NET-15: Wireless Networking
Mechanisms exist to control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.
Control Question: Does the organization control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access?
General (40)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| CSA IoT SCF 2 | SWS-05 |
| GovRAMP Low | AC-18 |
| GovRAMP Low+ | AC-18 |
| GovRAMP Moderate | AC-18 |
| GovRAMP High | AC-18 |
| IEC 62443-4-2 2019 | NDR 1.6 (15.2.1) |
| ISO 27002 2022 | 8.21 |
| ISO 27017 2015 | 13.1.2 |
| MITRE ATT&CK 10 | T1011, T1011.001, T1020.001, T1040, T1070, T1070.001, T1070.002, T1119, T1530, T1552, T1552.004, T1557, T1557.002, T1558, T1558.002, T1558.003, T1558.004, T1565, T1565.001, T1565.002, T1602, T1602.001, T1602.002 |
| MPA Content Security Program 5.1 | TS-2.11 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (low) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (moderate) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 (high) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53 R5 (source) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 1 | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | AC-18 |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.1.16 |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.1.16[a] 3.1.16[b] |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.16.a 03.01.16.b |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.01.16.a[01] A.03.01.16.a[02] A.03.01.16.a[04] |
| NIST 800-207 | NIST Tenet 2 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) | 11.2 11.2.1 11.2.2 2.3 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) | 11.2.1 11.2.2 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) | 11.2.1 11.2.2 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) | 11.2.1 11.2.2 |
| SCF CORE Fundamentals | NET-15 |
| SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) | NET-15 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational | NET-15 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure | NET-15 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats | NET-15 |
US (20)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| US CERT RMM 1.2 | TM:SG4.SP1 |
| US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) | AC-18 5.13.1 5.13.1.1 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) | AC.L2-3.1.16 |
| US CMMC 2.0 Level 3 (source) | AC.L2-3.1.16 |
| US CMS MARS-E 2.0 | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R4 | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (low) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (high) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R4 (LI-SaaS) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (source) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (low) (source) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) | AC-18 |
| US FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) (source) | AC-18 |
| US IRS 1075 | AC-18 |
| US NISPOM 2020 | 8-311 |
| US - TX DIR Control Standards 2.0 | AC-18 |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 1 | AC-18 |
| US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 | AC-18 |
EMEA (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 | 4.24 12.12 12.14 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 | 2-3-1-5 2-4-1-4 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-4-1-4 2-4-1-5 |
APAC (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia ISM June 2024 | ISM-0225 ISM-0248 ISM-0536 ISM-1314 ISM-1315 ISM-1316 ISM-1317 ISM-1318 ISM-1319 ISM-1320 ISM-1321 ISM-1322 ISM-1323 ISM-1324 ISM-1327 ISM-1330 ISM-1334 ISM-1335 ISM-1454 ISM-1543 |
| APAC Japan ISMAP | 13.1.2 |
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 | 18.2.5.C.01 18.2.5.C.02 18.2.6.C.01 18.2.7.C.01 18.2.8.C.01 18.2.25.C.01 18.2.26.C.01 18.2.27.C.01 18.2.28.C.01 18.2.28.C.02 18.2.29.C.01 18.2.29.C.02 18.2.29.C.03 18.2.30.C.01 18.2.31.C.01 18.2.32.C.01 18.2.34.C.01 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.01.16.A 03.01.16.B |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.
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).
- Administrative processes and technologies control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.
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
Network Security (NET) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- 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.
- Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
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 control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.
Assessment Objectives
- NET-15_A01 usage restrictions are established for each type of wireless access to the system.
- NET-15_A02 connection requirements are established for each type of wireless access to the system.
- NET-15_A03 wireless access points are identified.
- NET-15_A04 wireless access is authorized prior to allowing such connections.
- NET-15_A05 each type of wireless access to the system is defined.
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)