Skip to main content

PES-03.4: Access To Critical Systems

PES 5 — Medium Protect

Physical access control mechanisms exist to enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility.

Control Question: Does the organization enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility?

General (18)
Framework Mapping Values
COBIT 2019 DSS05.05
GovRAMP High PE-03(01)
MPA Content Security Program 5.1 PS-1.0
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 PR.AC-P2
NIST 800-53 R4 PE-3(1)
NIST 800-53 R4 (high) PE-3(1)
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) PE-3(1)
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) PE-3(1)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay PE-3(1)
NIST 800-161 R1 PE-3(1)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 PE-3(1)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 PE-3(1)
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) 3.10.1
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.10.07.a.01 03.10.07.a.02
SWIFT CSF 2023 3.1
TISAX ISA 6 5.3.4
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure PES-03.4
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats PES-03.4
US (11)
Framework Mapping Values
US C2M2 2.1 ARCHITECTURE-3.J.MIL2
US CMMC 2.0 Level 1 (source) PE.L1-B.1.VIII
US CMMC 2.0 Level 2 (source) PE.L2-3.10.1
US FAR 52.204-21 52.204-21(b)(1)(viii)
US FedRAMP R4 PE-3(1)
US FedRAMP R4 (high) PE-3(1)
US FedRAMP R5 (source) PE-3(1)
US FedRAMP R5 (high) (source) PE-3(1)
US HIPAA Administrative Simplification 2013 (source) 164.310(b) 164.310(c)
US HIPAA Security Rule / NIST SP 800-66 R2 (source) 164.310(b) 164.310(c)
US NNPI (unclass) 11.1 11.2 11.3
EMEA (5)
APAC (6)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia ISM June 2024 ISM-0813 ISM-1053 ISM-1074 ISM-1530
APAC India SEBI CSCRF PR.AA.S10
APAC New Zealand HISF 2022 HHSP10 HML10 HSUP09
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP09
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.6 8.3.3.C.01 8.3.4.C.01 8.3.4.C.02 8.3.5.C.01
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 8.5.6(d)
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 03.10.07.A.01 03.10.07.A.02

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility.

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.

  • 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

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 enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility.

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 enforce physical access to critical systems or sensitive/regulated data, in addition to the physical access controls for the facility.

Assessment Objectives

  1. PES-03.4_A01 physical spaces are defined.
  2. PES-03.4_A02 physical access controls are enforced for the facility at physical spaces.
  3. PES-03.4_A03 physical access authorizations are enforced.

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.