NET-30: Third-Party Remote Access Governance
Mechanisms exist to proactively control and monitor third-party accounts used to access, support, or maintain system components via remote access.
Renumbered: Formerly NET-14.6 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization proactively control and monitor third-party accounts used to access, support, or maintain system components via remote access?
General (6)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) | 8.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) | 8.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) | 8.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) | 8.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) | 8.2.7 |
| PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) | 8.2.7 |
US (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal DHS CISA TIC 3.0 | 3.PEP.EN.VPNET |
| USA Federal DoW BaTB OT 2026 | 6 |
| USA Federal NERC CIP 2024 | CIP-005-7 2.4 CIP-005-7 2.5 CIP-005-7 3.1 CIP-005-7 3.2 |
APAC (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC India RBI Digital Payments 2021 | 73.e |
| APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 | 3.10.3(a) 5.1.3 |
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 proactively control and monitor third-party accounts used to access, support, or maintain system components via remote 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
- NET-30_A01 third-party accounts used to access, support or maintain system components via remote access are proactively controlled and monitored.
Evidence Requirements
- E-IAC-14 Remote Access Authorizations
-
Documented evidence of authorization for users to connect via remote access methods.
Identity & Access Management - E-NET-06 Authorized Network Connections
-
Documented evidence of third-party Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) authorized to connect to organizational TAAS, including remote access authorizations.
Network Security
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Document and approve all third-party remote access
Small
- Third-party remote access policy
- Require justification and time limits
Medium
- Formal third-party remote access governance policy
- Session monitoring requirements
Large
- Enterprise third-party remote access governance
- PAM-managed third-party sessions
- Session recording
Enterprise
- Enterprise third-party remote access platform (e.g., BeyondTrust, CyberArk)
- Just-in-time access
- Session recording and monitoring