Skip to content
HodeiShield®

How do I evaluate TPRM platforms for my sector?

By HodeitekPublished

For security and compliance leads who are about to buy, compare or replace a third-party risk tool and want to know what their regulation asks before they see a demo.

Start from the regime that binds you, not from the feature list. For each rule (DORA, NIS2, ENS, HIPAA, CMMC 2.0, SAMA or ECC) check what it asks about third parties, what evidence it expects and whether the platform keeps that evidence with an owner and a date. Then test with your own suppliers before you buy.

Download the checklist as PDFTPRM platform evaluation checklist by sector. PDF, direct download, no form

Criteria that apply to any sector

Before looking at each rule, six questions always apply. None depends on the brand of the tool, and all of them can be tested in a demo with your own data.

What to check in the platform

  • A third-party inventory with an internal owner, criticality, contract data and subcontractors.
  • Evidence with an owner, a validity date and a status, and expired evidence that stops counting.
  • How supplier information is obtained: questionnaire, documents, external scan, SBOM. Each route measures something different.
  • How the score or risk is calculated: visible inputs, a documented method and estimates marked as estimates.
  • A change log, export of your data and an API, so you can leave the tool.
  • Where data is hosted, which subprocessors take part and what the platform does not do. None makes you compliant on its own.

DORA: EU financial entities

DORA is Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 and has applied since 17 January 2025. Article 28 makes clear that the entity stays responsible even when it outsources, requires an ICT third-party risk strategy and, in paragraph 3, a register of information on all contractual arrangements. Article 29 asks for an assessment of concentration risk, Article 30 sets minimum contract terms (with exit plans and access and audit rights for critical or important functions) and Article 31 sets up the designation of critical providers, which then fall under EU oversight.

The format of the register is set by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2956.

What to check in the platform

  • A register with LEI, jurisdiction, the function supported and criticality per provider and per contract.
  • Export in the format of the official templates (the supervisors' guidance names xBRL-CSV packages), with filing through the official channel still in your hands.
  • Per-contract tracking of exit plan, audit right and the subcontracting chain.
  • A concentration view: how many functions depend on the same provider.

Source: Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 (DORA), Articles 28 to 31, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab); Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2956, register of information templates, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)

NIS2: essential and important entities in the EU

Directive (EU) 2022/2555 requires, in Article 21(2)(d), supply chain security measures, including the security aspects of the relationship with each direct supplier. Article 21(3) adds that you must take into account the vulnerabilities specific to each supplier and the overall quality of its products and cybersecurity practices. Article 20 makes the management body responsible for approving and overseeing those measures.

For DNS, cloud, data centre, managed service and other specific provider types, Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 adds technical requirements.

What to check in the platform

  • Assessment per supplier covering vulnerabilities and security practices, not only a generic questionnaire.
  • Incident notification clauses from the supplier towards you, with deadline tracking.
  • Reports that the management body can approve and review.
  • Incident handling with the Article 23 deadlines: 24 hours, 72 hours and one month.

Source: Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2), Articles 20, 21 and 23, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab); Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, technical and methodological requirements, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)

ENS: the Spanish public sector and its suppliers

Royal Decree 311/2022 applies to the public sector and, under Article 2(3), also to the systems of private entities that provide services or solutions to a public body. In Annex II, measure op.ext.1 asks for a service level agreement before external resources are used, op.ext.2 for a routine system to measure compliance with it and op.ext.3 for protection of the supply chain.

The first two apply at medium and high category; op.ext.3 applies at high category.

What to check in the platform

  • That it distinguishes the system category (basic, medium, high) and shows which op.ext measures apply.
  • Service level agreements per supplier and periodic measurement of compliance.
  • Impact and risk analysis for an incident that starts in the supply chain, with containment measures.
  • The supplier's own ENS conformity status when it serves a public body.

Source: Royal Decree 311/2022 (ENS), Article 2 and Annex II, op.ext measures, in the BOE (Spanish) (opens in a new tab)

HIPAA: US healthcare and business associates

Under HIPAA, anyone who creates, receives, maintains or transmits protected health information on behalf of a covered entity is a business associate. The Security Rule (45 CFR 164.308(b) and 164.314(a)) lets a business associate handle ePHI only with satisfactory assurances in a contract. Sections 164.502(e) and 164.504(e) cover the same for the Privacy Rule, including the assurances the business associate must obtain from its own subcontractors.

A business associate must notify the covered entity of a breach without unreasonable delay and no later than 60 calendar days after discovery (164.410).

What to check in the platform

  • A flag for which third parties touch health information and the status of each business associate contract, with dates.
  • A record of the business associate's subcontractors and their assurances.
  • Tracking of breach notification clauses and the 60-day limit.
  • If the platform itself will store health information, it is a business associate: ask for the contract before loading data.

Source: 45 CFR 164.308(b), business associate contracts, on eCFR (opens in a new tab); 45 CFR 164.314(a), business associate contracts (Security Rule), on eCFR (opens in a new tab); 45 CFR 164.502(e), disclosures to business associates, on eCFR (opens in a new tab); 45 CFR 164.504(e), content of business associate contracts, on eCFR (opens in a new tab); 45 CFR 164.410, notification by a business associate, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)

CMMC 2.0: the US defence supply chain

The CMMC program is in 32 CFR Part 170. Section 170.23 requires the prime contractor to comply and to require its subcontractors to comply, with a minimum level that depends on the information they handle: Level 1 for federal contract information without CUI and at least Level 2 where there is CUI. Section 170.16(c) and 170.17(c) add that a cloud provider handling CUI must be FedRAMP Moderate authorized or meet equivalent requirements.

What to check in the platform

  • A field per supplier for the type of information it handles (FCI or CUI) and the CMMC level required.
  • Evidence that you have flowed the requirements down in the contract.
  • The status of each subcontractor against the required level, with the date of the last evidence.
  • If you will load CUI into the tool, that its hosting meets the cloud requirement of 170.16(c).

Source: 32 CFR 170.23, application to subcontractors, on eCFR (opens in a new tab); 32 CFR Part 170 (CMMC program), on eCFR (opens in a new tab)

SAMA and NCA ECC: Saudi financial and national sectors

The SAMA Cyber Security Framework devotes domain 3.4 to third parties, with three subdomains: 3.4.1 contract and vendor management, 3.4.2 outsourcing and 3.4.3 cloud computing. The NCA Essential Cybersecurity Controls (ECC-2:2024) include domain 4, third-party and cloud computing cybersecurity.

What to check in the platform

  • That the framework library includes SAMA and ECC and states the edition (the one we consulted is ECC-2:2024).
  • An inventory of third parties with access to systems or data, and contract clauses per supplier.
  • A flag for outsourcing and cloud providers, which have their own subdomain in SAMA.
  • Evidence per control, with an owner and a date, to answer the supervising body.

Source: SAMA Cyber Security Framework, domain 3.4 «Third Party Cyber Security», in the SAMA Rulebook (opens in a new tab); NCA Essential Cybersecurity Controls (ECC-2:2024), domain 4 (opens in a new tab)

Types of tool and where HodeiShield fits

There are four families and none is better in the abstract: questionnaire and evidence collection platforms, external security rating services, GRC suites with a vendor module, and integrated platforms that join supplier evidence, risk quantification and multi-framework compliance. HodeiShield belongs to the fourth, and it is one option among others.

According to its documentation, it calculates a supplier score from 0 to 100 with dependencies in a graph, blast radius and a concentration index (HHI); runs an external scan (exposed ports, CVEs, known breaches), matches supplier SBOMs (CycloneDX or SPDX) against OSV.dev and offers a portal where the supplier answers questionnaires through a single-use link, with no account. It quantifies FAIR exposure in euros with a simulated uncertainty band (uncalibrated). It measures 17 frameworks, among them NIS2, ENS, DORA, HIPAA, CMMC 2.0, SAMA CSF and Saudi ECC-1:2018, as coverage measured against its controls, not as certification.

Limits: documentary evidence is uploaded or linked, not pulled from the cloud. It generates the DORA register of information as an xBRL-CSV package, but you file it.

How to run the comparison

With two or three candidates, load the same ten real suppliers into each, including the most critical one and the one with the most subcontractors. Ask each tool to produce what your supervisor or auditor would ask for: the register, the evidence for one control and the deadline for an incident. Score with the list in the PDF and note what each one does not do.

Frequently asked questions

What is a TPRM platform?
Software to inventory third parties, collect and monitor their security evidence, measure their risk and keep the records that supervisors ask for. TPRM stands for third-party risk management.
Does a TPRM platform make me compliant with DORA or NIS2?
No. Responsibility stays with the entity (DORA Article 28) and, under NIS2, with the management body (Article 20). The tool organises data and deadlines; you take the decisions.
What is the difference between an external scan and a questionnaire?
The scan measures what can be seen from outside, such as exposed ports or known breaches. The questionnaire collects what the supplier declares about its internal controls. They complement each other and neither proves on its own that a control works.
Which suppliers do I start with?
Those that support critical or important functions (DORA), those that touch health information (HIPAA) or CUI (CMMC), and those with no alternative. Then widen by criticality.
What if I am subject to several rules at once?
Look for a mapping between frameworks so that the same evidence can be reused, and check that each correspondence can be reviewed. An answer that serves two frameworks is only worth something if the correspondence is right.
What do I ask about where my data is stored?
Hosting region, subprocessors, encryption, backups and how you get your data back when you leave. Depending on the regime there may be extra requirements, such as the cloud requirement of 170.16(c) in CMMC.

TPRM platform evaluation checklist by sector

The common criteria and those for DORA, NIS2, ENS, HIPAA, CMMC 2.0 and SAMA or ECC in one printable list, with the source of each rule and room for notes.

Download the checklist as PDF

PDF, direct download, no form

How do I achieve NIS2 compliance with software?If NIS2 is your main regime, read what software can and cannot do for compliance.

Sources

  1. Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 (DORA), Articles 28 to 31, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)
  2. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2956, register of information templates, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)
  3. Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2), Articles 20, 21 and 23, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)
  4. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, technical and methodological requirements, on EUR-Lex (opens in a new tab)
  5. Royal Decree 311/2022 (ENS), Article 2 and Annex II, op.ext measures, in the BOE (Spanish) (opens in a new tab)
  6. 45 CFR 164.308(b), business associate contracts, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  7. 45 CFR 164.314(a), business associate contracts (Security Rule), on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  8. 45 CFR 164.502(e), disclosures to business associates, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  9. 45 CFR 164.504(e), content of business associate contracts, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  10. 45 CFR 164.410, notification by a business associate, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  11. 32 CFR 170.23, application to subcontractors, on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  12. 32 CFR Part 170 (CMMC program), on eCFR (opens in a new tab)
  13. SAMA Cyber Security Framework, domain 3.4 «Third Party Cyber Security», in the SAMA Rulebook (opens in a new tab)
  14. NCA Essential Cybersecurity Controls (ECC-2:2024), domain 4 (opens in a new tab)

Try the list with your suppliers

In a demo we load sample suppliers into HodeiShield and go through this list point by point, including what it does not cover. A person from Hodeitek answers you.

Request a demo