Skip to main content

MON-11: Monitoring For Information Disclosure

MON 8 — High Detect

Mechanisms exist to monitor for evidence of unauthorized exfiltration or disclosure of non-public information.

Control Question: Does the organization monitor for evidence of unauthorized exfiltration or disclosure of non-public information?

General (11)
Framework Mapping Values
ISO 27002 2022 5.7
NIST 800-53 R4 AU-13
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) AU-13
NIST 800-53 R5 (NOC) (source) AU-13
NIST 800-161 R1 AU-13
NIST 800-161 R1 Flow Down AU-13
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 AU-13
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 AU-13
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.01.22.b
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure MON-11
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats MON-11
US (2)
Framework Mapping Values
US CERT RMM 1.2 IMC:SG2.SP1 KIM:SG4.SP2
US NISPOM 2020 8-602
APAC (2)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 HHSP63 HML69 HSUP55
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP55
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.01.22.B

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to monitor for evidence of unauthorized exfiltration or disclosure of non-public information.

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 monitor for evidence of unauthorized exfiltration or disclosure of non-public information.

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 monitor for evidence of unauthorized exfiltration or disclosure of non-public information.

Assessment Objectives

  1. MON-11_A01 open-source information and/or information sites to be monitored for evidence of unauthorized disclosure of organizational information is/are defined.
  2. MON-11_A02 the frequency with which open-source information and/or information sites are monitored for evidence of unauthorized disclosure of organizational information is defined.
  3. MON-11_A03 personnel or roles to be notified if an information disclosure is discovered is/are defined.
  4. MON-11_A04 additional actions to be taken if an information disclosure is discovered are defined.
  5. MON-11_A05 personnel or roles are notified if an information disclosure is discovered.
  6. MON-11_A06 additional actions are taken if an information disclosure is discovered.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Content filtering
  • Keyword alerting (e.g., Google Alerts)
  • Review of social media outlets

Small

  • Content filtering
  • Keyword alerting (e.g., Google Alerts)
  • Review of social media outlets

Medium

  • Content filtering
  • Keyword alerting (e.g., Google Alerts)
  • Review of social media outlets

Large

  • Content filtering
  • Keyword alerting (e.g., Google Alerts)
  • Review of social media outlets

Enterprise

  • Content filtering
  • Keyword alerting (e.g., Google Alerts)
  • Review of social media outlets

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.