Skip to main content

CLD-03: Cloud Infrastructure Security Subnet

CLD 6 — Medium Protect

Mechanisms exist to host security-specific technologies in a dedicated subnet.

Control Question: Does the organization host security-specific technologies in a dedicated subnet?

General (10)
Framework Mapping Values
CSA CCM 4 IVS-06 IVS-08
CSA IoT SCF 2 CLS-09
ISO 27017 2015 CLD.9.5.1
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) SC-7(29)
NIST 800-53 R5 (NOC) (source) SC-7(29)
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay SC-7(29)
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay SC-7(29)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay SC-7(29)
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) 3.13.2 NFO–PL-8
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) CLD-03
US (5)
Framework Mapping Values
US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) SC.L2-3.13.2
US CMMC 2.0 Level 3 (source) SC.L2-3.13.2
US HIPAA HICP Large Practice 4.L.A
US NSTC NSPM-33 6.9
US - CA CCPA 2025 7123(c)(10) 7123(c)(5)(B)
EMEA (2)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2020 COS-01 COS-02 COS-05
EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 9.2
APAC (3)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-1385 ISM-1750
APAC Japan ISMAP 12.4.5.P 13.1.4.P
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 22.1.24.C.02

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to host security-specific technologies in a dedicated subnet.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

Cloud Security (CLD) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Cloud-based technologies are governed no differently from on-premise network assets (e.g., cloud-based technology is viewed as an extension of the corporate network).
  • A Shared Responsibility Matrix (SRM), or similar Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM), is documented for each Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) instance that takes into account differences between Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) methodologies.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Cloud Security (CLD) 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: o Identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for cloud security management. o Use an informal process to govern cloud-specific cybersecurity and data privacy-specific tools.

  • Cloud security management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
  • IT/cybersecurity personnel:
  • A Shared Responsibility Matrix (SRM), or similar Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM), is documented for each Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) instance that takes into account differences between Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) methodologies.
  • IT personnel have a documented architecture for cloud-based technologies to support cybersecurity and data protection requirements.
  • Cybersecurity and data privacy requirements are identified and documented for cloud-specific sensitive/regulated data processing, storing and/ or transmitting, including restrictions on data processing and storage locations.
  • Network security requirements for managed subnets are identified and documented.
Level 3 — Well Defined

Cloud Security (CLD) 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 Ensure the cloud security architecture supports the organization's technology strategy to securely design, configure and maintain cloud employments. o Ensure multi-tenant CSP assets (physical and virtual) are designed and governed such that provider and customer (tenant) user access is appropriately segmented from other tenant users. o Ensure CSPs use secure protocols for the import, export and management of data in cloud-based services. o Implement a dedicated subnet to host security-specific technologies on all cloud instances, where technically feasible. o Governs changes to cloud-based systems, applications and services to ensure their stability, reliability and predictability. o Reviews processes to identify and prevent use of unapproved CSPs.

  • Roles and associated responsibilities for governing cloud instances, including provisioning, maintaining and deprovisioning, are formally assigned.
  • A Shared Responsibility Matrix (SRM), or similar Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM), is documented for each Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) instance that takes into account differences between Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) methodologies.
  • IT architects, in conjunction with cybersecurity architects:
  • A Change Advisory Board (CAB), or similar function:
  • A dedicated IT infrastructure team, or similar function, enables the implementation of cloud management controls to ensure cloud instances are both secure and compliant, leveraging industry-recognized secure practices that are CC|P-specific.
  • Cybersecurity and data privacy requirements are identified and documented for each CSP instance to address sensitive/regulated data processing, storing and/ or transmitting and provide restrictions on data processing and storage locations.
  • A Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) is used to help ensure the protection of sensitive/regulated data processed, stored or transmitted on external systems.
  • Network security requirements for managed subnets are identified and documented.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Cloud Security (CLD) 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 host security-specific technologies in a dedicated subnet.

Assessment Objectives

  1. CLD-03_A01 cloud security management subnets are logically isolated.
  2. CLD-03_A02 cloud security management subnet system components and functions to be isolated are defined.
  3. CLD-03_A03 organization-defined criteria are used to isolate cloud security management subnets.

Technology Recommendations

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.