IAC-05.5: Address Confirmation
Mechanisms exist to require that a notice of proofing be delivered through an out-of-band channel to verify the user's address (physical or digital).
Renumbered: Formerly IAC-28.5 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization require that a notice of proofing be delivered through an out-of-band channel to verify the user's address (physical or digital)?
General (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | IA-12(05) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | IA-12(05) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | IA-12(05) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | IA-12(05) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | IA-12(05) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | IA-12(05) |
US (4)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | IA-12(5) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | IA-12(05) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | IA-12(05) |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | IA-12(CE-5) |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India RBI PA 2025 | IV.13.b.ii |
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
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 — Well Defined
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 require that a notice of proofing be delivered through an out-of-band channel to verify the user's address (physical or digital).
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
- IAC-05.5_A01 organization-defined criteria are delivered through an out-of-band channel to verify the user’s address (physical or digital) of record.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Verify user address before sending confirmation communications
Small
- Address confirmation procedure for account communications
Medium
- Formal address confirmation policy for account-related communications
Large
- Enterprise identity verification process for address confirmation
Enterprise
- Enterprise identity proofing platform with address confirmation (e.g., Experian, LexisNexis)
- Automated address verification