According to Gartner, Cybersecurity and operational resilience have become top priorities for financial institutions, with millions being budgeted for consumer and commercial client protection. Two key regulatory frameworks—the Cybersecurity Risk and Institute (CRI) Profile and the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) aim to address these challenges. While both frameworks enhance security and resilience, they differ in scope, approach, and regulatory focus.
This blog explores the critical differences between the CRI Profile and DORA, providing a clear comparison to help financial institutions navigate their compliance obligations. Additionally, we will highlight how Auxin Security offers solutions to meet the requirements of both frameworks, ensuring comprehensive and streamlined compliance.
How Does the CRI Profile Differ from DORA?
Comparison table for “How Does the CRI Profile Differ from DORA?” with an additional column detailing what Auxin Security offers in relation to each framework:
| Aspect | CRI Profile | DORA | What Auxin Security Offers |
| Purpose | Streamlines global regulatory compliance for financial institutions by consolidating cybersecurity requirements. | Enhances digital operational resilience for EU financial entities, focusing on ICT-related risks and operational continuity. | Auxin helps implement both frameworks, streamlining compliance through automation and aligning processes to meet cybersecurity and operational resilience goals. |
| Scope | Focuses on financial institutions globally, addressing over 3,000 cybersecurity regulations from various regions. | Targets financial institutions within the EU, creating a harmonized approach for ICT risk management and resilience. | Auxin’s team provides expertise in cross-border regulatory compliance, ensuring seamless adherence to global and EU-specific requirements through unified risk management solutions. |
| Regulatory Focus | Consolidates cybersecurity standards across multiple regulators, including NIST, FFIEC, ECB, etc. | Focuses on ensuring operational resilience to ICT disruptions and cyberattacks, with EU-wide applicability. | Auxin integrates tools that cater to both cybersecurity consolidation (CRI) and operational resilience (DORA), ensuring coverage of both regulatory frameworks in one system. |
| Key Components | Diagnostic statements that reduce compliance efforts, simplifying the process of meeting multiple regulatory obligations. | Mandatory ICT risk management, incident reporting, resilience testing, and third-party risk management. | Auxin automates compliance processes for both diagnostic statements (CRI) and ICT resilience testing (DORA), reducing manual efforts and providing real-time compliance monitoring. |
| Third-Party Risk Management | Addresses third-party risks by consolidating regulatory requirements across regions. | Mandates stricter oversight of third-party ICT providers, including resilience and recovery provisions. | Auxin’s solutions ensure thorough management of third-party risks by integrating third-party service monitoring and audit capabilities to meet both CRI and DORA requirements. |
| Incident Reporting | Simplifies the collection and presentation of evidence related to cybersecurity incidents across multiple jurisdictions. | Requires real-time reporting of ICT-related incidents to both national and EU authorities. | Auxin provides real-time incident reporting tools that satisfy both CRI and DORA requirements, ensuring swift responses and detailed reports for internal and external stakeholders. |
| Resilience Testing | Encourages regular cybersecurity resilience testing based on diagnostic statements. | Mandates regular operational resilience testing, including thorough assessments of ICT systems. | Auxin helps implement automated resilience testing tools that align with both frameworks, ensuring FIs are prepared for audits, disruptions, and cyberattacks. |
| Automation Capabilities | Automation is encouraged for collecting and reusing evidence across multiple regulations. | Less emphasis on automation but focuses on reducing manual efforts through resilience testing and third-party management. | Auxin integrates advanced automation tools to reduce manual compliance efforts, allowing for streamlined resilience testing and evidence gathering across both CRI and DORA. |
| Target Audience | Global financial institutions, focusing on simplifying global compliance efforts. | Financial entities operating within the EU, focusing on operational resilience to ICT risks. | Auxin supports both global and EU-based financial institutions by tailoring solutions to each framework, ensuring full compliance with minimal disruption to daily operations. |
This table outlines how the CRI Profile and DORA differ while highlighting how Auxin Security can assist financial institutions in meeting the demands of both frameworks with tailored solutions.
Conclusion
The Cybersecurity Risk and Institute (CRI) Profile and the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) serve distinct yet complementary purposes, with CRI focusing on global compliance and cybersecurity standards, while DORA emphasizes ICT risk management within the EU. Understanding these differences is essential for institutions striving to navigate compliance effectively. Auxin Security offers tailored solutions that streamline adherence to both frameworks, automating processes and integrating tools to help organizations achieve robust security and resilience in an increasingly complex regulatory environment.
