Skip to main content

MON-02.7: System-Wide / Time-Correlated Audit Trail

MON 5 — Medium Detect

Automated mechanisms exist to compile audit records into an organization-wide audit trail that is time-correlated.

Control Question: Does the organization use automated mechanisms to compile audit records into an organization-wide audit trail that is time-correlated?

General (21)
Framework Mapping Values
CIS CSC 8.1 8.2
CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 8.2
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 8.2
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 8.2
CSA CCM 4 LOG-03
CSA IoT SCF 2 MON-07
GovRAMP High AU-12(01)
NIST 800-53 R4 AU-12(1)
NIST 800-53 R4 (high) AU-12(1)
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) AU-12(1)
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) AU-12(1)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay AU-12(1)
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.03.01.a
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 10.6 10.6.1 10.6.2 10.6.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 10.6.1 10.6.2 10.6.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 10.6.1 10.6.2 10.6.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 10.6.1 10.6.2 10.6.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 10.6.1 10.6.2 10.6.3
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) MON-02.7
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure MON-02.7
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats MON-02.7
US (11)
Framework Mapping Values
US CMS MARS-E 2.0 AU-12(1)
US DoD Zero Trust Execution Roadmap 7.1
US DHS CISA SSDAF 1.b.i 1.b.ii
US DHS CISA TIC 3.0 3.UNI.AACCO
US EO 14028 4e(i)(B) 4e(i)(B)
US FedRAMP R4 AU-12(1)
US FedRAMP R4 (high) AU-12(1)
US FedRAMP R5 (source) AU-12(1)
US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) AU-12(1)
US IRS 1075 AU-12(1)
US - CA CCPA 2025 7123(c)(7)
EMEA (1)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 2-11-1-1 2-11-1-2 2-11-1-3
APAC (2)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-0988
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 16.6.11.C.02
Americas (2)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada OSFI B-13 3.3.1
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.03.01.A

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to compile audit records into an organization-wide audit trail that is time-correlated.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to compile audit records into an organization-wide audit trail that is time-correlated.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for situational awareness management. o Configure alerts for critical or sensitive data that is stored, transmitted and processed on assets. o Use a structured process to review and analyze logs.

  • Situational awareness management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
  • Secure baseline configurations generate logs that contain sufficient information to establish necessary details of activity and allow for forensics analysis.
  • IT/cybersecurity personnel:
  • A log aggregator, or similar automated tool, provides an event log report generation capability to aid in detecting and assessing anomalous activities on business-critical systems.
Level 3 — Well Defined

Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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: o Governs asset management that ensures compliance with requirements for asset management. o Leverages a Configuration Management Database (CMDB), or similar tool, as the authoritative source of IT assets. o Centrally collects logs and is protected according to the manufacturer’s security guidelines to protect the integrity of the event logs with cryptographic mechanisms. o Monitors the organization for Indicators of Compromise (IoC) and provides 24x7x365 near real-time alerting capability. o Is configured to alert incident response personnel of detected suspicious events such that incident responders can look to terminate suspicious events.

  • An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function:
  • A Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM), or similar automated tool:
  • Both inbound and outbound network traffic is monitored for unauthorized activities to identify prohibited activities and assist incident handlers with identifying potentially compromised systems.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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

Continuous Monitoring (MON) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions.
  • Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

Assessment Objectives

  1. MON-02.7_A01 system components from which audit records are to be compiled into a system-wide (logical or physical) audit trail are defined.
  2. MON-02.7_A02 level of tolerance for the relationship between timestamps of individual records in the audit trail is defined.
  3. MON-02.7_A03 audit records from organization-defined system components are compiled into a system-wide (logical or physical) audit trail that is time-correlated to within organization-defined level of tolerance.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)

Small

  • Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
  • Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)

Medium

  • Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
  • Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)

Large

  • Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
  • Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)

Enterprise

  • Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
  • Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)

The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) is maintained by SCF Council. Use of SCF content is subject to the SCF Terms & Conditions.

Manage this control in SCF Connect

Track implementation status, collect evidence, and map controls to your compliance frameworks automatically.