| Control Domain |
Control |
Name |
MetadataId |
Category |
Title |
Owner |
Requirements |
Description |
Info |
Policy# |
| AU_ISM |
1182 |
AU_ISM_1182 |
AU ISM 1182 |
Guidelines for Networking - Network design and configuration |
Network access controls - 1182 |
|
n/a |
Network access controls are implemented to limit traffic within and between network segments to only those that are required for business purposes. |
link |
3 |
| AU_ISM |
1546 |
AU_ISM_1546 |
AU ISM 1546 |
Guidelines for System Hardening - Authentication hardening |
Authenticating to systems - 1546 |
|
n/a |
Users are authenticated before they are granted access to a system and its resources. |
link |
7 |
| AU_ISM |
520 |
AU_ISM_520 |
AU ISM 520 |
Guidelines for Networking - Network design and configuration |
Network access controls - 520 |
|
n/a |
Network access controls are implemented on networks to prevent the connection of unauthorised network devices. |
link |
1 |
| Azure_Security_Benchmark_v1.0 |
1.1 |
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v1.0_1.1 |
Azure Security Benchmark 1.1 |
Network Security |
Protect resources using Network Security Groups or Azure Firewall on your Virtual Network |
Customer |
Ensure that all Virtual Network subnet deployments have a Network Security Group applied with network access controls specific to your application's trusted ports and sources. Use Azure Services with Private Link enabled, deploy the service inside your Vnet, or connect privately using Private Endpoints. For service specific requirements, please refer to the security recommendation for that specific service.
Alternatively, if you have a specific use case, requirements can be met by implementing Azure Firewall.
General Information on Private Link:
https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/private-link/private-link-overview
How to create a Virtual Network:
https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/quick-create-portal
How to create an NSG with a security configuration:
https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/tutorial-filter-network-traffic
How to deploy and configure Azure Firewall:
https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal |
n/a |
link |
21 |
| Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0 |
NS-1 |
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0_NS-1 |
Azure Security Benchmark NS-1 |
Network Security |
Implement security for internal traffic |
Customer |
Ensure that all Azure virtual networks follow an enterprise segmentation principle that aligns to the business risks. Any system that could incur higher risk for the organization should be isolated within its own virtual network and sufficiently secured with either a network security group (NSG) and/or Azure Firewall.
Based on your applications and enterprise segmentation strategy, restrict or allow traffic between internal resources based on network security group rules. For specific well-defined applications (such as a 3-tier app), this can be a highly secure "deny by default, permit by exception" approach. This might not scale well if you have many applications and endpoints interacting with each other. You can also use Azure Firewall in circumstances where central management is required over a large number of enterprise segments or spokes (in a hub/spoke topology).
Use Azure Security Center Adaptive Network Hardening to recommend network security group configurations that limit ports and source IPs based with the reference to external network traffic rules.
Use Azure Sentinel to discover the use of legacy insecure protocols such as SSL/TLSv1, SMBv1, LM/NTLMv1, wDigest, Unsigned LDAP Binds, and weak ciphers in Kerberos.
How to create a network security group with security rules: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/tutorial-filter-network-traffic
How to deploy and configure Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal
Adaptive Network Hardening in Azure Security Center: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/security-center/security-center-adaptive-network-hardening
Azure Sentinel insecure protocols workbook:https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/sentinel/quickstart-get-visibility#use-built-in-workbooks |
n/a |
link |
20 |
| Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0 |
NS-4 |
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0_NS-4 |
Azure Security Benchmark NS-4 |
Network Security |
Protect applications and services from external network attacks |
Customer |
Protect Azure resources against attacks from external networks, including distributed denial of service (DDoS) Attacks, application specific attacks, and unsolicited and potentially malicious internet traffic. Azure includes native capabilities for this:
- Use Azure Firewall to protect applications and services against potentially malicious traffic from the internet and other external locations.
- Use Web Application Firewall (WAF) capabilities in Azure Application Gateway, Azure Front Door, and Azure Content Delivery Network (CDN) to protect your applications, services, and APIs against application layer attacks.
- Protect your assets against DDoS attacks by enabling DDoS standard protection on your Azure virtual networks.
- Use Azure Security Center to detect misconfiguration risks related to the above.
Azure Firewall Documentation: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/
How to deploy Azure WAF: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/web-application-firewall/overview
Manage Azure DDoS Protection Standard using the Azure portal: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/manage-ddos-protection |
n/a |
link |
15 |
| Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0 |
NS-2 |
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0_NS-2 |
Microsoft cloud security benchmark NS-2 |
Network Security |
Secure cloud services with network controls |
Shared |
**Security Principle:**
Secure cloud services by establishing a private access point for the resources. You should also disable or restrict access from public network when possible.
**Azure Guidance:**
Deploy private endpoints for all Azure resources that support the Private Link feature, to establish a private access point for the resources. You should also disable or restrict public network access to services where feasible.
For certain services, you also have the option to deploy VNet integration for the service where you can restrict the VNET to establish a private access point for the service.
**Implementation and additional context:**
Understand Azure Private Link:
https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/private-link/private-link-overview |
n/a |
link |
36 |
| CCCS |
AC-17(1) |
CCCS_AC-17(1) |
CCCS AC-17(1) |
Access Control |
Remote Access | Automated Monitoring / Control |
|
n/a |
The information system monitors and controls remote access methods. |
link |
7 |
| CCCS |
SC-7 |
CCCS_SC-7 |
CCCS SC-7 |
System and Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection |
|
n/a |
(A) The information system monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system.
(B) The information system implements sub-networks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal organizational networks.
(C) The information system connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture. |
link |
3 |
| CIS_Azure_1.1.0 |
3.7 |
CIS_Azure_1.1.0_3.7 |
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 3.7 |
3 Storage Accounts |
Ensure default network access rule for Storage Accounts is set to deny |
Shared |
The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. |
Restricting default network access helps to provide a new layer of security, since storage accounts accept connections from clients on any network. To limit access to selected networks, the default action must be changed. |
link |
1 |
| CIS_Azure_1.3.0 |
3.6 |
CIS_Azure_1.3.0_3.6 |
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 3.6 |
3 Storage Accounts |
Ensure default network access rule for Storage Accounts is set to deny |
Shared |
The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. |
Restricting default network access helps to provide a new layer of security, since storage accounts accept connections from clients on any network. To limit access to selected networks, the default action must be changed. |
link |
2 |
| CIS_Azure_1.4.0 |
3.6 |
CIS_Azure_1.4.0_3.6 |
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 3.6 |
3 Storage Accounts |
Ensure Default Network Access Rule for Storage Accounts is Set to Deny |
Shared |
The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. |
Restricting default network access helps to provide a new layer of security, since storage accounts accept connections from clients on any network. To limit access to selected networks, the default action must be changed. |
link |
2 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
AC.L1-3.1.1 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L1-3.1.1 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
57 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
AC.L2-3.1.12 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.12 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
35 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
AC.L2-3.1.13 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.13 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
29 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
AC.L2-3.1.14 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.14 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
29 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
AC.L2-3.1.3 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.3 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
54 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
SC.L1-3.13.1 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.1 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
58 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
SC.L1-3.13.5 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.5 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
53 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
SC.L2-3.13.2 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.2 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
53 |
| CMMC_2.0_L2 |
SC.L2-3.13.6 |
CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.6 |
404 not found |
|
|
|
n/a |
n/a |
|
28 |
| CMMC_L3 |
AC.1.001 |
CMMC_L3_AC.1.001 |
CMMC L3 AC.1.001 |
Access Control |
Limit information system access to authorized users, processes acting on behalf of authorized users, and devices (including other information systems). |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Access control policies (e.g., identity- or role-based policies, control matrices, and cryptography) control access between active entities or subjects (i.e., users or processes acting on behalf of users) and passive entities or objects (e.g., devices, files, records, and domains) in systems. Access enforcement mechanisms can be employed at the application and service level to provide increased information security. Other systems include systems internal and external to the organization. This requirement focuses on account management for systems and applications. The definition of and enforcement of access authorizations, other than those determined by account type (e.g., privileged verses non-privileged) are addressed in requirement AC.1.002. |
link |
32 |
| CMMC_L3 |
AC.1.002 |
CMMC_L3_AC.1.002 |
CMMC L3 AC.1.002 |
Access Control |
Limit information system access to the types of transactions and functions that authorized users are permitted to execute. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Organizations may choose to define access privileges or other attributes by account, by type of account, or a combination of both. System account types include individual, shared, group, system, anonymous, guest, emergency, developer, manufacturer, vendor, and temporary. Other attributes required for authorizing access include restrictions on time-of-day, day-of-week, and point-oforigin. In defining other account attributes, organizations consider system-related requirements (e.g., system upgrades scheduled maintenance,) and mission or business requirements, (e.g., time zone differences, customer requirements, remote access to support travel requirements). |
link |
28 |
| CMMC_L3 |
AC.2.013 |
CMMC_L3_AC.2.013 |
CMMC L3 AC.2.013 |
Access Control |
Monitor and control remote access sessions. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Remote access is access to organizational systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) communicating through external networks (e.g., the Internet). Remote access methods include dial-up, broadband, and wireless. Organizations often employ encrypted virtual private networks (VPNs) to enhance confidentiality over remote connections. The use of encrypted VPNs does not make the access non-remote; however, the use of VPNs, when adequately provisioned with appropriate control (e.g., employing encryption techniques for confidentiality protection), may provide sufficient assurance to the organization that it can effectively treat such connections as internal networks. VPNs with encrypted tunnels can affect the capability to adequately monitor network communications traffic for malicious code.
Automated monitoring and control of remote access sessions allows organizations to detect cyberattacks and help to ensure ongoing compliance with remote access policies by auditing connection activities of remote users on a variety of system components (e.g., servers, workstations, notebook computers, smart phones, and tablets). |
link |
10 |
| CMMC_L3 |
AC.2.016 |
CMMC_L3_AC.2.016 |
CMMC L3 AC.2.016 |
Access Control |
Control the flow of CUI in accordance with approved authorizations. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Information flow control regulates where information can travel within a system and between systems (versus who can access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include the following: keeping exportcontrolled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet; blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization; restricting requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server; and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content.
Organizations commonly use information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on characteristics of the information or the information path. Enforcement occurs in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict system services, provide a packetfiltering capability based on header information, or message-filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering and inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement.
Transferring information between systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners or stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes: prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and implementing trustworthy regrading mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. |
link |
18 |
| CMMC_L3 |
CM.3.068 |
CMMC_L3_CM.3.068 |
CMMC L3 CM.3.068 |
Configuration Management |
Restrict, disable, or prevent the use of nonessential programs, functions, ports, protocols, and services. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Restricting the use of nonessential software (programs) includes restricting the roles allowed to approve program execution; prohibiting auto-execute; program blacklisting and whitelisting; or restricting the number of program instances executed at the same time. The organization makes a security-based determination which functions, ports, protocols, and/or services are restricted. Bluetooth, File Transfer Protocol (FTP), and peer-to-peer networking are examples of protocols organizations consider preventing the use of, restricting, or disabling. |
link |
25 |
| CMMC_L3 |
SC.1.175 |
CMMC_L3_SC.1.175 |
CMMC L3 SC.1.175 |
System and Communications Protection |
Monitor, control, and protect communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of organizational systems. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Communications can be monitored, controlled, and protected at boundary components and by restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems. Boundary components include gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a system security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems includes restricting external web communications traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses.
Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security requirements associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. |
link |
32 |
| CMMC_L3 |
SC.1.176 |
CMMC_L3_SC.1.176 |
CMMC L3 SC.1.176 |
System and Communications Protection |
Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal networks. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones (DMZs). DMZs are typically implemented with boundary control devices and techniques that include routers, gateways, firewalls, virtualization, or cloud-based technologies. |
link |
5 |
| CMMC_L3 |
SC.3.183 |
CMMC_L3_SC.3.183 |
CMMC L3 SC.3.183 |
System and Communications Protection |
Deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception (i.e., deny all, permit by exception). |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
This requirement applies to inbound and outbound network communications traffic at the system boundary and at identified points within the system. A deny-all, permit-by-exception network communications traffic policy ensures that only those connections which are essential and approved are allowed. |
link |
32 |
| CMMC_L3 |
SC.3.185 |
CMMC_L3_SC.3.185 |
CMMC L3 SC.3.185 |
System and Communications Protection |
Implement cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure of CUI during transmission unless otherwise protected by alternative physical safeguards. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
This requirement applies to internal and external networks and any system components that can transmit information including servers, notebook computers, desktop computers, mobile devices, printers, copiers, scanners, and facsimile machines. Communication paths outside the physical protection of controlled boundaries are susceptible to both interception and modification. Organizations relying on commercial providers offering transmission services as commodity services rather than as fully dedicated services (i.e., services which can be highly specialized to individual customer needs), may find it difficult to obtain the necessary assurances regarding the implementation of the controls for transmission confidentiality. In such situations, organizations determine what types of confidentiality services are available in commercial telecommunication service packages. If it is infeasible or impractical to obtain the necessary safeguards and assurances of the effectiveness of the safeguards through appropriate contracting vehicles, organizations implement compensating safeguards or explicitly accept the additional risk. An example of an alternative physical safeguard is a protected distribution system (PDS) where the distribution medium is protected against electronic or physical intercept, thereby ensuring the confidentiality of the information being transmitted. |
link |
10 |
| CMMC_L3 |
SC.3.191 |
CMMC_L3_SC.3.191 |
CMMC L3 SC.3.191 |
System and Communications Protection |
Protect the confidentiality of CUI at rest. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Information at rest refers to the state of information when it is not in process or in transit and is located on storage devices as specific components of systems. The focus of protection at rest is not on the type of storage device or the frequency of access but rather the state of the information. Organizations can use different mechanisms to achieve confidentiality protections, including the use of cryptographic mechanisms and file share scanning. Organizations may also use other controls including secure off-line storage in lieu of online storage when adequate protection of information at rest cannot otherwise be achieved or continuous monitoring to identify malicious code at rest. |
link |
14 |
| FedRAMP_High_R4 |
AC-17 |
FedRAMP_High_R4_AC-17 |
FedRAMP High AC-17 |
Access Control |
Remote Access |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization:
a. Establishes and documents usage restrictions, configuration/connection requirements, and implementation guidance for each type of remote access allowed; and
b. Authorizes remote access to the information system prior to allowing such connections.
Supplemental Guidance: Remote access is access to organizational information systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) communicating through external networks (e.g., the Internet). Remote access methods include, for example, dial-up, broadband, and wireless. Organizations often employ encrypted virtual private networks (VPNs) to enhance confidentiality and integrity over remote connections. The use of encrypted VPNs does not make the access non-remote; however, the use of VPNs, when adequately provisioned with appropriate security controls (e.g., employing appropriate encryption techniques for confidentiality and integrity protection) may provide sufficient assurance to the organization that it can effectively treat such connections as internal networks. Still, VPN connections traverse external networks, and the encrypted VPN does not enhance the availability of remote connections. Also, VPNs with encrypted tunnels can affect the organizational capability to adequately monitor network communications traffic for malicious code. Remote access controls apply to information systems other than public web servers or systems designed for public access. This control addresses authorization prior to allowing remote access without specifying the formats for such authorization. While organizations may use interconnection security agreements to authorize remote access connections, such agreements are not required by this control. Enforcing access restrictions for remote connections is addressed in AC-3. Related controls: AC-2, AC-3, AC-18, AC-19, AC-20, CA-3, CA-7, CM-8, IA-2, IA-3, IA-8, MA-4, PE-17, PL-4, SC-10, SI-4.
References: NIST Special Publications 800-46, 800-77, 800-113, 800-114, 800-121. |
link |
41 |
| FedRAMP_High_R4 |
AC-17(1) |
FedRAMP_High_R4_AC-17(1) |
FedRAMP High AC-17 (1) |
Access Control |
Automated Monitoring / Control |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system monitors and controls remote access methods.
Supplemental Guidance: Automated monitoring and control of remote access sessions allows organizations to detect cyber attacks and also ensure ongoing compliance with remote access policies by auditing connection activities of remote users on a variety of information system components (e.g., servers, workstations, notebook computers, smart phones, and tablets). Related controls: AU-2, AU-12. |
link |
37 |
| FedRAMP_High_R4 |
AC-4 |
FedRAMP_High_R4_AC-4 |
FedRAMP High AC-4 |
Access Control |
Information Flow Enforcement |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies].
Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels.
Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18.
References: None. |
link |
54 |
| FedRAMP_High_R4 |
SC-7 |
FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7 |
FedRAMP High SC-7 |
System And Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system:
a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system;
b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and
c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture.
Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13.
References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. |
link |
54 |
| FedRAMP_High_R4 |
SC-7(3) |
FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7(3) |
FedRAMP High SC-7 (3) |
System And Communications Protection |
Access Points |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system.
Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. |
link |
53 |
| FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 |
AC-17 |
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_AC-17 |
FedRAMP Moderate AC-17 |
Access Control |
Remote Access |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization:
a. Establishes and documents usage restrictions, configuration/connection requirements, and implementation guidance for each type of remote access allowed; and
b. Authorizes remote access to the information system prior to allowing such connections.
Supplemental Guidance: Remote access is access to organizational information systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) communicating through external networks (e.g., the Internet). Remote access methods include, for example, dial-up, broadband, and wireless. Organizations often employ encrypted virtual private networks (VPNs) to enhance confidentiality and integrity over remote connections. The use of encrypted VPNs does not make the access non-remote; however, the use of VPNs, when adequately provisioned with appropriate security controls (e.g., employing appropriate encryption techniques for confidentiality and integrity protection) may provide sufficient assurance to the organization that it can effectively treat such connections as internal networks. Still, VPN connections traverse external networks, and the encrypted VPN does not enhance the availability of remote connections. Also, VPNs with encrypted tunnels can affect the organizational capability to adequately monitor network communications traffic for malicious code. Remote access controls apply to information systems other than public web servers or systems designed for public access. This control addresses authorization prior to allowing remote access without specifying the formats for such authorization. While organizations may use interconnection security agreements to authorize remote access connections, such agreements are not required by this control. Enforcing access restrictions for remote connections is addressed in AC-3. Related controls: AC-2, AC-3, AC-18, AC-19, AC-20, CA-3, CA-7, CM-8, IA-2, IA-3, IA-8, MA-4, PE-17, PL-4, SC-10, SI-4.
References: NIST Special Publications 800-46, 800-77, 800-113, 800-114, 800-121. |
link |
41 |
| FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 |
AC-17(1) |
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_AC-17(1) |
FedRAMP Moderate AC-17 (1) |
Access Control |
Automated Monitoring / Control |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system monitors and controls remote access methods.
Supplemental Guidance: Automated monitoring and control of remote access sessions allows organizations to detect cyber attacks and also ensure ongoing compliance with remote access policies by auditing connection activities of remote users on a variety of information system components (e.g., servers, workstations, notebook computers, smart phones, and tablets). Related controls: AU-2, AU-12. |
link |
37 |
| FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 |
AC-4 |
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_AC-4 |
FedRAMP Moderate AC-4 |
Access Control |
Information Flow Enforcement |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies].
Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels.
Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18.
References: None. |
link |
54 |
| FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 |
SC-7 |
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7 |
FedRAMP Moderate SC-7 |
System And Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system:
a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system;
b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and
c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture.
Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13.
References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. |
link |
54 |
| FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 |
SC-7(3) |
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7(3) |
FedRAMP Moderate SC-7 (3) |
System And Communications Protection |
Access Points |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system.
Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. |
link |
53 |
| hipaa |
0866.09m3Organizational.1516-09.m |
hipaa-0866.09m3Organizational.1516-09.m |
0866.09m3Organizational.1516-09.m |
08 Network Protection |
0866.09m3Organizational.1516-09.m 09.06 Network Security Management |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization describes the groups, roles, and responsibilities for the logical management of network components, and ensures coordination of and consistency in the elements of the network infrastructure. |
|
11 |
| IRS_1075_9.3 |
.1.12 |
IRS_1075_9.3.1.12 |
IRS 1075 9.3.1.12 |
Access Control |
Remote Access (AC-17) |
|
n/a |
The agency must:
a. Establish and document usage restrictions, configuration/connection requirements, and implementation guidance for each type of remote access allowed
b. Authorize remote access to the information system prior to allowing such connections
c. Authorize and document the execution of privileged commands and access to security-relevant information via remote access for compelling operational needs only (CE4)
The information system must:
a. Monitor and control remote access methods (CE1)
b. Implement cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions where FTI is transmitted over the remote connection and (CE2)
c. Route all remote accesses through a limited number of managed network access control points (CE3)
Remote access is defined as any access to an agency information system by a user communicating through an external network, for example, the Internet.
Any remote access where FTI is accessed over the remote connection must be performed using multi-factor authentication.
FTI cannot be accessed remotely by agency employees, agents, representatives, or contractors located offshore--outside of the United States territories, embassies, or military installations. Further, FTI may not be received, processed, stored, transmitted, or disposed of by IT systems located offshore. |
link |
7 |
| IRS_1075_9.3 |
.16.5 |
IRS_1075_9.3.16.5 |
IRS 1075 9.3.16.5 |
System and Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection (SC-7) |
|
n/a |
The information system must:
a. Monitor and control communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system
b. Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically and logically separated from internal agency networks
c. Connect to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with agency security architecture requirements
Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within the security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks).
The agency must limit the number of external network connections to the information system. (CE3)
The agency must: (CE4)
a. Implement a secure managed interface for each external telecommunication service
b. Establish a traffic flow policy for each managed interface
d. Protect the confidentiality and integrity of the information being transmitted across each interface
e. Document each exception to the traffic flow policy with a supporting mission/business need and duration of that need, and accept the associated risk
f. Review exceptions to the traffic flow policy at a minimum annually, and remove exceptions that are no longer supported by an explicit mission/business need
The information system at managed interfaces must deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception (i.e., deny all, permit by exception). (CE5)
The information system must, in conjunction with a remote device, prevent the device from simultaneously establishing non-remote connections with the system and communicating via some other connection to resources in external networks. (CE7)
Additional requirements for protecting FTI on networks are provided in Section 9.4.10, Network Protections. |
link |
4 |
| ISO27001-2013 |
A.13.1.1 |
ISO27001-2013_A.13.1.1 |
ISO 27001:2013 A.13.1.1 |
Communications Security |
Network controls |
Shared |
n/a |
Networks shall be managed and controlled to protect information in systems and applications. |
link |
40 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.1.1 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.1 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.1 |
Access Control |
Limit system access to authorized users, processes acting on behalf of authorized users, and devices (including other systems). |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Access control policies (e.g., identity- or role-based policies, control matrices, and cryptography) control access between active entities or subjects (i.e., users or processes acting on behalf of users) and passive entities or objects (e.g., devices, files, records, and domains) in systems. Access enforcement mechanisms can be employed at the application and service level to provide increased information security. Other systems include systems internal and external to the organization. This requirement focuses on account management for systems and applications. The definition of and enforcement of access authorizations, other than those determined by account type (e.g., privileged verses non-privileged) are addressed in requirement 3.1.2. |
link |
55 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.1.12 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.12 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.12 |
Access Control |
Monitor and control remote access sessions. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Remote access is access to organizational systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) communicating through external networks (e.g., the Internet). Remote access methods include dial-up, broadband, and wireless. Organizations often employ encrypted virtual private networks (VPNs) to enhance confidentiality over remote connections. The use of encrypted VPNs does not make the access non-remote; however, the use of VPNs, when adequately provisioned with appropriate control (e.g., employing encryption techniques for confidentiality protection), may provide sufficient assurance to the organization that it can effectively treat such connections as internal networks. VPNs with encrypted tunnels can affect the capability to adequately monitor network communications traffic for malicious code. Automated monitoring and control of remote access sessions allows organizations to detect cyber-attacks and help to ensure ongoing compliance with remote access policies by auditing connection activities of remote users on a variety of system components (e.g., servers, workstations, notebook computers, smart phones, and tablets). [SP 800-46], [SP 800-77], and [SP 800-113] provide guidance on secure remote access and virtual private networks. |
link |
36 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.1.13 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.13 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.13 |
Access Control |
Employ cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of remote access sessions. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Cryptographic standards include FIPS-validated cryptography and NSA-approved cryptography. See [NIST CRYPTO]; [NIST CAVP]; [NIST CMVP]; National Security Agency Cryptographic Standards. |
link |
31 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.1.14 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.14 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.14 |
Access Control |
Route remote access via managed access control points. |
Shared |
The customer is responsible for implementing this requirement. |
Routing remote access through managed access control points enhances explicit, organizational control over such connections, reducing the susceptibility to unauthorized access to organizational systems resulting in the unauthorized disclosure of CUI. |
link |
30 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.1.3 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.3 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.3 |
Access Control |
Control the flow of CUI in accordance with approved authorizations. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Information flow control regulates where information can travel within a system and between systems (versus who can access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include the following: keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet; blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization; restricting requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server; and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Organizations commonly use information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on characteristics of the information or the information path. Enforcement occurs in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message-filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering and inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Transferring information between systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners or stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes: prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and implementing trustworthy regrading mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. |
link |
58 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.13.1 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.1 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.1 |
System and Communications Protection |
Monitor, control, and protect communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of organizational systems. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Communications can be monitored, controlled, and protected at boundary components and by restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems. Boundary components include gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a system security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems includes restricting external web communications traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security requirements associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies.
[28] There is no prescribed format or specified level of detail for system security plans. However, organizations ensure that the required information in 3.12.4 is conveyed in those plans. |
link |
53 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.13.2 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.2 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.2 |
System and Communications Protection |
Employ architectural designs, software development techniques, and systems engineering principles that promote effective information security within organizational systems. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Organizations apply systems security engineering principles to new development systems or systems undergoing major upgrades. For legacy systems, organizations apply systems security engineering principles to system upgrades and modifications to the extent feasible, given the current state of hardware, software, and firmware components within those systems. The application of systems security engineering concepts and principles helps to develop trustworthy, secure, and resilient systems and system components and reduce the susceptibility of organizations to disruptions, hazards, and threats. Examples of these concepts and principles include developing layered protections; establishing security policies, architecture, and controls as the foundation for design; incorporating security requirements into the system development life cycle; delineating physical and logical security boundaries; ensuring that developers are trained on how to build secure software; and performing threat modeling to identify use cases, threat agents, attack vectors and patterns, design patterns, and compensating controls needed to mitigate risk. Organizations that apply security engineering concepts and principles can facilitate the development of trustworthy, secure systems, system components, and system services; reduce risk to acceptable levels; and make informed risk-management decisions. [SP 800-160-1] provides guidance on systems security engineering. |
link |
53 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.13.5 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.5 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.5 |
System and Communications Protection |
Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal networks. |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones (DMZs). DMZs are typically implemented with boundary control devices and techniques that include routers, gateways, firewalls, virtualization, or cloud-based technologies. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies |
link |
53 |
| NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 |
.13.6 |
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.6 |
NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.6 |
System and Communications Protection |
Deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception (i.e., deny all, permit by exception). |
Shared |
Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. |
This requirement applies to inbound and outbound network communications traffic at the system boundary and at identified points within the system. A deny-all, permit-by-exception network communications traffic policy ensures that only those connections which are essential and approved are allowed. |
link |
24 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R4 |
AC-17 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R4_AC-17 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 AC-17 |
Access Control |
Remote Access |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization:
a. Establishes and documents usage restrictions, configuration/connection requirements, and implementation guidance for each type of remote access allowed; and
b. Authorizes remote access to the information system prior to allowing such connections.
Supplemental Guidance: Remote access is access to organizational information systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) communicating through external networks (e.g., the Internet). Remote access methods include, for example, dial-up, broadband, and wireless. Organizations often employ encrypted virtual private networks (VPNs) to enhance confidentiality and integrity over remote connections. The use of encrypted VPNs does not make the access non-remote; however, the use of VPNs, when adequately provisioned with appropriate security controls (e.g., employing appropriate encryption techniques for confidentiality and integrity protection) may provide sufficient assurance to the organization that it can effectively treat such connections as internal networks. Still, VPN connections traverse external networks, and the encrypted VPN does not enhance the availability of remote connections. Also, VPNs with encrypted tunnels can affect the organizational capability to adequately monitor network communications traffic for malicious code. Remote access controls apply to information systems other than public web servers or systems designed for public access. This control addresses authorization prior to allowing remote access without specifying the formats for such authorization. While organizations may use interconnection security agreements to authorize remote access connections, such agreements are not required by this control. Enforcing access restrictions for remote connections is addressed in AC-3. Related controls: AC-2, AC-3, AC-18, AC-19, AC-20, CA-3, CA-7, CM-8, IA-2, IA-3, IA-8, MA-4, PE-17, PL-4, SC-10, SI-4.
References: NIST Special Publications 800-46, 800-77, 800-113, 800-114, 800-121. |
link |
41 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R4 |
AC-17(1) |
NIST_SP_800-53_R4_AC-17(1) |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 AC-17 (1) |
Access Control |
Automated Monitoring / Control |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system monitors and controls remote access methods.
Supplemental Guidance: Automated monitoring and control of remote access sessions allows organizations to detect cyber attacks and also ensure ongoing compliance with remote access policies by auditing connection activities of remote users on a variety of information system components (e.g., servers, workstations, notebook computers, smart phones, and tablets). Related controls: AU-2, AU-12. |
link |
37 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R4 |
AC-4 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R4_AC-4 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 AC-4 |
Access Control |
Information Flow Enforcement |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies].
Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels.
Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18.
References: None. |
link |
54 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R4 |
SC-7 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7 |
System And Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection |
Shared |
n/a |
The information system:
a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system;
b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and
c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture.
Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13.
References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. |
link |
54 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R4 |
SC-7(3) |
NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7(3) |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7 (3) |
System And Communications Protection |
Access Points |
Shared |
n/a |
The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system.
Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. |
link |
53 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R5 |
AC-17 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R5_AC-17 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AC-17 |
Access Control |
Remote Access |
Shared |
n/a |
a. Establish and document usage restrictions, configuration/connection requirements, and implementation guidance for each type of remote access allowed; and
b. Authorize each type of remote access to the system prior to allowing such connections. |
link |
41 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R5 |
AC-17(1) |
NIST_SP_800-53_R5_AC-17(1) |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AC-17 (1) |
Access Control |
Monitoring and Control |
Shared |
n/a |
Employ automated mechanisms to monitor and control remote access methods. |
link |
37 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R5 |
AC-4 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R5_AC-4 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AC-4 |
Access Control |
Information Flow Enforcement |
Shared |
n/a |
Enforce approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between connected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. |
link |
54 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R5 |
SC-7 |
NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7 |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7 |
System and Communications Protection |
Boundary Protection |
Shared |
n/a |
a. Monitor and control communications at the external managed interfaces to the system and at key internal managed interfaces within the system;
b. Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically;logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and
c. Connect to external networks or systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security and privacy architecture. |
link |
54 |
| NIST_SP_800-53_R5 |
SC-7(3) |
NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7(3) |
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7 (3) |
System and Communications Protection |
Access Points |
Shared |
n/a |
Limit the number of external network connections to the system. |
link |
53 |
| NZ_ISM_v3.5 |
GS-3 |
NZ_ISM_v3.5_GS-3 |
NZISM Security Benchmark GS-3 |
Gateway security |
19.1.12 Configuration of Gateways |
Customer |
n/a |
Gateways are essential in controlling the flow of information between security domains. Any failure, particularly at the higher classifications, may have serious consequences. Hence mechanisms for alerting personnel to situations that may give rise to information security incidents are especially important for gateways. |
link |
6 |
| NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1 |
GS-3 |
NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1_GS-3 |
NZISM Security Benchmark GS-3 |
Gateway security |
19.1.12 Configuration of Gateways |
Customer |
Agencies MUST ensure that gateways:
are the only communications paths into and out of internal networks;
by default, deny all connections into and out of the network;
allow only explicitly authorised connections;
are managed via a secure path isolated from all connected networks (i.e. physically at the gateway or on a dedicated administration network);
provide sufficient logging and audit capabilities to detect information security incidents, attempted intrusions or anomalous usage patterns; and
provide real-time alerts. |
Gateways are essential in controlling the flow of information between security domains. Any failure, particularly at the higher classifications, may have serious consequences. Hence mechanisms for alerting personnel to situations that may give rise to information security incidents are especially important for gateways. |
link |
6 |
| PCI_DSS_V3.2.1 |
1.3.2 |
PCI_DSS_v3.2.1_1.3.2 |
PCI DSS v3.2.1 1.3.2 |
Requirement 1 |
PCI DSS requirement 1.3.2 |
customer |
n/a |
n/a |
link |
2 |
| PCI_DSS_V3.2.1 |
1.3.4 |
PCI_DSS_v3.2.1_1.3.4 |
PCI DSS v3.2.1 1.3.4 |
Requirement 1 |
PCI DSS requirement 1.3.4 |
customer |
n/a |
n/a |
link |
2 |
| PCI_DSS_v4.0 |
1.3.2 |
PCI_DSS_v4.0_1.3.2 |
PCI DSS v4.0 1.3.2 |
Requirement 01: Install and Maintain Network Security Controls |
Network access to and from the cardholder data environment is restricted |
Shared |
n/a |
Outbound traffic from the CDE is restricted as follows:
• To only traffic that is necessary.
• All other traffic is specifically denied. |
link |
2 |
| PCI_DSS_v4.0 |
1.4.2 |
PCI_DSS_v4.0_1.4.2 |
PCI DSS v4.0 1.4.2 |
Requirement 01: Install and Maintain Network Security Controls |
Network connections between trusted and untrusted networks are controlled |
Shared |
n/a |
Inbound traffic from untrusted networks to trusted networks is restricted to:
• Communications with system components that are authorized to provide publicly accessible services, protocols, and ports.
• Stateful responses to communications initiated by system components in a trusted network.
• All other traffic is denied. |
link |
7 |
| RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 |
14.1 |
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_14.1 |
|
Anti-Phishing |
Anti-Phishing-14.1 |
|
n/a |
Subscribe to Anti-phishing/anti-rouge app services from external service providers for identifying and taking down phishing websites/rouge applications. |
|
31 |
| RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 |
15.1 |
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_15.1 |
|
Data Leak Prevention Strategy |
Data Leak Prevention Strategy-15.1 |
|
n/a |
Develop a comprehensive data loss/leakage prevention strategy to safeguard sensitive (including confidential)business and customer data/information. |
|
8 |
| RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 |
7.7 |
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_7.7 |
|
Patch/Vulnerability & Change Management |
Patch/Vulnerability & Change Management-7.7 |
|
n/a |
Periodically evaluate the access device configurations and patch levels to ensure
that all access points, nodes between (i) different VLANs in the Data Centre (ii)
LAN/WAN interfaces (iii) bank???s network to external network and interconnections
with partner, vendor and service provider networks are to be securely configured. |
|
25 |
| SWIFT_CSCF_v2021 |
1.1 |
SWIFT_CSCF_v2021_1.1 |
SWIFT CSCF v2021 1.1 |
SWIFT Environment Protection |
SWIFT Environment Protection |
|
n/a |
Ensure the protection of the user's local SWIFT infrastructure from potentially compromised elements of the general IT environment and external environment. |
link |
30 |
| SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 |
1.1 |
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_1.1 |
SWIFT CSCF v2022 1.1 |
1. Restrict Internet Access & Protect Critical Systems from General IT Environment |
Ensure the protection of the user's local SWIFT infrastructure from potentially compromised elements of the general IT environment and external environment. |
Shared |
n/a |
A separated secure zone safeguards the user's SWIFT infrastructure from compromises and attacks on the broader enterprise and external environments. |
link |
22 |
| SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 |
1.5A |
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_1.5A |
SWIFT CSCF v2022 1.5A |
1. Restrict Internet Access & Protect Critical Systems from General IT Environment |
Ensure the protection of the customer’s connectivity infrastructure from external environment and potentially compromised elements of the general IT environment. |
Shared |
n/a |
A separated secure zone safeguards the customer's infrastructure used for external connectivity from external environments and compromises or attacks on the broader enterprise environment. |
link |
26 |
| UK_NCSC_CSP |
11 |
UK_NCSC_CSP_11 |
UK NCSC CSP 11 |
External interface protection |
External interface protection |
Shared |
n/a |
All external or less trusted interfaces of the service should be identified and appropriately defended. |
link |
8 |
| UK_NCSC_CSP |
5.3 |
UK_NCSC_CSP_5.3 |
UK NCSC CSP 5.3 |
Operational security |
Protective Monitoring |
Shared |
n/a |
A service which does not effectively monitor for attack, misuse and malfunction will be unlikely to detect attacks (both successful and unsuccessful). As a result, it will be unable to quickly respond to potential compromises of your environments and data. |
link |
4 |