Skip to main content

NET-24: Wireless Networking

NET 9 — Critical Protect

Mechanisms exist to control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.

Renumbered: Formerly NET-15 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access?

General (36)
Framework Mapping Values
GovRAMP AC-18
GovRAMP Low AC-18
GovRAMP Low+ AC-18
GovRAMP Moderate AC-18
GovRAMP High AC-18
IEC 62443-2-1 2024 NET 2.1
IEC 62443-3-3 2013 SR 1.6 RE 1 SR 2.2
IEC 62443-4-2 2019 NDR 1.6
ISO 27002 2022 8.21
ISO 27017 2015 13.1.2
ISO 27018 2025 8.21
MITRE ATT&CK 16 T1011 T1011.001 T1020.001 T1040 T1070 T1070.001 T1070.002 T1070.008 T1119 T1530 T1552 T1552.004 T1557 T1557.002 T1557.004 T1558 T1558.002 T1558.003 T1558.004 T1565 T1565.001 T1565.002 T1602 T1602.001 T1602.002
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 TS-2.11
NIST 800-53 R4 AC-18
NIST 800-53 R5.2 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 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 800-171 R3 (source) 03.01.16.a 03.01.16.b
NIST 800-171A (source) 3.1.16[a] 3.1.16[b]
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.01.16.a[01] A.03.01.16.a[02] A.03.01.16.a[04] A.03.01.16.b
NIST 800-207 NIST Tenet 2
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 2.3 11.2 11.2.1 11.2.2
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
US (12)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 AC-18 AC-18.a AC-18.b AC-18.c
USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 2 ACL2.-3.1.16
USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 5.20.1 5.20.1.1 AC-18
USA Federal FFIEC ITEH 2016 II.C.9.a
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (low) AC-18
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) AC-18
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) AC-18
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) AC-18
USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 AC-18(IRS-Defined)-1 AC-18(IRS-Defined)-2 AC-18(IRS-Defined)-3 AC-18(IRS-Defined)-4
USA Texas DIR SCSC 2.2 2025 AC-18
USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 1 AC-18
USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 AC-18
EMEA (4)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 mp.com.2 mp.com.3
EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 2-3-1-5 2-4-1-4
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 2-5-3-4
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 2-4-1-4
APAC (3)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2026 ISM-0225 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 New Zealand NZISM 3.9 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
APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 5.8.1 5.8.1(a) A.3.1 A.3.1(a)
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 03.01.16.A 03.01.16.B

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

Network Security (NET) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with NET domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Network security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.

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. ▪ Wireless access is protected via secure authentication and encryption.

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 control authorized wireless usage and monitor for unauthorized wireless access.

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

  1. NET-24_A01 usage restrictions are established for each type of wireless access to the system.
  2. NET-24_A02 connection requirements are established for each type of wireless access to the system.
  3. NET-24_A03 wireless access points are identified.
  4. NET-24_A04 wireless access is authorized prior to allowing such connections.
  5. NET-24_A05 each type of wireless access to the system is defined.

Evidence Requirements

E-NET-14 Wireless Networking Configuration

Documented evidence of wireless networking configuration, including authentication and encryption, wireless boundaries and guest network isolation.

Network Security

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.