Skip to main content

PES-01: Physical & Environmental Protections

PES 9 — Critical Govern

Mechanisms exist to facilitate the operation of physical and environmental protection controls.

Control Question: Does the organization facilitate the operation of physical and environmental protection controls?

General (50)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) A1.2 A1.2-POF1 A1.2-POF2 A1.2-POF3 A1.2-POF4 A1.2-POF5 A1.2-POF6 A1.2-POF7 A1.2-POF9 CC6.4 CC6.4-POF1 CC6.4-POF2
COBIT 2019 DSS01.04 DSS01.05 DSS05.05
CSA CCM 4 DCS-03
CSA IoT SCF 2 PHY-01
ENISA 2.0 SO9
Generally Accepted Privacy Principles (GAPP) 8.2.3 8.2.4
GovRAMP Low PE-01
GovRAMP Low+ PE-01
GovRAMP Moderate PE-01
GovRAMP High PE-01
ISO 27002 2022 5.14 5.15 5.18 7.1 7.5
ISO 27017 2015 11.1.4
MPA Content Security Program 5.1 OR-3.1 PS-1.0 PS-1.2 PS-1.5 PS-2.0
NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) 4.D(2)(b) 4.D(2)(c) 4.D(2)(j)
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 PR.AC-P2 PR.PO-P4
NIST 800-53 R4 PE-1
NIST 800-53 R4 (low) PE-1
NIST 800-53 R4 (moderate) PE-1
NIST 800-53 R4 (high) PE-1
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) PE-1 PE-23
NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) PE-1
NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) PE-1
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) PE-1
NIST 800-53 R5 (NOC) (source) PE-23
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay PE-1
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay PE-1
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay PE-1
NIST 800-161 R1 PE-1 PE-23
NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline PE-1
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 1 PE-1
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 PE-1
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 PE-1
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) 3.10.2 NFO-PE-1
NIST 800-171A (source) 3.10.2[a] 3.10.2[b] 3.10.2[c] 3.10.2[d]
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.08.01 03.08.02 03.10.01.a 03.10.07.a
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) DE.CM-02 ID.AM PR.AA PR.AA-06 PR.IR-02
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 9.1 9.1.1 9.2
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) 9.1.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 9.1.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C-VT (source) 9.1.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 9.1.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 9.1.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ P2PE (source) 9.1.1
SPARTA CM0053
SWIFT CSF 2023 3.1
TISAX ISA 6 8.1.2
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) PES-01
SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational PES-01
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure PES-01
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats PES-01
US (31)
Framework Mapping Values
US C2M2 2.1 ACCESS-3.A.MIL1 ACCESS-3.D.MIL2 ACCESS-3.E.MIL2 ACCESS-3.F.MIL2 ACCESS-3.G.MIL2 ACCESS-3.H.MIL2
US CERT RMM 1.2 AM:SG1.SP1
US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) 5.9 5.9.1
US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) PE.L2-3.10.2
US CMMC 2.0 Level 3 (source) PE.L2-3.10.2
US CMS MARS-E 2.0 PE-1
US FedRAMP R4 PE-1
US FedRAMP R4 (low) PE-1
US FedRAMP R4 (moderate) PE-1
US FedRAMP R4 (high) PE-1
US FedRAMP R4 (LI-SaaS) PE-1
US FedRAMP R5 (source) PE-1
US FedRAMP R5 (low) (source) PE-1
US FedRAMP R5 (moderate) (source) PE-1
US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) PE-1
US FedRAMP R5 (LI-SaaS) (source) PE-1
US HIPAA Administrative Simplification 2013 (source) 164.310(a)(1) 164.310(a)(2)(ii) 164.310(a)(2)(iv)
US HIPAA Security Rule / NIST SP 800-66 R2 (source) 164.310(a)(1) 164.310(a)(2)(ii) 164.310(a)(2)(iv)
US HIPAA HICP Small Practice 6.S.B
US HIPAA HICP Medium Practice 4.M.C
US HIPAA HICP Large Practice 4.M.C
US IRS 1075 2.B.3 2.B.3.4 PE-1
US NERC CIP 2024 (source) CIP-003-8 1.1.3 CIP-003-8 1.2.2
US NISPOM 2020 8-308
US NNPI (unclass) 10.6 11.1 11.2 11.3
US - CA CCPA 2025 7123(c)(3)(D)
US - NY DFS 23 NYCRR500 2023 Amd 2 500.3(j)
US - TX DIR Control Standards 2.0 PE-1
US - TX TX-RAMP Level 1 PE-1
US - TX TX-RAMP Level 2 PE-1
US - VT Act 171 of 2018 2447(b)(7)
EMEA (16)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 3.4.3(33)
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 13.1.1 13.1.3 13.2.1 13.2.2(a) 13.2.3 13.3.2(a) 13.3.3
EMEA Austria Sec 14 Sec 15
EMEA Belgium 16
EMEA Germany C5 2020 PS-01
EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 9.15 12.27 18.1 18.2 18.10
EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 2-3
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 2-3-1 2-3-2 2-3-4 2-14-1 2-14-2 2-14-3 2-14-4
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 2-13 2-13-1 2-13-1-8 2-13-1-9 2-13-2
EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 TPC-46
EMEA Saudi Arabia SAMA CSF 1.0 3.3.2
EMEA South Africa 19
EMEA Spain BOE-A-2022-7191 18
EMEA Spain 311/2022 18
EMEA UAE NIAF 3.2.2
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 1500
APAC (7)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-0810
APAC India SEBI CSCRF PR.AA.S10 PR.IP.S9
APAC Japan ISMAP 11.1.4
APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 HHSP47 HML47 HSUP11 HSUP39
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP11 HSUP39
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 5.7.4.C.01 8.1.10.C.01
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 8.5.1 8.5.2 8.5.5 8.5.6(a) 8.5.6(b) 8.5.6(c) 8.5.6(d) 8.5.6(e) 8.5.6(f)
Americas (2)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada OSFI B-13 3.2.10
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.08.01 03.08.02 03.10.01.A 03.10.07.A

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to facilitate the operation of physical and environmental protection controls.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Physical access control is decentralized.
  • Physical security controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards), focusing on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs).
  • Human Resources, or a similar function, maintains a current list of personnel and facilitates the implementation of physical access management controls.
  • IT personnel implement appropriate physical security practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's technology assets and data.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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:

  • Physical access control 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 physical access control.
  • Human Resources, or a similar function, maintains a current list of personnel with authorized access to organizational facilities and facilitates the implementation of physical access management controls.
  • Physical security controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards).
  • Physical controls, administrative processes and technologies are primarily designed and implemented for offices, rooms and facilities that focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
  • A facilities maintenance team, or similar function, manages the operation of automated physical and environmental protection controls.
Level 3 — Well Defined

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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: o Performs the centralized-management of physical security controls across the enterprise. o Maintains a current list of personnel with authorized access to organizational facilities and implements physical access management controls.

  • The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function with technical competence to address cybersecurity concerns, analyzes the organization's business strategy to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for physical access control practices.
  • The CISO, or similar function, develops a security-focused Concept of Operations (CONOPS) that documents management, operational and technical measures to apply defense-in-depth techniques across the enterprise for physical access controls.
  • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity and data protection controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's applications, systems, services and data with regards to physical access controls.
  • A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity and data privacy program, including physical access controls.
  • A physical security team, or similar function:
  • A facilities maintenance team, or similar function, manages the operation of environmental protection controls.
  • Administrative processes exist to authorize physical access to facilities based on the position or role of the individual.
  • Administrative processes and physical controls restrict unescorted access to facilities to personnel with required security clearances, formal access authorizations and validated the need for access.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • 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.
  • Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
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 facilitate the operation of physical and environmental protection controls.

Assessment Objectives

  1. PES-01_A01 the physical facility where organizational systems reside is protected.
  2. PES-01_A02 the location or site of the facility where the system resides is planned considering physical and environmental hazards.
  3. PES-01_A03 for existing facilities, physical and environmental hazards are considered in the organizational risk management strategy.
  4. PES-01_A04 the support infrastructure for organizational systems is protected.
  5. PES-01_A05 the physical facility where organizational systems reside is monitored.
  6. PES-01_A06 the support infrastructure for organizational systems is monitored.
  7. PES-01_A07 physical security operations are conducted according to documented policies, standards, procedures and/or other organizational directives.
  8. PES-01_A08 adequate resources (e.g., people, processes, technologies, data and/or facilities) are provided to support physical security operations.
  9. PES-01_A09 responsibility and authority for the performance of physical security-related activities are assigned to designated personnel.
  10. PES-01_A10 personnel performing physical security-related activities have the skills and knowledge needed to perform their assigned duties.

Evidence Requirements

E-PES-01 Environmental Monitoring

Documented evidence of environmental monitoring (e.g., water leaks, temperature, humidity, etc.)

Physical Security
E-PES-05 Physical Security Operations

Documented evidence of the organization's physical security capabilities as it pertains to operating and monitoring Physical Access Control (PAC)mechanisms.

Physical Security

Technology Recommendations

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.