General Information & Client Service
  • Americas: +1.212.553.1653
  • Asia: +852.3551.3077
  • China: +86.10.6319.6580
  • EMEA: +44.20.7772.5454
  • Japan: +81.3.5408.4100
Media Relations
  • New York: +1.212.553.0376
  • London: +44.20.7772.5456
  • Hong Kong: +852.3758.1350
  • Tokyo: +813.5408.4110
  • Sydney: +61.2.9270.8141
  • Mexico City: +001.888.779.5833
  • Buenos Aires: +0800.666.3506
  • São Paulo: +0800.891.2518
December 04, 2018

BCBS published a report that identifies, describes, and compares the range of observed bank, regulatory, and supervisory cyber-resilience practices across jurisdictions. The challenges and initiatives to enhance cyber-resilience have been summarized in the form of 10 key findings and illustrated by case studies that focus on concrete developments in the jurisdictions covered. BCBS classifies the expectations and practices into four broad dimensions of cyber-resilience: governance and culture; risk measurement and assessment of preparedness; communication and information-sharing; and interconnections with third parties.

The following are some of the key findings of the study:

  • While regulators generally do not require a specific cyber strategy, all expect institutions to maintain adequate capability in this area as part of their global strategies. In most jurisdictions, broader IT and operational risk management practices are quite mature and are used to address cyber-risk and supervise cyber-resilience.
  • Although management models such as the three lines of defence (3LD) model are widely adopted, cyber-resilience is not always clearly articulated across the technical, business, and strategic lines. This confusion in roles and responsibilities hampers the effectiveness of the 3LD model.
  • Although some forward-looking indicators of cyber-resilience are being picked up through the most widespread supervisory practices, no standard set of metrics has emerged yet. This makes it more difficult for supervisors and banks to articulate and engage on cyber-resilience.
  • Most observed information-sharing mechanisms involve bank-to-bank and bank-to-regulator communications, with the former being mostly done on a voluntary basis.
  • Regulatory frameworks for outsourcing activities across jurisdictions are quite established and share substantial commonalities. However, there is no common approach regarding third parties beyond outsourced services, which implies different scopes of regulation and supervisory actions. While third parties may provide cost-effective solutions to increase resilience levels, the onus remains on the banks to demonstrate adequate understanding and active management of the third-party dependencies and concentration across the value chain

In preparing this range of practices document, BCBS relied on input from its member jurisdictions in response to a survey conducted by FSB in April 2017. By describing the diversity of approaches thematically, the report will help banks and supervisors navigate the regulatory environment and will serve as a useful input for identifying areas where further policy work by the Basel Committee may be warranted. Going forward, the Committee will integrate the cyber dimension into its broader operational resilience work. 

 

Related Links

Keywords: International, Banking, Regtech, Suptech, Cyber Resilience, Operational Risk, Cyber Risk, BCBS

Related Articles
News

EBA Publishes Reports Monitoring the Implementation of Basel III in EU

EBA published two reports measuring the impact of implementing the final Basel III reforms and monitoring the implementation of liquidity measures in EU.

March 20, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

BCBS Publishes Results of Survey on Proportionality in Bank Regulation

BCBS published a report presenting the results of a survey conducted on proportionality practices in bank regulation and supervision.

March 19, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

US Agencies Adopt Interim Rule to Facilitate Transfers of Legacy Swaps

US Agencies (FCA, FDIC, FED, FHFA, and OCC) are adopting and inviting comments on an interim final rule.

March 19, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EIOPA Requests Data on LTG Measures from Insurers Under Solvency II

EIOPA has requested the European Economic Area insurance undertakings, which are subject to Solvency II, to provide information on the long-term guarantee (LTG) measures.

March 18, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

PRA Proposes Reporting Amendments to Pillar 2 Liquidity Framework

PRA proposed (CP6/19) regulatory reporting amendments and clarifications to the Pillar 2 liquidity framework for banks in UK.

March 18, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Third Update for March 2019

EBA published answers to seven questions under the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) updates for this week.

March 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

OCC Updates Recovery Planning Booklet of the Comptroller's Handbook

OCC updated the Recovery Planning booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook.

March 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

CFTC and MAS Announce Mutual Recognition of Derivatives Trading Venues

CFTC and MAS announced the mutual recognition of certain derivatives trading venues in the U.S. and Singapore.

March 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EBA Publishes Report on Convergence of Supervisory Practices Across EU

EBA published annual report on the convergence of supervisory practices in EU.

March 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

CPMI-IOSCO Publish Update to Level 1 Assessment of PFMI Implementation

CPMI and IOSCO jointly updated the Level 1 Assessment Online Tracker on monitoring of the implementation of the Principles for financial market infrastructures (PFMI).

March 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 2763