AST-01.2: Stakeholder Identification & Involvement
Mechanisms exist to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.
Control Question: Does the organization identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) to support the ongoing secure management of those assets?
General (13)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| COBIT 2019 | EDM05.01 EDM05.02 EDM05.03 DSS06.02 |
| ISO 27001 2022 (source) | 4.2 4.2(a) |
| ISO 27002 2022 | 5.9 |
| ISO 27017 2015 | 8.1 |
| ISO 27701 2025 | 4.2 |
| ISO 42001 2023 | 9.3.2(c) A.4.6 A.8 A.8.2 A.8.3 A.8.4 A.8.5 |
| NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 | GOVERN 1.1 GOVERN 2.0 GOVERN 5.0 |
| NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 | ID.IM-P2 ID.IM-P8 |
| NIST CSF 2.0 (source) | GV.OC GV.OC-02 ID.AM ID.AM-08 |
| TISAX ISA 6 | 1.2.2 1.3.1 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational | AST-01.2 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure | AST-01.2 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats | AST-01.2 |
US (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CERT RMM 1.2 | GG2.GP7 MON:SG1.SP2 |
| US NERC CIP 2024 (source) | CIP-003-8 R3 |
| US TSA / DHS 1580/82-2022-01 | III.A |
EMEA (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 | 3.3.2(16) 3.5(54) |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-1-1-4 |
| EMEA UK CAF 4.0 | A3.a (point 4) |
APAC (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF | GV.PO.S5 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 4.4.3 4.4.3.1 |
| APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 | HSUP27 |
| APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 | HSUP27 |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 3.3.1(c) |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Asset Management (AST) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Asset management is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel.
- Asset inventories are performed in an ad hoc manner.
- Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories.
- Data process owners maintain limited network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data that is specific to their initiative.
- IT personnel work with data/process owners to help ensure secure practices are implemented throughout the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Asset Management (AST) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Asset management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
- IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for asset management.
- Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
- Asset management is formally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel.
- Technology assets are categorized according to data classification and business criticality.
- Inventories cover technology assets in scope for statutory, regulatory and/ or contractual compliance, which includes both physical and virtual assets.
- Software licensing is tracked as part of IT asset inventories.
- Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect technology assets assigned to them or under their supervision.
- IT/cybersecurity personnel maintain network diagrams to document the flow of sensitive/regulated data across the network.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Asset Management (AST) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, governs asset management to help ensure compliance with requirements for asset management.
- An ITAM function, or similar function, maintains an inventory of IT assets, covering both physical and virtual assets, as well as centrally managed asset ownership assignments.
- Technology assets and data are categorized according to data classification and business criticality criteria.
- A Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) function oversees supply chain risks including the removal and prevention of certain technology services and/ or equipment designated as supply chain threats by a statutory or regulatory body.
- Data/process owners document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed, generating Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs) and network diagrams to document the flow of data.
- Quarterly IT asset inventories are reviewed and shared with appropriate stakeholders.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Asset Management (AST) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement.
- Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
- Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
- Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
- Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
- Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
- Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to identify and involve pertinent stakeholders of critical Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) to support the ongoing secure management of those assets.
Assessment Objectives
- AST-01.2_A01 pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services are identified and documented.
- AST-01.2_A02 pertinent stakeholders of critical systems, applications and services are involved in supporting the ongoing secure management of those assets.
Evidence Requirements
- E-CPL-03 Controls Responsibility Matrix (CRM)
-
Documented evidence of a Controls Responsibility Matrix (CRM), or similar documentation, that identifies the stakeholder involved in executing assigned controls (e.g., Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted & Informed (RASCI) matrix).
Compliance
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- System Security & Privacy Plan (SSPP)
Small
- System Security & Privacy Plan (SSPP)
Medium
- System Security & Privacy Plan (SSPP)
Large
- System Security & Privacy Plan (SSPP)
Enterprise
- System Security & Privacy Plan (SSPP)