MNT-06: Authorized Maintenance Personnel
Mechanisms exist to maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel.
Control Question: Does the organization maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel?
General (29)
US (21)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CERT RMM 1.2 | AM:SG1.SP1 TM:SG4.SP1 |
| US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) | MA-5 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) | MA.L2-3.7.6 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 3 (source) | MA.L2-3.7.6 |
| US CMS MARS-E 2.0 | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R4 | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (low) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (LI-SaaS) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (low) (source) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | MA-5 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) (source) | MA-5 |
| US HIPAA HICP Large Practice | 5.L.A |
| US IRS 1075 | MA-5 |
| US NISPOM 2020 | 8-304 |
| US - TX DIR Control Standards 2.0 | MA-5 |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 1 | MA-5 |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 | MA-5 |
EMEA (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 12.7 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-13-1-7 |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2024 | ISM-0305 ISM-0307 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.07.06.A 03.07.06.B 03.07.06.C 03.07.06.D |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Maintenance (MNT) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- IT personnel use an informal process to implement secure and timely technology asset-specific maintenance operations, including preventative and reactive maintenance operations.
- Facilities management uses an informal process to facilitate the secure and timely implementation of non-IT maintenance operations, including preventative and reactive maintenance operations.
- Maintenance operations are decentralized both in terms of change management and execution.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Maintenance (MNT) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Identify cybersecurity and data protection controls to appropriately address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for technology asset maintenance. o Develop and disseminate formal guidance to facilitate a localized/regionalized process to implement secure and timely technology asset-specific maintenance operations, including preventative and reactionary maintenance operations.
- Technology asset maintenance is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
- IT/cybersecurity personnel:
- Maintenance controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage change control processes associated with maintenance operations.
- Asset custodians develop and maintain formalized procedures to conduct controlled and timely maintenance activities throughout the lifecycle of the system, application or service.
- Maintenance operations may be centralized for certain locations (e.g., datacenters) and decentralized for other locations, both in terms of change management and execution.
- Facilities management uses a localized/regionalized process to facilitate the secure and timely implementation of non-IT maintenance operations, including preventative and reactionary maintenance operations.
- Administrative processes maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel.
- Administrative processes ensure the risks associated with maintenance personnel who do not have appropriate access authorizations, clearances or formal access approvals are appropriately mitigated.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Maintenance (MNT) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- IT/cybersecurity personnel develop and disseminate formal practices to implement enterprise-wide capability to conduct secure and timely technology asset-specific maintenance operations, including preventative and reactionary maintenance operations.
- Technology asset-related maintenance operations are centralized in terms of change management and governance. Local/regional practices fall under the broader enterprise-wide technology asset maintenance program.
- Facilities management uses an enterprise-wide process to facilitate the secure and timely implementation of non-IT maintenance operations, including preventative and reactionary maintenance operations. Local/regional practices fall under the broader enterprise-wide facilities management program.
- A Change Control Board (CCB), or similar function, centrally manages the process of IT and non-IT maintenance operations to reduce the chance of business interruptions from maintenance operations.
- Administrative processes maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel.
- Administrative processes ensure the risks associated with maintenance personnel who do not have appropriate access authorizations, clearances or formal access approvals are appropriately mitigated.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Maintenance (MNT) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- 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.
- Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to maintain a current list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel.
Assessment Objectives
- MNT-06_A01 a process for maintenance personnel authorization is established.
- MNT-06_A02 a list of authorized maintenance organizations or personnel is maintained.
- MNT-06_A03 non-escorted personnel who perform maintenance on the system possess the required access authorizations.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
Small
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
Medium
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Separation of Duties (SoD)
Large
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Separation of Duties (SoD)
Enterprise
- Role Based Access Control (RBAC)
- Separation of Duties (SoD)