangements, in accordance with the expectations of competent authorities and resolution authorities;

9. (i)

   the conditions for the participation of ICT third-party service providers in the financial entities’ ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training in accordance with Article 13(6).

The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions shall include, in addition to the elements referred to in paragraph 2, at least the following:

By way of derogation from point (e), the ICT third-party service provider and the financial entity that is a microenterprise may agree that the financial entity’s rights of access, inspection and audit can be delegated to an independent third party, appointed by the ICT third-party service provider, and that the financial entity is able to request information and assurance on the ICT third-party service provider’s performance from the third party at any time.

1. (a)

   full service level descriptions, including updates and revisions thereof with precise quantitative and qualitative performance targets within the agreed service levels to allow effective monitoring by the financial entity of ICT services and enable appropriate corrective actions to be taken, without undue delay, when agreed service levels are not met;

2. (b)

   notice periods and reporting obligations of the ICT third-party service provider to the financial entity, including notification of any development that might have a material impact on the ICT third-party service provider’s ability to effectively provide the ICT services supporting critical or important functions in line with agreed service levels;

3. (c)

   requirements for the ICT third-party service provider to implement and test business contingency plans and to have in place ICT security measures, tools and policies that provide an appropriate level of security for the provision of services by the financial entity in line with its regulatory framework;

4. (d)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to participate and fully cooperate in the financial entity’s TLPT as referred to in Articles 26 and 27;

5. (e)

   the right to monitor, on an ongoing basis, the ICT third-party service provider’s performance, which entails the following:

   1. (i)

      unrestricted rights of access, inspection and audit by the financial entity, or an appointed third party, and by the competent authority, and the right to take copies of relevant documentation on-site if they are critical to the operations of the ICT third-party service provider, the effective exercise of which is not impeded or limited by other contractual arrangements or implementation policies;

   2. (ii)

      the right to agree on alternative assurance levels if other clients’ rights are affected;

   3. (iii)

      the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to fully cooperate during the onsite inspections and audits performed by the competent authorities, the Lead Overseer, financial entity or an appointed third party; and

   4. (iv)

      the obligation to provide details on the scope, procedures to be followed and frequency of such inspections and audits;

6. (f)

   exit strategies, in particular the establishment of a mandatory adequate transition period:

   1. (i)

      during which the ICT third-party service provider will continue providing the respective functions, or ICT services, with a view to reducing the risk of disruption at the financial entity or to ensure its effective resolution and restructuring;

   2. (ii)

      allowing the financial entity to migrate to another ICT third-party service provider or change to in-house solutions consistent with the complexity of the service provided.

When negotiating contractual arrangements, financial entities and ICT third-party service providers shall consider the use of standard contractual clauses developed by public authorities for specific services.

The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify further the elements referred to in paragraph 2, point (a), which a financial entity needs to determine and assess when subcontracting ICT services supporting critical or important functions.

When developing those draft regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall take into consideration the size and overall risk profile of the financial entity, and the nature, scale and complexity of its services, activities and operations.

The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 July 2024.

Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.

The rights and obligations of the financial entity and of the ICT third-party service provider shall be clearly allocated and set out in writing. The full contract shall include the service level agreements and be documented in one written document which shall be available to the parties on paper, or in a document with another downloadable, durable and accessible format.

The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services shall include at least the following elements:

1. (a)

   a clear and complete description of all functions and ICT services to be provided by the ICT third-party service provider, indicating whether subcontracting of an ICT service supporting a critical or important function, or material parts thereof, is permitted and, when that is the case, the conditions applying to such subcontracting;

2. (b)

   the locations, namely the regions or countries, where the contracted or subcontracted functions and ICT services are to be provided and where data is to be processed, including the storage location, and the requirement for the ICT third-party service provider to notify the financial entity in advance if it envisages changing such locations;

3. (c)

   provisions on availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality in relation to the protection of data, including personal data;

4. (d)

   provisions on ensuring access, recovery and return in an easily accessible format of personal and non-personal data processed by the financial entity in the event of the insolvency, resolution or discontinuation of the business operations of the ICT third-party service provider, or in the event of the termination of the contractual arrangements;

5. (e)

   service level descriptions, including updates and revisions thereof;

6. (f)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to provide assistance to the financial entity at no additional cost, or at a cost that is determined ex-ante, when an ICT incident that is related to the ICT service provided to the financial entity occurs;

7. (g)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to fully cooperate with the competent authorities and the resolution authorities of the financial entity, including persons appointed by them;

8. (h)

   termination rights and related minimum notice periods for the termination of the contractual arrangements, in accordance with the expectations of competent authorities and resolution authorities;

9. (i)

   the conditions for the participation of ICT third-party service providers in the financial entities’ ICT security awareness programmes and digital operational resilience training in accordance with Article 13(6).

The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services supporting critical or important functions shall include, in addition to the elements referred to in paragraph 2, at least the following:

By way of derogation from point (e), the ICT third-party service provider and the financial entity that is a microenterprise may agree that the financial entity’s rights of access, inspection and audit can be delegated to an independent third party, appointed by the ICT third-party service provider, and that the financial entity is able to request information and assurance on the ICT third-party service provider’s performance from the third party at any time.

1. (a)

   full service level descriptions, including updates and revisions thereof with precise quantitative and qualitative performance targets within the agreed service levels to allow effective monitoring by the financial entity of ICT services and enable appropriate corrective actions to be taken, without undue delay, when agreed service levels are not met;

2. (b)

   notice periods and reporting obligations of the ICT third-party service provider to the financial entity, including notification of any development that might have a material impact on the ICT third-party service provider’s ability to effectively provide the ICT services supporting critical or important functions in line with agreed service levels;

3. (c)

   requirements for the ICT third-party service provider to implement and test business contingency plans and to have in place ICT security measures, tools and policies that provide an appropriate level of security for the provision of services by the financial entity in line with its regulatory framework;

4. (d)

   the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to participate and fully cooperate in the financial entity’s TLPT as referred to in Articles 26 and 27;

5. (e)

   the right to monitor, on an ongoing basis, the ICT third-party service provider’s performance, which entails the following:

   1. (i)

      unrestricted rights of access, inspection and audit by the financial entity, or an appointed third party, and by the competent authority, and the right to take copies of relevant documentation on-site if they are critical to the operations of the ICT third-party service provider, the effective exercise of which is not impeded or limited by other contractual arrangements or implementation policies;

   2. (ii)

      the right to agree on alternative assurance levels if other clients’ rights are affected;

   3. (iii)

      the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to fully cooperate during the onsite inspections and audits performed by the competent authorities, the Lead Overseer, financial entity or an appointed third party; and

   4. (iv)

      the obligation to provide details on the scope, procedures to be followed and frequency of such inspections and audits;

6. (f)

   exit strategies, in particular the establishment of a mandatory adequate transition period:

   1. (i)

      during which the ICT third-party service provider will continue providing the respective functions, or ICT services, with a view to reducing the risk of disruption at the financial entity or to ensure its effective resolution and restructuring;

   2. (ii)

      allowing the financial entity to migrate to another ICT third-party service provider or change to in-house solutions consistent with the complexity of the service provided.