Templates for IEC 62443-4-1 compared: what Exida, TÜV SÜD and the free sample process cover, where gaps remain and what the CRA requires.
Exida – solid process base without vulnerability management
Exida offers template packages for operators and for OEMs. For manufacturers the OEM package is relevant.
It consists of editable Word documents and covers the core development processes: configuration management, requirements specification, security design, threat modelling, test planning and an assessment of the process itself. It also includes a coding standard and a user manual.
Two areas are missing. For vulnerability handling the package supplies neither processes nor templates, and supplier management is only sketched. Both are topics that auditors and CRA evidence reviewers notice first. If you buy the package you must close these gaps with internal work or external support.
For companies that already develop securely and only want to structure their processes, this is a usable starting point. Beginners miss worked examples that show what a finished artefact looks like.
Mittelstand‑Digital Zentrum Hannover – free overview, no templates
The Mittelstand‑Digital Zentrum Hannover provides a Sample process for IT‑secure product development (https://digitalzentrum-hannover.de/aktuelles/musterprozess-it-sicherer-produktentwicklung). It traces the product development lifecycle according to IEC 62443-4-1, is freely available online and can be downloaded as a PDF.
For getting started this is the cheapest option on the market. The sample process names the relevant topics and shows their order in the lifecycle. A development manager encountering IEC 62443-4-1 for the first time will understand within an hour what it is about.
It is not sufficient for implementation. The sample process stays at the conceptual level: there are no document templates and no completed examples. Translating it into company‑specific processes and documents is entirely up to the reader.
TÜV SÜD – auditor reputation with an embedded consulting limit
TÜV SÜD offers a template package for implementing IEC 62443-4-1, which can be augmented with workshops.
The name helps. A package from a recognised testing and certification body is easier to get approved internally, and the provided processes are aligned with the standard’s requirements.
The catch lies in the same role. As an independent certification body TÜV SÜD may not provide comprehensive consulting during implementation because that could jeopardise its independence in a later audit. For the same reason the accompanying workshops are limited in scope. You buy templates from an organisation that can only help you to a limited extent when it comes to filling them out.
As with Exida, filled examples are missing. The structure is there; you must develop the contents yourself.
The three offers compared
Our template package
Our templates for the secure development process according to IEC 62443-4-1 are today part of the CRA template package, as the module “development process and SDLC”. Included are process descriptions with roles, inputs, outputs and evidence, plus templates for security requirements, secure design, verification and testing as well as for risk assessment and threat modelling. The module is available separately without the full package.
Two boundaries apply: the package does not replace an existing quality management system, and the standards themselves must be must be purchased. The templates assume a basic understanding of IEC 62443-4-1.
Why IEC 62443-4-1 templates must be CRA-capable today
Manufacturers have two dates in their calendars. From 11 September 2026, reporting obligations apply for actively exploited vulnerabilities and serious security incidents. From 11 December 2027 the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) applies in full, including evidence requirements and conformity assessment.
The three offers described above are tailored to IEC 62443-4-1. None of the product descriptions maps their artefacts to CRA requirements.
That does not make them worthless, but it pushes work further down the line. A process manual that an auditor accepts under IEC 62443-4-1 does not yet answer a conformity assessment body’s question of which document demonstrates which CRA requirement. Building that mapping afterwards is more expensive than carrying it from the start. If you buy templates now, check whether they are prepared to make the jump into CRA evidence. Which documents are required for that is listed on CRA templates for manufacturers.
How to recognise a useful template package
Four questions separate templates that save work from templates that create work:
- Are there completed examples? An empty form with headings costs almost as much time as a blank sheet. A worked example artefact shows detail and language level.
- Are roles, inputs, outputs and interfaces named? Most friction arises between development, QA, product management and procurement, not within a single process step.
- Is there a mapping from requirement to evidence? Without it you only discover during assessment which document is missing.
- Are the documents editable and adaptable to your process landscape? You can read a PDF, but you cannot integrate it into your management system.
A package that meets all four points does not replace your own implementation. It shortens the path from the standard requirement to reliable documentation, and that is exactly what templates are for.
