KSI-PIY-RES—Reviewing Executive Support
Formerly KSI-PIY-08
>Control Description
>Trust Center Components3
Ways to express your implementation of this indicator — approaches vary by organization size, complexity, and data sensitivity.
From the field: Mature implementations express data rights as an operationalized service — self-service DSAR portals processing requests automatically, fulfillment metrics tracked as dashboard indicators, and response time SLAs measured against actual performance. Data rights become a measurable service with API-driven fulfillment.
Data Subject Rights Portal
Self-service portal expressing data rights as a product feature — individuals exercise access, deletion, and portability rights directly
Data Rights Fulfillment Metrics
Dashboard expressing DSAR fulfillment posture — volume, response times, and completion rates as live indicators
Data Rights Request SLA
Human-readable SLAs for responding to data subject access requests
>Programmatic Queries
CLI Commands
jira issue list --project SECURITY --status "In Progress,Done" --created-after "-90d" --plainjira board list --project SECURITY --plain>20x Assessment Focus Areas
Aligned with FedRAMP 20x Phase Two assessment methodology
Completeness & Coverage:
- •Does executive oversight cover all dimensions of the security program — risk management, compliance, investment, staffing, incident response, and strategic direction?
- •Are executive roles and responsibilities for security clearly defined, including accountability for FedRAMP authorization and ongoing compliance?
- •How do you ensure executive support extends to resource allocation (headcount, tooling budget, training) and not just verbal endorsement?
- •Are there security program areas that lack adequate executive visibility or sponsorship, and how are those gaps escalated?
Automation & Validation:
- •What automated dashboards or reports keep executives informed of security posture, risk levels, and compliance status without requiring manual compilation?
- •How do you measure whether executive decisions (resource allocation, risk acceptance, strategic direction) actually improve security outcomes?
- •What automated escalation triggers when security risks exceed defined thresholds, ensuring executive awareness without waiting for scheduled reviews?
- •How do you validate that executive-approved risk acceptances are still appropriate and have not become stale?
Inventory & Integration:
- •What GRC platform or reporting tool provides executives with aggregated security metrics and risk data?
- •How do executive reporting dashboards integrate with underlying security tools to provide accurate, real-time data rather than manually curated reports?
- •What mechanisms ensure executive security reviews are connected to operational outcomes (budget approvals, staffing decisions, project prioritization)?
- •How is executive engagement in security tracked and documented — board meeting minutes, risk committee records, decision logs?
Continuous Evidence & Schedules:
- •How frequently does executive leadership review security program status, and what evidence demonstrates each review occurred?
- •Is executive engagement data (review dates, decisions made, resources allocated) available in structured format for assessor review?
- •How do you demonstrate that executive support is persistent and effective rather than limited to annual compliance reviews?
- •What evidence shows executive-directed security improvements were implemented and produced measurable results?
Update History
Ask AI
Configure your API key to use AI features.