PES-01.1: Physical Security Plan (PSP)

There is no evidence of a capability to document a Site Security Plan (SitePlan) for each server and communications room to summarize the implemented security controls to protect physical access to technology assets, as well as applicable risks and threats.

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.

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.
• Administrative processes exist to ensure Business process owners (BPOs) develop and maintain System Security Plans (SSPs) or similar documentation, to identify and maintain key architectural information on each business-critical system, application or service.

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.

• 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.
• Administrative processes exist to ensure Business Process Owners (BPOs) develop and maintain System Security Plans (SSPs) or similar documentation, to identify and maintain key architectural information on each business-critical system, application or service.

See C|P-CMM3. There are no defined C|P-CMM4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to document a Site Security Plan (SitePlan) for each server and communications room to summarize the implemented security controls to protect physical access to technology assets, as well as applicable risks and threats.

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 document a Site Security Plan (SitePlan) for each server and communications room to summarize the implemented security controls to protect physical access to technology assets, as well as applicable risks and threats.