Standards Comparison

    DORA

    Mandatory
    2023

    EU regulation for digital operational resilience in financial sector

    VS

    SOX

    Mandatory
    2002

    U.S. law mandating internal controls over financial reporting

    Quick Verdict

    DORA mandates ICT resilience for EU financial firms via risk frameworks and penetration testing, while SOX enforces financial reporting integrity for U.S. public companies through ICFR assessments and CEO certifications. Organizations adopt them for regulatory compliance and investor trust.

    Digital Operational Resilience

    DORA

    Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 - Digital Operational Resilience Act

    Cost
    €€€€
    Complexity
    High
    Implementation Time
    18-24 months

    Key Features

    • Mandates comprehensive ICT risk management frameworks
    • Requires 4-hour initial reporting for major incidents
    • Enforces triennial threat-led penetration testing (TLPT)
    • Oversees critical third-party ICT providers (CTPPs)
    • Harmonizes resilience standards across 27 EU states
    Financial Reporting

    SOX

    Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

    Cost
    €€€
    Complexity
    Medium
    Implementation Time
    18-24 months

    Key Features

    • CEO/CFO certification of financial reports (Sections 302/906)
    • Management ICFR assessment and auditor attestation (Section 404)
    • PCAOB oversight of public company auditors (Title I)
    • Auditor independence and rotation requirements (Title II)
    • Whistleblower protections and document retention (Sections 806/802)

    Detailed Analysis

    A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

    DORA Details

    What It Is

    Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), formally Regulation (EU) 2022/2554, is an EU regulation bolstering ICT resilience in finance against disruptions like cyberattacks. Applicable to 20 financial entity types and critical ICT providers, it mandates proactive, risk-based strategies, entering full force January 17, 2025.

    Key Components

    • **ICT Risk ManagementFrameworks for identifying, mitigating risks with annual reviews.
    • **Incident Reporting4-hour notifications, 72-hour updates for major incidents.
    • **Resilience TestingAnnual scans, triennial TLPT for critical functions.
    • **Third-Party OversightDue diligence, monitoring of CTPPs by ESAs. Built on harmonized RTS/ITS, emphasizes proportionality; compliance via supervisory oversight, no certification.

    Why Organizations Use It

    Mandatory for EU finance to meet legal requirements, mitigate systemic risks (e.g., 74% ransomware hit rate), enhance recovery (RTO <4 hours), and build trust. Drives cybersecurity investments, reduces outage costs, offers competitive resilience amid threats like CrowdStrike.

    Implementation Overview

    Gap analysis, policy setup, tool deployment, testing programs, vendor contracts. Targets ~22,000 EU entities, scalable by size/complexity. Involves RTS adherence, incident simulations; audited via ESAs, penalties up to 2% turnover.

    SOX Details

    What It Is

    Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) is a U.S. federal regulation enacted post-Enron scandals to protect investors via accurate corporate disclosures. It mandates internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) assessments using a risk-based approach aligned with frameworks like COSO.

    Key Components

    • **Three pillarsPCAOB oversight (Title I), auditor independence (Title II), executive accountability (Titles III–XI).
    • Key sections: 302/906 (CEO/CFO certifications), 404 (ICFR assessment/attestation), 409 (real-time disclosures).
    • Built on COSO principles; no fixed controls, focuses on key risks.
    • Compliance via annual management reports and auditor attestation (exemptions for smaller filers).

    Why Organizations Use It

    • Legal mandate for U.S. public companies; severe penalties for non-compliance.
    • Enhances investor trust, reduces restatements, lowers cost of capital.
    • Drives operational efficiency, fraud deterrence, M&A readiness.

    Implementation Overview

    • **Phased, risk-basedscoping, documentation, testing, monitoring.
    • Applies to public issuers; scales by size (exemptions for EGCs/non-accelerated filers).
    • Requires PCAOB-audited attestation for larger firms; ongoing annual cycles.

    Key Differences

    Scope

    DORA
    ICT risk management, resilience testing, third-party oversight
    SOX
    Financial reporting, internal controls (ICFR), governance

    Industry

    DORA
    EU financial entities and critical ICT providers
    SOX
    U.S. public companies and auditors

    Nature

    DORA
    Mandatory EU regulation with ESA enforcement
    SOX
    Mandatory U.S. federal law with SEC/PCAOB oversight

    Testing

    DORA
    Annual basic tests, triennial TLPT for critical entities
    SOX
    Annual ICFR assessment and auditor attestation

    Penalties

    DORA
    Up to 2% global turnover, oversight fees
    SOX
    Criminal fines up to $5M, 20 years imprisonment

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Common questions about DORA and SOX

    DORA FAQ

    SOX FAQ

    You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

    Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

    Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

    Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

    100+ Standards & Regulations
    AI-Powered Insights
    Collaborative Assessments
    Actionable Recommendations

    Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages