CHG-07: Test, Validate & Document Changes
Mechanisms exist to appropriately test and document proposed changes in a non-production environment before changes are implemented into production.
Renumbered: Formerly CHG-02.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, CHG-07 was Emergency Changes. That control is now CHG-10.
Control Question: Does the organization appropriately test and document proposed changes in a non-production environment before changes are implemented in a production environment?
General (37)
US (10)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | CM-3(2) |
| USA Federal C2M2 2.1 | ASSET-4b ASSET-4c ASSET-4d ASSET-4f ASSET-4h ASSET-4i THREAT-1h |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | CM-3(2) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | CM-03(02) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | CM-03(02) |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | CM-3(CE-2) |
| USA Federal NERC CIP 2024 | CIP-010-4 1.4.2 CIP-010-4 1.5.1 CIP-010-4 1.5.2 |
| USA Federal NRC 10 CFR 73.54 2015 | 73.54(d)(3) |
| USA California CCPA 2025 | 7123(c)(5)(D) 7123(c)(5)(E) |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 | CM-03 (02) |
EMEA (8)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | OPS-27.01B.3 DEV-03.01B.2 DEV-07.01B DEV-07.02B DEV-07.04B.1 DEV-07.04B.4 |
| EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 | op.exp.5 |
| EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 | Article 12.2(c)(iii) Article 17.2(c) Article 17.2(d) Article 17.3 Article 17.3(a) Article 17.3(b) Article 37.1(b) |
| EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 | 3.4.4.37 |
| EMEA LUX CCSF 20/750 2020 | 3.6.2-70 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 | 1-5-3 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 1-5-3-2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia SAMA CSF 1.0 2017 | 3.3.7.4.b |
APAC (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India RBI Digital Payments 2021 | 73.a |
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF 2024 | PR.MA.S1 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 12.1.2.10 12.5.1.5 12.5.1.9 14.2.3 14.2.3.1 14.2.3.2 14.2.3.3 |
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | 10.2(f) 10.11 |
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 | 6.3.8.C.01 |
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 7.5.3 7.5.5 7.5.7 |
Americas (4)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Argentina Reg 132 2018 | C.1.1-1 C.1.1-3 |
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.04.03.B 03.04.03.C 03.04.04.A 03.04.11.B |
| Americas Canada OSFI B-13 2022 | 2.5.1 |
| Americas Canada OSFI Self-Assessment Guidance | 2.5.1 |
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
Change Management (CHG) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CHG domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Change management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ Whenever possible, IT and/or cybersecurity personnel test changes to business-critical Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) on a similarly configured IT environment, prior to widespread production release of the change.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Change management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Change management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Business stakeholders and process owners ensure changes to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) within the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) are controlled through formal change control procedures. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to test controls after a change is implemented to ensure cybersecurity and/or data protection controls are operating properly. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to document the results from testing changes.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A centralized Change Management Office (CMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CHG domain capabilities. ▪ Technical procedures (e.g., ITIL change enablement) are utilized along with change management governance capabilities (e.g., Change Advisory Board (CAB)) to ensure successful, efficient and secure change management operations. ▪ 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 CHG 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 appropriately test and document proposed changes in a non-production environment before changes are implemented in a production environment.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Assessment Objectives
- CHG-07_A01 changes to the system are tested before finalizing the implementation of the changes.
- CHG-07_A02 changes to the system are validated before finalizing the implementation of the changes.
- CHG-07_A03 changes to the system are documented before finalizing the implementation of the changes.
- CHG-07_A04 the frequency at which changes are to be reviewed is defined.
- CHG-07_A05 the circumstances under which changes are to be reviewed are defined.
- CHG-07_A06 changes to the system are reviewed organization-defined frequency or when organization-defined circumstances to determine whether unauthorized changes have occurred.
- CHG-07_A07 systems or system components that implement the security design principle of secure system modification are defined.
- CHG-07_A08 systems or system components implement the security design principle of secure system modification.
- CHG-07_A09 approved configuration-controlled changes to the system are documented.
Evidence Requirements
- E-CHG-05 Change Control Records
-
Documented evidence of change control records (including test results, when applicable).
Change Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Change Control Board (CCB)
- Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
- VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
Small
- Change Control Board (CCB)
- Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
- VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
Medium
- Change Control Board (CCB)
- Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
- VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
Large
- Change Control Board (CCB)
- Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
- VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
Enterprise
- Change Control Board (CCB)
- Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
- VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)