Secure Controls Framework
Download The SCF
SCF COREFAQAboutContact

Creative Commons. No Cost. No Registration Required

Download SCF MA&D

SCF MA&D is included in the SCF download, the complete cyber due diligence, risk quantification, integration, and separation framework built on the Common Controls Framework™. One download, complete M&A toolkit.

Download the MA&D

CDPAS Assessment

Evidence Request List

Explore Additional SCF Content

Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Volunteer-driven by the SCF Council. No registration required.

Creative Commons. No Cost. No Registration Required

Download SCF MA&D

SCF MA&D is included in the SCF download, the complete cyber due diligence, risk quantification, integration, and separation framework built on the Common Controls Framework™. One download, complete M&A toolkit.

Download the MA&DExplore Additional SCF ContentExplore Additional SCF ContentExplore Additional SCF Content

Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Volunteer-driven by the SCF Council. No registration required.

Free Content

MADSS: Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures Security Standards

The Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures Security Standards (MADSS) provides a standardized approach to MA&D cybersecurity and data privacy due diligence. Based on the CDPAS assessment framework, MADSS normalizes MA&D-related Third-Party Internal Control Assessment (3PICA) Services built on the Common Controls Framework™.

8
Standard Categories
50+
Sub-Standards Defined
FREE
Creative Commons
MADSS Standards

Standardizing MA&D Cybersecurity Due Diligence

The SCF took on an ambitious project to “build a better mousetrap” to fix common complaints associated with MA&D due diligence. The MADSS provides a cohesive, consistent set of standards for evaluating cybersecurity and data protection controls as part of MA&D activities.

The MADSS is not one-size-fits-all. Instead, the guidance should be adopted and tailored to the unique size, resources and risk circumstances of each organization. It can be modified, or augmented, with specific requirements. By following this methodology, cybersecurity and data privacy practitioners can improve the currently disjointed approach used to perform assessments of cybersecurity and/or data privacy controls.

The MADSS is based on the SCF’s Cybersecurity & Data Protection Assessment Standards (CDPAS). Per NIST, a standard is a document, established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, which provides for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines or characteristics for activities or their results, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context.”

Assessment vs. Audit

The MADSS focuses on third-party assessments, not audits. An assessment evaluates whether controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended, and producing the desired outcome. An audit independently examines records and activities to ensure compliance with established controls and procedures. These terms are not interchangeable.

MADSS Standards

Who Uses MADSS?

The intended audience encompasses the “assessment ecosystem,” including all parties involved in MA&D cybersecurity due diligence activities.

Entity Being Acquired (EBA)

The organization (seller/target company) seeking to be acquired by another entity. EBAs must demonstrate proactive governance and maintain evidence of their cybersecurity and data privacy posture for assessment.

Acquiring Entity (AE)

The organization (buyer/acquirer/suitor) seeking to acquire another entity. AEs define risk tolerances, maturity levels, and materiality thresholds that form the assessment criteria.

Third-Party Assessor (TPA)

A company or individual that performs MA&D-related cybersecurity and/or data protection control assessment services. TPAs must demonstrate subject matter competency, independence, and ethical conduct.

External Service Providers (ESP)

Independent third-party organizations providing services, technologies, facilities and/or people, including consultants, Cloud Service Providers (CSPs), Managed Service Providers (MSPs), and MSSPs.

MADSS Standards

MA&D Considerations for Threat Identification & Risk Management

From an MA&D perspective, the goal of threat identification and risk analysis is to determine whether criteria fall within acceptable or unacceptable risk parameters. Understanding the relationship between risk appetite, risk tolerance, and risk thresholds is vital.

Risk Appetite (Strategic)

The types and amount of risk, on a broad level, an organization is willing to accept in its pursuit of value. Defined at the corporate level where strategic actions and decisions are made. Can be organization-wide or compartmentalized.

Risk Tolerance (Operational)

The level of risk an entity is willing to assume in order to achieve a desired result. Put into practice at the Line of Business (LOB) level where operational actions and decisions are made, defined by the established risk appetite.

Risk Thresholds (Tactical)

Values used to establish concrete decision points and operational control limits to trigger management action and response escalation. Used at the department/team level to assess operational risk within tolerance.

Risks vs. Threats

A risk exists due to a control absence or deficiency. A threat affects the ability of a control to exist or operate properly. Both tie into cybersecurity and data protection controls, but understanding the differences is critical for MA&D due diligence.

MADSS Standards

Eight Standard Categories

The MADSS defines eight standard categories covering the complete lifecycle of MA&D cybersecurity due diligence, from professional duty of care through conformity designation.

Below, you can view each standard and their corresponding substandards in more detail.

Standard 1: Professional Duty of Care
Establishes ethical and professional requirements for all parties involved in the assessment process.
Standard
#
Standard Name
1.1
Ethical Conduct
1.2
Independence
1.3
Subject Matter Competency
1.4
Conflict of Interest (COI) Avoidance
Standard 2: Secure Practices
Defines security and data protection requirements for the assessment process itself, protecting sensitive information throughout.
Standard
#
Standard Name
2.1
Security & Data Protection by Design & by Default
2.2
Statement of Work (SOW)
2.3
Assessment-Specific Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
2.4
Intellectual Property (IP) Protections
2.5
Protection of Assessment Information
2.6
Use of Assessment Information
2.7
Disposal of Assessment Information
Standard 3: MA&D Due Diligence for EBA & AE
Covers due diligence requirements for both the Entity Being Acquired and the Acquiring Entity, including boundary demarcation, stakeholder identification, control definitions, risk tolerance, maturity levels, and post-close planning.
Standard
#
Standard Name
3.1
Adherence To Data Protection Requirements
3.2
Assessment Boundary Demarcation
3.3
Graphical Representation of Assessment Boundary
3.4
Stakeholder Identification
3.5
Control Reciprocity
3.6
Control Inheritance
3.7
Defined Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Controls
3.8
Defined Risk Tolerance
3.9
Defined Maturity Level
3.10
Defined Materiality Threshold
3.11
Material Risk Designation
3.12
Material Threat Designation
3.13
Material Incident Designation
3.14
Internal MA&D Assessment
3.15
Implemented Capability
3.16
Virtual Data Room (VDR)
3.17
Post-Close Integration Security Plan (PCISP)
Standard 4: MA&D Due Diligence for Third-Party Assessors
Defines requirements for Third-Party Assessors (TPAs) conducting the independent assessment, including control sets, assessment planning, boundaries, evidence, and stakeholder validation.
Standard
#
Standard Name
4.1
Agreed Upon Control Set
4.2
Formalized Assessment Plan
4.3
Defined Assessment Boundaries
4.4
Validate Control Applicability
4.5
Defined Evidence Request List (ERL)
4.6
Explicit Authorization For Testing
4.7
First-Party Declarations (1PD): Control Inheritance
4.8
Third-Party Attestations (3PA): Control Inheritance & Reciprocity
4.9
Stakeholder Validation
Standard 5: MA&D Due Care for EBA
Establishes due care requirements for the Entity Being Acquired, including proactive governance and non-conformity oversight responsibilities.
Standard
#
Standard Name
5.1
Proactive Governance
5.2
Non-Conformity Oversight
Standard 6: MA&D Due Care for Third-Party Assessors
Defines the assessment execution requirements for TPAs, including methods, rigor levels, assessment objectives, control designation, objectivity, sampling, and automation.
Standard
#
Standard Name
6.1
Assessment Methods
6.2
Assessment Rigor
6.3
Assessing Based On Control Applicability
6.4
Assessment Objectives (AOs)
6.5
Control Designation
6.6
Objectivity Through Reasonable Interpretation
6.7
Adequate Sampling
6.8
MA&D Assessment Tools & Automation
A&D Assessment Tools & Automation
Ensures assessment integrity through structured findings documentation and objective peer review processes.
Standard
#
Standard Name
7.1
MA&D Assessment Findings
7.2
Objective Peer Review
Standard 8: Conformity Designation
Governs the final output of the assessment, including the Report on Conformity (ROC), finding challenges, and projected remediation cost estimation.
Standard
#
Standard Name
8.1
Report On Conformity (ROC)
8.2
MA&D Assessment Finding Challenges
8.3
Projected MA&D Remediation Costs
Control Applicability

PPTDF Control Applicability Framework

The MADSS uses the People, Processes, Technologies, Data and Facilities (PPTDF) framework to categorize control applicability across the assessment boundary.

People

Human resources, roles, responsibilities, training, awareness, and personnel security controls applicable to the assessment boundary.

Processes

Administrative and operational procedures, policies, standards, and governance activities that define how controls are managed and executed.

Technologies

Technical controls including systems, applications, services, and infrastructure components within the assessment boundary.

Data

Data classification, handling, protection, privacy, retention, and disposal controls for information within scope of the assessment.

Facilities

Physical security controls for buildings, offices, data centers, and other physical locations within the assessment boundary.

Assessment Rigor

Three Levels of Assessment Rigor

The MADSS recognizes three levels of rigor to assess a control, each with increasing depth and coverage to provide corresponding levels of assurance.

Level 1: Standard Rigor

Minimum assurance. Determines whether applicable controls are implemented and free of obvious errors. Provides a baseline level of understanding of administrative, technical and physical measures.

Level 2: Enhanced Rigor

Moderate assurance. Determines whether controls are implemented, free of obvious/apparent errors, and provides increased grounds for confidence that controls are implemented correctly and operating as intended.

Level 3: Comprehensive Rigor

High assurance. Provides further increased confidence that controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended on an ongoing and consistent basis, and supports continuous improvement in effectiveness.

Assessment Methods: Examine, Interview & Test

Assessors independently verify conformity using three methods: Examine (checking/inspecting/reviewing assessment objects), Interview (conducting discussions to facilitate understanding), and Test (exercising assessment objects under specified conditions to compare actual with expected behavior).

Valuation Impact

Considerations to Improve Valuation & Reduce Risk

Cybersecurity posture directly impacts MA&D valuation. The MADSS appendices address how security practices can affect deal value, both positively and negatively.

Red Flags That Can Hurt Valuation

!

Material control deficiencies or material weaknesses

!

Undisclosed material incidents or breaches

!

Non-compliance with regulatory obligations

!

Absence of governance documentation

!

No defined risk tolerance or maturity targets

Opportunities to Improve Valuation

Demonstrated maturity at L2+ across material controls

Third-party assessment evidence and attestations

Documented risk management and treatment plans

Proactive governance and compliance programs

Post-Close Integration Security Plan (PCISP) readiness

Continuous Improvement

Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA)

The MADSS is designed to operate within a continuous PDCA improvement cycle, enabling organizations to systematically improve their MA&D due diligence practices over time.

P

PLAN

Define the MA&D assessment scope and boundaries. Identify stakeholders, agree upon the control set, define risk tolerances and maturity levels, and establish the assessment plan with the Evidence Request List (ERL).

D

DO

Conduct the MA&D assessment using the three methods (Examine, Interview, Test). Evaluate controls against PPTDF applicability. Document findings, control designations, and gather evidence through the Virtual Data Room (VDR).

C

CHECK

Perform objective peer review of assessment findings. Validate conformity designations. Calculate projected remediation costs. Compare findings against defined materiality thresholds and risk tolerances.

A

ACT

Issue the Report on Conformity (ROC). Address finding challenges. Develop the Post-Close Integration Security Plan (PCISP). Incorporate lessons learned into future MA&D due diligence processes.

Related SCF Content

MADSS Works With CDPAS & SCR-CMM

The MADSS is built on the CDPAS assessment framework and integrates with SCR-CMM maturity levels, creating a comprehensive ecosystem for MA&D cybersecurity due diligence.

MADSS: MA&D Security Standards

MA&D-specific assessment standards providing performance standards for cybersecurity and data protection-related 3PICA Services in mergers, acquisitions and divestitures. 8 Standards, 50+ Sub-Standards, 3PICA Services.

CDPAS: Assessment Standards

The general-purpose cybersecurity & data protection assessment standards that MADSS is built upon. CDPAS provides the foundational assessment methodology.

SCR-CMM: Capability Maturity Model

Provides the L0–L5 maturity scoring system used within MADSS to define and evaluate maturity level expectations for MA&D due diligence.