dora.yaml

urn: urn:intuitem:risk:library:dora
locale: en
ref_id: DORA
name: Digital Operational Resilience Act
description: REGULATION (EU) 2022/2554 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
  of 14 December 2022 on digital operational resilience for the financial sector and
  amending Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014, (EU)
  No 909/2014 and (EU) 2016/1011
copyright: European Union law
version: 3
provider: EU
packager: intuitem
objects:
  framework:
    urn: urn:intuitem:risk:framework:dora
    ref_id: DORA
    name: Digital Operational Resilience Act
    description: REGULATION (EU) 2022/2554 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
      of 14 December 2022 on digital operational resilience for the financial sector
      and amending Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014,
      (EU) No 909/2014 and (EU) 2016/1011
    requirement_nodes:
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Preamble
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-1
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 1
      description: In the digital age, information and communication technology (ICT)
        supports complex systems used for everyday activities. It keeps our economies
        running in key sectors, including the financial sector, and enhances the functioning
        of the internal market. Increased digitalisation and interconnectedness also
        amplify ICT risk, making society as a whole, and the financial system in particular,
        more vulnerable to cyber threats or ICT disruptions. While the ubiquitous
        use of ICT systems and high digitalisation and connectivity are today core
        features of the activities of Union financial entities, their digital resilience
        has yet to be better addressed and integrated into their broader operational
        frameworks.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-2
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 2
      description: The use of ICT has in the past decades gained a pivotal role in
        the provision of financial services, to the point where it has now acquired
        a critical importance in the operation of typical daily functions of all financial
        entities. Digitalisation now covers, for instance, payments, which have increasingly
        moved from cash and paper-based methods to the use of digital solutions, as
        well as securities clearing and settlement, electronic and algorithmic trading,
        lending and funding operations, peer-to-peer finance, credit rating, claim
        management and back-office operations. The insurance sector has also been
        transformed by the use of ICT, from the emergence of insurance intermediaries
        offering their services online operating with InsurTech, to digital insurance
        underwriting. Finance has not only become largely digital throughout the whole
        sector, but digitalisation has also deepened interconnections and dependencies
        within the financial sector and with third-party infrastructure and service
        providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-3
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 3
      description: "The European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) reaffirmed in a 2020 report\
        \ addressing systemic cyber risk how the existing high level of interconnectedness\
        \ across financial entities, financial markets and financial market infrastructures,\
        \ and particularly the interdependencies of their ICT systems, could constitute\
        \ a systemic vulnerability because localised cyber incidents could quickly\
        \ spread from any of the approximately 22 000 Union financial entities to\
        \ the entire financial system, unhindered by geographical boundaries. Serious\
        \ ICT breaches that occur in the financial sector do not merely affect financial\
        \ entities taken in isolation. They also smooth the way for the propagation\
        \ of localised vulnerabilities across the financial transmission channels\
        \ and potentially trigger adverse consequences for the stability of the Union\u2019\
        s financial system, such as generating liquidity runs and an overall loss\
        \ of confidence and trust in financial markets."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-4
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 4
      description: In recent years, ICT risk has attracted the attention of international,
        Union and national policy makers, regulators and standard-setting bodies in
        an attempt to enhance digital resilience, set standards and coordinate regulatory
        or supervisory work. At international level, the Basel Committee on Banking
        Supervision, the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures, the Financial
        Stability Board, the Financial Stability Institute, as well as the G7 and
        G20 aim to provide competent authorities and market operators across various
        jurisdictions with tools to bolster the resilience of their financial systems.
        That work has also been driven by the need to duly consider ICT risk in the
        context of a highly interconnected global financial system and to seek more
        consistency of relevant best practices.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-5
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 5
      description: "Despite Union and national targeted policy and legislative initiatives,\
        \ ICT risk continues to pose a challenge to the operational resilience, performance\
        \ and stability of the Union financial system. The reforms that followed the\
        \ 2008 financial crisis primarily strengthened the financial resilience of\
        \ the Union financial sector and aimed to safeguard the competitiveness and\
        \ stability of the Union from economic, prudential and market conduct perspectives.\
        \ Although ICT security and digital resilience are part of operational risk,\
        \ they have been less in the focus of the post- financial crisis regulatory\
        \ agenda and have developed in only some areas of the Union\u2019s financial\
        \ services policy and regulatory landscape, or in only a few Member States."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-6
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 6
      description: "In its Communication of 8 March 2018 entitled \u2018FinTech Action\
        \ plan: For a more competitive and innovative European financial sector\u2019\
        , the Commission highlighted the paramount importance of making the Union\
        \ financial sector more resilient, including from an operational perspective\
        \ to ensure its technological safety and good functioning, its quick recovery\
        \ from ICT breaches and incidents, ultimately enabling the effective and smooth\
        \ provision of financial services across the whole Union, including under\
        \ situations of stress, while also preserving consumer and market trust and\
        \ confidence."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-7
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 7
      description: "In April 2019, the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking\
        \ Authority), (EBA) established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European\
        \ Parliament and of the Council (4), the European Supervisory Authority (European\
        \ Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), (\u2018EIOPA\u2019) established\
        \ by Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council\
        \ (5) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets\
        \ Authority), (\u2018ESMA\u2019) established by Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010\
        \ of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) (known collectively as\
        \ \u2018European Supervisory Authorities\u2019 or \u2018ESAs\u2019) jointly\
        \ issued technical advice calling for a coherent approach to ICT risk in finance\
        \ and recommending to strengthen, in a proportionate way, the digital operational\
        \ resilience of the financial services industry through a sector-specific\
        \ initiative of the Union."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-8
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 8
      description: The Union financial sector is regulated by a Single Rulebook and
        governed by a European system of financial supervision. Nonetheless, provisions
        tackling digital operational resilience and ICT security are not yet fully
        or consistently harmonised, despite digital operational resilience being vital
        for ensuring financial stability and market integrity in the digital age,
        and no less important than, for example, common prudential or market conduct
        standards. The Single Rulebook and system of supervision should therefore
        be developed to also cover digital operational resilience, by strengthening
        the mandates of competent authorities to enable them to supervise the management
        of ICT risk in the financial sector in order to protect the integrity and
        efficiency of the internal market, and to facilitate its orderly functioning.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-9
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 9
      description: Legislative disparities and uneven national regulatory or supervisory
        approaches with regard to ICT risk trigger obstacles to the functioning of
        the internal market in financial services, impeding the smooth exercise of
        the freedom of establishment and the provision of services for financial entities
        operating on a cross-border basis. Competition between the same type of financial
        entities operating in different Member States could also be distorted. This
        is the case, in particular, for areas where Union harmonisation has been very
        limited, such as digital operational resilience testing, or absent, such as
        the monitoring of ICT third-party risk. Disparities stemming from developments
        envisaged at national level could generate further obstacles to the functioning
        of the internal market to the detriment of market participants and financial
        stability.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-10
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 10
      description: To date, due to the ICT risk related provisions being only partially
        addressed at Union level, there are gaps or overlaps in important areas, such
        as ICT-related incident reporting and digital operational resilience testing,
        and inconsistencies as a result of emerging divergent national rules or cost-ineffective
        application of overlapping rules. This is particularly detrimental for an
        ICT-intensive user such as the financial sector since technology risks have
        no borders and the financial sector deploys its services on a wide cross-border
        basis within and outside the Union. Individual financial entities operating
        on a cross-border basis or holding several authorisations (e.g. one financial
        entity can have a banking, an investment firm, and a payment institution licence,
        each issued by a different competent authority in one or several Member States)
        face operational challenges in addressing ICT risk and mitigating adverse
        impacts of ICT incidents on their own and in a coherent cost-effective way.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-11
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 11
      description: As the Single Rulebook has not been accompanied by a comprehensive
        ICT or operational risk framework, further harmonisation of key digital operational
        resilience requirements for all financial entities is required. The development
        of ICT capabilities and overall resilience by financial entities, based on
        those key requirements, with a view to withstanding operational outages, would
        help preserve the stability and integrity of the Union financial markets and
        thus contribute to ensuring a high level of protection of investors and consumers
        in the Union. Since this Regulation aims to contribute to the smooth functioning
        of the internal market, it should be based on the provisions of Article 114
        of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) as interpreted
        in accordance with the consistent case law of the Court of Justice of the
        European Union (Court of Justice).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-12
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 12
      description: This Regulation aims to consolidate and upgrade ICT risk requirements
        as part of the operational risk requirements that have, up to this point,
        been addressed separately in various Union legal acts. While those acts covered
        the main categories of financial risk (e.g. credit risk, market risk, counterparty
        credit risk and liquidity risk, market conduct risk), they did not comprehensively
        tackle, at the time of their adoption, all components of operational resilience.
        The operational risk rules, when further developed in those Union legal acts,
        often favoured a traditional quantitative approach to addressing risk (namely
        setting a capital requirement to cover ICT risk) rather than targeted qualitative
        rules for the protection, detection, containment, recovery and repair capabilities
        against ICT-related incidents, or for reporting and digital testing capabilities.
        Those acts were primarily meant to cover and update essential rules on prudential
        supervision, market integrity or conduct. By consolidating and upgrading the
        different rules on ICT risk, all provisions addressing digital risk in the
        financial sector should for the first time be brought together in a consistent
        manner in one single legislative act. Therefore, this Regulation fills in
        the gaps or remedies inconsistencies in some of the prior legal acts, including
        in relation to the terminology used therein, and explicitly refers to ICT
        risk via targeted rules on ICT risk-management capabilities, incident reporting,
        operational resilience testing and ICT third-party risk monitoring. This Regulation
        should thus also raise awareness of ICT risk and acknowledge that ICT incidents
        and a lack of operational resilience have the possibility to jeopardise the
        soundness of financial entities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-13
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 13
      description: Financial entities should follow the same approach and the same
        principle-based rules when addressing ICT risk taking into account their size
        and overall risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity of their services,
        activities and operations. Consistency contributes to enhancing confidence
        in the financial system and preserving its stability especially in times of
        high reliance on ICT systems, platforms and infrastructures, which entails
        increased digital risk. Observing basic cyber hygiene should also avoid imposing
        heavy costs on the economy by minimising the impact and costs of ICT disruptions.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-14
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 14
      description: A Regulation helps reduce regulatory complexity, fosters supervisory
        convergence and increases legal certainty, and also contributes to limiting
        compliance costs, especially for financial entities operating across borders,
        and to reducing competitive distortions. Therefore, the choice of a Regulation
        for the establishment of a common framework for the digital operational resilience
        of financial entities is the most appropriate way to guarantee a homogenous
        and coherent application of all components of ICT risk management by the Union
        financial sector.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-15
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 15
      description: Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the
        Council (7) was the first horizontal cybersecurity framework enacted at Union
        level, applying also to three types of financial entities, namely credit institutions,
        trading venues and central counterparties. However, since Directive (EU) 2016/1148
        set out a mechanism of identification at national level of operators of essential
        services, only certain credit institutions, trading venues and central counterparties
        that were identified by the Member States, have been brought into its scope
        in practice, and hence required to comply with the ICT security and incident
        notification requirements laid down in it. Directive (EU) 2022/2555 of the
        European Parliament and of the Council (8) sets a uniform criterion to determine
        the entities falling within its scope of application (size-cap rule) while
        also keeping the three types of financial entities in its scope.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-16
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 16
      description: However, as this Regulation increases the level of harmonisation
        of the various digital resilience components, by introducing requirements
        on ICT risk management and ICT-related incident reporting that are more stringent
        in comparison to those laid down in the current Union financial services law,
        this higher level constitutes an increased harmonisation also in comparison
        with the requirements laid down in Directive (EU) 2022/2555. Consequently,
        this Regulation constitutes lex specialis with regard to Directive (EU) 2022/2555.
        At the same time, it is crucial to maintain a strong relationship between
        the financial sector and the Union horizontal cybersecurity framework as currently
        laid out in Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to ensure consistency with the cyber
        security strategies adopted by Member States and to allow financial supervisors
        to be made aware of cyber incidents affecting other sectors covered by that
        Directive.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-17
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 17
      description: In accordance with Article 4(2) of the Treaty on European Union
        and without prejudice to the judicial review by the Court of Justice, this
        Regulation should not affect the responsibility of Member States with regard
        to essential State functions concerning public security, defence and the safeguarding
        of national security, for example concerning the supply of information which
        would be contrary to the safeguarding of national security.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-18
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 18
      description: "To enable cross-sector learning and to effectively draw on experiences\
        \ of other sectors in dealing with cyber threats, the financial entities referred\
        \ to in Directive (EU) 2022/2555 should remain part of the \u2018ecosystem\u2019\
        \ of that Directive (for example, Cooperation Group and computer security\
        \ incident response teams (CSIRTs)).The ESAs and national competent authorities\
        \ should be able to participate in the strategic policy discussions and the\
        \ technical workings of the Cooperation Group under that Directive, and to\
        \ exchange information and further cooperate with the single points of contact\
        \ designated or established in accordance with that Directive. The competent\
        \ authorities under this Regulation should also consult and cooperate with\
        \ the CSIRTs. The competent authorities should also be able to request technical\
        \ advice from the competent authorities designated or established in accordance\
        \ with Directive (EU) 2022/2555 and establish cooperation arrangements that\
        \ aim to ensure effective and fast-response coordination mechanisms."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-19
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 19
      description: Given the strong interlinkages between the digital resilience and
        the physical resilience of financial entities, a coherent approach with regard
        to the resilience of critical entities is necessary in this Regulation and
        Directive (EU) 2022/2557 of the European Parliament and the Council (9). Given
        that the physical resilience of financial entities is addressed in a comprehensive
        manner by the ICT risk management and reporting obligations covered by this
        Regulation, the obligations laid down in Chapters III and IV of Directive
        (EU) 2022/2557 should not apply to financial entities falling within the scope
        of that Directive.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-20
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 20
      description: "Cloud computing service providers are one category of digital\
        \ infrastructure covered by Directive (EU) 2022/2555. The Union Oversight\
        \ Framework (\u2018Oversight Framework\u2019) established by this Regulation\
        \ applies to all critical ICT third-party service providers, including cloud\
        \ computing service providers providing ICT services to financial entities,\
        \ and should be considered complementary to the supervision carried out pursuant\
        \ to Directive (EU) 2022/ 2555. Moreover, the Oversight Framework established\
        \ by this Regulation should cover cloud computing service providers in the\
        \ absence of a Union horizontal framework establishing a digital oversight\
        \ authority."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-21
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 21
      description: In order to maintain full control over ICT risk, financial entities
        need to have comprehensive capabilities to enable a strong and effective ICT
        risk management, as well as specific mechanisms and policies for handling
        all ICT-related incidents and for reporting major ICT-related incidents. Likewise,
        financial entities should have policies in place for the testing of ICT systems,
        controls and processes, as well as for managing ICT third-party risk. The
        digital operational resilience baseline for financial entities should be increased
        while also allowing for a proportionate application of requirements for certain
        financial entities, particularly microenterprises, as well as financial entities
        subject to a simplified ICT risk management framework. To facilitate an efficient
        supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision that is
        proportionate and addresses the need to reduce administrative burdens on the
        competent authorities, the relevant national supervisory arrangements in respect
        of such financial entities should take into account their size and overall
        risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity of their services, activities
        and operations even when the relevant thresholds established in Article 5
        of Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council
        (10) are exceeded. In particular, supervisory activities should focus primarily
        on the need to address serious risks associated with the ICT risk management
        of a particular entity.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-22
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 22
      description: ICT-related incident reporting thresholds and taxonomies vary significantly
        at national level. While common ground may be achieved through the relevant
        work undertaken by the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) established
        by Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council
        (11) and the Cooperation Group under Directive (EU) 2022/2555, divergent approaches
        on setting the thresholds and use of taxonomies still exist, or can emerge,
        for the remainder of financial entities. Due to those divergences, there are
        multiple requirements that financial entities must comply with, especially
        when operating across several Member States and when part of a financial group.
        Moreover, such divergences have the potential to hinder the creation of further
        uniform or centralised Union mechanisms that speed up the reporting process
        and support a quick and smooth exchange of information between competent authorities,
        which is crucial for addressing ICT risk in the event of large-scale attacks
        with potentially systemic consequences.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-23
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 23
      description: To reduce the administrative burden and potentially duplicative
        reporting obligations for certain financial entities, the requirement for
        the incident reporting pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European
        Parliament and of the Council (12) should cease to apply to payment service
        providers that fall within the scope of this Regulation. Consequently, credit
        institutions, e-money institutions, payment institutions and account information
        service providers, as referred to in Article 33(1) of that Directive, should,
        from the date of application of this Regulation, report pursuant to this Regulation,
        all operational or security payment-related incidents which have been previously
        reported pursuant to that Directive, irrespective of whether such incidents
        are ICT-related.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-24
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 24
      description: To enable competent authorities to fulfil supervisory roles by
        acquiring a complete overview of the nature, frequency, significance and impact
        of ICT-related incidents and to enhance the exchange of information between
        relevant public authorities, including law enforcement authorities and resolution
        authorities, this Regulation should lay down a robust ICT-related incident
        reporting regime whereby the relevant requirements address current gaps in
        financial services law, and remove existing overlaps and duplications to alleviate
        costs. It is essential to harmonise the ICT-related incident reporting regime
        by requiring all financial entities to report to their competent authorities
        through a single streamlined framework as set out in this Regulation. In addition,
        the ESAs should be empowered to further specify relevant elements for the
        ICT-related incident reporting framework, such as taxonomy, timeframes, data
        sets, templates and applicable thresholds. To ensure full consistency with
        Directive (EU) 2022/2555, financial entities should be allowed, on a voluntary
        basis, to notify significant cyber threats to the relevant competent authority,
        when they consider that the cyber threat is of relevance to the financial
        system, service users or clients.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-25
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 25
      description: Digital operational resilience testing requirements have been developed
        in certain financial subsectors setting out frameworks that are not always
        fully aligned. This leads to a potential duplication of costs for cross-border
        financial entities and makes the mutual recognition of the results of digital
        operational resilience testing complex which, in turn, can fragment the internal
        market.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-26
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 26
      description: In addition, where no ICT testing is required, vulnerabilities
        remain undetected and result in exposing a financial entity to ICT risk and
        ultimately create a higher risk to the stability and integrity of the financial
        sector. Without Union intervention, digital operational resilience testing
        would continue to be inconsistent and would lack a system of mutual recognition
        of ICT testing results across different jurisdictions. In addition, as it
        is unlikely that other financial subsectors would adopt testing schemes on
        a meaningful scale, they would miss out on the potential benefits of a testing
        framework, in terms of revealing ICT vulnerabilities and risks, and testing
        defence capabilities and business continuity, which contributes to increasing
        the trust of customers, suppliers and business partners. To remedy those overlaps,
        divergences and gaps, it is necessary to lay down rules for a coordinated
        testing regime and thereby facilitate the mutual recognition of advanced testing
        for financial entities meeting the criteria set out in this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-27
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 27
      description: "Financial entities\u2019 reliance on the use of ICT services is\
        \ partly driven by their need to adapt to an emerging competitive digital\
        \ global economy, to boost their business efficiency and to meet consumer\
        \ demand. The nature and extent of such reliance has been continuously evolving\
        \ in recent years, driving cost reduction in financial intermediation, enabling\
        \ business expansion and scalability in the deployment of financial activities\
        \ while offering a wide range of ICT tools to manage complex internal processes."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-28
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 28
      description: The extensive use of ICT services is evidenced by complex contractual
        arrangements, whereby financial entities often encounter difficulties in negotiating
        contractual terms that are tailored to the prudential standards or other regulatory
        requirements to which they are subject, or otherwise in enforcing specific
        rights, such as access or audit rights, even when the latter are enshrined
        in their contractual arrangements. Moreover, many of those contractual arrangements
        do not provide for sufficient safeguards allowing for the fully-fledged monitoring
        of subcontracting processes, thus depriving the financial entity of its ability
        to assess the associated risks. In addition, as ICT third- party service providers
        often provide standardised services to different types of clients, such contractual
        arrangements do not always cater adequately for the individual or specific
        needs of financial industry actors.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-29
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 29
      description: "Even though Union financial services law contains certain general\
        \ rules on outsourcing, monitoring of the contractual dimension is not fully\
        \ anchored into Union law. In the absence of clear and bespoke Union standards\
        \ applying to the contractual arrangements concluded with ICT third-party\
        \ service providers, the external source of ICT risk is not comprehensively\
        \ addressed. Consequently, it is necessary to set out certain key principles\
        \ to guide financial entities\u2019 management of ICT third-party risk, which\
        \ are of particular importance when financial entities resort to ICT third-party\
        \ service providers to support their critical or important functions. Those\
        \ principles should be accompanied by a set of core contractual rights in\
        \ relation to several elements in the performance and termination of contractual\
        \ arrangements with a view to providing certain minimum safeguards in order\
        \ to strengthen financial entities\u2019 ability to effectively monitor all\
        \ ICT risk emerging at the level of third-party service providers. Those principles\
        \ are complementary to the sectoral law applicable to outsourcing."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-30
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 30
      description: "A certain lack of homogeneity and convergence regarding the monitoring\
        \ of ICT third-party risk and ICT third-party dependencies is evident today.\
        \ Despite efforts to address outsourcing, such as EBA Guidelines on outsourcing\
        \ of 2019 and ESMA Guidelines on outsourcing to cloud service providers of\
        \ 2021 the broader issue of counteracting systemic risk which may be triggered\
        \ by the financial sector\u2019s exposure to a limited number of critical\
        \ ICT third- party service providers is not sufficiently addressed by Union\
        \ law. The lack of rules at Union level is compounded by the absence of national\
        \ rules on mandates and tools that allow financial supervisors to acquire\
        \ a good understanding of ICT third-party dependencies and to monitor adequately\
        \ risks arising from the concentration of ICT third-party dependencies."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-31
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 31
      description: Taking into account the potential systemic risk entailed by increased
        outsourcing practices and by the ICT third- party concentration, and mindful
        of the insufficiency of national mechanisms in providing financial supervisors
        with adequate tools to quantify, qualify and redress the consequences of ICT
        risk occurring at critical ICT third-party service providers, it is necessary
        to establish an appropriate Oversight Framework allowing for a continuous
        monitoring of the activities of ICT third-party service providers that are
        critical ICT third-party service providers to financial entities, while ensuring
        that the confidentiality and security of customers other than financial entities
        is preserved. While intra-group provision of ICT services entails specific
        risks and benefits, it should not be automatically considered less risky than
        the provision of ICT services by providers outside of a financial group and
        should therefore be subject to the same regulatory framework. However, when
        ICT services are provided from within the same financial group, financial
        entities might have a higher level of control over intra-group providers,
        which ought to be taken into account in the overall risk assessment.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-32
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 32
      description: With ICT risk becoming more and more complex and sophisticated,
        good measures for the detection and prevention of ICT risk depend to a great
        extent on the regular sharing between financial entities of threat and vulnerability
        intelligence. Information sharing contributes to creating increased awareness
        of cyber threats. In turn, this enhances the capacity of financial entities
        to prevent cyber threats from becoming real ICT-related incidents and enables
        financial entities to more effectively contain the impact of ICT-related incidents
        and to recover faster. In the absence of guidance at Union level, several
        factors seem to have inhibited such intelligence sharing, in particular uncertainty
        about its compatibility with data protection, anti-trust and liability rules.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-33
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 33
      description: In addition, doubts about the type of information that can be shared
        with other market participants, or with non- supervisory authorities (such
        as ENISA, for analytical input, or Europol, for law enforcement purposes)
        lead to useful information being withheld. Therefore, the extent and quality
        of information sharing currently remains limited and fragmented, with relevant
        exchanges mostly being local (by way of national initiatives) and with no
        consistent Union-wide information-sharing arrangements tailored to the needs
        of an integrated financial system. It is therefore important to strengthen
        those communication channels.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-34
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 34
      description: "Financial entities should be encouraged to exchange among themselves\
        \ cyber threat information and intelligence, and to collectively leverage\
        \ their individual knowledge and practical experience at strategic, tactical\
        \ and operational levels with a view to enhancing their capabilities to adequately\
        \ assess, monitor, defend against, and respond to cyber threats, by participating\
        \ in information sharing arrangements. It is therefore necessary to enable\
        \ the emergence at Union level of mechanisms for voluntary information-sharing\
        \ arrangements which, when conducted in trusted environments, would help the\
        \ community of the financial industry to prevent and collectively respond\
        \ to cyber threats by quickly limiting the spread of ICT risk and impeding\
        \ potential contagion throughout the financial channels. Those mechanisms\
        \ should comply with the applicable competition law rules of the Union set\
        \ out in the Communication from the Commission of 14 January 2011 entitled\
        \ \u2018Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the\
        \ Functioning of the European Union to horizontal cooperation agreements\u2019\
        , as well as with Union data protection rules, in particular Regulation (EU)\
        \ 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13). They should\
        \ operate based on the use of one or more of the legal bases that are laid\
        \ down in Article 6 of that Regulation, such as in the context of the processing\
        \ of personal data that is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interest\
        \ pursued by the controller or by a third party, as referred to in Article\
        \ 6(1), point (f), of that Regulation, as well as in the context of the processing\
        \ of personal data necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which\
        \ the controller is subject, necessary for the performance of a task carried\
        \ out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested\
        \ in the controller, as referred to in Article 6(1), points (c) and (e), respectively,\
        \ of that Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-35
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 35
      description: "In order to maintain a high level of digital operational resilience\
        \ for the whole financial sector, and at the same time to keep pace with technological\
        \ developments, this Regulation should address risk stemming from all types\
        \ of ICT services. To that end, the definition of ICT services in the context\
        \ of this Regulation should be understood in a broad manner, encompassing\
        \ digital and data services provided through ICT systems to one or more internal\
        \ or external users on an ongoing basis. That definition should, for instance,\
        \ include so called \u2018over the top\u2019 services, which fall within the\
        \ category of electronic communications services. It should exclude only the\
        \ limited category of traditional analogue telephone services qualifying as\
        \ Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) services, landline services, Plain\
        \ Old Telephone Service (POTS), or fixed-line telephone services."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-36
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 36
      description: Notwithstanding the broad coverage envisaged by this Regulation,
        the application of the digital operational resilience rules should take into
        account the significant differences between financial entities in terms of
        their size and overall risk profile. As a general principle, when distributing
        resources and capabilities for the implementation of the ICT risk management
        framework, financial entities should duly balance their ICT-related needs
        to their size and overall risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity
        of their services, activities and operations, while competent authorities
        should continue to assess and review the approach of such distribution.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-37
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 37
      description: Account information service providers, referred to in Article 33(1)
        of Directive (EU) 2015/2366, are explicitly included in the scope of this
        Regulation, taking into account the specific nature of their activities and
        the risks arising therefrom. In addition, electronic money institutions and
        payment institutions exempted pursuant to Article 9(1) of Directive 2009/110/EC
        of the European Parliament and of the Council (14) and Article 32(1) of Directive
        (EU) 2015/2366 are included in the scope of this Regulation even if they have
        not been granted authorisation in accordance Directive 2009/110/EC to issue
        electronic money, or if they have not been granted authorisation in accordance
        with Directive (EU) 2015/2366 to provide and execute payment services. However,
        post office giro institutions, referred to in Article 2(5), point (3), of
        Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (15), are
        excluded from the scope of this Regulation. The competent authority for payment
        institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366, electronic money
        institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC and account information
        service providers as referred to in Article 33(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366,
        should be the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 22
        of Directive (EU) 2015/2366.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-38
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 38
      description: As larger financial entities might enjoy wider resources and can
        swiftly deploy funds to develop governance structures and set up various corporate
        strategies, only financial entities that are not microenterprises in the sense
        of this Regulation should be required to establish more complex governance
        arrangements. Such entities are better equipped in particular to set up dedicated
        management functions for supervising arrangements with ICT third-party service
        providers or for dealing with crisis management, to organise their ICT risk
        management according to the three lines of defence model, or to set up an
        internal risk management and control model, and to submit their ICT risk management
        framework to internal audits.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-39
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 39
      description: Some financial entities benefit from exemptions or are subject
        to a very light regulatory framework under the relevant sector-specific Union
        law. Such financial entities include managers of alternative investment funds
        referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament
        and of the Council (16), insurance and reinsurance undertakings referred to
        in Article 4 of Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the
        Council (17), and institutions for occupational retirement provision which
        operate pension schemes which together
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-40
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 40
      description: Since the entities referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to (23),
        of Directive 2013/36/EU are excluded from the scope of that Directive, Member
        States should consequently be able to choose to exempt from the application
        of this Regulation such entities located within their respective territories.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-41
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 41
      description: Similarly, in order to align this Regulation to the scope of Directive
        2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (18), it is also
        appropriate to exclude from the scope of this Regulation natural and legal
        persons referred in Articles 2 and 3 of that Directive which are allowed to
        provide investment services without having to obtain an authorisation under
        Directive 2014/65/EU. However, Article 2 of Directive 2014/65/EU also excludes
        from the scope of that Directive entities which qualify as financial entities
        for the purposes of this Regulation such as, central securities depositories,
        collective investment undertakings or insurance and reinsurance undertakings.
        The exclusion from the scope of this Regulation of the persons and entities
        referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of that Directive should not encompass those
        central securities depositories, collective investment undertakings or insurance
        and reinsurance undertakings.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-42
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 42
      description: Under sector-specific Union law, some financial entities are subject
        to lighter requirements or exemptions for reasons associated with their size
        or the services they provide. That category of financial entities includes
        small and non- interconnected investment firms, small institutions for occupational
        retirement provision which may be excluded from the scope of Directive (EU)
        2016/2341 under the conditions laid down in Article 5 of that Directive by
        the Member State concerned and operate pension schemes which together do not
        have more than 100 members in total, as well as institutions exempted pursuant
        to Directive 2013/36/EU. Therefore, in accordance with the principle of proportionality
        and to preserve the spirit of sector-specific Union law, it is also appropriate
        to subject those financial entities to a simplified ICT risk management framework
        under this Regulation. The proportionate character of the ICT risk management
        framework covering those financial entities should not be altered by the regulatory
        technical standards that are to be developed by the ESAs. Moreover, in accordance
        with the principle of proportionality, it is appropriate to also subject payment
        institutions referred to in Article 32(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 and
        electronic money institutions referred to in Article 9 of Directive 2009/110/EC
        exempted in accordance with national law transposing those Union legal acts
        to a simplified ICT risk management framework under this Regulation, while
        payment institutions and electronic money institutions which have not been
        exempted in accordance with their respective national law transposing sectoral
        Union law should comply with the general framework laid down by this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-43
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 43
      description: "Similarly, financial entities which qualify as microenterprises\
        \ or are subject to the simplified ICT risk management framework under this\
        \ Regulation should not be required to establish a role to monitor their arrangements\
        \ concluded with ICT third-party service providers on the use of ICT services;\
        \ or to designate a member of senior management to be responsible for overseeing\
        \ the related risk exposure and relevant documentation; to 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; to document and review at least once a year the ICT\
        \ risk management framework; to subject to internal audit on a regular basis\
        \ the ICT risk management framework; to perform in-depth assessments after\
        \ major changes in their network and information system infrastructures and\
        \ processes; to regularly conduct risk analyses on legacy ICT systems; to\
        \ subject the implementation of the ICT Response and Recovery plans to independent\
        \ internal audit reviews; to have a crisis management function, to expand\
        \ the testing of business continuity and response and recovery plans to capture\
        \ switchover scenarios between primary ICT infrastructure and redundant facilities;\
        \ to report to competent authorities, upon their request, an estimation of\
        \ aggregated annual costs and losses caused by major ICT-related incidents,\
        \ to maintain redundant ICT capacities; to communicate to national competent\
        \ authorities implemented changes following post ICT-related incident reviews;\
        \ to monitor on a continuous basis relevant technological developments, to\
        \ establish a comprehensive digital operational resilience testing programme\
        \ as an integral part of the ICT risk management framework provided for in\
        \ this Regulation, or to adopt and regularly review a strategy on ICT third-party\
        \ risk. In addition, microenterprises should only be required to assess the\
        \ need to maintain such redundant ICT capacities based on their risk profile.\
        \ Microenterprises should benefit from a more flexible regime as regards digital\
        \ operational resilience testing programmes. When considering the type and\
        \ frequency of testing to be performed, they should properly balance the objective\
        \ of maintaining a high digital operational resilience, the available resources\
        \ and their overall risk profile. Microenterprises and financial entities\
        \ subject to the simplified ICT risk management framework under this Regulation\
        \ should be exempted from the requirement to perform advanced testing of ICT\
        \ tools, systems and processes based on threat-led penetration testing (TLPT),\
        \ as only financial entities meeting the criteria set out in this Regulation\
        \ should be required to carry out such testing. In light of their limited\
        \ capabilities, microenterprises should be able to agree with the ICT third-party\
        \ service provider to delegate the financial entity\u2019s rights of access,\
        \ inspection and audit to an independent third-party, to be appointed by the\
        \ ICT third-party service provider, provided that the financial entity is\
        \ able to request, at any time, all relevant information and assurance on\
        \ the ICT third-party service provider\u2019s performance from the respective\
        \ independent third-party."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-44
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 44
      description: As only those financial entities identified for the purposes of
        the advanced digital resilience testing should be required to conduct threat-led
        penetration tests, the administrative processes and financial costs entailed
        in the performance of such tests should be borne by a small percentage of
        financial entities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-45
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 45
      description: "To ensure full alignment and overall consistency between financial\
        \ entities\u2019 business strategies, on the one hand, and the conduct of\
        \ ICT risk management, on the other hand, the financial entities\u2019 management\
        \ bodies should be required to maintain a pivotal and active role in steering\
        \ and adapting the ICT risk management framework and the overall digital operational\
        \ resilience strategy. The approach to be taken by management bodies should\
        \ not only focus on the means of ensuring the resilience of the ICT systems,\
        \ but should also cover people and processes through a set of policies which\
        \ cultivate, at each corporate layer, and for all staff, a strong sense of\
        \ awareness about cyber risks and a commitment to observe a strict cyber hygiene\
        \ at all levels. The ultimate responsibility of the management body in managing\
        \ a financial entity\u2019s ICT risk should be an overarching principle of\
        \ that comprehensive approach, further translated into the continuous engagement\
        \ of the management body in the control of the monitoring of the ICT risk\
        \ management."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-46
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 46
      description: "Moreover, the principle of the management body\u2019s full and\
        \ ultimate responsibility for the management of the ICT risk of the financial\
        \ entity goes hand in hand with the need to secure a level of ICT-related\
        \ investments and an overall budget for the financial entity that would enable\
        \ the financial entity to achieve a high level of digital operational resilience."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-47
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 47
      description: Inspired by relevant international, national and industry best
        practices, guidelines, recommendations and approaches to the management of
        cyber risk, this Regulation promotes a set of principles that facilitate the
        overall structure of ICT risk management. Consequently, as long as the main
        capabilities which financial entities put in place address the various functions
        in the ICT risk management (identification, protection and prevention, detection,
        response and recovery, learning and evolving and communication) set out in
        this Regulation, financial entities should remain free to use ICT risk management
        models that are differently framed or categorised.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-48
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 48
      description: To keep pace with an evolving cyber threat landscape, financial
        entities should maintain updated ICT systems that are reliable and capable,
        not only for guaranteeing the processing of data required for their services,
        but also for ensuring sufficient technological resilience to allow them to
        deal adequately with additional processing needs due to stressed market conditions
        or other adverse situations.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-49
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 49
      description: Efficient business continuity and recovery plans are necessary
        to allow financial entities to promptly and quickly resolve ICT-related incidents,
        in particular cyber-attacks, by limiting damage and giving priority to the
        resumption of activities and recovery actions in accordance with their back-up
        policies. However, such resumption should in no way jeopardise the integrity
        and security of the network and information systems or the availability, authenticity,
        integrity or confidentiality of data.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-50
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 50
      description: While this Regulation allows financial entities to determine their
        recovery time and recovery point objectives in a flexible manner and hence
        to set such objectives by fully taking into account the nature and the criticality
        of the relevant functions and any specific business needs, it should nevertheless
        require them to carry out an assessment of the potential overall impact on
        market efficiency when determining such objectives.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-51
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 51
      description: The propagators of cyber-attacks tend to pursue financial gains
        directly at the source, thus exposing financial entities to significant consequences.
        To prevent ICT systems from losing integrity or becoming unavailable, and
        hence to avoid data breaches and damage to physical ICT infrastructure, the
        reporting of major ICT-related incidents by financial entities should be significantly
        improved and streamlined. ICT-related incident reporting should be harmonised
        through the introduction of a requirement for all financial entities to report
        directly to their relevant competent authorities. Where a financial entity
        is subject to supervision by more than one national competent authority, Member
        States should designate a single competent authority as the addressee of such
        reporting. Credit institutions classified as significant in accordance with
        Article 6(4) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 (19) should submit such
        reporting to the national competent authorities, which should subsequently
        transmit the report to the European Central Bank (ECB).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-52
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 52
      description: 'The direct reporting should enable financial supervisors to have
        immediate access to information about major ICT- related incidents. Financial
        supervisors should in turn pass on details of major ICT-related incidents
        to public non- financial authorities (such as competent authorities and single
        points of contact under Directive (EU) 2022/2555, national data protection
        authorities, and to law enforcement authorities for major ICT-related incidents
        of a criminal nature) in order to enhance such authorities awareness of such
        incidents and, in the case of CSIRTs, to facilitate prompt assistance that
        may be given to financial entities, as appropriate. Member States should,
        in addition, be able to determine that financial entities themselves should
        provide such information to public authorities outside the financial services
        area. Those information flows should allow financial entities to swiftly benefit
        from any relevant technical input, advice about remedies, and subsequent follow-up
        from such authorities. The information on major ICT-related incidents should
        be mutually channelled: financial supervisors should provide all necessary
        feedback or guidance to the financial entity, while the ESAs should share
        anonymised data on cyber threats and vulnerabilities relating to an incident,
        to aid wider collective defence.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-53
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 53
      description: While all financial entities should be required to carry out incident
        reporting, that requirement is not expected to affect all of them in the same
        manner. Indeed, relevant materiality thresholds, as well as reporting timelines,
        should be duly adjusted, in the context of delegated acts based on the regulatory
        technical standards to be developed by the ESAs, with a view to covering only
        major ICT-related incidents. In addition, the specificities of financial entities
        should be taken into account when setting timelines for reporting obligations.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-54
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 54
      description: "This Regulation should require credit institutions, payment institutions,\
        \ account information service providers and electronic money institutions\
        \ to report all operational or security payment-related incidents \u2013 previously\
        \ reported under Directive (EU) 2015/2366 \u2013 irrespective of the ICT nature\
        \ of the incident."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-55
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 55
      description: The ESAs should be tasked with assessing the feasibility and conditions
        for a possible centralisation of ICT-related incident reports at Union level.
        Such centralisation could consist of a single EU Hub for major ICT-related
        incident reporting either directly receiving relevant reports and automatically
        notifying national competent authorities, or merely centralising relevant
        reports forwarded by the national competent authorities and thus fulfilling
        a coordination role. The ESAs should be tasked with preparing, in consultation
        with the ECB and ENISA, a joint report exploring the feasibility of setting
        up a single EU Hub.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-56
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 56
      description: "In order to achieve a high level of digital operational resilience,\
        \ and in line with both the relevant international standards (e.g. the G7\
        \ Fundamental Elements for Threat-Led Penetration Testing) and with the frameworks\
        \ applied in the Union, such as the TIBER-EU, financial entities should regularly\
        \ test their ICT systems and staff having ICT- related responsibilities with\
        \ regard to the effectiveness of their preventive, detection, response and\
        \ recovery capabilities, to uncover and address potential ICT vulnerabilities.\
        \ To reflect differences that exist across, and within, the various financial\
        \ subsectors as regards financial entities\u2019 level of cybersecurity preparedness,\
        \ testing should include a wide variety of tools and actions, ranging from\
        \ the assessment of basic requirements (e.g. 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 or end-to-end testing) to more advanced testing\
        \ by means of TLPT. Such advanced testing should be required only of financial\
        \ entities that are mature enough from an ICT perspective to reasonably carry\
        \ it out. The digital operational resilience testing required by this Regulation\
        \ should thus be more demanding for those financial entities meeting the criteria\
        \ set out in this Regulation (for example, large, systemic and ICT-mature\
        \ credit institutions, stock exchanges, central securities depositories and\
        \ central counterparties) than for other financial entities. At the same time,\
        \ the digital operational resilience testing by means of TLPT should be more\
        \ relevant for financial entities operating in core financial services subsectors\
        \ and playing a systemic role (for example, payments, banking, and clearing\
        \ and settlement), and less relevant for other subsectors (for example, asset\
        \ managers and credit rating agencies)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-57
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 57
      description: Financial entities involved in cross-border activities and exercising
        the freedoms of establishment, or of provision of services within the Union,
        should comply with a single set of advanced testing requirements (i.e. TLPT)
        in their home Member State, which should include the ICT infrastructures in
        all jurisdictions where the cross-border financial group operates within the
        Union, thus allowing such cross-border financial groups to incur related ICT
        testing costs in one jurisdiction only.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-58
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 58
      description: To draw on the expertise already acquired by certain competent
        authorities, in particular with regard to implementing the TIBER-EU framework,
        this Regulation should allow Member States to designate a single public authority
        as responsible in the financial sector, at national level, for all TLPT matters,
        or competent authorities, to delegate, in the absence of such designation,
        the exercise of TLPT related tasks to another national financial competent
        authority.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-59
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 59
      description: Since this Regulation does not require financial entities to cover
        all critical or important functions in one single threat-led penetration test,
        financial entities should be free to determine which and how many critical
        or important functions should be included in the scope of such a test.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-60
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 60
      description: "Pooled testing within the meaning of this Regulation \u2013 involving\
        \ the participation of several financial entities in a TLPT and for which\
        \ an ICT third-party service provider can directly enter into contractual\
        \ arrangements with an external tester \u2013 should be allowed only where\
        \ 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 the confidentiality of the data related to such services,\
        \ are reasonably expected to be adversely impacted. Pooled testing should\
        \ also be subject to safeguards (direction by one designated financial entity,\
        \ calibration of the number of participating financial entities) to ensure\
        \ a rigorous testing exercise for the financial entities involved which meet\
        \ the objectives of the TLPT pursuant to this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-61
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 61
      description: "In order to take advantage of internal resources available at\
        \ corporate level, this Regulation should allow the use of internal testers\
        \ for the purposes of carrying out TLPT, provided there is supervisory approval,\
        \ no conflicts of interest, and periodical alternation of the use of internal\
        \ and external testers (every three tests), while also requiring the provider\
        \ of the threat intelligence in the TLPT to always be external to the financial\
        \ entity. The responsibility for conducting TLPT should remain fully with\
        \ the financial entity. Attestations provided by authorities should be solely\
        \ for the purpose of mutual recognition and should not preclude any follow-up\
        \ action needed to address the ICT risk to which the financial entity is exposed,\
        \ nor should they be seen as a supervisory endorsement of a financial entity\u2019\
        s ICT risk management and mitigation capabilities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-62
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 62
      description: "To ensure a sound monitoring of ICT third-party risk in the financial\
        \ sector, it is necessary to lay down a set of principle-based rules to guide\
        \ financial entities\u2019 when monitoring risk arising in the context of\
        \ functions outsourced to ICT third-party service providers, particularly\
        \ for ICT services supporting critical or important functions, as well as\
        \ more generally in the context of all ICT third-party dependencies."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-63
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 63
      description: To address the complexity of the various sources of ICT risk, while
        taking into account the multitude and diversity of providers of technological
        solutions which enable a smooth provision of financial services, this Regulation
        should cover a wide range of ICT third-party service providers, including
        providers of cloud computing services, software, data analytics services and
        providers of data centre services. Similarly, since financial entities should
        effectively and coherently identify and manage all types of risk, including
        in the context of ICT services procured within a financial group, it should
        be clarified that undertakings which are part of a financial group and provide
        ICT services predominantly to their parent undertaking, or to subsidiaries
        or branches of their parent undertaking, as well as financial entities providing
        ICT services to other financial entities, should also be considered as ICT
        third-party service providers under this Regulation. Lastly, in light of the
        evolving payment services market becoming increasingly dependent on complex
        technical solutions, and in view of emerging types of payment services and
        payment-related solutions, participants in the payment services ecosystem,
        providing payment-processing activities, or operating payment infrastructures,
        should also be considered to be ICT third-party service providers under this
        Regulation, with the exception of central banks when operating payment or
        securities settlement systems, and public authorities when providing ICT related
        services in the context of fulfilling State functions.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-64
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 64
      description: A financial entity should at all times remain fully responsible
        for complying with its obligations set out in this Regulation. Financial entities
        should apply a proportionate approach to the monitoring of risks emerging
        at the level of the ICT third-party service providers, by duly considering
        the nature, scale, complexity and importance of their ICT-related dependencies,
        the criticality or importance of the services, processes or functions subject
        to the contractual arrangements and, ultimately, on the basis of a careful
        assessment of any potential impact on the continuity and quality of financial
        services at individual and at group level, as appropriate.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-65
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 65
      description: "The conduct of such monitoring should follow a strategic approach\
        \ to ICT third-party risk formalised through the adoption by the financial\
        \ entity\u2019s management body of a dedicated ICT third-party risk strategy,\
        \ rooted in a continuous screening of all ICT third-party dependencies. To\
        \ enhance supervisory awareness of ICT third-party dependencies, and with\
        \ a view to further supporting the work in the context of the Oversight Framework\
        \ established by this Regulation, all financial entities should be required\
        \ to maintain a register of information with all contractual arrangements\
        \ about the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers.\
        \ Financial supervisors should be able to request the full register, or to\
        \ ask for specific sections thereof, and thus to obtain essential information\
        \ for acquiring a broader understanding of the ICT dependencies of financial\
        \ entities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-66
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 66
      description: A thorough pre-contracting analysis should underpin and precede
        the formal conclusion of contractual arrangements, in particular by focusing
        on elements such as the criticality or importance of the services supported
        by the envisaged ICT contract, the necessary supervisory approvals or other
        conditions, the possible concentration risk entailed, as well as applying
        due diligence in the process of selection and assessment of ICT third-party
        service providers and assessing potential conflicts of interest. For contractual
        arrangements concerning critical or important functions, financial entities
        should take into consideration the use by ICT third-party service providers
        of the most up-to-date and highest information security standards. Termination
        of contractual arrangements could be prompted at least by a series of circumstances
        showing shortfalls at the ICT third-party service provider level, in particular
        significant breaches of laws or contractual terms, circumstances revealing
        a potential alteration of the performance of the functions provided for in
        the contractual arrangements, evidence of weaknesses of the ICT third-party
        service provider in its overall ICT risk management, or circumstances indicating
        the inability of the relevant competent authority to effectively supervise
        the financial entity.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-67
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 67
      description: "To address the systemic impact of ICT third-party concentration\
        \ risk, this Regulation promotes a balanced solution by means of taking a\
        \ flexible and gradual approach to such concentration risk since the imposition\
        \ of any rigid caps or strict limitations might hinder the conduct of business\
        \ and restrain the contractual freedom. Financial entities should thoroughly\
        \ assess their envisaged contractual arrangements to identify the likelihood\
        \ of such risk emerging, including by means of in-depth analyses of subcontracting\
        \ arrangements, in particular when concluded with ICT third-party service\
        \ providers established in a third country. At this stage, and with a view\
        \ to striking a fair balance between the imperative of preserving contractual\
        \ freedom and that of guaranteeing financial stability, it is not considered\
        \ appropriate to set out rules on strict caps and limits to ICT third-party\
        \ exposures. In the context of the Oversight Framework, a Lead Overseer, appointed\
        \ pursuant to this Regulation, should, in respect to critical ICT third-party\
        \ service providers, pay particular attention to fully grasp the magnitude\
        \ of interdependences, discover specific instances where a high degree of\
        \ concentration of critical ICT third-party service providers in the Union\
        \ is likely to put a strain on the Union financial system\u2019s stability\
        \ and integrity and maintain a dialogue with critical ICT third-party service\
        \ providers where that specific risk is identified."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-68
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 68
      description: "To evaluate and monitor on a regular basis the ability of an ICT\
        \ third party service provider to securely provide services to a financial\
        \ entity without adverse effects on a financial entity\u2019s digital operational\
        \ resilience, several key contractual elements with ICT third-party service\
        \ providers should be harmonised. Such harmonisation should cover minimum\
        \ areas which are crucial for enabling a full monitoring by the financial\
        \ entity of the risks that could emerge from the ICT third-party service provider,\
        \ from the perspective of a financial entity\u2019s need to secure its digital\
        \ resilience because it is deeply dependent on the stability, functionality,\
        \ availability and security of the ICT services received."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-69
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 69
      description: When renegotiating contractual arrangements to seek alignment with
        the requirements of this Regulation, financial entities and ICT third-party
        service providers should ensure the coverage of the key contractual provisions
        as provided for in this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-70
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 70
      description: "The definition of \u2018critical or important function\u2019 provided\
        \ for in this Regulation encompasses the \u2018critical functions\u2019 as\
        \ defined in Article 2(1), point (35), of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European\
        \ Parliament and of the Council (20). Accordingly, functions deemed to be\
        \ critical pursuant to Directive 2014/59/EU are included in the definition\
        \ of critical functions within the meaning of this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-71
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 71
      description: "Irrespective of the criticality or importance of the function\
        \ supported by the ICT services, contractual arrangements should, in particular,\
        \ provide for a specification of the complete descriptions of functions and\
        \ services, of the locations where such functions are provided and where data\
        \ is to be processed, as well as an indication of service level descriptions.\
        \ Other essential elements to enable a financial entity\u2019s monitoring\
        \ of ICT third party risk are: contractual provisions specifying how the accessibility,\
        \ availability, integrity, security and protection of personal data are ensured\
        \ by the ICT third-party service provider, provisions laying down the relevant\
        \ guarantees for enabling the access, recovery and return of data in the case\
        \ of insolvency, resolution or discontinuation of the business operations\
        \ of the ICT third-party service provider, as well as provisions requiring\
        \ the ICT third-party service provider to provide assistance in case of ICT\
        \ incidents in connection with the services provided, at no additional cost\
        \ or at a cost determined ex-ante; provisions on the obligation of the ICT\
        \ third-party service provider to fully cooperate with the competent authorities\
        \ and resolution authorities of the financial entity; and provisions on 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."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-72
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 72
      description: "In addition to such contractual provisions, and with a view to\
        \ ensuring that financial entities remain in full control of all developments\
        \ occurring at third-party level which may impair their ICT security, the\
        \ contracts for the provision of ICT services supporting critical or important\
        \ functions should also provide for the following: the specification of the\
        \ full service level descriptions, with precise quantitative and qualitative\
        \ performance targets, to enable without undue delay appropriate corrective\
        \ actions when the agreed service levels are not met; the relevant notice\
        \ periods and reporting obligations of the ICT third-party service provider\
        \ in the event of developments with a potential material impact on the ICT\
        \ third-party service provider\u2019s ability to effectively provide their\
        \ respective ICT services; a requirement upon the ICT third-party service\
        \ provider to implement and test business contingency plans and have ICT security\
        \ measures, tools and policies allowing for the secure provision of services,\
        \ and to participate and fully cooperate in the TLPT carried out by the financial\
        \ entity."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-73
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 73
      description: "Contracts for the provision of ICT services supporting critical\
        \ or important functions should also contain provisions enabling the rights\
        \ of access, inspection and audit by the financial entity, or an appointed\
        \ third party, and the right to take copies as crucial instruments in the\
        \ financial entities\u2019 ongoing monitoring of the ICT third-party service\
        \ provider\u2019s performance, coupled with the service provider\u2019s full\
        \ cooperation during inspections. Similarly, the competent authority of the\
        \ financial entity should have the right, based on notices, to inspect and\
        \ audit the ICT third-party service provider, subject to the protection of\
        \ confidential information."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-74
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 74
      description: Such contractual arrangements should also provide for dedicated
        exit strategies to enable, in particular, mandatory transition periods during
        which ICT third-party service providers should continue providing the relevant
        services with a view to reducing the risk of disruptions at the level of the
        financial entity, or to allow the latter effectively to switch to the use
        of other ICT third-party service providers or, alternatively, to change to
        in-house solutions, consistent with the complexity of the provided ICT service.
        Moreover, financial entities within the scope of Directive 2014/59/EU should
        ensure that the relevant contracts for ICT services are robust and fully enforceable
        in the event of resolution of those financial entities. Therefore, in line
        with the expectations of the resolution authorities, those financial entities
        should ensure that the relevant contracts for ICT services are resolution
        resilient. As long as they continue meeting their payment obligations, those
        financial entities should ensure, among other requirements, that the relevant
        contracts for ICT services contain clauses for non-termination, non-suspension
        and non-modification on grounds of restructuring or resolution.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-75
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 75
      description: "Moreover, the voluntary use of standard contractual clauses developed\
        \ by public authorities or Union institutions, in particular the use of contractual\
        \ clauses developed by the Commission for cloud computing services could provide\
        \ further comfort to the financial entities and ICT third-party service providers,\
        \ by enhancing their level of legal certainty regarding the use of cloud computing\
        \ services in the financial sector, in full alignment with the requirements\
        \ and expectations set out by the Union financial services law. The development\
        \ of standard contractual clauses builds on measures already envisaged in\
        \ the 2018 Fintech Action Plan that announced the Commission\u2019s intention\
        \ to encourage and facilitate the development of standard contractual clauses\
        \ for the use of cloud computing services outsourcing by financial entities,\
        \ drawing on cross-sectorial cloud computing services stakeholders\u2019 efforts,\
        \ which the Commission has facilitated with the help of the financial sector\u2019\
        s involvement."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-76
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 76
      description: "With a view to promoting convergence and efficiency in relation\
        \ to supervisory approaches when addressing ICT third-party risk in the financial\
        \ sector, as well as to strengthening the digital operational resilience of\
        \ financial entities which rely on critical ICT third-party service providers\
        \ for the provision of ICT services that support the supply of financial services,\
        \ and thereby to contributing to the preservation of the Union\u2019s financial\
        \ system stability and the integrity of the internal market for financial\
        \ services, critical ICT third-party service providers should be subject to\
        \ a Union Oversight Framework. While the set-up of the Oversight Framework\
        \ is justified by the added value of taking action at Union level and by virtue\
        \ of the inherent role and specificities of the use of ICT services in the\
        \ provision of financial services, it should be recalled, at the same time,\
        \ that this solution appears suitable only in the context of this Regulation\
        \ specifically dealing with digital operational resilience in the financial\
        \ sector. However, such Oversight Framework should not be regarded as a new\
        \ model for Union supervision in other areas of financial services and activities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-77
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 77
      description: "The Oversight Framework should apply only to critical ICT third-party\
        \ service providers. There should therefore be a designation mechanism to\
        \ take into account the dimension and nature of the financial sector\u2019\
        s reliance on such ICT third-party service providers. That mechanism should\
        \ involve a set of quantitative and qualitative criteria to set the criticality\
        \ parameters as a basis for inclusion in the Oversight Framework. In order\
        \ to ensure the accuracy of that assessment, and regardless of the corporate\
        \ structure of the ICT third-party service provider, such criteria should,\
        \ in the case of a ICT third-party service provider that is part of a wider\
        \ group, take into consideration the entire ICT third-party service provider\u2019\
        s group structure. On the one hand, critical ICT third-party service providers,\
        \ which are not automatically designated by virtue of the application of those\
        \ criteria, should have the possibility to opt in to the Oversight Framework\
        \ on a voluntary basis, on the other hand, ICT third-party service providers,\
        \ that are already subject to oversight mechanism frameworks supporting the\
        \ fulfilment of the tasks of the European System of Central Banks as referred\
        \ to in Article 127(2) TFEU, should be exempted."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-78
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 78
      description: Similarly, financial entities providing ICT services to other financial
        entities, while belonging to the category of ICT third-party service providers
        under this Regulation, should also be exempted from the Oversight Framework
        since they are already subject to supervisory mechanisms established by the
        relevant Union financial services law. Where applicable, competent authorities
        should take into account, in the context of their supervisory activities,
        the ICT risk posed to financial entities by financial entities providing ICT
        services. Likewise, due to the existing risk monitoring mechanisms at group
        level, the same exemption should be introduced for ICT third-party service
        providers delivering services predominantly to the entities of their own group.
        ICT third-party service providers providing ICT services solely in one Member
        State to financial entities that are active only in that Member State should
        also be exempted from the designation mechanism because of their limited activities
        and lack of cross-border impact.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-79
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 79
      description: The digital transformation experienced in financial services has
        brought about an unprecedented level of use of, and reliance upon, ICT services.
        Since it has become inconceivable to provide financial services without the
        use of cloud computing services, software solutions and data-related services,
        the Union financial ecosystem has become intrinsically co-dependent on certain
        ICT services provided by ICT service suppliers. Some of those suppliers, innovators
        in developing and applying ICT-based technologies, play a significant role
        in the delivery of financial services, or have become integrated into the
        financial services value chain. They have thus become critical to the stability
        and integrity of the Union financial system. This widespread reliance on services
        supplied by critical ICT third-party service providers, combined with the
        interdependence of the information systems of various market operators, create
        a direct, and potentially severe, risk to the Union financial services system
        and to the continuity of delivery of financial services if critical ICT third-party
        service providers were to be affected by operational disruptions or major
        cyber incidents. Cyber incidents have a distinctive ability to multiply and
        propagate throughout the financial system at a considerably faster pace than
        other types of risk monitored in the financial sector and can extend across
        sectors and beyond geographical borders. They have the potential to evolve
        into a systemic crisis, where trust in the financial system has been eroded
        due to the disruption of functions supporting the real economy, or to substantial
        financial losses, reaching a level which the financial system is unable to
        withstand, or which requires the deployment of heavy shock absorption measures.
        To prevent these scenarios from taking place and thereby endangering the financial
        stability and integrity of the Union, it is essential to provide the convergence
        of supervisory practices relating to ICT third-party risk in finance, in particular
        through new rules enabling the Union oversight of critical ICT third-party
        service providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-80
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 80
      description: "The Oversight Framework largely depends on the degree of collaboration\
        \ between the Lead Overseer and the critical ICT third-party service provider\
        \ delivering to financial entities services affecting the supply of financial\
        \ services. Successful oversight is predicated, inter alia, upon the ability\
        \ of the Lead Overseer to effectively conduct monitoring missions and inspections\
        \ to assess the rules, controls and processes used by the critical ICT third-party\
        \ service providers, as well as to assess the potential cumulative impact\
        \ of their activities on financial stability and the integrity of the financial\
        \ system. At the same time, it is crucial that critical ICT third-party service\
        \ providers follow the Lead Overseer\u2019s recommendations and address its\
        \ concerns. Since a lack of cooperation by a critical ICT third- party service\
        \ provider providing services that affect the supply of financial services,\
        \ such as the refusal to grant access to its premises or to submit information,\
        \ would ultimately deprive the Lead Overseer of its essential tools in appraising\
        \ ICT third-party risk, and could adversely impact the financial stability\
        \ and the integrity of the financial system, it is necessary to also provide\
        \ for a commensurate sanctioning regime."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-81
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 81
      description: "Against this background, the need of the Lead Overseer to impose\
        \ penalty payments to compel critical ICT third- party service providers to\
        \ comply with the transparency and access-related obligations set out in this\
        \ Regulation should not be jeopardised by difficulties raised by the enforcement\
        \ of those penalty payments in relation to critical ICT third-party service\
        \ providers established in third countries. In order to ensure the enforceability\
        \ of such penalties, and to allow a swift roll out of procedures upholding\
        \ the critical ICT third-party service providers\u2019 rights of defence in\
        \ the context of the designation mechanism and the issuance of recommendations,\
        \ those critical ICT third-party service providers, providing services to\
        \ financial entities that affect the supply of financial services, should\
        \ be required to maintain an adequate business presence in the Union. Due\
        \ to the nature of the oversight, and the absence of comparable arrangements\
        \ in other jurisdictions, there are no suitable alternative mechanisms ensuring\
        \ this objective by way of effective cooperation with financial supervisors\
        \ in third countries in relation to the monitoring of the impact of digital\
        \ operational risks posed by systemic ICT third-party service providers, qualifying\
        \ as critical ICT third-party service providers established in third countries.\
        \ Therefore, in order to continue its provision of ICT services to financial\
        \ entities in the Union, an ICT third-party service provider established in\
        \ a third country which has been designated as critical in accordance with\
        \ this Regulation should undertake, within 12 months of such designation,\
        \ all necessary arrangements to ensure its incorporation within the Union,\
        \ by means of establishing a subsidiary, as defined throughout the Union acquis,\
        \ namely in Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council\
        \ (21)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-82
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 82
      description: The requirement to set up a subsidiary in the Union should not
        prevent the critical ICT third-party service provider from supplying ICT services
        and related technical support from facilities and infrastructure located outside
        the Union. This Regulation does not impose a data localisation obligation
        as it does not require data storage or processing to be undertaken in the
        Union.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-83
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 83
      description: Critical ICT third-party service providers should be able to provide
        ICT services from anywhere in the world, not necessarily or not only from
        premises located in the Union. Oversight activities should be first conducted
        on premises located in the Union and by interacting with entities located
        in the Union, including the subsidiaries established by critical ICT third-party
        service providers pursuant to this Regulation. However, such actions within
        the Union might be insufficient to allow the Lead Overseer to fully and effectively
        perform its duties under this Regulation. The Lead Overseer should therefore
        also be able to exercise its relevant oversight powers in third countries.
        Exercising those powers in third countries should allow the Lead Overseer
        to examine the facilities from which the ICT services or the technical support
        services are actually provided or managed by the critical ICT third- party
        service provider, and should give the Lead Overseer a comprehensive and operational
        understanding of the ICT risk management of the critical ICT third-party service
        provider. The possibility for the Lead Overseer, as a Union agency, to exercise
        powers outside the territory of the Union should be duly framed by relevant
        conditions, in particular the consent of the critical ICT third-party service
        provider concerned. Similarly, the relevant authorities of the third country
        should be informed of, and not have objected to, the exercise on their own
        territory of the activities of the Lead Overseer. However, in order to ensure
        efficient implementation, and without prejudice to the respective competences
        of the Union institutions and the Member States, such powers also need to
        be fully anchored in the conclusion of administrative cooperation arrangements
        with the relevant authorities of the third country concerned. This Regulation
        should therefore enable the ESAs to conclude administrative cooperation arrangements
        with the relevant authorities of third countries, which should not otherwise
        create legal obligations in respect of the Union and its Member States.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-84
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 84
      description: To facilitate communication with the Lead Overseer and to ensure
        adequate representation, critical ICT third-party service providers which
        are part of a group should designate one legal person as their coordination
        point.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-85
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 85
      description: "The Oversight Framework should be without prejudice to Member\
        \ States\u2019 competence to conduct their own oversight or monitoring missions\
        \ in respect to ICT third-party service providers which are not designated\
        \ as critical under this Regulation, but which are regarded as important at\
        \ national level."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-86
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 86
      description: "To leverage the multi-layered institutional architecture in the\
        \ financial services area, the Joint Committee of the ESAs should continue\
        \ to ensure overall cross-sectoral coordination in relation to all matters\
        \ pertaining to ICT risk, in accordance with its tasks on cybersecurity. It\
        \ should be supported by a new Subcommittee (the \u2018Oversight Forum\u2019\
        ) carrying out preparatory work both for the individual decisions addressed\
        \ to critical ICT third-party service providers, and for the issuing of collective\
        \ recommendations, in particular in relation to benchmarking the oversight\
        \ programmes for critical ICT third-party service providers, and identifying\
        \ best practices for addressing ICT concentration risk issues."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-87
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 87
      description: To ensure that critical ICT third-party service providers are appropriately
        and effectively overseen on a Union level, this Regulation provides that any
        of the three ESAs could be designated as a Lead Overseer. The individual assignment
        of a critical ICT third-party service provider to one of the three ESAs should
        result from an assessment of the preponderance of financial entities operating
        in the financial sectors for which that ESA has responsibilities. This approach
        should lead to a balanced allocation of tasks and responsibilities between
        the three ESAs, in the context of exercising the oversight functions, and
        should make the best use of the human resources and technical expertise available
        in each of the three ESAs.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-88
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 88
      description: "Lead Overseers should be granted the necessary powers to conduct\
        \ investigations, to carry out onsite and offsite inspections at the premises\
        \ and locations of critical ICT third-party service providers and to obtain\
        \ complete and updated information. Those powers should enable the Lead Overseer\
        \ to acquire real insight into the type, dimension and impact of the ICT third-party\
        \ risk posed to financial entities and ultimately to the Union\u2019s financial\
        \ system. Entrusting the ESAs with the lead oversight role is a prerequisite\
        \ for understanding and addressing the systemic dimension of ICT risk in finance.\
        \ The impact of critical ICT third-party service providers on the Union financial\
        \ sector and the potential issues caused by the ICT concentration risk entailed\
        \ call for taking a collective approach at Union level. The simultaneous carrying\
        \ out of multiple audits and access rights, performed separately by numerous\
        \ competent authorities, with little or no coordination among them, would\
        \ prevent financial supervisors from obtaining a complete and comprehensive\
        \ overview of ICT third-party risk in the Union, while also creating redundancy,\
        \ burden and complexity for critical ICT third-party service providers if\
        \ they were subject to numerous monitoring and inspection requests."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-89
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 89
      description: Due to the significant impact of being designated as critical,
        this Regulation should ensure that the rights of critical ICT third-party
        service providers are observed throughout the implementation of the Oversight
        Framework. Prior to being designated as critical, such providers should, for
        example, have the right to submit to the Lead Overseer a reasoned statement
        containing any relevant information for the purposes of the assessment related
        to their designation. Since the Lead Overseer should be empowered to submit
        recommendations on ICT risk matters and suitable remedies thereto, which include
        the power to oppose certain contractual arrangements ultimately affecting
        the stability of the financial entity or the financial system, critical ICT
        third-party service providers should also be given the opportunity to provide,
        prior to the finalisation of those recommendations, explanations regarding
        the expected impact of the solutions, envisaged in the recommendations, on
        customers that are entities falling outside the scope of this Regulation and
        to formulate solutions to mitigate risks. Critical ICT third-party service
        providers disagreeing with the recommendations should submit a reasoned explanation
        of their intention not to endorse the recommendation. Where such reasoned
        explanation is not submitted or where it is considered to be insufficient,
        the Lead Overseer should issue a public notice summarily describing the matter
        of non-compliance.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-90
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 90
      description: "Competent authorities should duly include the task of verifying\
        \ substantive compliance with recommendations issued by the Lead Overseer\
        \ in their functions with regard to prudential supervision of financial entities.\
        \ Competent authorities should be able to require financial entities to take\
        \ additional measures to address the risks identified in the Lead Overseer\u2019\
        s recommendations, and should, in due course, issue notifications to that\
        \ effect. Where the Lead Overseer addresses recommendations to critical ICT\
        \ third-party service providers that are supervised under Directive (EU) 2022/2555,\
        \ the competent authorities should be able, on a voluntary basis and before\
        \ adopting additional measures, to consult the competent authorities under\
        \ that Directive in order to foster a coordinated approach to dealing with\
        \ the critical ICT third-party service providers in question."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-91
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 91
      description: 'The exercise of the oversight should be guided by three operational
        principles seeking to ensure: (a) close coordination among the ESAs in their
        Lead Overseer roles, through a joint oversight network (JON), (b) consistency
        with the framework established by Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (through a voluntary
        consultation of bodies under that Directive to avoid duplication of measures
        directed at critical ICT third-party service providers), and (c) applying
        diligence to minimise the potential risk of disruption to services provided
        by the critical ICT third-party service providers to customers that are entities
        falling outside the scope of this Regulation.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-92
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 92
      description: The Oversight Framework should not replace, or in any way or for
        any part substitute for, the requirement for financial entities to manage
        themselves the risks entailed by the use of ICT third-party service providers,
        including their obligation to maintain an ongoing monitoring of contractual
        arrangements concluded with critical ICT third- party service providers. Similarly,
        the Oversight Framework should not affect the full responsibility of financial
        entities for complying with, and discharging, all the legal obligations laid
        down in this Regulation and in the relevant financial services law.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-93
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 93
      description: "To avoid duplications and overlaps, competent authorities should\
        \ refrain from taking individually any measures aiming to monitor the critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider\u2019s risks and should, in that respect,\
        \ rely on the relevant Lead Overseer\u2019s assessment. Any measures should\
        \ in any case be coordinated and agreed in advance with the Lead Overseer\
        \ in the context of the exercise of tasks in the Oversight Framework."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-94
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 94
      description: "To promote convergence at international level as regards the use\
        \ of best practices in the review and monitoring of ICT third-party service\
        \ providers\u2019 digital risk-management, the ESAs should be encouraged to\
        \ conclude cooperation arrangements with relevant supervisory and regulatory\
        \ third-country authorities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-95
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 95
      description: To leverage the specific competences, technical skills and expertise
        of staff specialising in operational and ICT risk within the competent authorities,
        the three ESAs and, on a voluntary basis, the competent authorities under
        Directive (EU) 2022/2555, the Lead Overseer should draw on national supervisory
        capabilities and knowledge and set up dedicated examination teams for each
        critical ICT third-party service provider, pooling multidisciplinary teams
        in support of the preparation and execution of oversight activities, including
        general investigations and inspections of critical ICT third-party service
        providers, as well as for any necessary follow-up thereto.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-96
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 96
      description: "Whereas costs resulting from oversight tasks would be fully funded\
        \ from fees levied on critical ICT third-party service providers, the ESAs\
        \ are. however, likely to incur, before the start of the Oversight Framework,\
        \ costs for the implementation of dedicated ICT systems supporting the upcoming\
        \ oversight, since dedicated ICT systems would need to be developed and deployed\
        \ beforehand. This Regulation therefore provides for a hybrid funding model,\
        \ whereby the Oversight Framework would, as such, be fully fee-funded, while\
        \ the development of the ESAs\u2019 ICT systems would be funded from Union\
        \ and national competent authorities\u2019 contributions."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-97
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 97
      description: Competent authorities should have all required supervisory, investigative
        and sanctioning powers to ensure the proper exercise of their duties under
        this Regulation. They should, in principle, publish notices of the administrative
        penalties they impose. Since financial entities and ICT third-party service
        providers can be established in different Member States and supervised by
        different competent authorities, the application of this Regulation should
        be facilitated by, on the one hand, close cooperation among relevant competent
        authorities, including the ECB with regard to specific tasks conferred on
        it by Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, and, on the other hand, by consultation
        with the ESAs through the mutual exchange of information and the provision
        of assistance in the context of relevant supervisory activities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-98
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 98
      description: "In order to further quantify and qualify the criteria for the\
        \ designation of ICT third-party service providers as critical and to harmonise\
        \ oversight fees, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU\
        \ should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by further\
        \ specifying the systemic impact that a failure or operational outage of an\
        \ ICT third-party service provider could have on the financial entities it\
        \ provides ICT services to, the number of global systemically important institutions\
        \ (G-SIIs), or other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs), that rely\
        \ on the ICT third-party service provider in question, the number of ICT third-party\
        \ service providers active on a given market, the costs of migrating data\
        \ and ICT workloads to other ICT third-party service providers, as well as\
        \ the amount of the oversight fees and the way in which they are to be paid.\
        \ It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate\
        \ consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and\
        \ that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles\
        \ laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better\
        \ Law-Making (22). In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation\
        \ of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council should receive\
        \ all documents at the same time as Member States\u2019 experts, and their\
        \ experts should systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert\
        \ groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-99
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 99
      description: Regulatory technical standards should ensure the consistent harmonisation
        of the requirements laid down in this Regulation. In their roles as bodies
        endowed with highly specialised expertise, the ESAs should develop draft regulatory
        technical standards which do not involve policy choices, for submission to
        the Commission. Regulatory technical standards should be developed in the
        areas of ICT risk management, major ICT-related incident reporting, testing,
        as well as in relation to key requirements for a sound monitoring of ICT third-party
        risk. The Commission and the ESAs should ensure that those standards and requirements
        can be applied by all financial entities in a manner that is proportionate
        to their size and overall risk profile, and the nature, scale and complexity
        of their services, activities and operations. The Commission should be empowered
        to adopt those regulatory technical standards by means of delegated acts pursuant
        to Article 290 TFEU and in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations
        (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-100
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 100
      description: To facilitate the comparability of reports on major ICT-related
        incidents and major operational or security payment- related incidents, as
        well as to ensure transparency regarding contractual arrangements for the
        use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party service providers, the ESAs
        should develop draft implementing technical standards establishing standardised
        templates, forms and procedures for financial entities to report a major ICT-related
        incident and a major operational or security payment-related incident, as
        well as standardised templates for the register of information. When developing
        those standards, the ESAs should 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 Commission should be empowered
        to adopt those implementing technical standards by means of implementing acts
        pursuant to Article 291 TFEU and in accordance with Article 15 of Regulations
        (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-101
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 101
      description: Since further requirements have already been specified through
        delegated and implementing acts based on technical regulatory and implementing
        technical standards in Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009 (23), (EU) No 648/2012
        (24), (EU) No 600/2014 (25) and (EU) No 909/2014 (26) of the European Parliament
        and of the Council, it is appropriate to mandate the ESAs, either individually
        or jointly through the Joint Committee, to submit regulatory and implementing
        technical standards to the Commission for adoption of delegated and implementing
        acts carrying over and updating existing ICT risk management rules.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-102
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 102
      description: "Since this Regulation, together with Directive (EU) 2022/2556\
        \ of the European Parliament and of the Council (27), entails a consolidation\
        \ of the ICT risk management provisions across multiple regulations and directives\
        \ of the Union\u2019s financial services acquis, including Regulations (EC)\
        \ No 1060/2009, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014 and (EU) No 909/2014, and\
        \ Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council\
        \ (28), in order to ensure full consistency, those Regulations should be amended\
        \ to clarify that the applicable ICT risk-related provisions are laid down\
        \ in this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-103
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 103
      description: Consequently, the scope of the relevant articles related to operational
        risk, upon which empowerments laid down in Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009,
        (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014, (EU) No 909/2014, and (EU) 2016/1011 had
        mandated the adoption of delegated and implementing acts, should be narrowed
        down with a view to carry over into this Regulation all provisions covering
        the digital operational resilience aspects which today are part of those Regulations.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-104
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 104
      description: The potential systemic cyber risk associated with the use of ICT
        infrastructures that enable the operation of payment systems and the provision
        of payment processing activities should be duly addressed at Union level through
        harmonised digital resilience rules. To that effect, the Commission should
        swiftly assess the need for reviewing the scope of this Regulation while aligning
        such review with the outcome of the comprehensive review envisaged under Directive
        (EU) 2015/2366. Numerous large-scale attacks over the past decade demonstrate
        how payment systems have become exposed to cyber threats. Placed at the core
        of the payment services chain and showing strong interconnections with the
        overall financial system, payment systems and payment processing activities
        acquired a critical significance for the functioning of the Union financial
        markets. Cyber-attacks on such systems can cause severe operational business
        disruptions with direct repercussions on key economic functions, such as the
        facilitation of payments, and indirect effects on related economic processes.
        Until a harmonised regime and the supervision of operators of payment systems
        and processing entities are put in place at Union level, Member States may,
        with a view to applying similar market practices, draw inspiration from the
        digital operational resilience requirements laid down by this Regulation,
        when applying rules to operators of payment systems and processing entities
        supervised under their own jurisdictions.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-105
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 105
      description: Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to achieve a high
        level of digital operational resilience for regulated financial entities,
        cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States because it requires harmonisation
        of various different rules in Union and national law, but can rather, by reason
        of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may
        adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out
        in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle
        of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go
        beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:recital-106
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node2
      ref_id: Recital 106
      description: The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance
        with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament
        and of the Council (29) and delivered an opinion on 10 May 2021 (30),
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node109
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Chapter I
      description: General provisions
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node110
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node109
      name: Article 1
      description: Subject matter
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:1.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node110
      ref_id: '1.1'
      description: "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:\n(a)\trequirements applicable to financial\
        \ entities in relation to:\n(i)\tinformation and communication technology\
        \ (ICT) risk management;\n(ii)\treporting of major ICT-related incidents and\
        \ notifying, on a voluntary basis, significant cyber threats to the competent\
        \ authorities;\n(iii)\treporting 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);\n(iv)\tdigital operational resilience\
        \ testing;\n(v)\tinformation and intelligence sharing in relation to cyber\
        \ threats and vulnerabilities;\n(vi)\tmeasures for the sound management of\
        \ ICT third-party risk;\n(b)\trequirements in relation to the contractual\
        \ arrangements concluded between ICT third-party service providers and financial\
        \ entities;\n(c)\trules for the establishment and conduct of the Oversight\
        \ Framework for critical ICT third-party service providers when providing\
        \ services to financial entities;\n(d)\trules on cooperation among competent\
        \ authorities, and rules on supervision and enforcement by competent authorities\
        \ in relation to all matters covered by this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:1.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node110
      ref_id: '1.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:1.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node110
      ref_id: '1.3'
      description: "This Regulation is without prejudice to the responsibility of\
        \ Member States\u2019 regarding essential State functions concerning public\
        \ security, defence and national security in accordance with Union law."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node114
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node109
      name: Article 2
      description: Scope
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:2.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node114
      ref_id: '2.1'
      description: "Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4, this Regulation applies\
        \ to the following entities:\n(a)\tcredit institutions;\n(b)\tpayment institutions,\
        \ including payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366;\n\
        (c)\taccount information service providers;\n(d)\telectronic money institutions,\
        \ including electronic money institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2009/110/EC;\
        \ (e)\tinvestment firms;\n(f)\tcrypto-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 (\u2018the Regulation\
        \ on markets in crypto-assets\u2019) and issuers of asset-referenced tokens;\n\
        (g)\tcentral securities depositories;\n(h)\tcentral counterparties;\n(i)\t\
        trading venues;\n(j)\ttrade repositories;\n(k)\tmanagers of alternative investment\
        \ funds;\n(l)\tmanagement companies;\n(m)\tdata reporting service providers;\n\
        (n)\tinsurance and reinsurance undertakings;\n(o)\tinsurance intermediaries,\
        \ reinsurance intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries;\n(p)\t\
        institutions for occupational retirement provision;\n(q)\tcredit rating agencies;\n\
        (r)\tadministrators of critical benchmarks;\n(s)\tcrowdfunding service providers;\n\
        (t)\tsecuritisation repositories;\n(u)\tICT third-party service providers."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:2.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node114
      ref_id: '2.2'
      description: "For the purposes of this Regulation, entities referred to in paragraph\
        \ 1, points (a) to (t), shall collectively be referred to as \u2018financial\
        \ entities\u2019."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:2.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node114
      ref_id: '2.3'
      description: "This Regulation does not apply to:\n(a)\tmanagers of alternative\
        \ investment funds as referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2011/61/EU;\n\
        (b)\tinsurance and reinsurance undertakings as referred to in Article 4 of\
        \ Directive 2009/138/EC;\n(c)\tinstitutions for occupational retirement provision\
        \ which operate pension schemes which together do not have more than 15 members\
        \ in total;\n(d)\tnatural or legal persons exempted pursuant to Articles 2\
        \ and 3 of Directive 2014/65/EU;\n(e)\tinsurance intermediaries, reinsurance\
        \ intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries which are microenterprises\
        \ or small or medium-sized enterprises;\n(f)\tpost office giro institutions\
        \ as referred to in Article 2(5), point (3), of Directive 2013/36/EU."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node118
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node114
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node109
      name: Article 3
      description: Definitions
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.1'
      description: "\u2018digital operational resilience\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.2'
      description: "\u2018network and information system\u2019 means a network and\
        \ information system as defined in Article 6, point 1, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.3'
      description: "\u2018legacy ICT system\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.4'
      description: "\u2018security of network and information systems\u2019 means\
        \ security of network and information systems as defined in Article 6, point\
        \ 2, of Directive (EU) 2022/2555;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.5'
      description: "\u2018ICT risk\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.6'
      description: "\u2018information asset\u2019 means a collection of information,\
        \ either tangible or intangible, that is worth protecting;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.7'
      description: "\u2018ICT asset\u2019 means a software or hardware asset in the\
        \ network and information systems used by the financial entity;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.8
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.8'
      description: "\u2018ICT-related incident\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.9'
      description: "\u2018operational or security payment-related incident\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.10'
      description: "\u2018major ICT-related incident\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.11'
      description: "\u2018major operational or security payment-related incident\u2019\
        \ means an operational or security payment-related incident that has a high\
        \ adverse impact on the payment-related services provided;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.12
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.12'
      description: "\u2018cyber threat\u2019 means \u2018cyber threat\u2019 as defined\
        \ in Article 2, point (8), of Regulation (EU) 2019/881;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.13
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.13'
      description: "\u2018significant cyber threat\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.14
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.14'
      description: "\u2018cyber-attack\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.15
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.15'
      description: "\u2018threat intelligence\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.16
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.16'
      description: "\u2018vulnerability\u2019 means a weakness, susceptibility or\
        \ flaw of an asset, system, process or control that can be exploited;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.17
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.17'
      description: "\u2018threat-led penetration testing (TLPT)\u2019 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\u2019\
        s critical live production systems;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.18
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.18'
      description: "\u2018ICT third-party risk\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.19
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.19'
      description: "\u2018ICT third-party service provider\u2019 means an undertaking\
        \ providing ICT services;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.20
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.20'
      description: "\u2018ICT intra-group service provider\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.21
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.21'
      description: "\u2018ICT services\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.22
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.22'
      description: "\u2018critical or important function\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.23
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.23'
      description: "\u2018critical ICT third-party service provider\u2019 means an\
        \ ICT third-party service provider designated as critical in accordance with\
        \ Article 31;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.24
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.24'
      description: "\u2018ICT third-party service provider established in a third\
        \ country\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.25
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.25'
      description: "\u2018subsidiary\u2019 means a subsidiary undertaking within the\
        \ meaning of Article 2, point (10), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.26
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.26'
      description: "\u2018group\u2019 means a group as defined in Article 2, point\
        \ (11), of Directive 2013/34/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.27
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.27'
      description: "\u2018parent undertaking\u2019 means a parent undertaking within\
        \ the meaning of Article 2, point (9), and Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.28
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.28'
      description: "\u2018ICT subcontractor established in a third country\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.29
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.29'
      description: "\u2018ICT concentration risk\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.30
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.30'
      description: "\u2018management body\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.31
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.31'
      description: "\u2018credit institution\u2019 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);"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.32
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.32'
      description: "\u2018institution exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU\u2019\
        \ means an entity as referred to in Article 2(5), points (4) to"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.33
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.33'
      description: "\u2018investment firm\u2019 means an investment firm as defined\
        \ in Article 4(1), point (1), of Directive 2014/65/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.34
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.34'
      description: "\u2018small and non-interconnected investment firm\u2019 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);"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.35
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.35'
      description: "\u2018payment institution\u2019 means a payment institution as\
        \ defined in Article 4, point (4), of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.36
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.36'
      description: "\u2018payment institution exempted pursuant to Directive (EU)\
        \ 2015/2366\u2019 means a payment institution exempted pursuant to Article\
        \ 32(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.37
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.37'
      description: "\u2018account information service provider\u2019 means an account\
        \ information service provider as referred to in Article 33(1) of Directive\
        \ (EU) 2015/2366;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.38
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.38'
      description: "\u2018electronic money institution\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.39
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.39'
      description: "\u2018electronic money institution exempted pursuant to Directive\
        \ 2009/110/EC\u2019 means an electronic money institution benefitting from\
        \ a waiver as referred to in Article 9(1) of Directive 2009/110/EC;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.40
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.40'
      description: "\u2018central counterparty\u2019 means a central counterparty\
        \ as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.41
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.41'
      description: "\u2018trade repository\u2019 means a trade repository as defined\
        \ in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.42
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.42'
      description: "\u2018central securities depository\u2019 means a central securities\
        \ depository as defined in Article 2(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No\
        \ 909/2014;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.43
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.43'
      description: "\u2018trading venue\u2019 means a trading venue as defined in\
        \ Article 4(1), point (24), of Directive 2014/65/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.44
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.44'
      description: "\u2018manager of alternative investment funds\u2019 means a manager\
        \ of alternative investment funds as defined in Article 4(1), point (b), of\
        \ Directive 2011/61/EU;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.45
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.45'
      description: "\u2018management company\u2019 means a management company as defined\
        \ in Article 2(1), point (b), of Directive 2009/65/EC;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.46
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.46'
      description: "\u2018data reporting service provider\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.47
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.47'
      description: "\u2018insurance undertaking\u2019 means an insurance undertaking\
        \ as defined in Article 13, point (1), of Directive 2009/138/EC;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.48
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.48'
      description: "\u2018reinsurance undertaking\u2019 means a reinsurance undertaking\
        \ as defined in Article 13, point (4), of Directive 2009/138/EC;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.49
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.49'
      description: "\u2018insurance intermediary\u2019 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);"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.50
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.50'
      description: "\u2018ancillary insurance intermediary\u2019 means an ancillary\
        \ insurance intermediary as defined in Article 2(1), point (4), of Directive\
        \ (EU) 2016/97;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.51
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.51'
      description: "\u2018reinsurance intermediary\u2019 means a reinsurance intermediary\
        \ as defined in Article 2(1), point (5), of Directive (EU) 2016/97;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.52
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.52'
      description: "\u2018institution for occupational retirement provision\u2019\
        \ means an institution for occupational retirement provision as defined in\
        \ Article 6, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2016/2341;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.53
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.53'
      description: "\u2018small institution for occupational retirement provision\u2019\
        \ means an institution for occupational retirement provision which operates\
        \ pension schemes which together have less than 100 members in total;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.54
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.54'
      description: "\u2018credit rating agency\u2019 means a credit rating agency\
        \ as defined in Article 3(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.55
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.55'
      description: "\u2018crypto-asset service provider\u2019 means a crypto-asset\
        \ service provider as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation\
        \ on markets in crypto-assets;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.56
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.56'
      description: "\u2018issuer of asset-referenced tokens\u2019 means an issuer\
        \ of asset-referenced tokens as defined in the relevant provision of the Regulation\
        \ on markets in crypto-assets;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.57
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.57'
      description: "\u2018administrator of critical benchmarks\u2019 means an administrator\
        \ of \u2018critical benchmarks\u2019 as defined in Article 3(1), point (25),\
        \ of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.58
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.58'
      description: "\u2018crowdfunding service provider\u2019 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);"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.59
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.59'
      description: "\u2018securitisation repository\u2019 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);"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.60
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.60'
      description: "\u2018microenterprise\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.61
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.61'
      description: "\u2018Lead Overseer\u2019 means the European Supervisory Authority\
        \ appointed in accordance with Article 31(1), point (b) of this Regulation;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.62
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.62'
      description: "\u2018Joint Committee\u2019 means the committee referred to in\
        \ Article 54 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU)\
        \ No 1095/2010;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.63
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.63'
      description: "\u2018small enterprise\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.64
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.64'
      description: "\u2018medium-sized enterprise\u2019 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:3.65
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node119
      ref_id: '3.65'
      description: "\u2018public authority\u2019 means any government or other public\
        \ administration entity, including national central banks."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node185
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node109
      name: Article 4
      description: Proportionality principle
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:4.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node185
      ref_id: '4.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:4.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node185
      ref_id: '4.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:4.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node185
      ref_id: '4.3'
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node189
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Chapter II
      description: ' ICT risk management'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node190
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node189
      name: Section I
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node190
      name: Article 5
      description: Governance and organisation
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      ref_id: '5.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      ref_id: '5.2'
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      description: 'For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the management body
        shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.a
      description: "bear the ultimate responsibility for managing the financial entity\u2019\
        s ICT risk;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.b
      description: put in place policies that aim to ensure the maintenance of high
        standards of availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality, of
        data;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.d
      description: 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);
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.e
      description: "approve, oversee and periodically review the implementation of\
        \ the financial entity\u2019s 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\u2019s overall business continuity policy and\
        \ response and recovery plan;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.f
      description: "approve and periodically review the financial entity\u2019s ICT\
        \ internal audit plans, ICT audits and material modifications to them;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.g
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.g
      description: "allocate and periodically review the appropriate budget to fulfil\
        \ the financial entity\u2019s 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.h
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.h
      description: "approve and periodically review the financial entity\u2019s policy\
        \ on arrangements regarding the use of ICT services provided by ICT third-party\
        \ service providers;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node194
      ref_id: 5.2.i
      description: 'put in place, at corporate level, reporting channels enabling
        it to be duly informed of the following:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i
      ref_id: 5.2.i.i
      description: arrangements concluded with ICT third-party service providers on
        the use of ICT services,
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i.ii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i
      ref_id: 5.2.i.ii
      description: any relevant planned material changes regarding the ICT third-party
        service providers,
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i.iii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.2.i
      ref_id: 5.2.i.iii
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      ref_id: '5.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:5.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node191
      ref_id: '5.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node189
      name: Section II
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 6
      description: ICT risk management framework
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.6'
      description: "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\u2019 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."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.8'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.a
      description: "explaining how the ICT risk management framework supports the\
        \ financial entity\u2019s business strategy and objectives;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.c
      description: setting out clear information security objectives, including key
        performance indicators and key risk metrics;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.d
      description: explaining the ICT reference architecture and any changes needed
        to reach specific business objectives;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.e
      description: outlining the different mechanisms put in place to detect ICT-related
        incidents, prevent their impact and provide protection from it;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.f
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.g
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.g
      description: implementing digital operational resilience testing, in accordance
        with Chapter IV of this Regulation;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8.h
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.8
      ref_id: 6.8.h
      description: outlining a communication strategy in the event of ICT-related
        incidents the disclosure of which is required in accordance with Article 14.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.9
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.9'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:6.10
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node210
      ref_id: '6.10'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node229
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 7
      description: ICT systems, protocols and tools
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node230
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node229
      description: 'In order to address and manage ICT risk, financial entities shall
        use and maintain updated ICT systems, protocols and tools that are:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:7.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node230
      ref_id: 7.a
      description: appropriate to the magnitude of operations supporting the conduct
        of their activities, in accordance with the proportionality principle as referred
        to in Article 4;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:7.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node230
      ref_id: 7.b
      description: reliable;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:7.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node230
      ref_id: 7.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:7.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node230
      ref_id: 7.d
      description: technologically resilient in order to adequately deal with additional
        information processing needs as required under stressed market conditions
        or other adverse situations.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 8
      description: Identification
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.6'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:8.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node235
      ref_id: '8.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 9
      description: Protection and prevention
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      ref_id: '9.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      ref_id: '9.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      ref_id: '9.3'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3
      ref_id: 9.3.a
      description: ensure the security of the means of transfer of data;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3
      ref_id: 9.3.b
      description: minimise the risk of corruption or loss of data, unauthorised access
        and technical flaws that may hinder business activity;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3
      ref_id: 9.3.c
      description: prevent the lack of availability, the impairment of the authenticity
        and integrity, the breaches of confidentiality and the loss of data;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.3
      ref_id: 9.3.d
      description: ensure that data is protected from risks arising from data management,
        including poor administration, processing- related risks and human error.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      ref_id: '9.4'
      description: 'As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article
        6(1), financial entities shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.d
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.e
      description: "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\u2019s 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:9.4
      ref_id: 9.4.f
      description: have appropriate and comprehensive documented policies for patches
        and updates.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node258
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node259
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node243
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 10
      description: Detection
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:10.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      ref_id: '10.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node262
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      description: All detection mechanisms referred to in the first subparagraph
        shall be regularly tested in accordance with Article 25.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:10.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      ref_id: '10.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:10.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      ref_id: '10.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:10.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node260
      ref_id: '10.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 11
      description: Response and recovery
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.2'
      description: 'Financial entities shall implement the ICT business continuity
        policy through dedicated, appropriate and documented arrangements, plans,
        procedures and mechanisms aiming to:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      ref_id: 11.2.a
      description: "ensure the continuity of the financial entity\u2019s critical\
        \ or important functions;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      ref_id: 11.2.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      ref_id: 11.2.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      ref_id: 11.2.d
      description: estimate preliminary impacts, damages and losses;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.2
      ref_id: 11.2.e
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.6'
      description: 'As part of their comprehensive ICT risk management, financial
        entities shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.6.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.6
      ref_id: 11.6.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.6.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.6
      ref_id: 11.6.b
      description: test the crisis communication plans established in accordance with
        Article 14.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node280
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node281
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.8
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.8'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.9
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.9'
      description: Central securities depositories shall provide the competent authorities
        with copies of the results of the ICT business continuity tests, or of similar
        exercises.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.10
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.10'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:11.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node266
      ref_id: '11.11'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 12
      description: Backup policies and procedures, restoration and recovery procedures
        and methods
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.1'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.1
      ref_id: 12.1.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.1
      ref_id: 12.1.b
      description: restoration and recovery procedures and methods.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node293
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node294
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.5'
      description: Central securities depositories shall maintain at least one secondary
        processing site endowed with adequate resources, capabilities, functions and
        staffing arrangements to ensure business needs.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node297
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      description: 'The secondary processing site shall be:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.5.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node297
      ref_id: 12.5.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.5.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node297
      ref_id: 12.5.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.5.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node297
      ref_id: 12.5.c
      description: "immediately accessible to the financial entity\u2019s staff to\
        \ ensure continuity of critical or important functions in the event that the\
        \ primary processing site has become unavailable."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.6'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:12.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node287
      ref_id: '12.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 13
      description: Learning and evolving
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node306
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node307
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.2.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node307
      ref_id: 13.2.a
      description: the promptness in responding to security alerts and determining
        the impact of ICT-related incidents and their severity;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.2.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node307
      ref_id: 13.2.b
      description: the quality and speed of performing a forensic analysis, where
        deemed appropriate;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.2.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node307
      ref_id: 13.2.c
      description: the effectiveness of incident escalation within the financial entity;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node310-1
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node307
      ref_id: 13.2.d
      description: ' the effectiveness of internal and external communication.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.3'
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.5'
      description: Senior ICT staff shall report at least yearly to the management
        body on the findings referred to in paragraph 3 and put forward recommendations.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.6'
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:13.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node303
      ref_id: '13.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node316
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 14
      description: Communication
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:14.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node316
      ref_id: '14.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:14.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node316
      ref_id: '14.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:14.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node316
      ref_id: '14.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node320
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 15
      description: Further harmonisation of ICT risk management tools, methods, processes
        and policies
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node321
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node320
      description: "The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, in consultation with\
        \ the European Union Agency on Cybersecurity (ENISA), develop common draft\
        \ regulatory technical standards in order to:\n(a)\tspecify 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;\n(b)\tdevelop 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;\n(c)\tdevelop 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;\n(d)\tspecify further\
        \ the components of the ICT business continuity policy referred to in Article\
        \ 11(1);\n(e)\tspecify 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\u2019 jurisdictions;\n(f)\tspecify further\
        \ the components of the ICT response and recovery plans referred to in Article\
        \ 11(3);\n(g)\tspecifying further the content and format of the report on\
        \ the review of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Article 6(5);\n\
        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, while duly taking into consideration any specific feature\
        \ arising from the distinct nature of activities across different financial\
        \ services sectors.\nThe ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical\
        \ standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.\nPower is delegated to the\
        \ Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical\
        \ standards referred to in the first paragraph in accordance with Articles\
        \ 10 to 14 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No\
        \ 1095/2010."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node322
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node209
      name: Article 16
      description: Simplified ICT risk management framework
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node322
      ref_id: '16.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node322
      description: 'Without prejudice to the first subparagraph, the entities listed
        in the first subparagraph shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.b
      description: continuously monitor the security and functioning of all ICT systems;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.d
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.e
      description: identify key dependencies on ICT third-party service providers;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.f
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.g
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.g
      description: 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);
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.1.h
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node324
      ref_id: 16.1.h
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node322
      ref_id: '16.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:16.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node322
      ref_id: '16.3'
      description: "The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, in consultation with\
        \ the ENISA, develop common draft regulatory technical standards in order\
        \ to:\n(a)\tspecify further the elements to be included in the ICT risk management\
        \ framework referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, point (a);\n\
        (b)\tspecify 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;\n(c)\tspecify further\
        \ the components of the ICT business continuity plans referred to in paragraph\
        \ 1, second subparagraph, point (f);\n(d)\tspecify 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;\n(e)\tspecify further the content and\
        \ format of the report on the review of the ICT risk management framework\
        \ referred to in paragraph 2.\nWhen 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.\nThe ESAs shall submit those draft\
        \ regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 January 2024.\nPower\
        \ 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."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: CHAPTER III
      description: ICT-related incident management, classification and reporting
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node336
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 17
      description: ICT-related incident management process
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node336
      ref_id: '17.1'
      description: Financial entities shall define, establish and implement an ICT-related
        incident management process to detect, manage and notify ICT-related incidents.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node336
      ref_id: '17.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node336
      ref_id: '17.3'
      description: 'The ICT-related incident management process referred to in paragraph
        1 shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.a
      description: put in place early warning indicators;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.b
      description: 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);
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.c
      description: assign roles and responsibilities that need to be activated for
        different ICT-related incident types and scenarios;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.d
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.e
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:17.3
      ref_id: 17.3.f
      description: establish ICT-related incident response procedures to mitigate
        impacts and ensure that services become operational and secure in a timely
        manner.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node346
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 18
      description: Classification of ICT-related incidents and cyber threats
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node346
      ref_id: '18.1'
      description: 'Financial entities shall classify ICT-related incidents and shall
        determine their impact based on the following criteria:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.b
      description: the duration of the ICT-related incident, including the service
        downtime;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.c
      description: the geographical spread with regard to the areas affected by the
        ICT-related incident, particularly if it affects more than two Member States;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.d
      description: the data losses that the ICT-related incident entails, in relation
        to availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.e
      description: "the criticality of the services affected, including the financial\
        \ entity\u2019s transactions and operations;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.1
      ref_id: 18.1.f
      description: the economic impact, in particular direct and indirect costs and
        losses, of the ICT-related incident in both absolute and relative terms.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node346
      ref_id: '18.2'
      description: "Financial entities shall classify cyber threats as significant\
        \ based on the criticality of the services at risk, including the financial\
        \ entity\u2019s transactions and operations, number and/or relevance of clients\
        \ or financial counterparts targeted and the geographical spread of the areas\
        \ at risk."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node346
      ref_id: '18.3'
      description: "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:\n(a)\tthe 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);\n\
        (b)\tthe 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\u2019, 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);\n(c)\tthe criteria set out in paragraph\
        \ 2 of this Article, including high materiality thresholds for determining\
        \ significant cyber threats."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:18.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node346
      ref_id: '18.4'
      description: '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.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 19
      description: Reporting of major ICT-related incidents and voluntary notification
        of significant cyber threats
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node359
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node360
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node361
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node362
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node363
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node365
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node366
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node368
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.4'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4
      ref_id: 19.4.a
      description: an initial notification;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4
      ref_id: 19.4.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.4
      ref_id: 19.4.c
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.6'
      description: "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:\n(a)\tEBA, ESMA or EIOPA;\n\
        (b)\tthe ECB, in the case of financial entities referred to in Article 2(1),\
        \ points (a), (b) and (d);\n(c)\tthe competent authorities, single points\
        \ of contact or CSIRTs designated or established in accordance with Directive\
        \ (EU) 2022/2555;\n(d)\tthe 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\n(e)\tother relevant public authorities under national law."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:19.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node357
      ref_id: '19.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node376
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 20
      description: Harmonisation of reporting content and templates
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:20.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node376
      ref_id: '20.1'
      description: "The ESAs, through the Joint Committee, and in consultation with\
        \ ENISA and the ECB, shall develop:\n(a)\tcommon draft regulatory technical\
        \ standards in order to:\n(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; (ii) determine\
        \ the time limits for the initial notification and for each report referred\
        \ to in Article 19(4);\n(iii) establish the content of the notification for\
        \ significant cyber threats.\nWhen 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;\n(b)\tcommon 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.\nThe ESAs shall submit\
        \ the common draft regulatory technical standards referred to in the first\
        \ paragraph, point (a), and the common draft implementing technical standards\
        \ referred to in the first paragraph, point (b), to the Commission by 17 July\
        \ 2024.\nPower is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation\
        \ by adopting the common regulatory technical standards referred to in the\
        \ first paragraph, point (a), in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulations\
        \ (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.\nPower is conferred\
        \ on the Commission to adopt the common implementing technical standards referred\
        \ to in the first paragraph, point (b), in accordance with Article 15 of Regulations\
        \ (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node378
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 21
      description: Centralisation of reporting of major ICT-related incidents
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:21.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node378
      ref_id: '21.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:21.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node378
      ref_id: '21.2'
      description: "The joint report referred to in paragraph 1 shall comprise at\
        \ least the following elements:\n(a)\tprerequisites for the establishment\
        \ of a single EU Hub;\n(b)\tbenefits, limitations and risks, including risks\
        \ associated with the high concentration of sensitive information;\n(c)\t\
        the necessary capability to ensure interoperability with regard to other relevant\
        \ reporting schemes;\n(d)\telements of operational management;\n(e)\tconditions\
        \ of membership;\n(f)\ttechnical arrangements for financial entities and national\
        \ competent authorities to access the single EU Hub;\n(g)\ta preliminary assessment\
        \ of financial costs incurred by setting-up the operational platform supporting\
        \ the single EU Hub, including the requisite expertise."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:21.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node378
      ref_id: '21.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node382
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 22
      description: Supervisory feedback
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:22.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node382
      ref_id: '22.1'
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:22.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node382
      ref_id: '22.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:22.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node382
      ref_id: '22.3'
      description: The ESAs shall issue warnings and produce high-level statistics
        to support ICT threat and vulnerability assessments.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node386
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node335
      name: Article 23
      description: Operational or security payment-related incidents concerning credit
        institutions, payment institutions, account information service providers,
        and electronic money institutions
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node387
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node386
      description: The requirements laid down in this Chapter shall also apply to
        operational or security payment-related incidents and to major operational
        or security payment-related incidents, where they concern credit institutions,
        payment institutions, account information service providers, and electronic
        money institutions.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node388
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Chapter IV
      description: Digital operational resilience testing
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node388
      name: Article 24
      description: General requirements for the performance of digital operational
        resilience testing
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:24.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node389
      ref_id: '24.6'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node396
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node388
      name: Article 25
      description: Testing of ICT tools and systems
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:25.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node396
      ref_id: '25.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:25.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node396
      ref_id: '25.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:25.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node396
      ref_id: '25.3'
      description: "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\u2019s ability to take calculated\
        \ risks, on the other hand."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node388
      name: Article 26
      description: Advanced testing of ICT tools, systems and processes based on TLPT
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node403
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node404
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node407
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node408
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: The number of financial entities participating in the pooled testing
        shall be duly calibrated taking into account the complexity and types of services
        involved.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.6'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.7
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.7'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node412
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.8
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.8'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node414
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: 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).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node415
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      description: "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:\n(a)\timpact-related factors,\
        \ in particular the extent to which the services provided and activities undertaken\
        \ by the financial entity impact the financial sector;\n(b)\tpossible financial\
        \ stability concerns, including the systemic character of the financial entity\
        \ at Union or national level, as applicable;\n(c)\tspecific ICT risk profile,\
        \ level of ICT maturity of the financial entity or technology features involved."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.9'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.10'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:26.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node400
      ref_id: '26.11'
      description: "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:\n(a)\tthe criteria used for the purpose of\
        \ the application of paragraph 8, second subparagraph;\n(b)\tthe requirements\
        \ and standards governing the use of internal testers;\n(c)\tthe requirements\
        \ in relation to:\n(i)\tthe scope of TLPT referred to in paragraph 2;\n(ii)\t\
        the testing methodology and approach to be followed for each specific phase\
        \ of the testing process;\n(iii)\tthe results, closure and remediation stages\
        \ of the testing;\n(d)\tthe 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.\nWhen 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.\nThe ESAs shall submit those draft\
        \ regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 17 July 2024.\nPower\
        \ 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."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node419
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node388
      name: Article 27
      description: Requirements for testers for the carrying out of TLPT
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node419
      ref_id: '27.1'
      description: 'Financial entities shall only use testers for the carrying out
        of TLPT, that:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      ref_id: 27.1.a
      description: are of the highest suitability and reputability;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      ref_id: 27.1.b
      description: possess technical and organisational capabilities and demonstrate
        specific expertise in threat intelligence, penetration testing and red team
        testing;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      ref_id: 27.1.c
      description: are certified by an accreditation body in a Member State or adhere
        to formal codes of conduct or ethical frameworks;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      ref_id: 27.1.d
      description: "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\u2019s confidential\
        \ information and redress for the business risks of the financial entity;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.1
      ref_id: 27.1.e
      description: are duly and fully covered by relevant professional indemnity insurances,
        including against risks of misconduct and negligence.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node419
      ref_id: '27.2'
      description: 'When using internal testers, financial entities shall ensure that,
        in addition to the requirements in paragraph 1, the following conditions are
        met:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2
      ref_id: 27.2.a
      description: 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);
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2
      ref_id: 27.2.b
      description: 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
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.2
      ref_id: 27.2.c
      description: the threat intelligence provider is external to the financial entity.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:27.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node419
      ref_id: '27.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node431
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Chapter V
      description: Managing of ICT third-party risk
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node432
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node431
      name: Section I
      description: Key principles for a sound management of ICT third-party risk
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node432
      name: Article 28
      description: General principles
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.1'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1
      ref_id: 28.1.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1
      ref_id: 28.1.b
      description: "financial entities\u2019 management of ICT third-party risk shall\
        \ be implemented in light of the principle of proportionality, taking into\
        \ account:"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.b.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.b
      ref_id: 28.1.b.i
      description: the nature, scale, complexity and importance of ICT-related dependencies,
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.b.ii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.1.b
      ref_id: 28.1.b.ii
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.3'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node441
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node442
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node443
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node444
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.4'
      description: 'Before entering into a contractual arrangement on the use of ICT
        services, financial entities shall:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      ref_id: 28.4.a
      description: assess whether the contractual arrangement covers the use of ICT
        services supporting a critical or important function;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      ref_id: 28.4.b
      description: assess if supervisory conditions for contracting are met;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      ref_id: 28.4.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      ref_id: 28.4.d
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.4
      ref_id: 28.4.e
      description: identify and assess conflicts of interest that the contractual
        arrangement may cause.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.5
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.5'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.6
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.6'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node453
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.7'
      description: 'Financial entities shall ensure that contractual arrangements
        on the use of ICT services may be terminated in any of the following circumstances:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7
      ref_id: 28.7.a
      description: significant breach by the ICT third-party service provider of applicable
        laws, regulations or contractual terms;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7
      ref_id: 28.7.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7
      ref_id: 28.7.c
      description: "ICT third-party service provider\u2019s 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;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.7
      ref_id: 28.7.d
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.8
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.8'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node460
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 'Financial entities shall ensure that they are able to exit contractual
        arrangements without:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.8.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node460
      ref_id: 28.8.a
      description: disruption to their business activities,
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.8.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node460
      ref_id: 28.8.b
      description: limiting compliance with regulatory requirements,
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.8.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node460
      ref_id: 28.8.c
      description: detriment to the continuity and quality of services provided to
        clients.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node464
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node465
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node466
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.9'
      description: '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.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:28.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node433
      ref_id: '28.10'
      description: '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.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node432
      name: Article 29
      description: Preliminary assessment of ICT concentration risk at entity level
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      ref_id: '29.1'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.1
      ref_id: 29.1.a
      description: contracting an ICT third-party service provider that is not easily
        substitutable; or
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.1
      ref_id: 29.1.b
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node473
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:29.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      ref_id: '29.2'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node475
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      description: "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\u2019s bankruptcy as well as any constraint that may arise\
        \ in respect to the urgent recovery of the financial entity\u2019s data."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node476
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node477
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node469
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node432
      name: Article 30
      description: Key contractual provision
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      ref_id: '30.1'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      ref_id: '30.2'
      description: 'The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services shall
        include at least the following elements:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.b
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.c
      description: provisions on availability, authenticity, integrity and confidentiality
        in relation to the protection of data, including personal data;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.d
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.e
      description: service level descriptions, including updates and revisions thereof;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.f
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.g
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.g
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.h
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.h
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.2
      ref_id: 30.2.i
      description: "the conditions for the participation of ICT third-party service\
        \ providers in the financial entities\u2019 ICT security awareness programmes\
        \ and digital operational resilience training in accordance with Article 13(6)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      ref_id: '30.3'
      description: '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:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.a
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.b
      description: "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\u2019s ability to effectively provide the ICT services supporting\
        \ critical or important functions in line with agreed service levels;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.c
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.d
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.d
      description: "the obligation of the ICT third-party service provider to participate\
        \ and fully cooperate in the financial entity\u2019s TLPT as referred to in\
        \ Articles 26 and 27;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.e
      description: "the right to monitor, on an ongoing basis, the ICT third-party\
        \ service provider\u2019s performance, which entails the following:"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e
      ref_id: 30.3.e.i
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e.ii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e
      ref_id: 30.3.e.ii
      description: "the right to agree on alternative assurance levels if other clients\u2019\
        \ rights are affected;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e.iii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e
      ref_id: 30.3.e.iii
      description: 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
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e.iv
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.e
      ref_id: 30.3.e.iv
      description: the obligation to provide details on the scope, procedures to be
        followed and frequency of such inspections and audits;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.f
      assessable: true
      depth: 5
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3
      ref_id: 30.3.f
      description: 'exit strategies, in particular the establishment of a mandatory
        adequate transition period:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.f.i
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.f
      ref_id: 30.3.f.i
      description: 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;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.f.ii
      assessable: true
      depth: 6
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.3.f
      ref_id: 30.3.f.ii
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node503
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      description: "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\u2019s 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\u2019s performance\
        \ from the third party at any time."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.4
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      ref_id: '30.4'
      description: 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.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:30.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node478
      ref_id: '30.5'
      description: '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.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node431
      name: Section II
      description: Oversight Framework of critical ICT third-party service providers
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 31
      description: Designation of critical ICT third-party service providers
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.1'
      description: "The ESAs, through the Joint Committee and upon recommendation\
        \ from the Oversight Forum established pursuant to Article 32(1), shall:\n\
        (a)\tdesignate the ICT third-party service providers that are critical for\
        \ financial entities, following an assessment that takes into account the\
        \ criteria specified in paragraph 2;\n(b)\tappoint as Lead Overseer for each\
        \ critical ICT third-party service provider the ESA that is responsible, in\
        \ accordance with Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 or (EU)\
        \ No 1095/2010, for the financial entities having together the largest share\
        \ of total assets out of the value of total assets of all financial entities\
        \ using the services of the relevant critical ICT third-party service provider,\
        \ as evidenced by the sum of the individual balance sheets of those financial\
        \ entities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.2'
      description: "The designation referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), shall be\
        \ based on all of the following criteria in relation to ICT services provided\
        \ by the ICT third-party service provider:\n(a)\tthe systemic impact on the\
        \ stability, continuity or quality of the provision of financial services\
        \ in the event that the relevant ICT third-party service provider would face\
        \ a large scale operational failure to provide its services, taking into account\
        \ the number of financial entities and the total value of assets of financial\
        \ entities to which the relevant ICT third-party service provider provides\
        \ services;\n(b)\tthe systemic character or importance of the financial entities\
        \ that rely on the relevant ICT third-party service provider, assessed in\
        \ accordance with the following parameters:\n(i)\tthe number of global systemically\
        \ important institutions (G-SIIs) or other systemically important institutions\
        \ (O-SIIs) that rely on the respective ICT third-party service provider;\n\
        (ii)\tthe interdependence between the G-SIIs or O-SIIs referred to in point\
        \ (i) and other financial entities, including situations where the G-SIIs\
        \ or O-SIIs provide financial infrastructure services to other financial entities;\n\
        (c)\tthe reliance of financial entities on the services provided by the relevant\
        \ ICT third-party service provider in relation to critical or important functions\
        \ of financial entities that ultimately involve the same ICT third-party service\
        \ provider, irrespective of whether financial entities rely on those services\
        \ directly or indirectly, through subcontracting arrangements;\n(d)\tthe degree\
        \ of substitutability of the ICT third-party service provider, taking into\
        \ account the following parameters:\n(i)\tthe lack of real alternatives, even\
        \ partial, due to the limited number of ICT third-party service providers\
        \ active on a specific market, or the market share of the relevant ICT third-party\
        \ service provider, or the technical complexity or sophistication involved,\
        \ including in relation to any proprietary technology, or the specific features\
        \ of the ICT third-party service provider\u2019s organisation or activity;\n\
        (ii)\tdifficulties in relation to partially or fully migrating the relevant\
        \ data and workloads from the relevant ICT third- party service provider to\
        \ another ICT third-party service provider, due either to significant financial\
        \ costs, time or other resources that the migration process may entail, or\
        \ to increased ICT risk or other operational risks to which the financial\
        \ entity may be exposed through such migration."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.3'
      description: Where the ICT third-party service provider belongs to a group,
        the criteria referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered in relation to
        the ICT services provided by the group as a whole.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.4'
      description: Critical ICT third-party service providers which are part of a
        group shall designate one legal person as a coordination point to ensure adequate
        representation and communication with the Lead Overseer.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.5'
      description: 'The Lead Overseer shall notify the ICT third-party service provider
        of the outcome of the assessment leading to the designation referred in paragraph
        1, point (a). Within 6 weeks from the date of the notification, the ICT third-party
        service provider may submit to the Lead Overseer a reasoned statement with
        any relevant information for the purposes of the assessment. The Lead Overseer
        shall consider the reasoned statement and may request additional information
        to be submitted within 30 calendar days of the receipt of such statement.

        After designating an ICT third-party service provider as critical, the ESAs,
        through the Joint Committee, shall notify the ICT third-party service provider
        of such designation and the starting date as from which they will effectively
        be subject to oversight activities. That starting date shall be no later than
        one month after the notification. The ICT third-party service provider shall
        notify the financial entities to which they provide services of their designation
        as critical.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.6'
      description: The Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance
        with Article 57 to supplement this Regulation by specifying further the criteria
        referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, by 17 July 2024.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.7'
      description: The designation referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), shall not
        be used until the Commission has adopted a delegated act in accordance with
        paragraph 6.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.8
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.8'
      description: "The designation referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), shall not\
        \ apply to the following:\n(i)\tfinancial entities providing ICT services\
        \ to other financial entities;\n(ii)\tICT third-party service providers that\
        \ are subject to oversight frameworks established for the purposes of supporting\
        \ the tasks referred to in Article 127(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning\
        \ of the European Union;\n(iii)\tICT intra-group service providers;\n(iv)\t\
        ICT third-party service providers providing ICT services solely in one Member\
        \ State to financial entities that are only active in that Member State."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.9'
      description: The ESAs, through the Joint Committee, shall establish, publish
        and update yearly the list of critical ICT third-party service providers at
        Union level.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.10'
      description: For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (a), competent authorities
        shall, on a yearly and aggregated basis, transmit the reports referred to
        in Article 28(3), third subparagraph, to the Oversight Forum established pursuant
        to Article 32. The Oversight Forum shall assess the ICT third-party dependencies
        of financial entities based on the information received from the competent
        authorities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.11'
      description: 'The ICT third-party service providers that are not included in
        the list referred to in paragraph 9 may request to be designated as critical
        in accordance with paragraph 1, point (a).

        For the purpose of the first subparagraph, the ICT third-party service provider
        shall submit a reasoned application to EBA, ESMA or EIOPA, which, through
        the Joint Committee, shall decide whether to designate that ICT third-party
        service provider as critical in accordance with paragraph 1, point (a).

        The decision referred to in the second subparagraph shall be adopted and notified
        to the ICT third-party service provider within 6 months of receipt of the
        application.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.12
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.12'
      description: Financial entities shall only make use of the services of an ICT
        third-party service provider established in a third country and which has
        been designated as critical in accordance with paragraph 1, point (a), if
        the latter has established a subsidiary in the Union within the 12 months
        following the designation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:31.13
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node507
      ref_id: '31.13'
      description: The critical ICT third-party service provider referred to in paragraph
        12 shall notify the Lead Overseer of any changes to the structure of the management
        of the subsidiary established in the Union.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 32
      description: Structure of the Oversight Framework
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.1'
      description: 'The Joint Committee, in accordance with Article 57(1) of Regulations
        (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, shall establish
        the Oversight Forum as a sub-committee for the purposes of supporting the
        work of the Joint Committee and of the Lead Overseer referred to in Article
        31(1), point (b), in the area of ICT third-party risk across financial sectors.
        The Oversight Forum shall prepare the draft joint positions and the draft
        common acts of the Joint Committee in that area.

        The Oversight Forum shall regularly discuss relevant developments on ICT risk
        and vulnerabilities and promote a consistent approach in the monitoring of
        ICT third-party risk at Union level.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.2'
      description: The Oversight Forum shall, on a yearly basis, undertake a collective
        assessment of the results and findings of the oversight activities conducted
        for all critical ICT third-party service providers and promote coordination
        measures to increase the digital operational resilience of financial entities,
        foster best practices on addressing ICT concentration risk and explore mitigants
        for cross-sector risk transfers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.3'
      description: The Oversight Forum shall submit comprehensive benchmarks for critical
        ICT third-party service providers to be adopted by the Joint Committee as
        joint positions of the ESAs in accordance with Article 56(1) of Regulations
        (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.4'
      description: "The Oversight Forum shall be composed of:\n(a)\tthe Chairpersons\
        \ of the ESAs;\n(b)\tone high-level representative from the current staff\
        \ of the relevant competent authority referred to in Article 46 from each\
        \ Member State;\n(c)\tthe Executive Directors of each ESA and one representative\
        \ from the Commission, from the ESRB, from ECB and from ENISA as observers;\n\
        (d)\twhere appropriate, one additional representative of a competent authority\
        \ referred to in Article 46 from each Member State as observer;\n(e)\twhere\
        \ applicable, one representative of the competent authorities designated or\
        \ established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555 responsible for\
        \ the supervision of an essential or important entity subject to that Directive,\
        \ which has been designated as a critical ICT third-party service provider,\
        \ as observer.\nThe Oversight Forum may, where appropriate, seek the advice\
        \ of independent experts appointed in accordance with paragraph 6."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.5'
      description: 'Each Member State shall designate the relevant competent authority
        whose staff member shall be the high-level representative referred in paragraph
        4, first subparagraph, point (b), and shall inform the Lead Overseer thereof.

        The ESAs shall publish on their website the list of high-level representatives
        from the current staff of the relevant competent authority designated by Member
        States.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.6'
      description: 'The independent experts referred to in paragraph 4, second subparagraph,
        shall be appointed by the Oversight Forum from a pool of experts selected
        following a public and transparent application process.

        The independent experts shall be appointed on the basis of their expertise
        in financial stability, digital operational resilience and ICT security matters.
        They shall act independently and objectively in the sole interest of the Union
        as a whole and shall neither seek nor take instructions from Union institutions
        or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public
        or private body.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.7'
      description: In accordance with Article 16 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010,
        (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, the ESAs shall by 17 July 2024 issue,
        for the purposes of this Section, guidelines on the cooperation between the
        ESAs and the competent authorities covering the detailed procedures and conditions
        for the allocation and execution of tasks between competent authorities and
        the ESAs and the details on the exchanges of information which are necessary
        for competent authorities to ensure the follow-up of recommendations pursuant
        to Article 35(1), point (d), addressed to critical ICT third-party service
        providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.8
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.8'
      description: The requirements set out in this Section shall be without prejudice
        to the application of Directive (EU) 2022/2555 and of other Union rules on
        oversight applicable to providers of cloud computing services.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:32.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node521
      ref_id: '32.9'
      description: The ESAs, through the Joint Committee and based on preparatory
        work conducted by the Oversight Forum, shall, on yearly basis, submit a report
        on the application of this Section to the European Parliament, the Council
        and the Commission.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 33
      description: Tasks of the Lead Overseer
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:33.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      ref_id: '33.1'
      description: The Lead Overseer, appointed in accordance with Article 31(1),
        point (b), shall conduct the oversight of the assigned critical ICT third-party
        service providers and shall be, for the purposes of all matters related to
        the oversight, the primary point of contact for those critical ICT third-party
        service providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:33.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      ref_id: '33.2'
      description: 'For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Lead Overseer shall assess
        whether each critical ICT third-party service provider has in place comprehensive,
        sound and effective rules, procedures, mechanisms and arrangements to manage
        the ICT risk which it may pose to financial entities.

        The assessment referred to in the first subparagraph shall focus mainly on
        ICT services provided by the critical ICT third- party service provider supporting
        the critical or important functions of financial entities. Where necessary
        to address all relevant risks, that assessment shall extend to ICT services
        supporting functions other than those that are critical or important.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:33.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      ref_id: '33.3'
      description: "The assessment referred to in paragraph 2 shall cover:\n(a)\t\
        ICT requirements to ensure, in particular, the security, availability, continuity,\
        \ scalability and quality of services which the critical ICT third-party service\
        \ provider provides to financial entities, as well as the ability to maintain\
        \ at all times high standards of availability, authenticity, integrity or\
        \ confidentiality of data;\n(b)\tthe physical security contributing to ensuring\
        \ the ICT security, including the security of premises, facilities, data centres;\n\
        (c)\tthe risk management processes, including ICT risk management policies,\
        \ ICT business continuity policy and ICT response and recovery plans;\n(d)\t\
        the governance arrangements, including an organisational structure with clear,\
        \ transparent and consistent lines of responsibility and accountability rules\
        \ enabling effective ICT risk management;\n(e)\tthe identification, monitoring\
        \ and prompt reporting of material ICT-related incidents to financial entities,\
        \ the management and resolution of those incidents, in particular cyber-attacks;\n\
        (f)\tthe mechanisms for data portability, application portability and interoperability,\
        \ which ensure an effective exercise of termination rights by the financial\
        \ entities;\n(g)\tthe testing of ICT systems, infrastructure and controls;\n\
        (h)\tthe ICT audits;\n(i)\tthe use of relevant national and international\
        \ standards applicable to the provision of its ICT services to the financial\
        \ entities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:33.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      ref_id: '33.4'
      description: 'Based on the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, and in coordination
        with the Joint Oversight Network (JON) referred to in Article 34(1), the Lead
        Overseer shall adopt a clear, detailed and reasoned individual oversight plan
        describing the annual oversight objectives and the main oversight actions
        planned for each critical ICT third-party service provider. That plan shall
        be communicated yearly to the critical ICT third-party service provider.

        Prior to the adoption of the oversight plan, the Lead Overseer shall communicate
        the draft oversight plan to the critical ICT third-party service provider.

        Upon receipt of the draft oversight plan, the critical ICT third-party service
        provider may submit a reasoned statement within 15 calendar days evidencing
        the expected impact on customers which are entities falling outside of the
        scope of this Regulation and where appropriate, formulating solutions to mitigate
        risks.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:33.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node531
      ref_id: '33.5'
      description: Once the annual oversight plans referred to in paragraph 4 have
        been adopted and notified to the critical ICT third- party service providers,
        competent authorities may take measures concerning such critical ICT third-party
        service providers only in agreement with the Lead Overseer.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node537
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 34
      description: Operational coordination between Lead Overseers
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:34.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node537
      ref_id: '34.1'
      description: To ensure a consistent approach to oversight activities and with
        a view to enabling coordinated general oversight strategies and cohesive operational
        approaches and work methodologies, the three Lead Overseers appointed in accordance
        with Article 31(1), point (b), shall set up a JON to coordinate among themselves
        in the preparatory stages and to coordinate the conduct of oversight activities
        over their respective overseen critical ICT third-party service providers,
        as well as in the course of any action that may be needed pursuant to Article
        42.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:34.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node537
      ref_id: '34.2'
      description: For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Lead Overseers shall draw
        up a common oversight protocol specifying the detailed procedures to be followed
        for carrying out the day-to-day coordination and for ensuring swift exchanges
        and reactions. The protocol shall be periodically revised to reflect operational
        needs, in particular the evolution of practical oversight arrangements.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:34.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node537
      ref_id: '34.3'
      description: The Lead Overseers may, on an ad-hoc basis, call on the ECB and
        ENISA to provide technical advice, share hands-on experience or join specific
        coordination meetings of the JON.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 35
      description: Powers of the Lead Overseer
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.1'
      description: "For the purposes of carrying out the duties laid down in this\
        \ Section, the Lead Overseer shall have the following powers in respect of\
        \ the critical ICT third-party service providers:\n(a)\tto request all relevant\
        \ information and documentation in accordance with Article 37;\n(b)\tto conduct\
        \ general investigations and inspections in accordance with Articles 38 and\
        \ 39, respectively;\n(c)\tto request, after the completion of the oversight\
        \ activities, reports specifying the actions that have been taken or the remedies\
        \ that have been implemented by the critical ICT third-party service providers\
        \ in relation to the recommendations referred to in point (d) of this paragraph;\n\
        (d)\tto issue recommendations on the areas referred to in Article 33(3), in\
        \ particular concerning the following:\n(i)\tthe use of specific ICT security\
        \ and quality requirements or processes, in particular in relation to the\
        \ roll-out of patches, updates, encryption and other security measures which\
        \ the Lead Overseer deems relevant for ensuring the ICT security of services\
        \ provided to financial entities;\n(ii)\tthe use of conditions and terms,\
        \ including their technical implementation, under which the critical ICT third-party\
        \ service providers provide ICT services to financial entities, which the\
        \ Lead Overseer deems relevant for preventing the generation of single points\
        \ of failure, the amplification thereof, or for minimising the possible systemic\
        \ impact across the Union\u2019s financial sector in the event of ICT concentration\
        \ risk;\n(iii)\tany planned subcontracting, where the Lead Overseer deems\
        \ that further subcontracting, including subcontracting arrangements which\
        \ the critical ICT third-party service providers plan to enter into with ICT\
        \ third-party service providers or with ICT subcontractors established in\
        \ a third country, may trigger risks for the provision of services by the\
        \ financial entity, or risks to the financial stability, based on the examination\
        \ of the information gathered in accordance with Articles 37 and 38;\n(iv)\t\
        refraining from entering into a further subcontracting arrangement, where\
        \ the following cumulative conditions are met:\n\u2014 the envisaged subcontractor\
        \ is an ICT third-party service provider or an ICT subcontractor established\
        \ in a third country;\n\u2014 the subcontracting concerns critical or important\
        \ functions of the financial entity; and\n\u2014 the Lead Overseer deems that\
        \ the use of such subcontracting poses a clear and serious risk to the financial\
        \ stability of the Union or to financial entities, including to the ability\
        \ of financial entities to comply with supervisory requirements.\nFor the\
        \ purpose of point (iv) of this point, ICT third-party service providers shall,\
        \ using the template referred to in Article 41(1), point (b), transmit the\
        \ information regarding subcontracting to the Lead Overseer."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.2'
      description: "When exercising the powers referred to in this Article, the Lead\
        \ Overseer shall:\n(a)\tensure regular coordination within the JON, and in\
        \ particular shall seek consistent approaches, as appropriate, with regard\
        \ to the oversight of critical ICT third-party service providers;\n(b)\ttake\
        \ due account of the framework established by Directive (EU) 2022/2555 and,\
        \ where necessary, consult the relevant competent authorities designated or\
        \ established in accordance with that Directive, in order to avoid duplication\
        \ of technical and organisational measures that might apply to critical ICT\
        \ third-party service providers pursuant to that \nDirective;\n(c)\tseek to\
        \ minimise, to the extent possible, the risk of disruption to services provided\
        \ by critical ICT third-party service providers to customers that are entities\
        \ falling outside the scope of this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.3'
      description: 'The Lead Overseer shall consult the Oversight Forum before exercising
        the powers referred to in paragraph 1.

        Before issuing recommendations in accordance with paragraph 1, point (d),
        the Lead Overseer shall give the opportunity to the ICT third-party service
        provider to provide, within 30 calendar days, relevant information evidencing
        the expected impact on customers that are entities falling outside the scope
        of this Regulation and, where appropriate, formulating solutions to mitigate
        risks.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.4'
      description: The Lead Overseer shall inform the JON of the outcome of the exercise
        of the powers referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) and (b). The Lead Overseer
        shall, without undue delay, transmit the reports referred to in paragraph
        1, point (c), to the JON and to the competent authorities of the financial
        entities using the ICT services of that critical ICT third-party service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.5'
      description: Critical ICT third-party service providers shall cooperate in good
        faith with the Lead Overseer, and assist it in the fulfilment of its tasks.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.6'
      description: In the event of whole or partial non-compliance with the measures
        required to be taken pursuant to the exercise of the powers under paragraph
        1, points (a), (b) and (c), and after the expiry of a period of at least 30
        calendar days from the date on which the critical ICT third-party service
        provider received notification of the respective measures, the Lead Overseer
        shall adopt a decision imposing a periodic penalty payment to compel the critical
        ICT third-party service provider to comply with those measures.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.7'
      description: The periodic penalty payment referred to in paragraph 6 shall be
        imposed on a daily basis until compliance is achieved and for no more than
        a period of six months following the notification of the decision to impose
        a periodic penalty payment to the critical ICT third-party service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.8
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.8'
      description: "The amount of the periodic penalty payment, calculated from the\
        \ date stipulated in the decision imposing the periodic penalty payment, shall\
        \ be up to 1 % of the average daily worldwide turnover of the critical ICT\
        \ third-party service provider in the preceding business year. When determining\
        \ the amount of the penalty payment, the Lead Overseer shall take into account\
        \ the following criteria regarding non-compliance with the measures referred\
        \ to in paragraph 6:\n(a)\tthe gravity and the duration of non-compliance;\n\
        (b)\twhether non-compliance has been committed intentionally or negligently;\n\
        (c)\tthe level of cooperation of the ICT third-party service provider with\
        \ the Lead Overseer.\nFor the purposes of the first subparagraph, in order\
        \ to ensure a consistent approach, the Lead Overseer shall engage in consultation\
        \ within the JON."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.9'
      description: Penalty payments shall be of an administrative nature and shall
        be enforceable. Enforcement shall be governed by the rules of civil procedure
        in force in the Member State on the territory of which inspections and access
        shall be carried out. Courts of the Member State concerned shall have jurisdiction
        over complaints related to irregular conduct of enforcement. The amounts of
        the penalty payments shall be allocated to the general budget of the European
        Union.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.10'
      description: The Lead Overseer shall disclose to the public every periodic penalty
        payment that has been imposed, unless such disclosure would seriously jeopardise
        the financial markets or cause disproportionate damage to the parties involved.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:35.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node541
      ref_id: '35.11'
      description: "Before imposing a periodic penalty payment under paragraph 6,\
        \ the Lead Overseer shall give the representatives of the critical ICT third-party\
        \ service provider subject to the proceedings the opportunity to be heard\
        \ on the findings and shall base its decisions only on findings on which the\
        \ critical ICT third-party service provider subject to the proceedings has\
        \ had an opportunity to comment.\nThe rights of the defence of the persons\
        \ subject to the proceedings shall be fully respected in the proceedings.\
        \ The critical ICT third-party service provider subject to the proceedings\
        \ shall be entitled to have access to the file, subject to the legitimate\
        \ interest of other persons in the protection of their business secrets. The\
        \ right of access to the file shall not extend to confidential information\
        \ or to the Lead Overseer\u2019s internal preparatory documents."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node553
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 36
      description: Exercise of the powers of the Lead Overseer outside the Union
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:36.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node553
      ref_id: '36.1'
      description: "When oversight objectives cannot be attained by means of interacting\
        \ with the subsidiary set up for the purpose of Article 31(12), or by exercising\
        \ oversight activities on premises located in the Union, the Lead Overseer\
        \ may exercise the powers, referred to in the following provisions, on any\
        \ premises located in a third-country which is owned, or used in any way,\
        \ for the purposes of providing services to Union financial entities, by a\
        \ critical ICT third-party service provider, in connection with its business\
        \ operations, functions or services, including any administrative, business\
        \ or operational offices, premises, lands, buildings or other properties:\
        \ (a) in Article 35(1), point (a); and\n(b) in Article 35(1), point (b), in\
        \ accordance with Article 38(2), points (a), (b) and (d), and in Article 39(1)\
        \ and (2), point (a).\nThe powers referred to in the first subparagraph may\
        \ be exercised subject to all of the following conditions:\n(i)\tthe conduct\
        \ of an inspection in a third-country is deemed necessary by the Lead Overseer\
        \ to allow it to fully and effectively perform its duties under this Regulation;\n\
        (ii)\tthe inspection in a third-country is directly related to the provision\
        \ of ICT services to financial entities in the Union;\n(iii)\tthe critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider concerned consents to the conduct of an\
        \ inspection in a third-country; and\n(iv)\tthe relevant authority of the\
        \ third-country concerned has been officially notified by the Lead Overseer\
        \ and raised no objection thereto."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:36.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node553
      ref_id: '36.2'
      description: "Without prejudice to the respective competences of the Union institutions\
        \ and of Member States, for the purposes of paragraph 1, EBA, ESMA or EIOPA\
        \ shall conclude administrative cooperation arrangements with the relevant\
        \ authority of the third country in order to enable the smooth conduct of\
        \ inspections in the third country concerned by the Lead Overseer and its\
        \ designated team for its mission in that third country. Those cooperation\
        \ arrangements shall not create legal obligations in respect of the Union\
        \ and its Member States nor shall they prevent Member States and their competent\
        \ authorities from concluding bilateral or multilateral arrangements with\
        \ those third countries and their relevant authorities.\nThose cooperation\
        \ arrangements shall specify at least the following elements:\n(a)\tthe procedures\
        \ for the coordination of oversight activities carried out under this Regulation\
        \ and any analogous monitoring of ICT third-party risk in the financial sector\
        \ exercised by the relevant authority of the third country concerned, including\
        \ details for transmitting the agreement of the latter to allow the conduct,\
        \ by the Lead Overseer and its designated team, of general investigations\
        \ and on-site inspections as referred to in paragraph 1, first subparagraph,\
        \ on the territory under its jurisdiction;\n(b)\tthe mechanism for the transmission\
        \ of any relevant information between EBA, ESMA or EIOPA and the relevant\
        \ authority of the third country concerned, in particular in connection with\
        \ information that may be requested by the Lead Overseer pursuant to Article\
        \ 37;\n(c)\tthe mechanisms for the prompt notification by the relevant authority\
        \ of the third-country concerned to EBA, ESMA or EIOPA of cases where an ICT\
        \ third-party service provider established in a third country and designated\
        \ as critical in accordance with Article 31(1), point (a), is deemed to have\
        \ infringed the requirements to which it is obliged to adhere pursuant to\
        \ the applicable law of the third country concerned when providing services\
        \ to financial institutions in that third country, as well as the remedies\
        \ and penalties applied;\n(d)\tthe regular transmission of updates on regulatory\
        \ or supervisory developments on the monitoring of ICT third-party risk of\
        \ financial institutions in the third country concerned;\n(e)\tthe details\
        \ for allowing, if needed, the participation of one representative of the\
        \ relevant third-country authority in the inspections conducted by the Lead\
        \ Overseer and the designated team."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:36.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node553
      ref_id: '36.3'
      description: "When the Lead Overseer is not able to conduct oversight activities\
        \ outside the Union, referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Lead Overseer\
        \ shall:\n(a)\texercise its powers under Article 35 on the basis of all facts\
        \ and documents available to it;\n(b)\tdocument and explain any consequence\
        \ of its inability to conduct the envisaged oversight activities as referred\
        \ to in this Article.\nThe potential consequences referred to in point (b)\
        \ of this paragraph shall be taken into consideration in the Lead Overseer\u2019\
        s recommendations issued pursuant to Article 35(1), point (d)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 37
      description: Request for information
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:37.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      ref_id: '37.1'
      description: The Lead Overseer may, by simple request or by decision, require
        critical ICT third-party service providers to provide all information that
        is necessary for the Lead Overseer to carry out its duties under this Regulation,
        including all relevant business or operational documents, contracts, policies,
        documentation, ICT security audit reports, ICT-related incident reports, as
        well as any information relating to parties to whom the critical ICT third-party
        service provider has outsourced operational functions or activities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:37.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      ref_id: '37.2'
      description: "When sending a simple request for information under paragraph\
        \ 1, the Lead Overseer shall:\n(a)\trefer to this Article as the legal basis\
        \ of the request;\n(b)\tstate the purpose of the request;\n(c)\tspecify what\
        \ information is required;\n(d)\tset a time limit within which the information\
        \ is to be provided;\n(e)\tinform the representative of the critical ICT third-party\
        \ service provider from whom the information is requested that he or she is\
        \ not obliged to provide the information, but in the event of a voluntary\
        \ reply to the request the information provided must not be incorrect or misleading."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:37.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      ref_id: '37.3'
      description: "When requiring by decision to supply information under paragraph\
        \ 1, the Lead Overseer shall:\n(a)\trefer to this Article as the legal basis\
        \ of the request;\n(b)\tstate the purpose of the request;\n(c)\tspecify what\
        \ information is required;\n(d)\tset a time limit within which the information\
        \ is to be provided;\n(e)\tindicate the periodic penalty payments provided\
        \ for in Article 35(6) where the production of the required information is\
        \ incomplete or when such information is not provided within the time limit\
        \ referred to in point (d) of this paragraph;\n(f)\tindicate the right to\
        \ appeal the decision to ESA\u2019s Board of Appeal and to have the decision\
        \ reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (Court of Justice)\
        \ in accordance with Articles 60 and 61 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010,\
        \ (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:37.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      ref_id: '37.4'
      description: The representatives of the critical ICT third-party service providers
        shall supply the information requested. Lawyers duly authorised to act may
        supply the information on behalf of their clients. The critical ICT third-party
        service provider shall remain fully responsible if the information supplied
        is incomplete, incorrect or misleading.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:37.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node557
      ref_id: '37.5'
      description: The Lead Overseer shall, without delay, transmit a copy of the
        decision to supply information to the competent authorities of the financial
        entities using the services of the relevant critical ICT third-party service
        providers and to the JON.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 38
      description: General investigations
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:38.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      ref_id: '38.1'
      description: In order to carry out its duties under this Regulation, the Lead
        Overseer, assisted by the joint examination team referred to in Article 40(1),
        may, where necessary, conduct investigations of critical ICT third-party service
        providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:38.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      ref_id: '38.2'
      description: "The Lead Overseer shall have the power to:\n(a)\texamine records,\
        \ data, procedures and any other material relevant to the execution of its\
        \ tasks, irrespective of the medium on which they are stored;\n(b)\ttake or\
        \ obtain certified copies of, or extracts from, such records, data, documented\
        \ procedures and any other material;\n(c)\tsummon representatives of the critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider for oral or written explanations on facts\
        \ or documents relating to the subject matter and purpose of the investigation\
        \ and to record the answers;\n(d)\tinterview any other natural or legal person\
        \ who consents to be interviewed for the purpose of collecting information\
        \ relating to the subject matter of an investigation;\n(e)\trequest records\
        \ of telephone and data traffic."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:38.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      ref_id: '38.3'
      description: 'The officials and other persons authorised by the Lead Overseer
        for the purposes of the investigation referred to in paragraph 1 shall exercise
        their powers upon production of a written authorisation specifying the subject
        matter and purpose of the investigation.

        That authorisation shall also indicate the periodic penalty payments provided
        for in Article 35(6) where the production of the required records, data, documented
        procedures or any other material, or the answers to questions asked to representatives
        of the ICT third-party service provider are not provided or are incomplete.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:38.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      ref_id: '38.4'
      description: The representatives of the critical ICT third-party service providers
        are required to submit to the investigations on the basis of a decision of
        the Lead Overseer. The decision shall specify the subject matter and purpose
        of the investigation, the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article
        35(6), the legal remedies available under Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU)
        No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, and the right to have the decision reviewed
        by the Court of Justice.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:38.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node563
      ref_id: '38.5'
      description: 'In good time before the start of the investigation, the Lead Overseer
        shall inform competent authorities of the financial entities using the ICT
        services of that critical ICT third-party service provider of the envisaged
        investigation and of the identity of the authorised persons.

        The Lead Overseer shall communicate to the JON all information transmitted
        pursuant to the first subparagraph.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 39
      description: Inspections
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.1'
      description: 'In order to carry out its duties under this Regulation, the Lead
        Overseer, assisted by the joint examination teams referred to in Article 40(1),
        may enter in, and conduct all necessary onsite inspections on, any business
        premises, land or property of the ICT third-party service providers, such
        as head offices, operation centres, secondary premises, as well as to conduct
        off-site inspections.

        For the purposes of exercising the powers referred to in the first subparagraph,
        the Lead Overseer shall consult the JON.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.2'
      description: "The officials and other persons authorised by the Lead Overseer\
        \ to conduct an on-site inspection shall have the power to:\n(a)\tenter any\
        \ such business premises, land or property; and\n(b)\tseal any such business\
        \ premises, books or records, for the period of, and to the extent necessary\
        \ for, the inspection.\nThe officials and other persons authorised by the\
        \ Lead Overseer shall exercise their powers upon production of a written authorisation\
        \ specifying the subject matter and the purpose of the inspection, and the\
        \ periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 35(6) where the representatives\
        \ of the critical ICT third-party service providers concerned do not submit\
        \ to the inspection.\n3.\tI"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.3'
      description: In good time before the start of the inspection, the Lead Overseer
        shall inform the competent authorities of the financial entities using that
        ICT third-party service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.4'
      description: Inspections shall cover the full range of relevant ICT systems,
        networks, devices, information and data either used for, or contributing to,
        the provision of ICT services to financial entities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.5'
      description: Before any planned on-site inspection, the Lead Overseer shall
        give reasonable notice to the critical ICT third-party service providers,
        unless such notice is not possible due to an emergency or crisis situation,
        or if it would lead to a situation where the inspection or audit would no
        longer be effective.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.6'
      description: The critical ICT third-party service provider shall submit to on-site
        inspections ordered by decision of the Lead Overseer. The decision shall specify
        the subject matter and purpose of the inspection, fix the date on which the
        inspection shall begin and shall indicate the periodic penalty payments provided
        for in Article 35(6), the legal remedies available under Regulations (EU)
        No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, as well as the right
        to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:39.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node569
      ref_id: '39.7'
      description: Where the officials and other persons authorised by the Lead Overseer
        find that a critical ICT third-party service provider opposes an inspection
        ordered pursuant to this Article, the Lead Overseer shall inform the critical
        ICT third-party service provider of the consequences of such opposition, including
        the possibility for competent authorities of the relevant financial entities
        to require financial entities to terminate the contractual arrangements concluded
        with that critical ICT third-party service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node577
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 40
      description: Ongoing oversight
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:40.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node577
      ref_id: '40.1'
      description: When conducting oversight activities, in particular general investigations
        or inspections, the Lead Overseer shall be assisted by a joint examination
        team established for each critical ICT third-party service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:40.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node577
      ref_id: '40.2'
      description: "The joint examination team referred to in paragraph 1 shall be\
        \ composed of staff members from:\n(a)\tthe ESAs;\n(b)\tthe relevant competent\
        \ authorities supervising the financial entities to which the critical ICT\
        \ third-party service provider provides ICT services;\n(c)\tthe national competent\
        \ authority referred to in Article 32(4), point (e), on a voluntary basis;\n\
        (d)\tone national competent authority from the Member State where the critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider is established, on a voluntary basis.\n\
        Members of the joint examination team shall have expertise in ICT matters\
        \ and in operational risk. The joint examination team shall work under the\
        \ coordination of a designated Lead Overseer staff member (the \u2018Lead\
        \ Overseer coordinator\u2019)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:40.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node577
      ref_id: '40.3'
      description: Within 3 months of the completion of an investigation or inspection,
        the Lead Overseer, after consulting the Oversight Forum, shall adopt recommendations
        to be addressed to the critical ICT third-party service provider pursuant
        to the powers referred to in Article 35.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:40.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node577
      ref_id: '40.4'
      description: 'The recommendations referred to in paragraph 3 shall be immediately
        communicated to the critical ICT third-party service provider and to the competent
        authorities of the financial entities to which it provides ICT services.

        For the purposes of fulfilling the oversight activities, the Lead Overseer
        may take into consideration any relevant third-party certifications and ICT
        third-party internal or external audit reports made available by the critical
        ICT third-party service provider.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node582
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 41
      description: Harmonisation of conditions enabling the conduct of the oversight
        activities
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:41.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node582
      ref_id: '41.1'
      description: "The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory\
        \ technical standards to specify:\n(a)\tthe information to be provided by\
        \ an ICT third-party service provider in the application for a voluntary request\
        \ to be designated as critical under Article 31(11);\n(b)\tthe content, structure\
        \ and format of the information to be submitted, disclosed or reported by\
        \ the ICT third-party service providers pursuant to Article 35(1), including\
        \ the template for providing information on subcontracting arrangements;\n\
        (c)\tthe criteria for determining the composition of the joint examination\
        \ team ensuring a balanced participation of staff members from the ESAs and\
        \ from the relevant competent authorities, their designation, tasks, and working\
        \ arrangements.\n(d)\tthe details of the competent authorities\u2019 assessment\
        \ of the measures taken by critical ICT third-party service providers based\
        \ on the recommendations of the Lead Overseer pursuant to Article 42(3)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:41.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node582
      ref_id: '41.2'
      description: The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards
        to the Commission by 17 July 2024.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 42
      description: Follow-up by competent authorities
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.1'
      description: Within 60 calendar days of the receipt of the recommendations issued
        by the Lead Overseer pursuant to Article 35(1), point (d), critical ICT third-party
        service providers shall either notify the Lead Overseer of their intention
        to follow the recommendations or provide a reasoned explanation for not following
        such recommendations. The Lead Overseer shall immediately transmit this information
        to the competent authorities of the financial entities concerned.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.2'
      description: 'The Lead Overseer shall publicly disclose where a critical ICT
        third-party service provider fails to notify the Lead Overseer in accordance
        with paragraph 1 or where the explanation provided by the critical ICT third-party
        service provider is not deemed sufficient. The information published shall
        disclose the identity of the critical ICT third-party service provider as
        well as information on the type and nature of the non-compliance. Such information
        shall be limited to what is relevant and proportionate for the purpose of
        ensuring public awareness, unless such publication would cause disproportionate
        damage to the parties involved or could seriously jeopardise the orderly functioning
        and integrity of financial markets or the stability of the whole or part of
        the financial system of the Union.

        The Lead Overseer shall notify the ICT third-party service provider of that
        public disclosure.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.3'
      description: 'Competent authorities shall inform the relevant financial entities
        of the risks identified in the recommendations addressed to critical ICT third-party
        service providers in accordance with Article 35(1), point (d).

        When managing ICT third-party risk, financial entities shall take into account
        the risks referred to in the first subparagraph.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.4'
      description: Where a competent authority deems that a financial entity fails
        to take into account or to sufficiently address within its management of ICT
        third-party risk the specific risks identified in the recommendations, it
        shall notify the financial entity of the possibility of a decision being taken,
        within 60 calendar days of the receipt of such notification, pursuant to paragraph
        6, in the absence of appropriate contractual arrangements aiming to address
        such risks.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.5'
      description: Upon receiving the reports referred to in Article 35(1), point
        (c), and prior to taking a decision as referred to in paragraph 6 of this
        Article, competent authorities may, on a voluntary basis, consult the competent
        authorities designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555
        responsible for the supervision of an essential or important entity subject
        to that Directive, which has been designated as a critical ICT third-party
        service provider.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.6'
      description: Competent authorities may, as a measure of last resort, following
        the notification and, if appropriate, the consultation as set out in paragraph
        4 and 5 of this Article, in accordance with Article 50, take a decision requiring
        financial entities to temporarily suspend, either in part or completely, the
        use or deployment of a service provided by the critical ICT third-party service
        provider until the risks identified in the recommendations addressed to critical
        ICT third-party service providers have been addressed. Where necessary, they
        may require financial entities to terminate, in part or completely, the relevant
        contractual arrangements concluded with the critical ICT third-party service
        providers.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.7
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.7'
      description: Where a critical ICT third-party service provider refuses to endorse
        recommendations, based on a divergent approach from the one advised by the
        Lead Overseer, and such a divergent approach may adversely impact a large
        number of financial entities, or a significant part of the financial sector,
        and individual warnings issued by competent authorities have not resulted
        in consistent approaches mitigating the potential risk to financial stability,
        the Lead Overseer may, after consulting the Oversight Forum, issue non-binding
        and non-public opinions to competent authorities, in order to promote consistent
        and convergent supervisory follow-up measures, as appropriate.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.8
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.8'
      description: "Upon receiving the reports referred to in Article 35(1), point\
        \ (c), competent authorities, when taking a decision as referred to in paragraph\
        \ 6 of this Article, shall take into account the type and magnitude of risk\
        \ that is not addressed by the critical ICT third-party service provider,\
        \ as well as the seriousness of the non-compliance, having regard to the following\
        \ criteria:\n(a)\tthe gravity and the duration of the non-compliance;\n(b)\t\
        whether the non-compliance has revealed serious weaknesses in the critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider\u2019s procedures, management systems,\
        \ risk management and internal controls;\n(c)\twhether a financial crime was\
        \ facilitated, occasioned or is otherwise attributable to the non-compliance;\n\
        (d)\twhether the non-compliance has been intentional or negligent;\n(e)\t\
        whether the suspension or termination of the contractual arrangements introduces\
        \ a risk for continuity of the financial entity\u2019s business operations\
        \ notwithstanding the financial entity\u2019s efforts to avoid disruption\
        \ in the provision of its services;\n(f)\twhere applicable, the opinion of\
        \ the competent authorities designated or established in accordance with Directive\
        \ (EU) 2022/2555 responsible for the supervision of an essential or important\
        \ entity subject to that Directive, which has been designated as a critical\
        \ ICT third-party service provider, requested on a voluntary basis in accordance\
        \ with paragraph 5 of this Article.\nCompetent authorities shall grant financial\
        \ entities the necessary period of time to enable them to adjust the contractual\
        \ arrangements with critical ICT third-party service providers in order to\
        \ avoid detrimental effects on their digital operational resilience and to\
        \ allow them to deploy exit strategies and transition plans as referred to\
        \ in Article 28."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.9
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.9'
      description: 'The decision referred to in paragraph 6 of this Article shall
        be notified to the members of the Oversight Forum referred to in Article 32(4),
        points (a), (b) and (c), and to the JON.

        The critical ICT third-party service providers affected by the decisions provided
        for in paragraph 6 shall fully cooperate with the financial entities impacted,
        in particular in the context of the process of suspension or termination of
        their contractual arrangements.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.10
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.10'
      description: Competent authorities shall regularly inform the Lead Overseer
        on the approaches and measures taken in their supervisory tasks in relation
        to financial entities as well as on the contractual arrangements concluded
        by financial entities where critical ICT third-party service providers have
        not endorsed in part or entirely recommendations addressed to them by the
        Lead Overseer.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:42.11
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node585
      ref_id: '42.11'
      description: The Lead Overseer may, upon request, provide further clarifications
        on the recommendations issued to guide the competent authorities on the follow-up
        measures.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node597
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 43
      description: Oversight fees
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:43.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node597
      ref_id: '43.1'
      description: "The Lead Overseer shall, in accordance with the delegated act\
        \ referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, charge critical ICT third-party\
        \ service providers fees that fully cover the Lead Overseer\u2019s necessary\
        \ expenditure in relation to the conduct of oversight tasks pursuant to this\
        \ Regulation, including the reimbursement of any costs which may be incurred\
        \ as a result of work carried out by the joint examination team referred to\
        \ in Article 40, as well as the costs of advice provided by the independent\
        \ experts as referred to in Article 32(4), second subparagraph, in relation\
        \ to matters falling under the remit of direct oversight activities.\nThe\
        \ amount of a fee charged to a critical ICT third-party service provider shall\
        \ cover all costs derived from the execution of the duties set out in this\
        \ Section and shall be proportionate to its turnover."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:43.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node597
      ref_id: '43.2'
      description: The Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance
        with Article 57 to supplement this Regulation by determining the amount of
        the fees and the way in which they are to be paid by 17 July 2024.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node600
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node506
      name: Article 44
      description: International cooperation
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:44.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node600
      ref_id: '44.1'
      description: "1.\tWithout prejudice to Article 36, EBA, ESMA and EIOPA may,\
        \ in accordance with Article 33 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No\
        \ 1095/2010 and (EU) No 1094/2010, respectively, conclude administrative arrangements\
        \ with third-country regulatory and supervisory authorities to foster international\
        \ cooperation on ICT third-party risk across different financial sectors,\
        \ in particular by developing best practices for the review of ICT risk management\
        \ practices and controls, mitigation measures and incident responses."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:44.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node600
      ref_id: '44.2'
      description: "2.\tThe ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, submit every\
        \ five years a joint confidential report to the European Parliament, to the\
        \ Council and to the Commission, summarising the findings of relevant discussions\
        \ held with the third countries\u2019 authorities referred to in paragraph\
        \ 1, focusing on the evolution of ICT third-party risk and the implications\
        \ for financial stability, market integrity, investor protection and the functioning\
        \ of the internal market."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node603
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: CHAPTER VI
      description: Information-sharing arrangements
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node604
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node603
      name: Article 45
      description: Information-sharing arrangements on cyber threat information and
        intelligence
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node604
      ref_id: '45.1'
      description: 'Financial entities may exchange amongst themselves cyber threat
        information and intelligence, including indicators of compromise, tactics,
        techniques, and procedures, cyber security alerts and configuration tools,
        to the extent that such information and intelligence sharing:'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1.a
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1
      ref_id: 45.1.a
      description: "aims to enhance the digital operational resilience of financial\
        \ entities, in particular through raising awareness in relation to cyber threats,\
        \ limiting or impeding the cyber threats\u2019 ability to spread, supporting\
        \ defence capabilities, threat detection techniques, mitigation strategies\
        \ or response and recovery stages;"
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1.b
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1
      ref_id: 45.1.b
      description: takes places within trusted communities of financial entities;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1.c
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.1
      ref_id: 45.1.c
      description: is implemented through information-sharing arrangements that protect
        the potentially sensitive nature of the information shared, and that are governed
        by rules of conduct in full respect of business confidentiality, protection
        of personal data in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and guidelines
        on competition policy.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.2
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node604
      ref_id: '45.2'
      description: For the purpose of paragraph 1, point (c), the information-sharing
        arrangements shall define the conditions for participation and, where appropriate,
        shall set out the details on the involvement of public authorities and the
        capacity in which they may be associated to the information-sharing arrangements,
        on the involvement of ICT third-party service providers, and on operational
        elements, including the use of dedicated IT platforms.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:45.3
      assessable: true
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node604
      ref_id: '45.3'
      description: Financial entities shall notify competent authorities of their
        participation in the information-sharing arrangements referred to in paragraph
        1, upon validation of their membership, or, as applicable, of the cessation
        of their membership, once it takes effect.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: CHAPTER VII
      description: Competent authorities
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node612
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 46
      description: Competent authorities
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:46.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node612
      ref_id: '46.1'
      description: "Without prejudice to the provisions on the Oversight Framework\
        \ for critical ICT third-party service providers referred to in Chapter V,\
        \ Section II, of this Regulation, compliance with this Regulation shall be\
        \ ensured by the following competent authorities in accordance with the powers\
        \ granted by the respective legal acts:\n(a)\tfor credit institutions and\
        \ for institutions exempted pursuant to Directive 2013/36/EU, the competent\
        \ authority designated in accordance with Article 4 of that Directive, and\
        \ for credit institutions classified as significant in accordance with Article\
        \ 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, the ECB in accordance with the powers\
        \ and tasks conferred by that Regulation;\n(b)\tfor payment institutions,\
        \ including payment institutions exempted pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/2366,\
        \ electronic money institutions, including those exempted pursuant to Directive\
        \ 2009/110/EC, and account information service providers as referred to in\
        \ Article 33(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366, the competent authority designated\
        \ in accordance with Article 22 of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;\n(c)\tfor investment\
        \ firms, the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 4 of\
        \ Directive (EU) 2019/2034 of the European Parliament and of the Council (38);\n\
        (d)\tfor crypto-asset service providers as authorised under the Regulation\
        \ on markets in crypto-assets and issuers of asset- referenced tokens, the\
        \ competent authority designated in accordance with the relevant provision\
        \ of that Regulation;\n(e)\tfor central securities depositories, the competent\
        \ authority designated in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EU) No\
        \ 909/2014;\n(f)\tfor central counterparties, the competent authority designated\
        \ in accordance with Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;\n(g)\tfor\
        \ trading venues and data reporting service providers, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Article 67 of Directive 2014/65/EU, and the\
        \ competent authority as defined in Article 2(1), point (18), of Regulation\
        \ (EU) No 600/2014;\n(h)\tfor trade repositories, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;\n\
        (i)\tfor managers of alternative investment funds, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Article 44 of Directive 2011/61/EU;\n(j)\t\
        for management companies, the competent authority designated in accordance\
        \ with Article 97 of Directive 2009/65/EC;\n(k)\tfor insurance and reinsurance\
        \ undertakings, the competent authority designated in accordance with Article\
        \ 30 of Directive 2009/138/EC;\n(l)\tfor insurance intermediaries, reinsurance\
        \ intermediaries and ancillary insurance intermediaries, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive (EU) 2016/97;\n(m)\t\
        for institutions for occupational retirement provision, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Article 47 of Directive (EU) 2016/2341;\n\
        (n)\tfor credit rating agencies, the competent authority designated in accordance\
        \ with Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009;\n(o)\tfor administrators\
        \ of critical benchmarks, the competent authority designated in accordance\
        \ with Articles 40 and 41 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011;\n \n(38) Directive\
        \ (EU) 2019/2034 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November\
        \ 2019 on the prudential supervision of investment firms and amending Directives\
        \ 2002/87/EC, 2009/65/EC, 2011/61/EU, 2013/36/EU, 2014/59/EU and 2014/65/EU\
        \ (OJ L 314, 5.12.2019, p. 64).\n(p)\tfor crowdfunding service providers,\
        \ the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation\
        \ (EU) 2020/1503;\n(q)\tfor securitisation repositories, the competent authority\
        \ designated in accordance with Articles 10 and 14(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node614
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 47
      description: Cooperation with structures and authorities established by Directive
        (EU) 2022/2555
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:47.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node614
      ref_id: '47.1'
      description: To foster cooperation and enable supervisory exchanges between
        the competent authorities designated under this Regulation and the Cooperation
        Group established by Article 14 of Directive (EU) 2022/2555, the ESAs and
        the competent authorities may participate in the activities of the Cooperation
        Group for matters that concern their supervisory activities in relation to
        financial entities. The ESAs and the competent authorities may request to
        be invited to participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group for matters
        in relation to essential or important entities subject to Directive (EU) 2022/2555
        that have also been designated as critical ICT third-party service providers
        pursuant to Article 31 of this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:47.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node614
      ref_id: '47.2'
      description: Where appropriate, competent authorities may consult and share
        information with the single points of contact and the CSIRTs designated or
        established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:47.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node614
      ref_id: '47.3'
      description: Where appropriate, competent authorities may request any relevant
        technical advice and assistance from the competent authorities designated
        or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555 and establish cooperation
        arrangements to allow effective and fast-response coordination mechanisms
        to be set up.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:47.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node614
      ref_id: '47.4'
      description: The arrangements referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article may,
        inter alia, specify the procedures for the coordination of supervisory and
        oversight activities in relation to essential or important entities subject
        to Directive (EU) 2022/2555 that have been designated as critical ICT third-party
        service providers pursuant to Article 31 of this Regulation, including for
        the conduct, in accordance with national law, of investigations and on-site
        inspections, as well as for mechanisms for the exchange of information between
        the competent authorities under this Regulation and the competent authorities
        designated or established in accordance with that Directive which includes
        access to information requested by the latter authorities.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node619
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 48
      description: Cooperation between authorities
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:48.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node619
      ref_id: '48.1'
      description: Competent authorities shall cooperate closely among themselves
        and, where applicable, with the Lead Overseer.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:48.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node619
      ref_id: '48.2'
      description: "Competent authorities and the Lead Overseer shall, in a timely\
        \ manner, mutually exchange all relevant information concerning critical ICT\
        \ third-party service providers which is necessary for them to carry out their\
        \ respective duties under this Regulation, in particular in relation to identified\
        \ risks, approaches and measures taken as part of the Lead Overseer\u2019\
        s oversight tasks."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node622
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 49
      description: Financial cross-sector exercises, communication and cooperation
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:49.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node622
      ref_id: '49.1'
      description: "The ESAs, through the Joint Committee and in collaboration with\
        \ competent authorities, resolution authorities as referred to in Article\
        \ 3 of Directive 2014/59/EU, the ECB, the Single Resolution Board as regards\
        \ information relating to entities falling under the scope of Regulation (EU)\
        \ No 806/2014, the ESRB and ENISA, as appropriate, may establish mechanisms\
        \ to enable the sharing of effective practices across financial sectors to\
        \ enhance situational awareness and identify common cyber vulnerabilities\
        \ and risks across sectors.\nThey may develop crisis management and contingency\
        \ exercises involving cyber-attack scenarios with a view to developing communication\
        \ channels and gradually enabling an effective coordinated response at Union\
        \ level in the event of a major cross-border ICT-related incident or related\
        \ threat having a systemic impact on the Union\u2019s financial sector as\
        \ a whole.\nThose exercises may, as appropriate, also test the financial sector\u2019\
        s dependencies on other economic sectors."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:49.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node622
      ref_id: '49.2'
      description: Competent authorities, ESAs and the ECB shall cooperate closely
        with each other and exchange information to carry out their duties pursuant
        to Articles 47 to 54. They shall closely coordinate their supervision in order
        to identify and remedy breaches of this Regulation, develop and promote best
        practices, facilitate collaboration, foster consistency of interpretation
        and provide cross-jurisdictional assessments in the event of any disagreements.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 50
      description: Administrative penalties and remedial measures
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.1'
      description: Competent authorities shall have all supervisory, investigatory
        and sanctioning powers necessary to fulfil their duties under this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.2'
      description: "The powers referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least the\
        \ following powers to:\n(a)\thave access to any document or data held in any\
        \ form that the competent authority considers relevant for the performance\
        \ of its duties and receive or take a copy of it;\n(b)\tcarry out on-site\
        \ inspections or investigations, which shall include but shall not be limited\
        \ to;\n(i)\tsummoning representatives of the financial entities for oral or\
        \ written explanations on facts or documents relating to the subject matter\
        \ and purpose of the investigation and to record the answers;\n(ii)\tinterviewing\
        \ any other natural or legal person who consents to be interviewed for the\
        \ purpose of collecting information relating to the subject matter of an investigation;\n\
        (c)\trequire corrective and remedial measures for breaches of the requirements\
        \ of this Regulation."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.3'
      description: 'Without prejudice to the right of Member States to impose criminal
        penalties in accordance with Article 52, Member States shall lay down rules
        establishing appropriate administrative penalties and remedial measures for
        breaches of this Regulation and shall ensure their effective implementation.

        Those penalties and measures shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.4'
      description: "Member States shall confer on competent authorities the power\
        \ to apply at least the following administrative penalties or remedial measures\
        \ for breaches of this Regulation:\n(a)\tissue an order requiring the natural\
        \ or legal person to cease conduct that is in breach of this Regulation and\
        \ to desist from a repetition of that conduct;\n(b)\trequire the temporary\
        \ or permanent cessation of any practice or conduct that the competent authority\
        \ considers to be contrary to the provisions of this Regulation and prevent\
        \ repetition of that practice or conduct;\n(c)\tadopt any type of measure,\
        \ including of pecuniary nature, to ensure that financial entities continue\
        \ to comply with legal requirements;\n(d)\trequire, insofar as permitted by\
        \ national law, existing data traffic records held by a telecommunication\
        \ operator, where there is a reasonable suspicion of a breach of this Regulation\
        \ and where such records may be relevant to an investigation into breaches\
        \ of this Regulation; and\n(e)\tissue public notices, including public statements\
        \ indicating the identity of the natural or legal person and the nature of\
        \ the breach."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.5'
      description: Where paragraph 2, point (c), and paragraph 4 apply to legal persons,
        Member States shall confer on competent authorities the power to apply the
        administrative penalties and remedial measures, subject to the conditions
        provided for in national law, to members of the management body, and to other
        individuals who under national law are responsible for the breach.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:50.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node625
      ref_id: '50.6'
      description: Member States shall ensure that any decision imposing administrative
        penalties or remedial measures set out in paragraph 2, point (c), is properly
        reasoned and is subject to a right of appeal.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node632
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 51
      description: Exercise of the power to impose administrative penalties and remedial
        measures
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:51.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node632
      ref_id: '51.1'
      description: "Competent authorities shall exercise the powers to impose administrative\
        \ penalties and remedial measures referred to in Article 50 in accordance\
        \ with their national legal frameworks, where appropriate, as follows:\n(a)\t\
        directly;\n(b)\tin collaboration with other authorities;\n(c)\tunder their\
        \ responsibility by delegation to other authorities; or (d) by application\
        \ to the competent judicial authorities."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:51.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node632
      ref_id: '51.2'
      description: "Competent authorities, when determining the type and level of\
        \ an administrative penalty or remedial measure to be imposed under Article\
        \ 50, shall take into account the extent to which the breach is intentional\
        \ or results from negligence, and all other relevant circumstances, including\
        \ the following, where appropriate:\n(a)\tthe materiality, gravity and the\
        \ duration of the breach;\n(b)\tthe degree of responsibility of the natural\
        \ or legal person responsible for the breach;\n(c)\tthe financial strength\
        \ of the responsible natural or legal person;\n(d)\tthe importance of profits\
        \ gained or losses avoided by the responsible natural or legal person, insofar\
        \ as they can be determined;\n(e)\tthe losses for third parties caused by\
        \ the breach, insofar as they can be determined;\n(f)\tthe level of cooperation\
        \ of the responsible natural or legal person with the competent authority,\
        \ without prejudice to the need to ensure disgorgement of profits gained or\
        \ losses avoided by that natural or legal person;\n(g)\tprevious breaches\
        \ by the responsible natural or legal person."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node635
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 52
      description: Criminal penalties
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:52.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node635
      ref_id: '52.1'
      description: Member States may decide not to lay down rules for administrative
        penalties or remedial measures for breaches that are subject to criminal penalties
        under their national law.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:52.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node635
      ref_id: '52.2'
      description: Where Member States have chosen to lay down criminal penalties
        for breaches of this Regulation, they shall ensure that appropriate measures
        are in place so that competent authorities have all the necessary powers to
        liaise with judicial, prosecuting, or criminal justice authorities within
        their jurisdiction to receive specific information related to criminal investigations
        or proceedings commenced for breaches of this Regulation, and to provide the
        same information to other competent authorities, as well as EBA, ESMA or EIOPA
        to fulfil their obligations to cooperate for the purposes of this Regulation.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node638
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 53
      description: Notification duties
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:53.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node638
      ref_id: '53.1'
      description: Member States shall notify the laws, regulations and administrative
        provisions implementing this Chapter, including any relevant criminal law
        provisions, to the Commission, ESMA, the EBA and EIOPA by 17 January 2025.
        Member States shall notify the Commission, ESMA, the EBA and EIOPA without
        undue delay of any subsequent amendments thereto.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 54
      description: Publication of administrative penalties
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.1'
      description: Competent authorities shall publish on their official websites,
        without undue delay, any decision imposing an administrative penalty against
        which there is no appeal after the addressee of the penalty has been notified
        of that decision.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.2'
      description: The publication referred to in paragraph 1 shall include information
        on the type and nature of the breach, the identity of the persons responsible
        and the penalties imposed.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.3'
      description: "Where the competent authority, following a case-by-case assessment,\
        \ considers that the publication of the identity, in the case of legal persons,\
        \ or of the identity and personal data, in the case of natural persons, would\
        \ be disproportionate, including risks in relation to the protection of personal\
        \ data, jeopardise the stability of financial markets or the pursuit of an\
        \ ongoing criminal investigation, or cause, insofar as these can be determined,\
        \ disproportionate damages to the person involved, it shall adopt one of the\
        \ following solutions in respect of the decision imposing an administrative\
        \ penalty:\n(a)\tdefer its publication until all reasons for non-publication\
        \ cease to exist;\n(b)\tpublish it on an anonymous basis, in accordance with\
        \ national law; or\n(c)\trefrain from publishing it, where the options set\
        \ out in points (a) and (b) are deemed either insufficient to guarantee a\
        \ lack of any danger for the stability of financial markets, or where such\
        \ a publication would not be proportionate to the leniency of the imposed\
        \ penalty."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.4'
      description: In the case of a decision to publish an administrative penalty
        on an anonymous basis in accordance with paragraph 3, point (b), the publication
        of the relevant data may be postponed.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.5'
      description: Where a competent authority publishes a decision imposing an administrative
        penalty against which there is an appeal before the relevant judicial authorities,
        competent authorities shall immediately add on their official website that
        information and, at later stages, any subsequent related information on the
        outcome of such appeal. Any judicial decision annulling a decision imposing
        an administrative penalty shall also be published.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:54.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node640
      ref_id: '54.6'
      description: Competent authorities shall ensure that any publication referred
        to in paragraphs 1 to 4 shall remain on their official website only for the
        period which is necessary to bring forth this Article. This period shall not
        exceed five years after its publication.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node647
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 55
      description: Professional secrecy
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:55.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node647
      ref_id: '55.1'
      description: Any confidential information received, exchanged or transmitted
        pursuant to this Regulation shall be subject to the conditions of professional
        secrecy laid down in paragraph 2.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:55.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node647
      ref_id: '55.2'
      description: The obligation of professional secrecy applies to all persons who
        work, or who have worked, for the competent authorities pursuant to this Regulation,
        or for any authority or market undertaking or natural or legal person to whom
        those competent authorities have delegated their powers, including auditors
        and experts contracted by them.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:55.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node647
      ref_id: '55.3'
      description: Information covered by professional secrecy, including the exchange
        of information among competent authorities under this Regulation and competent
        authorities designated or established in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2555,
        shall not be disclosed to any other person or authority except by virtue of
        provisions laid down by Union or national law;
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:55.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node647
      ref_id: '55.4'
      description: All information exchanged between the competent authorities pursuant
        to this Regulation that concerns business or operational conditions and other
        economic or personal affairs shall be considered confidential and shall be
        subject to the requirements of professional secrecy, except where the competent
        authority states, at the time of communication, that such information may
        be disclosed or where such disclosure is necessary for legal proceedings.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node652
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node611
      name: Article 56
      description: Data Protection
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:56.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node652
      ref_id: '56.1'
      description: The ESAs and the competent authorities shall be allowed to process
        personal data only where necessary for the purpose of carrying out their respective
        obligations and duties pursuant to this Regulation, in particular for investigation,
        inspection, request for information, communication, publication, evaluation,
        verification, assessment and drafting of oversight plans. The personal data
        shall be processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or Regulation
        (EU) 2018/1725, whichever is applicable.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:56.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node652
      ref_id: '56.2'
      description: Except where otherwise provided in other sectoral acts, the personal
        data referred to in paragraph 1 shall be retained until the discharge of the
        applicable supervisory duties and in any case for a maximum period of 15 years,
        except in the event of pending court proceedings requiring further retention
        of such data.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node655
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: Chapter VIII
      description: Delegated acts
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node655
      name: Article 57
      description: Exercise of the delegation
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.1'
      description: The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission
        subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.2'
      description: The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 31(6)
        and 43(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years
        from 17 January 2024. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of
        the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year
        period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an
        identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes
        such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.3'
      description: The delegation of power referred to in Articles 31(6) and 43(2)
        may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A
        decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified
        in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of
        the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date
        specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts
        already in force.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.4
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.4'
      description: Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts
        designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down
        in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.5
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.5'
      description: As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify
        it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:57.6
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node656
      ref_id: '57.6'
      description: A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 31(6) and 43(2) shall
        enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European
        Parliament or by the Council within a period of three months of notification
        of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry
        of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed
        the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by
        three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node663
      assessable: false
      depth: 1
      name: CHAPTER IX
      description: Transitional and final provisions
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node664
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node663
      name: Section I
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node665
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node664
      name: Article 58
      description: Review clause
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:58.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node665
      ref_id: '58.1'
      description: "By 17 January 2028, the Commission shall, after consulting the\
        \ ESAs and the ESRB, as appropriate, carry out a review and submit a report\
        \ to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied, where appropriate,\
        \ by a legislative proposal. The review shall include at least the following:\n\
        (a)\tthe criteria for the designation of critical ICT third-party service\
        \ providers in accordance with Article 31(2);\n(b)\tthe voluntary nature of\
        \ the notification of significant cyber threats referred to in Article 19;\n\
        (c)\tthe regime referred to in Article 31(12) and the powers of the Lead Overseer\
        \ provided for in Article 35(1), point (d), point (iv), first indent, with\
        \ a view to evaluating the effectiveness of those provisions with regard to\
        \ ensuring effective oversight of critical ICT third-party service providers\
        \ established in a third country, and the necessity to establish a subsidiary\
        \ in the Union.\nFor the purposes of the first subparagraph of this point,\
        \ the review shall include an analysis of the regime referred to in Article\
        \ 31(12), including in terms of access for Union financial entities to services\
        \ from third countries and availability of such services on the Union market\
        \ and it shall take into account further developments in the markets for the\
        \ services covered by this Regulation, the practical experience of financial\
        \ entities and financial supervisors with regard to the application and, respectively,\
        \ supervision of that regime, and any relevant regulatory and supervisory\
        \ developments taking place at international level.\n(d)\tthe appropriateness\
        \ of including in the scope of this Regulation financial entities referred\
        \ to in Article 2(3), point (e), making use of automated sales systems, in\
        \ light of future market developments on the use of such systems;\n(e)\tthe\
        \ functioning and effectiveness of the JON in supporting the consistency of\
        \ the oversight and the efficiency of the exchange of information within the\
        \ Oversight Framework."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:58.2
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node665
      ref_id: '58.2'
      description: 'In the context of the review of Directive (EU) 2015/2366, the
        Commission shall assess the need for increased cyber resilience of payment
        systems and payment-processing activities and the appropriateness of extending
        the scope of this Regulation to operators of payment systems and entities
        involved in payment-processing activities. In light of this assessment, the
        Commission shall submit, as part of the review of Directive (EU) 2015/2366,
        a report to the European Parliament and the Council no later than 17 July
        2023.

        Based on that review report, and after consulting ESAs, ECB and the ESRB,
        the Commission may submit, where appropriate and as part of the legislative
        proposal that it may adopt pursuant to Article 108, second paragraph, of Directive
        (EU) 2015/2366, a proposal to ensure that all operators of payment systems
        and entities involved in payment-processing activities are subject to an appropriate
        oversight, while taking into account existing oversight by the central bank.'
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:58.3
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node665
      ref_id: '58.3'
      description: By 17 January 2026, the Commission shall, after consulting the
        ESAs and the Committee of European Auditing Oversight Bodies, carry out a
        review and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied,
        where appropriate, by a legislative proposal, on the appropriateness of strengthened
        requirements for statutory auditors and audit firms as regards digital operational
        resilience, by means of the inclusion of statutory auditors and audit firms
        into the scope of this Regulation or by means of amendments to Directive 2006/43/EC
        of the European Parliament and of the Council (39).
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      assessable: false
      depth: 2
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node663
      name: Section II
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node670
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 59
      description: Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:59.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node670
      ref_id: '59.1'
      description: "Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 is amended as follows:\n(1)\tin Annex\
        \ I, Section A, point 4, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u2018A credit rating agency shall have sound administrative and accounting\
        \ procedures, internal control mechanisms, effective procedures for risk assessment,\
        \ and effective control and safeguard arrangements for managing ICT systems\
        \ in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 of the European Parliament\
        \ and of the Council (2)\tin Annex III, point 12 is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u201812. The credit rating agency infringes Article 6(2), in conjunction\
        \ with point 4 of Section A of Annex I, by not having sound administrative\
        \ or accounting procedures, internal control mechanisms, effective procedures\
        \ for risk assessment, or effective control or safeguard arrangements for\
        \ managing ICT systems in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554; or by\
        \ not implementing or maintaining decision-making procedures or organisational\
        \ structures as required by that point.\u2019."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node672
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 60
      description: Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:60.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node672
      ref_id: '60.1'
      description: "Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 is amended as follows:\n(1) Article\
        \ 26 is amended as follows:\n\t(a)\tparagraph 3 is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u20183. A CCP shall maintain and operate an organisational structure that\
        \ ensures continuity and orderly functioning in the performance of its services\
        \ and activities. It shall employ appropriate and proportionate systems, resources\
        \ and procedures, including ICT systems managed in accordance with Regulation\
        \ (EU) 2022/ 2554 of the European Parliament and of the Council (*). \n(b)\
        \ paragraph 6 is deleted;\n(2)\tArticle 34 is amended as follows:\n(a)\tparagraph\
        \ 1 is replaced by the following:\n\u20181. A CCP shall establish, implement\
        \ and maintain an adequate business continuity policy and disaster recovery\
        \ plan, which shall include ICT business continuity policy and ICT response\
        \ and recovery plans put in place and implemented in accordance with Regulation\
        \ (EU) 2022/2554, aiming to ensure the preservation of its functions, the\
        \ timely recovery of operations and the fulfilment of the CCP\u2019s obligations.\u2019\
        ;\n(b)\tin paragraph 3, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u20183. In order to ensure consistent application of this Article, ESMA shall,\
        \ after consulting the members of the ESCB, develop draft regulatory technical\
        \ standards specifying the minimum content and requirements of the business\
        \ continuity policy and of the disaster recovery plan, excluding ICT business\
        \ continuity policy and disaster recovery plans.\u2019;\n(3)\tin Article 56(3),\
        \ the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:\n\u20183. In order\
        \ to ensure consistent application of this Article, ESMA shall develop draft\
        \ regulatory technical standards specifying the details, other than for requirements\
        \ related to ICT risk management, of the application for registration referred\
        \ to in paragraph 1.\u2019;\n(4)\tin Article 79, paragraphs 1 and 2 are replaced\
        \ by the following:\n\u20181. A trade repository shall identify sources of\
        \ operational risk and minimise them also through the development of appropriate\
        \ systems, controls and procedures, including ICT systems managed in accordance\
        \ with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554.\n2. A trade repository shall establish,\
        \ implement and maintain an adequate business continuity policy and disaster\
        \ recovery plan including ICT business continuity policy and ICT response\
        \ and recovery plans established in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554,\
        \ aiming to ensure the maintenance of its functions, the timely recovery of\
        \ operations and the fulfilment of the trade repository\u2019s obligations.\u2019\
        ;\n(5)\tin Article 80, paragraph 1 is deleted.\n(6)\tin Annex I, Section II\
        \ is amended as follows:\n(a)\tpoints (a) and (b) are replaced by the following:\n\
        \u2018(a) a trade repository infringes Article 79(1) by not identifying sources\
        \ of operational risk or by not minimising those risks through the development\
        \ of appropriate systems, controls and procedures including ICT systems managed\
        \ in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554;\n(b)\ta trade repository infringes\
        \ Article 79(2) by not establishing, implementing or maintaining an adequate\
        \ business continuity policy and disaster recovery plan established in accordance\
        \ with Regulation (EU) 2022/ 2554, aiming to ensure the maintenance of its\
        \ functions, the timely recovery of operations and the fulfilment of the trade\
        \ repository\u2019s obligations;\u2019;\n(b) point (c) is deleted.\n(7)\t\
        Annex III is amended as follows:\n(a)\tSection II is amended as follows:\n\
        (i)\tpoint (c) is replaced by the following:\n\u2018(c) a Tier 2 CCP infringes\
        \ Article 26(3) by not maintaining or operating an organisational structure\
        \ that ensures continuity and orderly functioning in the performance of its\
        \ services and activities or by not employing appropriate and proportionate\
        \ systems, resources or procedures including ICT systems managed in accordance\
        \ with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554;\u2019;\n(ii)\tpoint (f) is deleted.\n(b)\t\
        in Section III, point (a) is replaced by the following:\n\u2018(a) a Tier\
        \ 2 CCP infringes Article 34(1) by not establishing, implementing or maintaining\
        \ an adequate business continuity policy and response and recovery plan set\
        \ up in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554, aiming to ensure the preservation\
        \ of its functions, the timely recovery of operations and the fulfilment of\
        \ the CCP\u2019s obligations, which at least allows for the recovery of all\
        \ transactions at the time of disruption to allow the CCP to continue to operate\
        \ with certainty and to complete settlement on the scheduled date;\u2019."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node674
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 61
      description: Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 909/2014
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:61.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node674
      ref_id: '61.1'
      description: "Article 45 of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 is amended as follows:\n\
        (1)\tparagraph 1 is replaced by the following:\n\u20181. A CSD shall identify\
        \ sources of operational risk, both internal and external, and minimise their\
        \ impact also through the deployment of appropriate ICT tools, processes and\
        \ policies set up and managed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554\
        \ of the European Parliament and of the Council (*), as well as through any\
        \ other relevant appropriate tools, controls and procedures for other types\
        \ of operational risk, including for all the securities settlement systems\
        \ it operates.\n(2)\tparagraph 2 is deleted;\n(3)\tparagraphs 3 and 4 are\
        \ replaced by the following:\n\u20183. For services that it provides as well\
        \ as for each securities settlement system that it operates, a CSD shall establish,\
        \ implement and maintain an adequate business continuity policy and disaster\
        \ recovery plan, including ICT business continuity policy and ICT response\
        \ and recovery plans established in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554,\
        \ to ensure the preservation of its services, the timely recovery of operations\
        \ and the fulfilment of the CSD\u2019s obligations in the case of events that\
        \ pose a significant risk to disrupting operations.\n4. The plan referred\
        \ to in paragraph 3 shall provide for the recovery of all transactions and\
        \ participants\u2019 positions at the time of disruption to allow the participants\
        \ of a CSD to continue to operate with certainty and to complete settlement\
        \ on the scheduled date, including by ensuring that critical IT systems can\
        \ resume operations from the time of disruption as provided for in Article\
        \ 12(5) and (7) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2554.\u2019;\n(4)\tparagraph 6 is\
        \ replaced by the following:\n\u20186. A CSD shall identify, monitor and manage\
        \ the risks that key participants in the securities settlement systems it\
        \ operates, as well as service and utility providers, and other CSDs or other\
        \ market infrastructures might pose to its operations. It shall, upon request,\
        \ provide competent and relevant authorities with information on any such\
        \ risk identified. It shall also inform the competent authority and relevant\
        \ authorities without delay of any operational incidents, other than in relation\
        \ to ICT risk, resulting from such risks.\u2019;\n(5)\tin paragraph 7, the\
        \ first subparagraph is replaced by the following:\n\u20187. ESMA shall, in\
        \ close cooperation with the members of the ESCB, develop draft regulatory\
        \ technical standards to specify the operational risks referred to in paragraphs\
        \ 1 and 6, other than ICT risk, and the methods to test, to address or to\
        \ minimise those risks, including the business continuity policies and disaster\
        \ recovery plans referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 and the methods of assessment\
        \ thereof.\u2019."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node676
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 62
      description: Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 600/2014
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:62.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node676
      ref_id: '62.1'
      description: "Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 is amended as follows:\n(1)\tArticle\
        \ 27g is amended as follows:\n(a)\tparagraph 4 is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u20184. An APA shall comply with the requirements concerning the security\
        \ of network and information systems set out in Regulation (EU) 2022/2554\
        \ of the European Parliament and of the Council (*).\n(b)\tin paragraph 8,\
        \ point (c) is replaced by the following:\n\u2018(c) the concrete organisational\
        \ requirements laid down in paragraphs 3 and 5.\u2019;\n(2)\tArticle 27h is\
        \ amended as follows:\n(a)\tparagraph 5 is replaced by the following:\n\u2018\
        5. A CTP shall comply with the requirements concerning the security of network\
        \ and information systems set out in Regulation (EU) 2022/2554.\u2019.\n(b)\t\
        in paragraph 8, point (e) is replaced by the following:\n\u2018(e) the concrete\
        \ organisational requirements laid down in paragraph 4.\u2019;\n(3)\tArticle\
        \ 27i is amended as follows:\n(a)\tparagraph 3 is replaced by the following:\n\
        \u20183. An ARM shall comply with the requirements concerning the security\
        \ of network and information systems set out in Regulation (EU) 2022/2554.\u2019\
        ;\n(b)\tin paragraph 5, point (b) is replaced by the following:\n\u2018(b)\
        \ the concrete organisational requirements laid down in paragraphs 2 and 4.\u2019\
        ."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node678
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 63
      description: Amendment to Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:63.1
      assessable: false
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node678
      ref_id: '63.1'
      description: "In Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011, the following paragraph\
        \ is added:\n\u20186. For critical benchmarks, an administrator shall have\
        \ sound administrative and accounting procedures, internal control mechanisms,\
        \ effective procedures for risk assessment, and effective control and safeguard\
        \ arrangements for managing ICT systems in accordance with Regulation (EU)\
        \ 2022/2554 of the European Parliament and of the Council (*)."
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node680
      assessable: false
      depth: 3
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node669
      name: Article 64
      description: Entry into force and application
    - urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:64.1
      assessable: true
      depth: 4
      parent_urn: urn:intuitem:risk:req_node:dora:node680
      ref_id: '64.1'
      description: 'This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following
        that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

        It shall apply from 17 January 2025.

        This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in
        all Member States.'