HRS-06.5: Use of Mobile Devices
Mechanisms exist to manage business risks associated with permitting mobile device access to organizational resources.
Renumbered: Formerly HRS-05.5 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization manage business risks associated with permitting mobile device access to organizational resources?
General (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| ISO 27001 2022 (source) | 7.3 7.3(a) 7.3(b) 7.3(c) |
| ISO 27002 2022 | 6.2 |
| ISO 27017 2015 | 7.1.2 |
| ISO 27018 2025 | 6.2 |
| ISO 42001 2023 | 7.3 |
| MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 | OR-1.1 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.18.a 03.15.03.a |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.01.18.a[01] A.03.15.03.a |
| Shared Assessments SIG 2025 | M.1.12 |
US (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal C2M2 2.1 | WORKFORCE-1e |
EMEA (7)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 | 2322 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L1 2024 | 2322 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 | 2322 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 | 2322 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 | 1-9-4-2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-5-1-1 2-5-1-2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 2022 | VII.B.TPC-84 |
APAC (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-0229 ISM-0230 ISM-0240 ISM-0701 ISM-0705 ISM-0866 ISM-0870 ISM-0871 ISM-0874 ISM-1082 ISM-1083 ISM-1084 ISM-1145 ISM-1196 ISM-1198 ISM-1199 ISM-1200 ISM-1366 ISM-1866 |
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 | 8.1.12.C.01 11.4.9.C.01 11.4.10.C.01 11.4.10.C.02 11.4.11.C.01 11.4.12.C.01 11.4.12.C.02 11.5.13.C.01 11.5.14.C.01 11.5.14.C.02 11.5.15.C.01 11.5.15.C.02 11.5.16.C.01 11.5.16.C.02 11.5.16.C.03 21.1.11.C.01 22.1.10.C.02 22.1.13.C.01 22.1.13.C.02 22.1.13.C.03 22.1.13.C.04 22.1.13.C.05 22.2.5.C.01 22.2.6.C.01 22.2.7.C.01 22.2.7.C.02 22.3.5.C.01 22.3.6.C.01 22.4.9.C.01 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.01.18.A 03.15.03.A |
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
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization. ▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software 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 HRS 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 manage business risks associated with permitting mobile device access to organizational resources.
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
- HRS-06.5_A01 rules that describe responsibilities and expected behavior for system usage and protecting sensitive / regulated data are established.
- HRS-06.5_A02 before authorizing access to information and the system, a documented acknowledgement from such individuals indicating that they have read, understand and agree to abide by the rules of behavior is received.
- HRS-06.5_A03 rules that describe responsibilities and expected behavior for system usage and protecting CUI are established.
Evidence Requirements
- E-HRS-22 Rules of Behavior
-
Documented evidence of personnel management practices to define "acceptable use" or "rules of behavior" criteria that specify acceptable and unacceptable user behaviors.
Human Resources
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Formal onboarding training
- Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Small
- Formal onboarding training
- Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Medium
- Formal onboarding training
- Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Large
- Formal onboarding training
- Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Enterprise
- Formal onboarding training
- Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)