Skip to main content

NET-15.3: Restrict Configuration By Users

NET 8 — High Protect

Mechanisms exist to identify and explicitly authorize users who are allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities.

Control Question: Does the organization identify and explicitly authorize users who are allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities?

General (10)
Framework Mapping Values
GovRAMP High AC-18(04)
NIST 800-53 R4 AC-18(4)
NIST 800-53 R4 (high) AC-18(4)
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) AC-18(4)
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) AC-18(4)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay AC-18(4)
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.01.16.a 03.01.16.c
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) NET-15.3
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure NET-15.3
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats NET-15.3
US (4)
Framework Mapping Values
US FedRAMP R4 AC-18(4)
US FedRAMP R4 (high) AC-18(4)
US FedRAMP R5 (source) AC-18(4)
US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) AC-18(4)
EMEA (1)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 12.13
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.01.16.A 03.01.16.C

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to identify and explicitly authorize users who are allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities.

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).
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 identify and explicitly authorize users who are allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities.

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 identify and explicitly authorize users who are allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities.

Assessment Objectives

  1. NET-15.3_A01 users allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities are identified.
  2. NET-15.3_A02 users allowed to independently configure wireless networking capabilities are explicitly authorized.
  3. NET-15.3_A03 radio antennas are selected to reduce the probability that signals from wireless access points can be received outside of organization-controlled boundaries.

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)

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.