Artifact GuideGLOBALETSI EN 319 401

ETSI EN 319 401 Security incident handling

Turn ETSI EN 319 401 V3.2.1 clause 7.9 into monitoring, classification, response, reporting, testing, and review evidence.

V3.2.1 incorporates NIS2-aligned significance criteria, but current law and the competent authority or CSIRT determine the reporting route and legal deadline.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Oct 15, 2026
Overview

ETSI EN 319 401 V3.2.1 requires an incident handling system that runs from risk-based monitoring and event intake through classification, containment, eradication, recovery, notification, evidence recording, testing, and post-incident review. The standard now includes detailed criteria for deciding whether an event is a . A TSP must still apply the current legal trigger, authority or CSIRT route, and deadline for its service and jurisdiction.

Search this module

Find a question or answer quickly

5 of 5 questions
Question 1

What does ETSI EN 319 401 require for security incidents?

Clause 7.9 of ETSI EN 319 401 V3.2.1 covers monitoring and logging, incident response, reporting, event assessment and classification, and post-incident review. It requires a documented incident handling policy with roles and procedures for timely detection, analysis, containment, response, recovery, documentation, and reporting.

The standard defines incident handling as actions and procedures to prevent, detect, analyse, contain, respond to, and recover from an incident. It also defines an as related and identified information security events that can harm assets or compromise operations, so the incident process should connect event intake, severity assessment, response, and lessons learned.

  • Detect potential security incidents through continuous monitoring and logging mechanisms for the TSP's network and information systems.
  • Define the assets subject to logging from the risk assessment; protect and back up logs for a predefined period; maintain synchronized time sources where feasible; and monitor the logging system independently.
  • Use incident response procedures that include containment, eradication, and recovery, then keep comprehensive documentation throughout detection and response.
  • Analyse reported events, assess severity, and be able to reassess and reclassify events when new inputs appear.
Question 2

Who must be involved in incident response?

The incident policy must assign competent people and connect incident handling to business continuity and disaster recovery. Communication plans must cover the CSIRT or competent authority, internal staff, and relevant external stakeholders. V3.2.1 also calls for incident manuals, escalation charts, contact lists, and templates.

Trusted-role personnel must follow up on potentially critical alerts. The TSP must test incident-response procedures at planned intervals and review roles, responsibilities, and procedures after significant incidents or significant changes to operations or risks.

  • Name the incident owner, trusted role personnel, escalation path, and business continuity handoff before an incident occurs.
  • Keep stakeholder communication plans separate from ad hoc status updates; EN 319 401 expects agreed communication plans and standardised reporting protocols.
  • Train staff on the reporting procedure and communicate the reporting procedure to contractors and customers.
  • Test and review roles, responsibilities, and procedures regularly and after incidents.
Question 3

When is an incident significant and reportable?

V3.2.1 says an incident is significant when any listed criterion is met. The general criteria include actual or potential direct financial loss above EUR 500,000 or 5% of the preceding financial year's turnover, whichever is lower; actual or potential exfiltration of the TSP's trade secrets; actual or potential death or considerable harm to health; successful, suspectedly malicious unauthorised access capable of severe operational disruption; and qualifying recurring incidents.

Trust-service-specific criteria include complete unavailability for more than 20 minutes; unavailability to users or relying parties for more than one hour calculated over a calendar week; limited availability affecting more than 1% or 200,000 Union users or relying parties, whichever is smaller; compromised physical access, or its protection, to a network-and-information-systems area restricted to trusted TSP personnel; or compromised integrity, confidentiality, or authenticity of service-related data affecting more than 0.1% or 100 Union users or relying parties, whichever is smaller. Scheduled interruptions and planned consequences of scheduled maintenance do not count as significant incidents under this test.

Do not treat clause 7.9.3 as the only legal reporting rule. Under NIS2 Article 23, a significant trust-service incident requires an early warning within 24 hours of awareness and, under the trust-service-provider derogation, the incident notification within that same 24-hour period. An intermediate report is due if requested. The final report is due no later than one month after the incident notification; if the incident is still ongoing, submit a progress report then and a final report within one month after handling it. eIDAS Article 19a contains a separate 24-hour rule for significant breaches or disruptions affecting non-qualified trust services. Other regimes can add reports.

  • Record each significance calculation, including user and relying-party counts, duration, financial threshold, data impact, physical-access impact, recurrence, and any scheduled-maintenance exclusion.
  • Identify the applicable rule, CSIRT or authority, awareness time, early-warning deadline, incident-notification deadline, requested intermediate reports, and final-report deadline.
  • Notify affected natural or legal persons without undue delay when the breach is likely to adversely affect the person to whom the trust service was provided.
  • Maintain a simple reporting procedure for staff, contractors, and customers to report possible network and information security incidents.
Question 4

What evidence should an incident file contain?

An EN 319 401 incident file should show the full chain: event source, severity assessment, classification changes, response actions, stakeholder communication, vulnerability handling, continuity coordination, and post-incident review.

Post-incident work must cover technical-vulnerability awareness, exposure evaluation, appropriate measures, root cause, documented lessons, and recurrence reduction. V3.2.1 also requires a quarterly check for recurring incidents that individually fall below the threshold but share an apparent root cause and collectively exceed the financial-loss criterion.

  • Monitoring evidence: alert records, log-review records, and the log categories covered by the monitoring process.
  • Response evidence: containment, eradication, recovery, owner decisions, communication records, and business continuity handoffs.
  • Reporting evidence: regulatory-rule assessment, appropriate-party notification records where applicable, and staff, contractor, or customer intake records.
  • Review evidence: root-cause analysis, vulnerability exposure assessment, mitigation plan or documented no-remediation basis, and proof that the post-incident review occurred.
Question 5

Questions and answers

Does every security event require a regulator report?

No. The TSP should intake and assess events, but a legal report depends on the applicable significance test, affected service, jurisdiction, and reporting rule. Keep the decision record even when the event is below threshold, because recurring incidents can be aggregated when they occur at least twice within six months, share an apparent root cause, and collectively cross the financial-loss threshold.

What is the NIS2 reporting sequence for a significant trust-service incident?

For a affecting provision of a trust service, NIS2 requires an early warning within 24 hours of awareness and, by special rule for trust service providers, the incident notification within that same 24-hour period. Provide an intermediate report if requested and a final report no later than one month after the incident notification. If the incident is still ongoing, submit a progress report then and a final report within one month after handling it.

Does eIDAS Article 19a use the same reporting test?

No. Article 19a applies to non-qualified trust service providers and requires notification of a security breach or service disruption with significant impact no later than 24 hours after awareness. Qualified trust service providers have a separate incident-notification duty in Article 24(2)(fb). NIS2 and its implementing regulation use their own significant-incident framework and reporting sequence. Assess every applicable rule and national procedure instead of treating one report as automatically satisfying all duties.

Primary sources

References and citations

etsi.org5 citations
Referenced sections
  • Primary ETSI source for incident definitions, clause 7.9 monitoring, response, reporting, significance, classification, testing, and post-incident review requirements.
  • Primary ETSI source for clause 7.9 requirements on monitoring, logging, incident response, reporting, event assessment, classification, and post-incident review.
  • Primary ETSI source for clause 7.9.2 incident-response roles, competencies, communication plans, documentation, and continuity interfaces.
Show 2 more
  • Clause 7.9.3 states the reporting procedures, general and trust-service-specific significance criteria, scheduled-maintenance exclusion, user-count method, and recurring-incident test.
  • Primary ETSI source for post-incident review, vulnerability exposure evaluation, root-cause, and evidence-retention expectations relevant to incident files.
"General Policy Requirements for Trust Service Providers"
More quoted passages
"Vulnerabilities and Incident management"
"incident categorisation, well-defined escalation procedures"
"within 24 hours of the breach being identified"
"each past incident led to a post-incident review"
eur-lex.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Binding EU source for trust-service-provider significance thresholds and exclusions reflected in V3.2.1.
  • Binding Article 3 and Article 14 criteria for significant incidents affecting trust service providers, including service-specific thresholds and the scheduled-maintenance exclusion.
eur-lex.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Binding current source for Article 19a duties applying to non-qualified TSPs.
  • Article 19a establishes the current non-qualified TSP risk and 24-hour significant breach or disruption notification duties.
eur-lex.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Binding EU source for significant-incident reporting duties and the trust-service-provider 24-hour notification rule.
  • Article 23 establishes the notification route and the 24-hour trust-service-provider incident notification for significant incidents affecting trust services.
Show all related guides (23)

ETSI EN 319 401 Audit and Conformity Assessment Evidence

How to prepare ETSI EN 319 401 evidence for audit and conformity assessment without overstating what the standard itself assesses.

ETSI EN 319 401 Audit Evidence Pack

Build an ETSI EN 319 401 audit evidence pack around records, logs, policies, risk assessment, incident handling, continuity, and supplier evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 Audit Evidence Pack Workflow

Build an ETSI EN 319 401 audit evidence pack for trust service providers: risk assessment, practice statement, policies, records, logs, continuity, and supplier evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 compliance duties for TSPs

ETSI EN 319 401 compliance guidance for trust service providers covering legal operation, evidence, accessibility, privacy, records, incidents, continuity, and suppliers.

ETSI EN 319 401 FAQ for trust service providers

Plain-language ETSI EN 319 401 answers covering TSP scope, trust service practice statements, risk assessment, incidents, records, continuity, and supplier evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 Incident and Continuity Workflow

Build an EN 319 401 incident and continuity evidence workflow for TSP monitoring, response, reporting, records, backup recovery, and crisis review.

ETSI EN 319 401 Incident Reporting and Continuity Duties

Practical ETSI EN 319 401 V3.1.1 guidance for trust service incident response, reporting, evidence retention, business continuity, and termination planning.

ETSI EN 319 401 Personnel, Asset, and Access Controls

Clause-focused EN 319 401 V3.1.1 guide to TSP personnel duties, trusted roles, asset inventories, classification, and access-control evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 policy and security requirements

ETSI EN 319 401 guidance for TSP policy and security requirements covering risk assessment, practice statements, terms, security controls, incidents, and evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 requirements map

Map ETSI EN 319 401 V3.1.1 requirements for trust service providers across risk assessment, policies, TSP operations, incidents, evidence, continuity, termination, and supply chain controls.

ETSI EN 319 401 Risk Assessment and Treatment

Clause-cited ETSI EN 319 401 V3.1.1 guidance for trust service risk assessment, risk treatment, residual-risk approval, and evidence planning.

ETSI EN 319 401 Subcontractor Controls

Practical EN 319 401 guidance for TSP subcontractor controls: retained responsibility, agreements, SLAs, supplier registers, monitoring, and audit evidence.

ETSI EN 319 401 Subcontractor Evidence Workflow

Build an EN 319 401 subcontractor evidence workflow for TSP supplier agreements, SLAs, audit mechanisms, risk reviews, supplier registers, and archived records.

ETSI EN 319 401 Trust Service Applicability Workflow

A scoped workflow for deciding when ETSI EN 319 401 applies to a trust service and what TSP policy, risk, terms, operations, and supplier evidence to collect.

ETSI EN 319 401 Trust Service Provider Applicability

Use ETSI EN 319 401 to decide whether a trust service provider activity falls in the standard's type-independent baseline and what service, policy, risk, supplier, and evidence boundaries to document.

ETSI EN 319 401 vs eIDAS: Controls and Legal Duties

Compare ETSI EN 319 401 V3.2.1 with current eIDAS duties for qualified and non-qualified trust service providers, including risk, incidents, audits, records, and termination.

ETSI EN 319 401 vs EN 319 403-1: TSP Policy vs CAB Assessment

Compare ETSI EN 319 401 V3.2.1 provider controls with EN 319 403-1 V2.3.1 CAB requirements for audit scope, evidence, sampling, reports, corrective action, and reassessment.