Roadmap
Six waves. They overlap in part, but their dependencies are strict: a wave whose prerequisite is unmet produces unusable work.
Wave 0 — Scoping
Objective: know what you are talking about and who decides.
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Portfolio PDE qualification register | Legal |
| Criticality classification register | Legal + CISO |
| Choice of assessment routes | Legal |
| Named RACI matrix approved | Sponsor |
| Governance bodies established | Sponsor |
| Choice of pivot format and toolchain | CISO |
| Licence policy v1 | Legal |
Do not proceed without: the classification. Without it you do not know which products need a notified body — that is, what the critical path is.
Wave 1 — Respond
Placed second deliberately: the reporting deadline is the nearest, and it applies to the legacy portfolio.
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Technical and legal on-call rota, with written delegation | Sponsor |
| Live accounts on the reporting platform, tested | PSIRT |
| Reporting templates | PSIRT + Legal |
| Decision register | Legal |
CVD policy published, security.txt online |
PSIRT |
| First timed exercise | PSIRT |
| List of Member States where each product is made available | Product |
Wave 2 — Generate
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Automated SBOM on priority chains | DevSecOps |
| Quality validation and blocking thresholds | CISO |
| Signing and provenance attestation | DevSecOps |
| Tooling sheets per product family | CISO |
Prerequisite: the pivot format is chosen (wave 0).
Wave 3 — Steer
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Steering platform in production | CISO |
| Automatic ingestion from every chain | DevSecOps |
| Vulnerability sources connected | CISO |
| Continuous monitoring active on shipped versions | CISO |
| Policies in warning mode, then blocking | CISO + Legal |
| Alert routing to owning teams | PSIRT |
Prerequisite: generation produces quality SBOMs (wave 2). Deploying the platform earlier is possible and even advisable, but activating it on poor SBOMs discredits the tool.
Wave 4 — Prove
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Pilot technical documentation for two representative products | Legal + CISO |
| Notified bodies engaged and assessments launched | Legal |
| Annex II user notices | Product + Legal |
| Support periods determined and communicated | Product + Legal |
| EU declarations and CE marking | Legal |
| Evidence vault with ten-year archiving | Legal + DevSecOps |
| First successful retrieval exercise | Legal |
Prerequisite: waves 0, 2 and 3. Technical documentation is assembled from existing artefacts; writing it before they exist produces a declaratory document with no evidence behind it.
Wave 5 — Sustain
| Deliverable | Owner |
|---|---|
| Structured regulatory watch, with impact assessed | Legal |
| Periodic reviews: classification, licences, support | Legal |
| Six-monthly exercises: reporting, retrieval | PSIRT |
| Continuous improvement of the actionable-alert ratio | CISO |
| Extension of scope to new products, by default | Everyone |
This is the wave with no end, and the one that gets left out of the budget. An unmaintained compliance arrangement degrades within eighteen months.
The dependencies, in one diagram
Wave 0 — Scoping
│
├──► Wave 1 — Respond (independent, nearest deadline)
│
└──► Wave 2 — Generate
│
└──► Wave 3 — Steer
│
└──► Wave 4 — Prove
│
└──► Wave 5 — Sustain
What to decide now
Three actions cannot wait, because their lead time is not yours to control:
- Contract notified bodies for class II and Critical products.
- Arm the reporting on-call rota, if that is not done.
- Classify the portfolio, without which point 1 is impossible.
The rest can be sequenced. Those three cannot.