END-06.1: Integrity Checks
Mechanisms exist to validate configurations through integrity checking of software and firmware.
Control Question: Does the organization validate configurations through integrity checking of software and firmware?
General (13)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | CC7.1 |
| GovRAMP Moderate | SI-07(01) |
| GovRAMP High | SI-07(01) |
| NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 | PR.DS-P6 PR.DS-P8 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (moderate) | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (high) | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-53 R5 (source) | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | SI-7(1) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | SI-7(1) |
| SWIFT CSF 2023 | 6.2 |
US (11)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) | SI-7(1) |
| US CMS MARS-E 2.0 | SI-7(1) |
| US DHS ZTCF | EPM-01 |
| US FedRAMP R4 | SI-7(1) |
| US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) | SI-7(1) |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | SI-7(1) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | SI-7(1) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) | SI-7(1) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | SI-7(1) |
| US IRS 1075 | SI-7(1) |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 | SI-7(1) |
EMEA (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 | 2425 |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India SEBI CSCRF | PR.DS.S6 |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to validate configurations through integrity checking of software and firmware.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Endpoint Security (END) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Asset management is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel.
- IT/cybersecurity personnel use an informal process to design, build and maintain secure configurations for test, development, staging and production environments, including the implementation of appropriate cybersecurity and data protection controls.
- Anti-malware technologies are decentralized but are deployed on all technology assets that can run Anti-malware software.
- Data management is decentralized.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Endpoint Security (END) 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:
- Endpoint 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 identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for endpoint security management.
- Anti-malware technologies are decentralized but are deployed on all technology assets that can run anti-malware software.
- Physical controls, administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
- Technologies are configured to protect data with the strength and integrity commensurate with the classification or sensitivity of the information and mostly conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides), including cryptographic protections for sensitive/regulated data.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Endpoint Security (END) 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:
- Configuration management is centralized for all operating systems, applications, servers and other configurable technologies.
- Technologies are configured to protect data with the strength and integrity commensurate with the classification or sensitivity of the information and conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides), including test, development, staging and production environments.
- Configurations conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides) for test, development, staging and production environments.
- An Identity & Access Management (IAM) function, or similar function, centrally manages permissions and implements “least privileges” practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
- An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, categorizes endpoint devices according to the data the asset stores, transmits and/ or processes and applies the appropriate technology controls to protect the asset and data that conform to industry-recognized standards for hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides).
- A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, centrally manages anti-malware and anti-phishing technologies, in accordance with industry-recognized practices for Prevention, Detection & Response (PDR) activities.
- A Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM), or similar automated tool, is tuned to detect and respond to anomalous behavior that could indicate account compromise or other malicious activities.
- The Human Resources (HR) department ensures that every user accessing a system that processes, stores, or transmits sensitive/regulated data is cleared and regularly trained in proper data handling practices.
- Unauthorized configuration changes are responded to in accordance with an Incident Response Plan (IRP) to determine if the any unauthorized configuration is malicious in nature.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Endpoint Security (END) 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
Endpoint Security (END) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions.
- Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.
Assessment Objectives
- END-06.1_A01 software, firmware and/or information on which an integrity check is to be performed is defined.
- END-06.1_A02 an integrity check of software, firmware and/or information is performed per an organization-defined time period.
- END-06.1_A03 transitional states or security-relevant events requiring integrity checks software, firmware and/or information are defined.
- END-06.1_A04 the frequency with which to perform an integrity check software, firmware and/or information is defined.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- File Integrity Monitor (FIM)
Small
- File Integrity Monitor (FIM)
Medium
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)
- File Integrity Monitor (FIM)
Large
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)
- File Integrity Monitor (FIM)
Enterprise
- CimTrak Integrity Suite (https://cimcor.com/cimtrak)
- Netwrix Auditor (https://netrix.com)
- File Integrity Monitor (FIM)