I've noticed that while we have procedures for vendor security reviews before onboarding, things can get tricky once the contract is signed. Vendors often change subprocessors, relocate hosting, or update their security measures, and we typically find out about these changes through emails. Customers expect us to manage these risks, but it feels like we're relying too heavily on vendors to inform us of changes. What are the best practices for keeping our vendor risk assessments up to date during the life of a contract?
3 Answers
It sounds like you’ve hit the nail on the head! Onboarding reviews can be easy, but mid-contract changes can really cause problems if you’re not proactive. Establishing what defines a material change, including notification requirements in the contracts, and scheduling regular refresh reviews based on the criticality of the vendor makes so much sense. Definitely treat vendor risk as an ongoing process rather than a one-time check!
It's a common issue, so no need to stress too much! Initial vendor reviews tend to be pretty structured, but ongoing monitoring often isn't. A lot of teams find it helpful to define what constitutes a material change and require vendors to notify them in the contract. Setting up periodic refresh reviews, especially for high-risk vendors, can help avoid chaos later on.
We tackled this by standardizing our vendor tracking process. It was a mess before, but now we keep all updates and evidence organized in one system, which really streamlined everything. We used a tool called Delve to centralize everything, so we aren't just searching through tons of emails anymore.
Related Questions
Can't Load PhpMyadmin On After Server Update
Redirect www to non-www in Apache Conf
How To Check If Your SSL Cert Is SHA 1
Windows TrackPad Gestures