AST-28: Usage Parameters
Mechanisms exist to monitor and enforce usage parameters that limit the potential damage caused from the unauthorized or unintentional alteration of system settings.
Renumbered: Formerly AST-14 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, AST-28 was Database Administrative Processes. That control is now OPS-04.2.
Control Question: Does the organization monitor and enforce usage parameters that limit the potential damage caused from the unauthorized or unintentional alteration of system parameters?
General (7)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| MITRE ATT&CK 16 | T1011 T1078 T1078.004 T1114.003 T1613 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SC-43 |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | SC-43 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | SC-43 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.18.a |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.01.18.a[01] |
| SWIFT CSF 2025 | 2.9 |
EMEA (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | HR-07.01B.4 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.01.18.A |
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
Asset Management (AST) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). 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. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Asset management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ The IT department establishes, maintains and updates an inventory that contains a listing of all organizational-owned TAASD, at a minimum covering common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers).
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 monitor and enforce usage parameters that limit the potential damage caused from the unauthorized or unintentional alteration of system parameters.
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
- AST-28_A01 the components for which usage restrictions and implementation guidance are to be established are defined.
- AST-28_A02 usage restrictions and implementation guidelines are established for components.
- AST-28_A03 the use of components is authorized within the system.
- AST-28_A04 the use of components is monitored within the system.
- AST-28_A05 the use of components is controlled within the system.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Centralized log collector
- Manual event log reviews
Small
- Centralized log collector
- Manual event log reviews
- Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
Medium
- Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)
Large
- Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)
Enterprise
- Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)