CFG-12: Restrict Roles Permitted To Install Software
Automated mechanisms exist to prevent the installation of software, unless the action is performed by a privileged user or service.
Renumbered: Formerly CFG-05 and CFG-05.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization configure systems to prevent the installation of software, unless the action is performed by a privileged user or service?
General (31)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | CC6.8-POF1 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 9.1 9.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 | 9.1 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 9.1 9.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 9.1 9.4 |
| CSA CCM 4.1.0 | IAM-09 |
| GovRAMP | CM-11 |
| GovRAMP Low | CM-11 |
| GovRAMP Low+ | CM-11 |
| GovRAMP Moderate | CM-11 |
| GovRAMP High | CM-11 |
| MITRE ATT&CK 16 | T1021.005 T1059 T1059.006 T1072 T1176 T1195 T1195.001 T1195.002 T1218 T1218.001 T1218.002 T1218.003 T1218.004 T1218.005 T1218.008 T1218.009 T1218.012 T1218.013 T1218.014 T1505 T1505.001 T1505.002 T1505.004 T1543 T1543.001 T1543.002 T1543.003 T1543.004 T1547.013 T1550.001 T1564.009 T1569 T1569.001 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | CM-11 CM-11(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | CM-11 CM-11(02) CM-11(03) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | CM-11 CM-11(02) CM-11(03) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | CM-11 |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.4.9 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.13.13.b |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.4.9[b] 3.4.9[c] |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.13.13.a[02] A.03.13.13.b[03] |
| NIST CSF 2.0 (source) | PR.PS-05 |
| TISAX ISA 6.0.3 | 1.3.4 |
US (12)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | CM-11 CM-11.a CM-11.b CM-11.c |
| USA Federal CISA CPG 2022 | 2.Q |
| USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 2 | CML2.-3.4.9 |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | CM-11 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (low) | CM-11 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | CM-11 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | CM-11 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) | CM-11 |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | CM-11 |
| USA Texas DIR SCSC 2.2 2025 | CM-11 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 1 | CM-11 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 | CM-11 |
EMEA (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | AM-05.01B.6 PSS-11.01B.1 |
| EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 | Article 11.2(c) |
APAC (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-0382 ISM-1592 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 12.5 12.5.1 12.5.1.1 12.5.1.2 12.5.1.3 12.6.2 12.6.2.1 12.6.2.2 12.6.2.3 12.6.2.4 |
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 5.2.1(b) |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.13.13.B |
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
Configuration Management (CFG) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CFG domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Configuration management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ Configurations mostly conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides).
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Configuration Management (CFG) 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 CFG domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CFG 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 CFG domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Configuration management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Configuration management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) are used to configure Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) according to the principles of least functionality and least privilege, mostly conforming to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides).
Level 3 — Well Defined
Configuration Management (CFG) 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 CFG 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 CFG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A configuration management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CFG domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of configuration management operations (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 CFG 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 configure systems to prevent the installation of software, unless the action is performed by a privileged user or service.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Configuration Management (CFG) 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
Configuration Management (CFG) 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
- CFG-12_A01 policies governing the installation of software by users are defined.
- CFG-12_A02 methods used to enforce software installation policies are defined.
- CFG-12_A03 software installation policies are enforced through organization-defined methods.
- CFG-12_A04 installation of software by users is monitored.
- CFG-12_A05 configuration settings prevent the ability of non-privileged users to install unauthorized software.
- CFG-12_A06 the installation of software is prevented by automated mechanisms unless the action is performed by a privileged user or service.
Evidence Requirements
- E-AST-31 Allowlist / Denylist
-
Documented evidence of software applications that are explicitly allowed (allowlist / whitelist) and/or blocked (denylist / blacklist).
Asset Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Privileged Account Management (PAM)
Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Privileged Account Management (PAM)
Medium
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Privileged Account Management (PAM)
Large
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Privileged Account Management (PAM)
Enterprise
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Privileged Account Management (PAM)