Skip to main content

AST-09.3: Automated Location Tracking

AST 5 — Medium Identify

Mechanisms exist to track the geographic location of system components.

Renumbered: Formerly AST-02.10 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization track the geographic location of system components?

General (6)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC2.1-POF6 CC2.1-POF9
NIST 800-53 R5.2 CM-08(08)
NIST 800-82 R3 CM-08(08)
NIST 800-161 R1 CM-8(8)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 CM-8(8)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 CM-8(8)
EMEA (1)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2026 AM-12.01AC.3

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).

Level 3 — Well Defined

Asset Management (AST) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An IT Asset Management (ITAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AST domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of ITAM operations (e.g., ITAM platform, (e.g., Configuration Management Database (CMBD) Asset Management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to track the geographic location of system components.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Asset Management (AST) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ 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. ▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.

Level 5 — Continuously Improving

Asset Management (AST) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes. ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.

Assessment Objectives

  1. AST-09.3_A01 automated mechanisms for tracking components are defined.
  2. AST-09.3_A02 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to support the tracking of system components by geographic location.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Prey (https://preyproject.com)
  • Apple Find My / Google Find My Device for mobile assets

Small

  • Prey (https://preyproject.com)
  • MDM solution with location tracking (e.g., Jamf Now, Microsoft Intune)

Medium

  • Prey (https://preyproject.com)
  • MDM solution with location tracking (e.g., Jamf, Microsoft Intune, Mosyle)
  • RFID asset tagging for physical hardware

Large

  • MDM solution with location tracking (e.g., Jamf, Microsoft Intune, VMware Workspace ONE)
  • RFID asset tracking system
  • Prey (https://preyproject.com) for supplemental coverage

Enterprise

  • Enterprise MDM with location tracking (e.g., Jamf Pro, Microsoft Intune, VMware Workspace ONE)
  • Enterprise RFID/barcode asset tracking system
  • Integration of location data with CMDB and ITAM platform

The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) is maintained by SCF Council. Use of SCF content is subject to the SCF Terms & Conditions.

Manage this control in SCF Connect

Track implementation status, collect evidence, and map controls to your compliance frameworks automatically.