PES-09.2: Personnel Searches
Physical access control mechanisms exist to inspect personnel and their personal effects (e.g., personal property ordinarily worn or carried by the individual, including vehicles) to prevent the unauthorized exfiltration of data and technology assets.
Renumbered: Formerly PES-04.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization inspect personnel and their personal effects (e.g., personal property ordinarily worn or carried by the individual, including vehicles) to prevent the unauthorized exfiltration of data and technology assets?
General (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 | PS-2.0 |
US (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | SC-7(CE-10).a |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 | 8.1.12.C.01 8.1.13.C.01 8.1.13.C.02 |
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
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 — Well Defined
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES 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 PES domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A facilities 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 physical and environmental security operations (e.g., facility management solution, visitor log management automation and proximity badge access). ▪ 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 PES 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). ▪ An implemented and operational physical security capability exists to inspect personnel and their personal effects (e.g., personal property ordinarily worn or carried by the individual, including vehicles) to prevent the unauthorized exfiltration of data and technology assets.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
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
- PES-09.2_A01 physical security personnel inspect individuals and their personal effects (e.g., personal property ordinarily worn or carried by the individual, including vehicles) to prevent the unauthorized exfiltration of data and technology assets.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size
Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size; visitor bag check policy for sensitive areas if required
Medium
- Documented personnel and property inspection procedure for restricted areas
- Signage notifying inspection requirements
Large
- Security guard inspection procedures at restricted area entry points
- Prohibited items policy and screening
Enterprise
- Enterprise screening program for restricted facilities (guards, metal detection, bag inspection)
- Legal review of inspection procedures
- Inspection records retention