A product with digital elements is any hardware or software product that contains or depends on digital components and is placed on the market. Under the CRA, the phrase matters because it determines whether security, documentation, and lifecycle obligations apply across development and maintenance.
Expanded Definition
A product with digital elements is broader than a standalone software application. Under the EU Cyber Resilience Act, it includes hardware, embedded firmware, consumer software, and connected products that rely on digital components to perform their intended function or to connect securely with other systems. The key distinction is market placement: once a product is placed on the market, security obligations can attach to the product as shipped, not only to the organisation that operates it.
For NHI Management Group, the concept matters because many modern products contain non-human identities, device credentials, update channels, API endpoints, and telemetry pathways that must be secured across the product lifecycle. In practice, the term sits at the intersection of secure-by-design engineering, vulnerability handling, and supply chain governance. It is not limited to internet-facing devices, and it is not the same as generic digital transformation language. The EU Cyber Resilience Act is the clearest reference point for how the term is used in regulatory context, although implementation details still vary across product categories and technical stacks. The most common misapplication is treating it as synonymous with software alone, which occurs when teams ignore embedded components, update mechanisms, and connected hardware dependencies.
Examples and Use Cases
Implementing the obligations associated with a product with digital elements rigorously often introduces lifecycle and evidentiary overhead, requiring organisations to weigh faster shipping against stronger assurance and traceability.
- A smart camera sold with firmware, a mobile companion app, and cloud connectivity must account for secure update paths, default configuration hardening, and vulnerability disclosure processes.
- An industrial sensor includes embedded software and remote administration interfaces, so the manufacturer must document security-relevant functions and support patch management after release.
- A consumer router depends on digital components for boot integrity and network authentication, making credential handling and update authenticity part of the product security posture.
- A software library embedded in a larger appliance can become part of the regulated product scope when shipped as an integral digital component rather than a standalone utility.
- An AI-enabled device with on-device inference and cloud orchestration may also raise questions about NIST AI Risk Management Framework alignment where model updates, data flows, and operational boundaries affect security outcomes.
These examples show why product scope is assessed from the perspective of the shipped item, not only the development team or the hosting environment. The phrase can also capture supply chain dependencies such as third-party firmware, signed updates, and device certificates that must be maintained after deployment.
Why It Matters for Security Teams
Security teams need this term because regulatory scope drives control scope. If a product is incorrectly excluded from the definition, teams may omit vulnerability handling, secure development evidence, documentation, or post-market support obligations that later become mandatory. This is especially important where products contain operational identities such as device certificates, service accounts, or API tokens, because those credentials can become the initial path for compromise when lifecycle controls are weak.
For governance functions, the term also affects supplier management, release criteria, and incident response planning. A product that depends on digital elements can create obligations for secure defaults, authenticity of software updates, and disclosure of exploitable weaknesses. The broader lesson is that the product boundary often determines the compliance boundary. When that boundary is wrong, teams inherit remediation work after a release, after a vulnerability report, or after a customer incident exposes the missing controls. Organisations typically encounter the full cost of this classification only after a security flaw is found in the field, at which point product with digital elements becomes operationally unavoidable to address.
Standards & Framework Alignment
This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.
NIST CSF 2.0, NIST AI RMF, NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and NIST SP 800-63 set the technical controls, while EU Cyber Resilience Act define the regulatory obligations.
| Framework | Control / Reference | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| NIST CSF 2.0 | GV.SC | Supply chain governance covers product security duties for digital components and dependencies. |
| NIST AI RMF | GOVERN | AI governance applies when a digital product embeds models, automation, or decision logic. |
| NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 | SI-2 | Flaw remediation and patch handling align with digital product maintenance obligations. |
| EU Cyber Resilience Act | The CRA defines products with digital elements and sets security obligations across their lifecycle. | |
| NIST SP 800-63 | SP 800-63B | Device and service authenticator handling matters when products depend on digital identities. |
Assign accountability for model updates, data flows, and security evidence across the product lifecycle.
Related resources from NHI Mgmt Group
Deepen Your Knowledge
Reviewed and updated by the NHIMG editorial team on August 1, 2026.
NHI Mgmt Group — the #1 independent authority on Non-Human Identity, IAM, and Agentic AI security. nhimg.org
