Skip to main content

NET-15: Policy Decision Point (PDP)

NET 5 — Medium Protect

Automated mechanisms exist to evaluate access requests against established criteria to dynamically and uniformly enforce access rights and permissions.

Renumbered: Formerly NET-04.7 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, NET-15 was Wireless Networking. That control is now NET-24.

Control Question: Does the organization use automated mechanisms to evaluate access requests against established criteria to dynamically and uniformly enforce access rights and permissions?

General (16)
Framework Mapping Values
GovRAMP AC-04(08)
GovRAMP High AC-04(08)
NIST 800-53 R4 AC-4(8)
NIST 800-53 R5.2 AC-04(08)
NIST 800-82 R3 AC-04(08)
NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 AC-04(08)
NIST 800-172 R3 03.01.10E 03.01.13E 03.01.14E
NIST 800-172A R3 A.03.01.10E.ODP[05] DS-A.03.01.13E DS-A.03.01.14E.a A.03.01.14E.ODP[01] DS-A.03.01.14E.b
NIST 800-207 NIST Tenet 4
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C-VT (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 1.3.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 1.3.3
US (1)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal DoD Zero Trust Execution Roadmap v1.1 3.4.2 5.1.2 5.2 5.2.2 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 automatically evaluate access requests against established criteria to dynamically and uniformly enforce access rights and permissions.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

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

  1. NET-15_A01 information flows between security domains on connected systems are identified.
  2. NET-15_A02 solutions are employed to control information flows between security domains on connected systems.
  3. NET-15_A03 cybersecurity / data privacy policy filters to be used as a basis for enforcing information flow control are defined.
  4. NET-15_A04 information flows for which information flow control is enforced by cybersecurity / data privacy filters are defined.
  5. NET-15_A05 information flow control is enforced using organization-defined cybersecurity / data privacy policy filter as a basis for flow control decisions for organization-defined information flows.
  6. NET-15_A06 cybersecurity / data privacy policy identifying actions to be taken after a filter processing failure are defined (e.g., block, strip, modify or quarantine)
  7. NET-15_A07 policy identifying actions to be taken after a filter processing failure are defined.
  8. NET-15_A08 organization's data after a filter processing failure in accordance with organization's data after a filter processing failure in accordance with organization-defined privacy policy.
  9. NET-15_A09 when transferring information between different security domains, data is sanitized to minimize organization's in accordance with organization-defined policy.

Evidence Requirements

E-NET-05 Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA)

Documented evidence of controls that would enable the organization to claim conformity with Zero Trust (ZT) principles.

Network Security

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Note: Typically not required at this size; identity provider conditional access policies act as the policy decision point

Small

  • Conditional access policies in identity provider and firewall as policy decision points

Medium

  • Document policy decision points for network access control

Large

  • Policy Decision Point (PDP) implemented in firewall/NAC
  • Access policy centralization

Enterprise

  • Enterprise PDP implementation (e.g., XACML, Zero Trust policy engine)
  • Centralized access policy management

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.