NET-14.2: Protection of Confidentiality / Integrity Using Encryption
Cryptographic mechanisms exist to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
Control Question: Are cryptographic mechanisms utilized to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN)?
General (24)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 12.7 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 12.7 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 12.7 |
| GovRAMP Core | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP Low+ | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP Moderate | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP High | AC-17(02) |
| NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 | PR.DS-P6 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (moderate) | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (high) | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5 (source) | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.1.13 |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.1.13[a] 3.1.13[b] |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.12.a |
| NIST 800-207 | NIST Tenet 2 |
| UL 2900-1 2017 | 9.1 |
| SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) | NET-14.2 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure | NET-14.2 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats | NET-14.2 |
US (13)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) | AC-17(2) 5.10.1.2 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) | AC.L2-3.1.13 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 3 (source) | AC.L2-3.1.13 |
| US CMS MARS-E 2.0 | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R4 | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-17(2) |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | AC-17(2) |
| US IRS 1075 | AC-17(2) |
| US NERC CIP 2024 (source) | CIP-005-7 2.2 |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 | AC-17(2) |
EMEA (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 9.8 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 | 2305 2306 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.01.12.A |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to Cryptographic protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
Level 1 — Performed Informally
Network Security (NET) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- IT personnel use an informal process to design, build and maintain secure networks for test, development, staging and production environments, including the implementation of appropriate cybersecurity and data protection controls.
- Administrative processes are used to configure boundary devices (e.g., firewalls, routers, etc.) to deny network traffic by default and allow network traffic by exception (e.g., deny all, permit by exception).
- Network monitoring is primarily reactive in nature.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
Network Security (NET) 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:
- Network security management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
- IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for network security management.
- IT personnel define secure networking practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's technology assets, data and network(s).
- Administrative processes and technologies focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
- Administrative processes are used to configure boundary devices (e.g., firewalls, routers, etc.) to deny network traffic by default and allow network traffic by exception (e.g., deny all, permit by exception).
- Network segmentation exists to implement separate network addresses (e.g., different subnets) to connect systems in different security domains (e.g., sensitive/regulated data environments).
- Technologies are configured to use cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Network Security (NET) 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:
- A Technology Infrastructure team, or similar function, defines centrally-managed network security controls for implementation across the enterprise.
- Secure engineering principles are used to design and implement network security controls (e.g., industry-recognized secure practices) to enforce the concepts of least privilege and least functionality at the network level.
- IT/cybersecurity architects work with the Technology Infrastructure team to implement a “layered defense” network architecture that provides a defense-in-depth approach for redundancy and risk reduction for network-based security controls, including wired and wireless networking.
- Administrative processes and technologies configure boundary devices (e.g., firewalls, routers, etc.) to deny network traffic by default and allow network traffic by exception (e.g., deny all, permit by exception).
- Technologies automate the Access Control Lists (ACLs) and similar rulesets review process to identify security issues and/ or misconfigurations.
- Network segmentation exists to implement separate network addresses (e.g., different subnets) to connect systems in different security domains (e.g., sensitive/regulated data environments).
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 Cryptographic protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
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 Cryptographic protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
Assessment Objectives
- NET-14.2_A01 cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of remote access sessions are identified.
- NET-14.2_A02 cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of remote access sessions are implemented.