NET-04.2: Human Reviews
Mechanisms exist to enforce the use of human reviews for Access Control Lists (ACLs) and similar rulesets on a routine basis.
Renumbered: Formerly NET-04.6 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, NET-04.2 was Object Security Attributes. That control is now NET-45.1.
Control Question: Does the organization enforce the use of human reviews for Access Control Lists (ACLs) and similar rulesets on a routine basis?
General (8)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 | TS-2.4 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AC-4(9) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | AC-04(09) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | AC-04(09) |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) | 1.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) | 1.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) | 1.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) | 1.2.7 |
EMEA (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 | Article 13.1(h) |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 | 2-4-1-2 |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 5.6.1 |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Network Security (NET) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with NET domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with NET domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with NET domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Network security-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Network security management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ IT personnel define secure networking practices to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the organization's TAASD. ▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Network Security (NET) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with NET domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with NET domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A network security management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain NET domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of network security operations (e.g., network management solution and log aggregator). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with NET domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies. ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to enforce the use of human reviews for Access Control Lists (ACLs) and similar rulesets on a routine basis.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Network Security (NET) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ 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. ▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Assessment Objectives
- NET-04.2_A01 information flows requiring the use of human reviews are defined.
- NET-04.2_A02 conditions under which the use of human reviews for information flows are to be enforced are defined.
- NET-04.2_A03 human reviews are used for organization-defined conditions.
Evidence Requirements
- E-NET-10 Information Flow Control
-
Documented evidence of information flow control mechanisms (e.g., Access Control Lists, etc.).
Network Security
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Human review of flagged data transfers
Small
- Policy requiring human review of sensitive data transfers
Medium
- Human review process for cross-boundary data transfers
- DLP alert review procedures
Large
- DLP alert triage workflow with human review
- Dedicated review team
Enterprise
- Enterprise DLP with human review workflow (SOC integration)
- SOAR-assisted triage
- 24/7 human review for critical transfers