Skip to main content

NET-27: Work From Anywhere (WFA) - Telecommuting Security

NET 10 — Critical Protect

Mechanisms exist to define secure telecommuting practices and govern remote access to Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) for remote workers.

Renumbered: Formerly NET-14.5 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization define secure telecommuting practices and govern remote access to Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) for remote workers?

General (12)
Framework Mapping Values
CSA CCM 4.1.0 HRS-04
ISO 27002 2022 6.7 7.9
ISO 27017 2015 6.2.2 11.2.6
ISO 27018 2025 6.7 7.9
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 OP-2.0
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) 3.1.12 3.10.6
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.01.12.a 03.10.06.a 03.10.06.b
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.01.12.a[01] A.03.10.06.ODP[01] A.03.10.06.a A.03.10.06.b
NIST 800-207 NIST Tenet 2
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 PR.AC-P3
SWIFT CSF 2025 3.1
TISAX ISA 6.0.3 2.1.4
US (4)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal DHS CISA TIC 3.0 3.PEP.EN.VPNET
USA Federal CMMC 2.0 Level 2 ACL2.-3.1.12 PEL2.-3.10.6
USA Federal FFIEC ITEH 2016 II.C.15.d
USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 2.B.7
EMEA (7)
APAC (3)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Japan ISMAP 6.2 6.2.2 6.2.2.1 6.2.2.2 6.2.2.3 6.2.2.4 6.2.2.5 6.2.2.6 6.2.2.7 6.2.2.8 6.2.2.9 6.2.2.10 6.2.2.11 6.2.2.12 6.2.2.13 6.2.2.14 6.2.2.15 6.2.2.16 6.2.2.17 6.2.2.18 6.2.2.19 6.2.2.20 6.2.2.21
APAC New Zealand HISF Microsmall 2023 HMS13
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 21.2.4.C.01 21.2.5.C.01 21.2.6.C.01 21.2.7.C.01 22.2.4.C.01 22.2.4.C.02
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 03.01.12.A 03.10.06.A 03.10.06.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

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 define secure telecommuting practices and govern remote access to TAASD for remote workers.

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-27_A01 secure telecommuting practices are defined.
  2. NET-27_A02 technical measures govern remote access to Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD) for remote workers.
  3. NET-27_A03 administrative measures govern rules of behavior for telecommuting practices.
  4. NET-27_A04 security requirements to be employed at alternate work sites are defined.
  5. NET-27_A05 alternate work sites allowed for use by employees are determined.
  6. NET-27_A06 the following security requirements are employed at alternate work sites: <A.03.10.06.ODP[01]: security requirements>.

Evidence Requirements

E-NET-03 Work From Anywhere (WFA) Guidance (remote workers)

Documented evidence of administrative and technical measures that are enforced at "alternate work sites" which includes working from home or working while traveling on business.

Network Security

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Remote work security policy
  • VPN requirement for home workers

Small

  • Work-from-anywhere security policy
  • VPN + MFA for remote workers
  • Acceptable use policy

Medium

  • Formal WFA security program
  • VPN/ZTNA + MFA
  • Endpoint security for remote devices

Large

  • Enterprise WFA security program
  • ZTNA/SASE solution
  • Remote endpoint management (MDM/UEM)

Enterprise

  • Enterprise WFA security framework
  • SASE platform (e.g., Zscaler, Netskope)
  • UEM for remote endpoints
  • Security awareness training for remote work

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.