Software Risk Assessment Methodologies: ISO, ETSI, NIST for Context
When you hear "risk assessment," you might think of complex frameworks like ISO 27005, ETSI TR 103 305, or the NIST Risk Management Framework. These are indeed comprehensive standards used by many organizations, and they offer deep insights into risk management processes. They cover everything from establishing context, identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks, to ongoing monitoring and review.
For instance, ISO 27005 provides guidelines for information security risk management. ETSI offers various standards and reports relevant to cybersecurity risk, and NIST provides a robust framework widely used, especially in government and large enterprises.
CRA Flexibility for Your Software
Here’s the good news for developers of most apps, games, and general software: the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) doesn't handcuff you to one specific, heavyweight methodology. While Recital 54 encourages manufacturers to "appropriately apply suitable harmonised standards, common specifications or European or international standards," the core requirement is that your risk assessment helps you identify relevant risks and meet the essential cybersecurity requirements laid out in Annex I.
This flexibility is crucial. For a standalone mobile game or a utility app, a full-blown ISO 27005 implementation might be overkill. The CRA allows for a proportionate approach. Your focus should be on a practical assessment that genuinely reflects the risks to your specific software product and its users.
Focus on CRA Essentials
Instead of getting bogged down in choosing the "perfect" comprehensive methodology, concentrate on ensuring your risk assessment process:
- Covers intended and foreseeable use (Article 13, Paragraph 3).
- Identifies how Annex I requirements apply and are implemented (Article 13, Paragraph 3).
- Is documented and updated (Article 13, Paragraph 3).
Key Takeway
While established methodologies like ISO 27005 offer valuable context, the CRA gives you the room to conduct a risk assessment that's proportionate to your software's complexity and risk profile. The goal is effective risk management, not rigid adherence to a specific complex standard.