NET-26.5: Remote Access Cryptographic Protections
Cryptographic mechanisms exist to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
Renumbered: Formerly NET-14.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Are cryptographic mechanisms utilized to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN)?
General (20)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 12.7 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 12.7 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 12.7 |
| GovRAMP | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP Core | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP Low+ | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP Moderate | AC-17(02) |
| GovRAMP High | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | AC-17(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | AC-17(02) |
| NIST 800-171 R2 (source) | 3.1.13 |
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.12.a |
| NIST 800-171A (source) | 3.1.13[a] 3.1.13[b] |
| NIST 800-171A R3 (source) | A.03.01.12.a[04] |
| NIST 800-207 | NIST Tenet 2 |
US (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | AC-17(2) |
| USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 2 | ACL2.-3.1.13 |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | AC-17(2) |
| USA Federal FFIEC ITEH 2016 | II.C.9.a II.C.15.c |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | AC-17(02) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | AC-17(02) |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | AC-17(CE-2) |
| USA Federal NERC CIP 2024 | CIP-005-7 2.2 |
| USA Texas TX-RAMP Level 2 | AC-17 (02) |
EMEA (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Germany C5 2026 | HR-07.01B.3 OPS-14.03B CRY-04.02B |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 | 2305 2306 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L1 2024 | 2305 2306 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 | 2305 2306 |
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 | 2305 2306 |
| EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 | 2-2-1-7 |
APAC (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Australia IoT Code of Practice 2024 | 7.0 |
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | A5-A3(b) |
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 5.7.2(c) |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 | 03.01.12.A |
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 cryptographic capability exists to protect the confidentiality and integrity of remote access sessions (e.g., VPN).
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
- NET-26.5_A01 cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of remote access sessions are identified.
- NET-26.5_A02 cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of remote access sessions are implemented.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Use VPN with encryption for remote access
Small
- Encrypted VPN (TLS/IPSec) for all remote access
Medium
- Encrypted remote access standard
- TLS/IPSec VPN
- Certificate-based authentication
Large
- Enterprise encrypted VPN with certificate-based auth
- FIPS-compliant encryption
Enterprise
- Enterprise encrypted ZTNA/VPN platform
- FIPS 140-2/140-3 compliant encryption
- End-to-end encryption enforcement