MON-09: Non-Repudiation
Mechanisms exist to utilize a non-repudiation capability to protect against an individual falsely denying having performed a particular action.
Control Question: Does the organization utilize a non-repudiation capability to protect against an individual falsely denying having performed a particular action?
General (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| GovRAMP High | AU-10 |
| IEC 62443-4-2 2019 | CR 2.12 (6.14.1) CR 2.12 (6.14.3(1)) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (high) | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-53 R5 (source) | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | AU-10 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | AU-10 |
US (7)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CERT RMM 1.2 | TM:SG2.SP2 |
| US CMS MARS-E 2.0 | AU-10 |
| US FedRAMP R4 | AU-10 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | AU-10 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | AU-10 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | AU-10 |
| US NISPOM 2020 | 8-602 |
EMEA (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU PSD2 | 26 |
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 21.14 |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 | 14.2.1 14.2.2 14.2.3 14.2.4 14.2.5 14.2.6 14.2.7 14.2.8 14.2.9 14.2.10 14.2.11 |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to utilize a non-repudiation capability to protect against an individual falsely denying having performed a particular action.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Continuous Monitoring (MON) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Generating event logs and the review of event logs is narrowly-focused to business-critical systems and/ or systems that store, processes and/ or transmit sensitive/regulated data.
- Secure baseline configurations generate logs that contain sufficient information to establish necessary details of activity and allow for forensics analysis.
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
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 utilize a non-repudiation capability to protect against an individual falsely denying having performed a particular action.
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 utilize a non-repudiation capability to protect against an individual falsely denying having performed a particular action.
Assessment Objectives
- MON-09_A01 actions to be covered by non-repudiation are defined.
- MON-09_A02 irrefutable evidence is provided that an individual (or process acting on behalf of an individual) has performed organization-defined actions.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Small
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Medium
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Large
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Enterprise
- Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)