Skip to main content

MON-06.2: Trend Analysis Reporting

MON 5 — Medium Detect

Mechanisms exist to employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

Control Question: Does the organization employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data?

General (6)
Framework Mapping Values
GovRAMP High CA-07(03)
NIST 800-53 R4 CA-7(3)
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) CA-7(3)
NIST 800-53 R5 (NOC) (source) CA-7(3)
NIST 800-161 R1 CA-7(3)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 CA-7(3)
US (4)
Framework Mapping Values
US C2M2 2.1 SITUATION-3.B.MIL2 SITUATION-3.C.MIL2 SITUATION-3.D.MIL3
US DoD Zero Trust Execution Roadmap 7.1.3
US FedRAMP R4 CA-7(3)
US FedRAMP R4 (high) CA-7(3)

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

C|P-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

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.
  • Administrative processes exist and a SIEM, or similar automated tool, is configured to perform trend analysis to assist in the determination if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.
  • The organization sets specific parameters on what type of audit information is permitted to be shared and what cannot be shared with third-parties, even with a NDA in place.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

See C|P-CMM3. There are no defined C|P-CMM4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

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 employ trend analyses to determine if security control implementations, the frequency of continuous monitoring activities, and/ or the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

Assessment Objectives

  1. MON-06.2_A01 trend analysis is employed to determine if control implementations used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.
  2. MON-06.2_A02 trend analysis is employed to determine if the frequency of continuous monitoring activities used in the continuous monitoring process needs to be modified based on empirical data.
  3. MON-06.2_A03 trend analysis is employed to determine if the types of activities used in the continuous monitoring process need to be modified based on empirical data.

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.