CHG-02.1: Prohibition Of Changes
Mechanisms exist to prohibit unauthorized changes, unless organization-approved change requests are received.
Control Question: Does the organization prohibit unauthorized changes, unless organization-approved change requests are received?
General (28)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | CC6.8 CC8.1-POF2 |
| CSA CCM 4 | CCC-03 CCC-04 |
| CSA IoT SCF 2 | GVN-05 |
| GovRAMP High | CM-03(01) |
| ISO 42001 2023 | 6.3 |
| MPA Content Security Program 5.1 | TS-2.6 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (high) | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-53 R5 (source) | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | CM-3(1) |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.04.02.b 03.04.03.a |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.04.03.b[02] A.03.04.05[05] |
| NIST 800-207 | NIST Tenet 5 |
| NIST CSF 2.0 (source) | ID.RA-07 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) | 1.2.2 6.5 6.5.1 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) | 1.2.2 6.5.1 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) | 6.5.1 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) | 1.2.2 6.5.1 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) | 1.2.2 6.5.1 |
| Shared Assessments SIG 2025 | G.2 |
| SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) | CHG-02.1 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational | CHG-02.1 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure | CHG-02.1 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats | CHG-02.1 |
US (7)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US C2M2 2.1 | ASSET-4.E.MIL2 ARCHITECTURE-5.H.MIL3 |
| US FedRAMP R4 | CM-3(1) |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | CM-3(1) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | CM-3(1) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | CM-3(1) |
| US NNPI (unclass) | 4.3 |
| US - CA CCPA 2025 | 7123(c)(4)(C) 7123(c)(5)(D) 7123(c)(5)(E) |
EMEA (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 | 3.4.4(37) 3.6.3(75) 3.6.3(76) |
| EMEA Germany C5 2020 | IDM-02 |
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 14.7 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 1-5-3-4 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 | TPC-73 |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 7.5.4 |
Americas (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada OSFI B-13 | 2.5 2.5.1 |
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.04.02.B 03.04.03.A |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to prohibit unauthorized changes, unless organization-approved change requests are received.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Change Management (CHG) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Govern changes to systems, applications and services to ensure their stability, reliability and predictability. o Notify stakeholders about proposed changes.
- IT personnel use an informal process to:
- Logical Access Control (LAC) limits the ability of non-administrators from making unauthorized configuration changes to systems, applications and services.
- Requests for Change (RFC) are submitted to IT personnel.
- prior to changes being made, RFCs are informally reviewed for cybersecurity and data privacy ramifications.
- Whenever possible, IT personnel test changes to business-critical systems/services/applications on a similarly configured IT environment as that of Production, prior to widespread production release of the change.
- Copying, deleting, moving and renaming operations are version controlled.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Change Management (CHG) 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:
- Change 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 change management.
- Changes are tracked through a centralized technology solution to submit, review, approve and assign Requests for Change (RFC).
- A Change Advisory Board (CAB), or similar function, exists to govern changes to systems, applications and services to ensure their stability, reliability and predictability.
- A CAB, or similar function, reviews RFCs for cybersecurity and data privacy ramifications.
- A CAB, or similar function, notifies stakeholders to ensure awareness of the impact of proposed changes.
- Logical Access Control (LAC) limits the ability of non-administrators from making unauthorized configuration changes to systems, applications and services.
- Cybersecurity controls are tested after a change is implemented to ensure cybersecurity controls are operating properly.
- Asset custodians are assigned responsibilities that cover change management duties, including privileged access to perform change management actions.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Change Management (CHG) 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: o Exists to govern changes to systems, applications and services to ensure their stability, reliability and predictability. o Reviews RFC for cybersecurity and data privacy ramifications. o Notifies stakeholders to ensure awareness of the impact of proposed changes.
- An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, ensures compliance with requirements for asset management.
- ITAM leverages a Configuration Management Database (CMDB), or similar tool, as the authoritative source of IT assets.
- Logical Access Control (LAC) is governed to limit the ability of non-administrators from making configuration changes to systems, applications and services.
- A formal Change Management (CM) program ensures that no unauthorized changes are made, that all changes are documented, that services are not disrupted and that resources are used efficiently.
- The CM function has formally defined roles and associated responsibilities.
- Changes are tracked through a centralized technology solution to submit, review, approve and assign Requests for Change (RFC).
- A Change Advisory Board (CAB), or similar function:
- IT personnel use dedicated development/test/staging environments to deploy and evaluate changes, wherever technically possible.
- Asset custodians are assigned responsibilities that cover change management duties, including privileged access to perform change management actions.
- File Integrity Monitoring (FIM) alerts are investigated for unauthorized changes.
- FIM alerts are investigated for unauthorized changes and are configured to implement remediation actions up on the detection of unauthorized baseline configurations change(s).
- FIM is deployed on systems that store, process or transmit sensitive/regulated/regulated data to monitor the integrity of business-critical files for tampering.
- Endpoint technologies detect and report changes with a centralized Change Management (CM) service to discover unauthorized changes.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Change Management (CHG) 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. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- 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 prohibit unauthorized changes, unless organization-approved change requests are received.
Assessment Objectives
- CHG-02.1_A01 mechanisms used to automate configuration change control are defined.
- CHG-02.1_A02 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to prohibit changes to the system until designated approvals are received.
- CHG-02.1_A03 approval authorities to be notified of and request approval for proposed changes to the system are defined.
- CHG-02.1_A04 the time period after which to highlight changes that have not been approved or disapproved is defined.
- CHG-02.1_A05 personnel to be notified when approved changes are complete is/are defined.
- CHG-02.1_A06 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to document proposed changes to the system.
- CHG-02.1_A07 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to notify organization-defined approval authorities of proposed changes to the system and request change approval.
- CHG-02.1_A08 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to highlight proposed changes to the system that have not been approved or disapproved within an organization-defined time period.
- CHG-02.1_A09 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to document all changes to the system.
- CHG-02.1_A10 organization-defined automated mechanisms are used to notify organization-defined personnel when approved changes to the system are completed.
- CHG-02.1_A11 proposed configuration-controlled changes to the system are approved or disapproved with explicit consideration for security impacts.
- CHG-02.1_A12 logical access restrictions associated with changes to the system are approved.
Evidence Requirements
- E-CHG-02 Charter - Change Control Board (CCB)
-
Documented evidence of the organization's Change Control Board (CCB) charter and mission to govern the organization's change control processes.
Change Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Manual processes/workflows
- Application whitelisting
Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Manual processes/workflows
- Application whitelisting
Medium
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Application whitelisting
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
Large
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Application whitelisting
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
Enterprise
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Application whitelisting
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)