DORA Logging and Detection Requirements (Article 10) and SIEM Evidence

What “Good” Looks Like

• Centralised logging for critical ICT assets and identity systems
• Use cases covering anomalous behaviour, privilege abuse, and availability signals
• Documented triage / escalation into ICT incident management
• Retention and integrity controls sufficient for forensics and reporting packs

Link to Reporting Clocks

Detection quality determines whether you can meet the awareness backstop for major-incident initial notification. See 4-hour / 72-hour / 1-month deadlines.

SIEM Role

A SIEM/SOAR platform such as ThreatHawk is a common way to evidence Article 10 — provided content packs and on-call coverage match critical functions. Tools alone are insufficient without trained responders.

How CyberSilo Helps

• Pillar-by-pillar evidence maps in CSA for DORA
• Detection and major-incident timelines with ThreatHawk SIEM
• Advisory scoping — contact CyberSilo

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Article 10 mandate a specific SIEM vendor?

No. It requires effective detection mechanisms. SIEM/MDR is a common implementation path, not a named-vendor mandate.

Is log collection enough?

No. Prompt detection implies analytics, alerting, and human response paths — collection without detection use cases fails the intent.

How does this relate to Articles 5–16?

Article 10 is one component of the ICT risk management framework spanning Articles 5–16.

Related DORA Resources

Hub · SIEM for DORA · CSA