IAC-47: Unique System-Generated Session Identifiers
Automated mechanisms exist to generate and recognize unique session identifiers for each session.
Renumbered: Formerly NET-09.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization use automated mechanisms to generate and recognize unique session identifiers for each session?
General (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| IEC 62443-3-3 2013 | SR 3.8 RE 2 SR 3.8 RE 3 |
| MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 | TS-8.1 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SC-23(3) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | SC-23(03) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | SC-23(03) |
| NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 | SC-23(03) |
US (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | SC-23(CE-3) |
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
Network Security (NET) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with NET domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Network security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
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 automatically generate and recognize unique session identifiers for each session.
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-47_A01 randomness requirements for generating a unique session identifier for each session are defined.
- IAC-47_A02 a unique session identifier is generated for each session with organization-defined randomness requirements.
- IAC-47_A03 only system-generated session identifiers are recognized.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Use randomly generated session IDs in applications
Small
- Session ID generation policy
- Use cryptographically random session identifiers
Medium
- Formal session ID management standards
- Cryptographic PRNG for session IDs
Large
- Application security standards for session management
- SAST/DAST testing for session ID generation
Enterprise
- Enterprise application security framework
- SAST/DAST automation (e.g., Veracode, Checkmarx)
- Session management standards