AzPolicyAdvertizer

last sync: 2024-Apr-24 17:46:58 UTC

Manage gateways | Regulatory Compliance - Operational

Azure BuiltIn Policy definition

Source Azure Portal
Display name Manage gateways
Id 63f63e71-6c3f-9add-4c43-64de23e554a7
Version 1.1.0
Details on versioning
Category Regulatory Compliance
Microsoft Learn
Description CMA_0363 - Manage gateways
Additional metadata Name/Id: CMA_0363 / CMA_0363
Category: Operational
Title: Manage gateways
Ownership: Customer
Description: Microsoft recommends that your organization manage network gateways by: - Granting administrative access to limited users and segregating roles and responsibilities - Using multifactor authentication for accessing gateways - Training system administrators on managing gateways - Ensuring system owners of systems connected through a gateway understand and accept security risks associated with the gateway - Authenticating and authorizing information and communication technology (ICT) equipment, users and services to access networks - Implementing one or more gateways to protect systems in different domains - Enabling detailed logging and audit trails for inbound and outbound traffic - Enabling and monitoring real-time alerts - Using separate log servers to keep track of all inbound and outbound traffic - Implementing allow lists for domain names or IP addresses - Seeking legal advice regarding the inspection of TLS traffic through Internet gateways - Implementing demilitarized zones to broker access to services accessed by external entities - Exporting data only after performing a data classification assessment or classifying the data - Following formal change management processes for any changes on gateways - Performing a security risk assessment on gateways and its configuration prior to implementation - Testing the strength of security controls. A secure network gateway provides protection against online security threats by enforcing company security policies and filtering malicious Internet traffic in real-time. At a minimum, it is recommended that a secure network gateway include URL filtering, application controls for web applications, and detection and filtering of malicious code. In addition, Microsoft recommends users understand and accept the risk of connecting via Gateway. Once connectivity is established, domain owners are considered as information stakeholders. It is recommended to update the internal/external authority about any changes in the Gateway and share the assessment results with them. Separate infrastructure for upward and downward path using diodes should be implemented. The New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) recommends agencies permitting TLS through their gateways to implement a solution that decrypts and inspects the TLS traffic as per content filtering requirements, or a whitelist specifying the addresses (uniform resource locators) to which encrypted connections are permitted, with all other addresses blocked.
Requirements: The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation.
Mode All
Type BuiltIn
Preview False
Deprecated False
Effect Default
Manual
Allowed
Manual, Disabled
RBAC role(s) none
Rule aliases none
Rule resource types IF (1)
Microsoft.Resources/subscriptions
Compliance
The following 85 compliance controls are associated with this Policy definition 'Manage gateways' (63f63e71-6c3f-9add-4c43-64de23e554a7)
Control Domain Control Name MetadataId Category Title Owner Requirements Description Info Policy#
CIS_Azure_1.1.0 2.1 CIS_Azure_1.1.0_2.1 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1 2 Security Center Ensure that standard pricing tier is selected Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. The standard pricing tier enables threat detection for networks and virtual machines, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 15
CIS_Azure_1.1.0 2.5 CIS_Azure_1.1.0_2.5 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.5 2 Security Center Ensure ASC Default policy setting "Monitor Endpoint Protection" is not "Disabled" Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Enable Endpoint protection recommendations for virtual machines. link 8
CIS_Azure_1.1.0 7.6 CIS_Azure_1.1.0_7.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 7.6 7 Virtual Machines Ensure that the endpoint protection for all Virtual Machines is installed Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Install endpoint protection for all virtual machines. link 11
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.1 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.1 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Servers Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Server, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.10 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.10 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.10 2 Security Center Ensure that Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS) integration with Security Center is selected Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. This setting enables Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS) integration with Security Center. link 8
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.2 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.2 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.2 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for App Service Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for App Service, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.3 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.3 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.3 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Azure SQL database servers Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Azure SQL database servers, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.4 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.4 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.4 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for SQL servers on machines Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for SQL servers on machines, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.5 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.5 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.5 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Storage Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Storage, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.6 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.6 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Kubernetes Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Kubernetes, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.7 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.7 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.7 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Container Registries Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Container Registries, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.8 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.8 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.8 2 Security Center Ensure that Azure Defender is set to On for Key Vault Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Azure Defender enables threat detection for Key Vault, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Azure Security Center. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 2.9 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_2.9 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.9 2 Security Center Ensure that Windows Defender ATP (WDATP) integration with Security Center is selected Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. This setting enables Windows Defender ATP (WDATP) integration with Security Center. link 8
CIS_Azure_1.3.0 7.6 CIS_Azure_1.3.0_7.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 7.6 7 Virtual Machines Ensure that the endpoint protection for all Virtual Machines is installed Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Install endpoint protection for all virtual machines. link 11
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.1 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.1 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Servers is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Servers enables threat detection for Servers, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.10 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.10 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.10 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (MCAS) Integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud is Selected Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. This setting enables Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (MCAS) integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 8
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.2 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.2 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.2 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for App Service is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for App Service enables threat detection for App Service, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.3 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.3 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.3 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases enables threat detection for Azure SQL database servers, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.4 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.4 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.4 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for SQL servers on machines is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for SQL servers on machines enables threat detection for SQL servers on machines, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.5 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.5 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.5 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Storage is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Storage enables threat detection for Storage, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.6 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.6 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Kubernetes is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Kubernetes enables threat detection for Kubernetes, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.7 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.7 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.7 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Container Registries is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Container Registries enables threat detection for Container Registries, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.8 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.8 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.8 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Key Vault is set to 'On' Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Key Vault enables threat detection for Key Vault, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 9
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 2.9 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_2.9 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.9 2 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (WDATP) integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud is selected Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. This setting enables Microsoft Defender for Endpoint integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. link 8
CIS_Azure_1.4.0 7.6 CIS_Azure_1.4.0_7.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 7.6 7 Virtual Machines Ensure that the endpoint protection for all Virtual Machines is installed Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Install endpoint protection for all virtual machines. link 11
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.1 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.1 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.1 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for Servers Is Set to 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for Servers in Microsoft Defender for Cloud incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Servers enables threat detection for Servers, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for Servers allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.10 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.10 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.10 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for Key Vault Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for Key Vault incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Key Vault enables threat detection for Key Vault, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for Key Vault allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.17 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.17 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.17 2.1 Ensure that Auto provisioning of 'Microsoft Defender for Containers components' is Set to 'On' Shared Microsoft Defender for Containers will require additional licensing. Enable automatic provisioning of the Microsoft Defender for Containers components. As with any compute resource, Container environments require hardening and run-time protection to ensure safe operations and detection of threats and vulnerabilities. link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.2 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.2 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.2 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for App Services Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for App Service incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for App Service enables threat detection for App Service, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for App Service allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.21 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.21 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.21 2.1 Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud is Selected Shared Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps works with Standard pricing tier Subscription. Choosing the Standard pricing tier of Microsoft Defender for Cloud incurs an additional cost per resource. This integration setting enables Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (formerly 'Microsoft Cloud App Security' or 'MCAS' - see additional info) to communicate with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers an additional layer of protection by using Azure Resource Manager events, which is considered to be the control plane for Azure. By analyzing the Azure Resource Manager records, Microsoft Defender for Cloud detects unusual or potentially harmful operations in the Azure subscription environment. Several of the preceding analytics are powered by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. To benefit from these analytics, subscription must have a Cloud App Security license. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps works only with Standard Tier subscriptions. link 8
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.22 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.22 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.22 2.1 Ensure that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint integration with Microsoft Defender for Cloud is selected Shared Microsoft Defender for Endpoint works with Standard pricing tier Subscription. Choosing the Standard pricing tier of Microsoft Defender for Cloud incurs an additional cost per resource. This integration setting enables Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly 'Advanced Threat Protection' or 'ATP' or 'WDATP' - see additional info) to communicate with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. **IMPORTANT:** When enabling integration between DfE & DfC it needs to be taken into account that this will have some side effects that may be undesirable. 1. For server 2019 & above if defender is installed (default for these server SKU's) this will trigger a deployment of the new unified agent and link to any of the extended configuration in the Defender portal. 1. If the new unified agent is required for server SKU's of Win 2016 or Linux and lower there is additional integration that needs to be switched on and agents need to be aligned. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint integration brings comprehensive Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) capabilities within Microsoft Defender for Cloud. This integration helps to spot abnormalities, as well as detect and respond to advanced attacks on endpoints monitored by Microsoft Defender for Cloud. MDE works only with Standard Tier subscriptions. link 8
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.4 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.4 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.4 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases enables threat detection for Azure SQL database servers, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for Azure SQL Databases allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.5 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.5 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.5 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for SQL Servers on Machines Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for SQL servers on machines incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for SQL servers on machines enables threat detection for SQL servers on machines, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for SQL servers on machines allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.7 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.7 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.7 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for Storage Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for Storage incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Storage enables threat detection for Storage, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for Storage allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 2.1.8 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_2.1.8 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 2.1.8 2.1 Ensure That Microsoft Defender for Containers Is Set To 'On' Shared Turning on Microsoft Defender for Containers incurs an additional cost per resource. Turning on Microsoft Defender for Containers enables threat detection for Container Registries including Kubernetes, providing threat intelligence, anomaly detection, and behavior analytics in the Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Enabling Microsoft Defender for Container Registries allows for greater defense-in-depth, with threat detection provided by the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). link 9
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 7.6 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_7.6 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 7.6 7 Ensure that Endpoint Protection for all Virtual Machines is installed Shared Endpoint protection will incur an additional cost to you. Install endpoint protection for all virtual machines. Installing endpoint protection systems (like anti-malware for Azure) provides for real-time protection capability that helps identify and remove viruses, spyware, and other malicious software. These also offer configurable alerts when known-malicious or unwanted software attempts to install itself or run on Azure systems. link 11
FedRAMP_High_R4 SI-3 FedRAMP_High_R4_SI-3 FedRAMP High SI-3 System And Information Integrity Malicious Code Protection Shared n/a The organization: a. Employs malicious code protection mechanisms at information system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code; b. Updates malicious code protection mechanisms whenever new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures; c. Configures malicious code protection mechanisms to: 1. Perform periodic scans of the information system [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] and real-time scans of files from external sources at [Selection (one or more); endpoint; network entry/exit points] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational security policy; and 2. [Selection (one or more): block malicious code; quarantine malicious code; send alert to administrator; [Assignment: organization-defined action]] in response to malicious code detection; and d. Addresses the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Information system entry and exit points include, for example, firewalls, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, remote-access servers, workstations, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes, for example, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can also be encoded in various formats (e.g., UUENCODE, Unicode), contained within compressed or hidden files, or hidden in files using steganography. Malicious code can be transported by different means including, for example, web accesses, electronic mail, electronic mail attachments, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of information system vulnerabilities. Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, anti-virus signature definitions and reputation-based technologies. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Pervasive configuration management and comprehensive software integrity controls may be effective in preventing execution of unauthorized code. In addition to commercial off-the-shelf software, malicious code may also be present in custom-built software. This could include, for example, logic bombs, back doors, and other types of cyber attacks that could affect organizational missions/business functions. Traditional malicious code protection mechanisms cannot always detect such code. In these situations, organizations rely instead on other safeguards including, for example, secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to help ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. Organizations may determine that in response to the detection of malicious code, different actions may be warranted. For example, organizations can define actions in response to malicious code detection during periodic scans, actions in response to detection of malicious downloads, and/or actions in response to detection of maliciousness when attempting to open or execute files. Related controls: CM-3, MP-2, SA-4, SA-8, SA-12, SA-13, SC-7, SC-26, SC-44, SI-2, SI-4, SI-7. References: NIST Special Publication 800-83. link 11
FedRAMP_High_R4 SI-3(1) FedRAMP_High_R4_SI-3(1) FedRAMP High SI-3 (1) System And Information Integrity Central Management Shared n/a The organization centrally manages malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Central management is the organization-wide management and implementation of malicious code protection mechanisms. Central management includes planning, implementing, assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the organization-defined, centrally managed flaw malicious code protection security controls. Related controls: AU-2, SI-8. link 10
FedRAMP_High_R4 SI-3(2) FedRAMP_High_R4_SI-3(2) FedRAMP High SI-3 (2) System And Information Integrity Automatic Updates Shared n/a The information system automatically updates malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, signature definitions. Due to information system integrity and availability concerns, organizations give careful consideration to the methodology used to carry out automatic updates. Related control: SI-8. link 6
FedRAMP_High_R4 SI-3(7) FedRAMP_High_R4_SI-3(7) FedRAMP High SI-3 (7) System And Information Integrity Nonsignature-Based Detection Shared n/a The information system implements nonsignature-based malicious code detection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Nonsignature-based detection mechanisms include, for example, the use of heuristics to detect, analyze, and describe the characteristics or behavior of malicious code and to provide safeguards against malicious code for which signatures do not yet exist or for which existing signatures may not be effective. This includes polymorphic malicious code (i.e., code that changes signatures when it replicates). This control enhancement does not preclude the use of signature-based detection mechanisms. link 6
FedRAMP_High_R4 SI-4(4) FedRAMP_High_R4_SI-4(4) FedRAMP High SI-4 (4) System And Information Integrity Inbound And Outbound Communications Traffic Shared n/a The information system monitors inbound and outbound communications traffic [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] for unusual or unauthorized activities or conditions. Supplemental Guidance: Unusual/unauthorized activities or conditions related to information system inbound and outbound communications traffic include, for example, internal traffic that indicates the presence of malicious code within organizational information systems or propagating among system components, the unauthorized exporting of information, or signaling to external information systems. Evidence of malicious code is used to identify potentially compromised information systems or information system components. link 4
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SI-3 FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SI-3 FedRAMP Moderate SI-3 System And Information Integrity Malicious Code Protection Shared n/a The organization: a. Employs malicious code protection mechanisms at information system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code; b. Updates malicious code protection mechanisms whenever new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures; c. Configures malicious code protection mechanisms to: 1. Perform periodic scans of the information system [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] and real-time scans of files from external sources at [Selection (one or more); endpoint; network entry/exit points] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational security policy; and 2. [Selection (one or more): block malicious code; quarantine malicious code; send alert to administrator; [Assignment: organization-defined action]] in response to malicious code detection; and d. Addresses the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Information system entry and exit points include, for example, firewalls, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, remote-access servers, workstations, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes, for example, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can also be encoded in various formats (e.g., UUENCODE, Unicode), contained within compressed or hidden files, or hidden in files using steganography. Malicious code can be transported by different means including, for example, web accesses, electronic mail, electronic mail attachments, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of information system vulnerabilities. Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, anti-virus signature definitions and reputation-based technologies. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Pervasive configuration management and comprehensive software integrity controls may be effective in preventing execution of unauthorized code. In addition to commercial off-the-shelf software, malicious code may also be present in custom-built software. This could include, for example, logic bombs, back doors, and other types of cyber attacks that could affect organizational missions/business functions. Traditional malicious code protection mechanisms cannot always detect such code. In these situations, organizations rely instead on other safeguards including, for example, secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to help ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. Organizations may determine that in response to the detection of malicious code, different actions may be warranted. For example, organizations can define actions in response to malicious code detection during periodic scans, actions in response to detection of malicious downloads, and/or actions in response to detection of maliciousness when attempting to open or execute files. Related controls: CM-3, MP-2, SA-4, SA-8, SA-12, SA-13, SC-7, SC-26, SC-44, SI-2, SI-4, SI-7. References: NIST Special Publication 800-83. link 11
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SI-3(1) FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SI-3(1) FedRAMP Moderate SI-3 (1) System And Information Integrity Central Management Shared n/a The organization centrally manages malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Central management is the organization-wide management and implementation of malicious code protection mechanisms. Central management includes planning, implementing, assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the organization-defined, centrally managed flaw malicious code protection security controls. Related controls: AU-2, SI-8. link 10
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SI-3(2) FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SI-3(2) FedRAMP Moderate SI-3 (2) System And Information Integrity Automatic Updates Shared n/a The information system automatically updates malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, signature definitions. Due to information system integrity and availability concerns, organizations give careful consideration to the methodology used to carry out automatic updates. Related control: SI-8. link 6
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SI-3(7) FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SI-3(7) FedRAMP Moderate SI-3 (7) System And Information Integrity Nonsignature-Based Detection Shared n/a The information system implements nonsignature-based malicious code detection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Nonsignature-based detection mechanisms include, for example, the use of heuristics to detect, analyze, and describe the characteristics or behavior of malicious code and to provide safeguards against malicious code for which signatures do not yet exist or for which existing signatures may not be effective. This includes polymorphic malicious code (i.e., code that changes signatures when it replicates). This control enhancement does not preclude the use of signature-based detection mechanisms. link 6
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SI-4(4) FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SI-4(4) FedRAMP Moderate SI-4 (4) System And Information Integrity Inbound And Outbound Communications Traffic Shared n/a The information system monitors inbound and outbound communications traffic [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] for unusual or unauthorized activities or conditions. Supplemental Guidance: Unusual/unauthorized activities or conditions related to information system inbound and outbound communications traffic include, for example, internal traffic that indicates the presence of malicious code within organizational information systems or propagating among system components, the unauthorized exporting of information, or signaling to external information systems. Evidence of malicious code is used to identify potentially compromised information systems or information system components. link 4
hipaa 0201.09j1Organizational.124-09.j hipaa-0201.09j1Organizational.124-09.j 0201.09j1Organizational.124-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0201.09j1Organizational.124-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Anti-virus and anti-spyware are installed, operating and updated on all end-user devices to conduct periodic scans of the systems to identify and remove unauthorized software. Server environments for which the server software developer specifically recommends not installing host-based anti-virus and anti-spyware software are addressed via a network-based malware detection (NBMD) solution. 18
hipaa 0204.09j2Organizational.1-09.j hipaa-0204.09j2Organizational.1-09.j 0204.09j2Organizational.1-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0204.09j2Organizational.1-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Scans for malicious software are performed on boot and every 12 hours. 11
hipaa 0205.09j2Organizational.2-09.j hipaa-0205.09j2Organizational.2-09.j 0205.09j2Organizational.2-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0205.09j2Organizational.2-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Malicious code that is identified is blocked, quarantined, and an alert is sent to the administrators. 10
hipaa 0206.09j2Organizational.34-09.j hipaa-0206.09j2Organizational.34-09.j 0206.09j2Organizational.34-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0206.09j2Organizational.34-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Anti-malware is centrally managed and cannot be disabled by the users. 6
hipaa 0207.09j2Organizational.56-09.j hipaa-0207.09j2Organizational.56-09.j 0207.09j2Organizational.56-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0207.09j2Organizational.56-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Centrally-managed, up-to-date anti-spam and anti-malware protection is implemented at information system entry/exit points for the network and on all devices. 7
hipaa 0214.09j1Organizational.6-09.j hipaa-0214.09j1Organizational.6-09.j 0214.09j1Organizational.6-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0214.09j1Organizational.6-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Protection against malicious code is based on malicious code detection and repair software, security awareness, and appropriate system access and change management controls. 13
hipaa 0215.09j2Organizational.8-09.j hipaa-0215.09j2Organizational.8-09.j 0215.09j2Organizational.8-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0215.09j2Organizational.8-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a The organization addresses the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication, and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the information system. 7
hipaa 0217.09j2Organizational.10-09.j hipaa-0217.09j2Organizational.10-09.j 0217.09j2Organizational.10-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0217.09j2Organizational.10-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a The organization configures malicious code and spam protection mechanisms to (i) perform periodic scans of the information system according to organization guidelines; (ii) perform real-time scans of files from external sources at endpoints and network entry/exit points as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational security policy; and, (iii) block malicious code, quarantine malicious code, or send an alert to the administrator in response to malicious code detection. 25
hipaa 0219.09j2Organizational.12-09.j hipaa-0219.09j2Organizational.12-09.j 0219.09j2Organizational.12-09.j 02 Endpoint Protection 0219.09j2Organizational.12-09.j 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a The organization has implemented safeguards to protect its information system's memory from unauthorized code execution. 7
hipaa 0225.09k1Organizational.1-09.k hipaa-0225.09k1Organizational.1-09.k 0225.09k1Organizational.1-09.k 02 Endpoint Protection 0225.09k1Organizational.1-09.k 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a Automated controls (e.g., browser settings) are in place to authorize and restrict the use of mobile code (e.g., Java, JavaScript, ActiveX, PDF, postscript, Shockwave movies, and Flash animations). 10
hipaa 0226.09k1Organizational.2-09.k hipaa-0226.09k1Organizational.2-09.k 0226.09k1Organizational.2-09.k 02 Endpoint Protection 0226.09k1Organizational.2-09.k 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a The organization has implemented and regularly updates mobile code protection, including anti-virus and anti-spyware. 9
hipaa 0227.09k2Organizational.12-09.k hipaa-0227.09k2Organizational.12-09.k 0227.09k2Organizational.12-09.k 02 Endpoint Protection 0227.09k2Organizational.12-09.k 09.04 Protection Against Malicious and Mobile Code Shared n/a The organization takes specific actions to protect against mobile code performing unauthorized actions. 18
hipaa 0635.10k1Organizational.12-10.k hipaa-0635.10k1Organizational.12-10.k 0635.10k1Organizational.12-10.k 06 Configuration Management 0635.10k1Organizational.12-10.k 10.05 Security In Development and Support Processes Shared n/a Managers responsible for application systems are also responsible for the strict control (security) of the project or support environment and ensure that all proposed system changes are reviewed to check that they do not compromise the security of either the system or the operating environment. 9
hipaa 0663.10h1System.7-10.h hipaa-0663.10h1System.7-10.h 0663.10h1System.7-10.h 06 Configuration Management 0663.10h1System.7-10.h 10.04 Security of System Files Shared n/a The operating system has in place supporting technical controls such as antivirus, file integrity monitoring, host-based (personal) firewalls or port filtering tools, and logging as part of its baseline. 16
hipaa 0724.07a3Organizational.4-07.a hipaa-0724.07a3Organizational.4-07.a 0724.07a3Organizational.4-07.a 07 Vulnerability Management 0724.07a3Organizational.4-07.a 07.01 Responsibility for Assets Shared n/a The organization employs automated mechanisms to scan the network, no less than weekly, to detect the presence of unauthorized components/devices (including hardware, firmware and software) in the environment; and disables network access by such components/devices or notify designated organizational officials. 6
hipaa 0809.01n2Organizational.1234-01.n hipaa-0809.01n2Organizational.1234-01.n 0809.01n2Organizational.1234-01.n 08 Network Protection 0809.01n2Organizational.1234-01.n 01.04 Network Access Control Shared n/a Network traffic is controlled in accordance with the organization’s access control policy through firewall and other network-related restrictions for each network access point or external telecommunication service's managed interface. 18
ISO27001-2013 A.12.2.1 ISO27001-2013_A.12.2.1 ISO 27001:2013 A.12.2.1 Operations Security Controls against malware Shared n/a Detection, prevention, and recovery controls to protect against malware shall be implemented, combined with appropriate user awareness. link 12
ISO27001-2013 A.12.4.1 ISO27001-2013_A.12.4.1 ISO 27001:2013 A.12.4.1 Operations Security Event Logging Shared n/a Event logs recording user activities, exceptions, faults and information security events shall be produced, kept and regularly reviewed. link 53
ISO27001-2013 A.12.4.3 ISO27001-2013_A.12.4.3 ISO 27001:2013 A.12.4.3 Operations Security Administrator and operator logs Shared n/a System administrator and system operator activities shall be logged and the logs protected and regularly reviewed. link 29
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .14.2 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.14.2 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.14.2 System and Information Integrity Provide protection from malicious code at designated locations within organizational systems. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Designated locations include system entry and exit points which may include firewalls, remote-access servers, workstations, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can be encoded in various formats (e.g., UUENCODE, Unicode), contained within compressed or hidden files, or hidden in files using techniques such as steganography. Malicious code can be inserted into systems in a variety of ways including web accesses, electronic mail, electronic mail attachments, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of system vulnerabilities. Malicious code protection mechanisms include anti-virus signature definitions and reputation-based technologies. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Pervasive configuration management and comprehensive software integrity controls may be effective in preventing execution of unauthorized code. In addition to commercial off-the-shelf software, malicious code may also be present in custom-built software. This could include logic bombs, back doors, and other types of cyber-attacks that could affect organizational missions/business functions. Traditional malicious code protection mechanisms cannot always detect such code. In these situations, organizations rely instead on other safeguards including secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to help ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. [SP 800-83] provides guidance on malware incident prevention. link 20
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .14.4 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.14.4 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.14.4 System and Information Integrity Update malicious code protection mechanisms when new releases are available. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Malicious code protection mechanisms include anti-virus signature definitions and reputation-based technologies. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Pervasive configuration management and comprehensive software integrity controls may be effective in preventing execution of unauthorized code. In addition to commercial off-the-shelf software, malicious code may also be present in custom-built software. This could include logic bombs, back doors, and other types of cyber-attacks that could affect organizational missions/business functions. Traditional malicious code protection mechanisms cannot always detect such code. In these situations, organizations rely instead on other safeguards including secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to help ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. link 11
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SI-3 NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SI-3 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SI-3 System And Information Integrity Malicious Code Protection Shared n/a The organization: a. Employs malicious code protection mechanisms at information system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code; b. Updates malicious code protection mechanisms whenever new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures; c. Configures malicious code protection mechanisms to: 1. Perform periodic scans of the information system [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] and real-time scans of files from external sources at [Selection (one or more); endpoint; network entry/exit points] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational security policy; and 2. [Selection (one or more): block malicious code; quarantine malicious code; send alert to administrator; [Assignment: organization-defined action]] in response to malicious code detection; and d. Addresses the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Information system entry and exit points include, for example, firewalls, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, remote-access servers, workstations, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes, for example, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can also be encoded in various formats (e.g., UUENCODE, Unicode), contained within compressed or hidden files, or hidden in files using steganography. Malicious code can be transported by different means including, for example, web accesses, electronic mail, electronic mail attachments, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of information system vulnerabilities. Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, anti-virus signature definitions and reputation-based technologies. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Pervasive configuration management and comprehensive software integrity controls may be effective in preventing execution of unauthorized code. In addition to commercial off-the-shelf software, malicious code may also be present in custom-built software. This could include, for example, logic bombs, back doors, and other types of cyber attacks that could affect organizational missions/business functions. Traditional malicious code protection mechanisms cannot always detect such code. In these situations, organizations rely instead on other safeguards including, for example, secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to help ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. Organizations may determine that in response to the detection of malicious code, different actions may be warranted. For example, organizations can define actions in response to malicious code detection during periodic scans, actions in response to detection of malicious downloads, and/or actions in response to detection of maliciousness when attempting to open or execute files. Related controls: CM-3, MP-2, SA-4, SA-8, SA-12, SA-13, SC-7, SC-26, SC-44, SI-2, SI-4, SI-7. References: NIST Special Publication 800-83. link 11
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SI-3(1) NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SI-3(1) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SI-3 (1) System And Information Integrity Central Management Shared n/a The organization centrally manages malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Central management is the organization-wide management and implementation of malicious code protection mechanisms. Central management includes planning, implementing, assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the organization-defined, centrally managed flaw malicious code protection security controls. Related controls: AU-2, SI-8. link 10
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SI-3(2) NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SI-3(2) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SI-3 (2) System And Information Integrity Automatic Updates Shared n/a The information system automatically updates malicious code protection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Malicious code protection mechanisms include, for example, signature definitions. Due to information system integrity and availability concerns, organizations give careful consideration to the methodology used to carry out automatic updates. Related control: SI-8. link 6
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SI-3(7) NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SI-3(7) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SI-3 (7) System And Information Integrity Nonsignature-Based Detection Shared n/a The information system implements nonsignature-based malicious code detection mechanisms. Supplemental Guidance: Nonsignature-based detection mechanisms include, for example, the use of heuristics to detect, analyze, and describe the characteristics or behavior of malicious code and to provide safeguards against malicious code for which signatures do not yet exist or for which existing signatures may not be effective. This includes polymorphic malicious code (i.e., code that changes signatures when it replicates). This control enhancement does not preclude the use of signature-based detection mechanisms. link 6
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SI-4(4) NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SI-4(4) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SI-4 (4) System And Information Integrity Inbound And Outbound Communications Traffic Shared n/a The information system monitors inbound and outbound communications traffic [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] for unusual or unauthorized activities or conditions. Supplemental Guidance: Unusual/unauthorized activities or conditions related to information system inbound and outbound communications traffic include, for example, internal traffic that indicates the presence of malicious code within organizational information systems or propagating among system components, the unauthorized exporting of information, or signaling to external information systems. Evidence of malicious code is used to identify potentially compromised information systems or information system components. link 4
NIST_SP_800-53_R5 SI-3 NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SI-3 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SI-3 System and Information Integrity Malicious Code Protection Shared n/a a. Implement [Selection (OneOrMore): signature based;non-signature based] malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code; b. Automatically update malicious code protection mechanisms as new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures; c. Configure malicious code protection mechanisms to: 1. Perform periodic scans of the system [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] and real-time scans of files from external sources at [Selection (OneOrMore): endpoint;network entry and exit points] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational policy; and 2. [Selection (OneOrMore): block malicious code;quarantine malicious code;take [Assignment: organization-defined action] ] ; and send alert to [Assignment: organization-defined personnel or roles] in response to malicious code detection; and d. Address the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the system. link 11
NIST_SP_800-53_R5 SI-4(4) NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SI-4(4) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SI-4 (4) System and Information Integrity Inbound and Outbound Communications Traffic Shared n/a (a) Determine criteria for unusual or unauthorized activities or conditions for inbound and outbound communications traffic; (b) Monitor inbound and outbound communications traffic [Assignment: organization-defined frequency] for [Assignment: organization-defined unusual or unauthorized activities or conditions]. link 4
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.2.1 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.2.1 PCI DSS v4.0 5.2.1 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Malicious software (malware) is prevented, or detected and addressed Shared n/a An anti-malware solution(s) is deployed on all system components, except for those system components identified in periodic evaluations per Requirement 5.2.3 that concludes the system components are not at risk from malware. link 12
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.2.2 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.2.2 PCI DSS v4.0 5.2.2 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Malicious software (malware) is prevented, or detected and addressed Shared n/a The deployed anti-malware solution(s): • Detects all known types of malware. • Removes, blocks, or contains all known types of malware. link 12
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.2.3 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.2.3 PCI DSS v4.0 5.2.3 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Malicious software (malware) is prevented, or detected and addressed Shared n/a Any system components that are not at risk for malware are evaluated periodically to include the following: • A documented list of all system components not at risk for malware. • Identification and evaluation of evolving malware threats for those system components. • Confirmation whether such system components continue to not require anti-malware protection. link 12
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.3.1 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.3.1 PCI DSS v4.0 5.3.1 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Anti-malware mechanisms and processes are active, maintained, and monitored Shared n/a The anti-malware solution(s) is kept current via automatic updates. link 6
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.3.3 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.3.3 PCI DSS v4.0 5.3.3 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Anti-malware mechanisms and processes are active, maintained, and monitored Shared n/a For removable electronic media, the antimalware solution: • Performs automatic scans of when the media is inserted, connected, or logically mounted, OR • Performs continuous behavioral analysis of systems or processes when the media is inserted, connected, or logically mounted. link 7
PCI_DSS_v4.0 5.4.1 PCI_DSS_v4.0_5.4.1 PCI DSS v4.0 5.4.1 Requirement 05: Protect All Systems and Networks from Malicious Software Anti-phishing mechanisms protect users against phishing attacks Shared n/a Processes and automated mechanisms are in place to detect and protect personnel against phishing attacks. link 7
SOC_2 CC6.8 SOC_2_CC6.8 SOC 2 Type 2 CC6.8 Logical and Physical Access Controls Prevent or detect against unauthorized or malicious software Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Restricts Application and Software Installation — The ability to install applications and software is restricted to authorized individuals. • Detects Unauthorized Changes to Software and Configuration Parameters — Processes are in place to detect changes to software and configuration parameters that may be indicative of unauthorized or malicious software. • Uses a Defined Change Control Process — A management-defined change control process is used for the implementation of software. • Uses Antivirus and Anti-Malware Software — Antivirus and anti-malware software is implemented and maintained to provide for the interception or detection and remediation of malware. • Scans Information Assets from Outside the Entity for Malware and Other Unauthorized Software — Procedures are in place to scan information assets that have been transferred or returned to the entity’s custody for malware and other unauthorized software and to remove any items detected prior to its implementation on the network. 53
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 2.9 SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_2.9 SWIFT CSCF v2022 2.9 2. Reduce Attack Surface and Vulnerabilities Ensure outbound transaction activity within the expected bounds of normal business. Shared n/a Implement transaction detection, prevention, and validation controls to ensure outbound transaction activity within the expected bounds of normal business. link 7
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 6.1 SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_6.1 SWIFT CSCF v2022 6.1 6. Detect Anomalous Activity to Systems or Transaction Records Ensure that local SWIFT infrastructure is protected against malware and act upon results. Shared n/a Anti-malware software from a reputable vendor is installed, kept up-to-date on all systems, and results are considered for appropriate resolving actions. link 31
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 6.5A SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_6.5A SWIFT CSCF v2022 6.5A 6. Detect Anomalous Activity to Systems or Transaction Records Detect and contain anomalous network activity into and within the local or remote SWIFT environment. Shared n/a Intrusion detection is implemented to detect unauthorised network access and anomalous activity. link 18
SWIFT_CSCF_v2022 9.4 SWIFT_CSCF_v2022_9.4 SWIFT CSCF v2022 9.4 9. Ensure Availability through Resilience Providers' availability and quality of service is ensured through usage of the recommended SWIFT connectivity packs and the appropriate line bandwidth Shared n/a Providers' availability and quality of service is ensured through usage of the recommended SWIFT connectivity packs and the appropriate line bandwidth link 5
Initiatives usage
Initiative DisplayName Initiative Id Initiative Category State Type
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark v1.1.0 1a5bb27d-173f-493e-9568-eb56638dde4d Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark v1.3.0 612b5213-9160-4969-8578-1518bd2a000c Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark v1.4.0 c3f5c4d9-9a1d-4a99-85c0-7f93e384d5c5 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark v2.0.0 06f19060-9e68-4070-92ca-f15cc126059e Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
FedRAMP High d5264498-16f4-418a-b659-fa7ef418175f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
FedRAMP Moderate e95f5a9f-57ad-4d03-bb0b-b1d16db93693 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
HITRUST/HIPAA a169a624-5599-4385-a696-c8d643089fab Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
ISO 27001:2013 89c6cddc-1c73-4ac1-b19c-54d1a15a42f2 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 03055927-78bd-4236-86c0-f36125a10dc9 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 cf25b9c1-bd23-4eb6-bd2c-f4f3ac644a5f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 179d1daa-458f-4e47-8086-2a68d0d6c38f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
PCI DSS v4 c676748e-3af9-4e22-bc28-50feed564afb Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
SOC 2 Type 2 4054785f-702b-4a98-9215-009cbd58b141 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
SWIFT CSP-CSCF v2022 7bc7cd6c-4114-ff31-3cac-59be3157596d Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
History
Date/Time (UTC ymd) (i) Change type Change detail
2022-09-27 16:35:32 change Minor (1.0.0 > 1.1.0)
2022-09-02 16:33:37 add 63f63e71-6c3f-9add-4c43-64de23e554a7
JSON compare
compare mode: version left: version right:
JSON
api-version=2021-06-01
EPAC