Risk & Compliance · RC-Q09

Question: Is third-party or supplier risk formally evaluated during onboarding and periodically thereafter?

Objective — Why This Matters

Vendors extend your attack surface and regulatory exposure. Formal, periodic supplier risk evaluation prevents hidden weaknesses from transferring liability to you and aligns safeguards with contractual duties.

Maturity Levels (0–5)

0 — Unaware
No structured vendor due diligence or risk rating.
1 — Ad Hoc
Basic questionnaires used inconsistently; results not tracked.
2 — Defined
Onboarding checklist with minimum controls and data classification.
3 — Managed
Risk scoring applied; periodic reviews scheduled by criticality.
4 — Integrated
Contract clauses tied to controls; findings tracked to closure; dashboards in place.
5 — Optimized
Continuous assurance (attestations/feeds); joint exercises; data-driven reclassification.

How to Level Up

From → To Actions
0 → 1 Identify critical vendors and record the data/systems they access.
1 → 2 Introduce a standard due-diligence checklist and minimum security/privacy requirements.
2 → 3 Implement risk scoring and review cadence by tier (high, medium, low).
3 → 4 Add contractual clauses (breach notice, audit, sub-processor control) and track CAPA to closure.
4 → 5 Integrate continuous assurance (certificates, scans, attestations) and test escalation via joint drills.

People / Process / Technology Enablers

Evidence Required

Metrics / KPIs

Low-Cost / Open-Source Options (MSME)

Purpose Tool Notes
Register Spreadsheet / Notion Columns: tier, review date, owner, result, actions.
Workflow GitHub Issues / Trello Template card per vendor assessment.
Dashboards Metabase / Redash Coverage and closure aging views.

Common Pitfalls

Compliance Mapping

Standard Clauses / Notes
ISO/IEC 27036 Supplier relationships and assurance.
DPDP Act 2023 Processor obligations and contractual controls.
NIST CSF 2.0 ID.SC-1/2/3 (supply-chain risk).
NIRMATA Scoring RC-Q09 Level ≥ 3 requires tiered reviews + CAPA tracking.