IAC-30.3: Non-Privileged Access for Non-Security Functions
Mechanisms exist to prohibit privileged users from using privileged accounts, while performing non-security functions.
Renumbered: Formerly IAC-21.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization prohibit privileged users from using privileged accounts, while performing non-security functions?
General (24)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 5.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 | 5.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 5.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 5.4 |
| CSA IoT SCF 2 | IAM-04 |
| GovRAMP | AC-06(02) |
| GovRAMP Core | AC-06(02) |
| GovRAMP Moderate | AC-06(02) |
| GovRAMP High | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AC-6(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 | AC-06(02) |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.1.6 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.06.b |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.1.6[a] 3.1.6[b] |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.01.06.b |
| NIST 800-207 | NIST Tenet 3 |
| OWASP Top 10 2025 | A01:2025 |
| SWIFT CSF 2025 | 1.2 |
US (7)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | AC-6(2) AC-6(2).a AC-6(2).b AC-6(2).c AC-6(2).d AC-6(2).e AC-6(2)-IS.1 |
| USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 2 | ACL2.-3.1.6 |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | AC-6(2) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | AC-06(02) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | AC-06(02) |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | AC-6(CE-2) AC-6(IRS-Defined)-1 AC-6(IRS-Defined)-2 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 | AC-06 (02) |
APAC (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia Essential 8 2024 | ISM-1175 ISM-1380 ISM-1689 ISM-1883 |
| APAC Australia ISM June 2026 | ISM-1175 ISM-1380 ISM-1689 ISM-1883 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.01.06.B |
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
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 prohibit privileged users from using privileged accounts, while performing non-security functions.
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-30.3_A01 non-security functions are identified.
- IAC-30.3_A02 users (or roles) with privileged accounts are required to use non-privileged accounts when accessing non-security functions or non-security information.
- IAC-30.3_A03 security functions or security-relevant information, the access to which requires users to use non-privileged accounts to access non-security functions, are defined.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Use standard (non-admin) accounts for daily work
Small
- Policy requiring non-privileged accounts for non-security functions
Medium
- Formal least-privilege access policy
- Standard accounts for daily activities
Large
- Enterprise least-privilege enforcement
- Automated detection of privilege misuse
Enterprise
- Enterprise least-privilege access management
- UEBA for privilege misuse detection
- Just-in-time privilege elevation