IAC-14.4: Default Authenticators
Mechanisms exist to ensure default authenticators are changed as part of account creation or system installation.
Renumbered: Formerly IAC-10.8 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization ensure default authenticators are changed as part of account creation or system installation?
General (46)
US (16)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | IA-5 |
| USA Federal CISA CPG 2022 | 2.A |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | IA-5 |
| USA Federal FFIEC ITEH 2016 | II.C.10.b |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (low) | IA-05 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | IA-05 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | IA-05 |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) | IA-05 |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | IA-5 IA-5(CE-5) |
| USA Federal 33 CFR Part 101 Subpart F | 101.650(a)(2) |
| USA Federal NERC CIP 2024 | CIP-007-6 5.4 |
| USA California SB327 2018 | 1798.91.04(b)(2) |
| USA Massachusetts 201 CMR 17.00 2008 | 17.04(2)(b) |
| USA Texas DIR SCSC 2.2 2025 | IA-05 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 1 | IA-05 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 | IA-05 |
EMEA (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | IAM-09.03B.1 PSS-07.01B.1 |
| EMEA UK Cyber Essentials 3.3 | 2-BP2 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 | 2211 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L1 2024 | 2211 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 | 2211 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 | 2211 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 | 2-2-2 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 | 2-3-1-7 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-2-1-3 |
APAC (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-1304 ISM-1806 ISM-2044 |
| APAC India RBI Digital Payments 2021 | 53.0 |
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | A2-C11(a) |
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 | 18.1.15.C.03 |
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 5.9.2(b) |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.05.07.E 03.05.12.D |
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
Identification & Authentication (IAC) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IAC domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ IAM controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage accounts and permissions. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel identify and implement IAM cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC). ▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts. ▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services. ▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.
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 ensure default authenticators are changed as part of account creation or system installation.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Identification & Authentication (IAC) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ 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. ▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.
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-14.4_A01 developers and installers of system components are required to provide unique authenticators or change default authenticators prior to delivery and installation.
Evidence Requirements
- E-IAC-17 Authenticator Configuration Settings
-
Documented evidence of authenticator management settings (e.g., password complexity, default authenticator changes, account lockout, protection of authenticators).
Identity & Access Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Small
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Medium
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
- Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Large
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
- Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Enterprise
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
- Identity & Access Management (IAM) program