Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking Sample Clauses

The Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking clause establishes requirements for conducting security testing on software applications to identify and address potential vulnerabilities. Typically, this clause outlines the scope, frequency, and methods for authorized penetration testing or ethical hacking, often specifying who may perform the assessments and under what conditions. Its core practical function is to proactively detect and remediate security weaknesses, thereby reducing the risk of data breaches and ensuring the ongoing security and integrity of the application.
POPULAR SAMPLE Copied 1 times
Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking. Iron Mountain shall, at least annually, perform vulnerability assessments on applications in its hosted environment(s) used to provide services that Process Customer Personal Data. Detailed results are the confidential and proprietary information of Iron Mountain and will not be provided.
View Source
Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking. No less frequently than once every twelve (12) months, data importer shall, perform vulnerability assessments on applications in its hosted environment(s) used to handle personal data.
View Source
Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking. Contractor should perform application penetration tests or ethical hacking of proprietary web facing applications. Industry standards such as OWASP should be utilized as a foundation for detecting vulnerabilities in the applications, and measuring the effectiveness of the application security controls in place.
View Source

Related to Application Vulnerability Assessments/Ethical Hacking

  • PROCUREMENT ETHICS Contractor understands that a person who is interested in any way in the sale of any supplies, services, construction, or insurance to the State of Utah is violating the law if the person gives or offers to give any compensation, gratuity, contribution, loan, reward, or any promise thereof to any person acting as a procurement officer on behalf of the State of Utah, or who in any official capacity participates in the procurement of such supplies, services, construction, or insurance, whether it is given for their own use or for the use or benefit of any other person or organization.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures. 2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to: (a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party; (b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties; (c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party; (d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party; (e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements; (f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and (g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity. 3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures. 4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) (eff. Apr. 1, 2025, Section 544.0106, pursuant to House Bill 4611, Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S.) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.

  • Diagnostic Assessment 6.3.1 Boards shall provide a list of pre-approved assessment tools consistent with their Board improvement plan for student achievement and which is compliant with Ministry of Education PPM (PPM 155: Diagnostic Assessment in Support of Student Learning, date of issue January 7, 2013). 6.3.2 Teachers shall use their professional judgment to determine which assessment and/or evaluation tool(s) from the Board list of preapproved assessment tools is applicable, for which student(s), as well as the frequency and timing of the tool. In order to inform their instruction, teachers must utilize diagnostic assessment during the school year.