Skip to main content

PES-29.1: Temperature & Humidity Controls Alerting

PES 8 — High Detect

Facility security mechanisms exist to trigger an alarm or notification of temperature and humidity changes that are potentially harmful to personnel or equipment.

Renumbered: Formerly PES-09.1 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization trigger an alarm or notification of temperature and humidity changes that be potentially harmful to personnel or equipment?

General (10)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) A1.2 A1.2-POF2 A1.2-POF4
COBIT 2019 DSS01.04
CSA CCM 4.1.0 DCS-14
GovRAMP PE-14(02)
GovRAMP Moderate PE-14(02)
GovRAMP High PE-14(02)
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 PS-3.1
NIST 800-53 R4 PE-14(2)
NIST 800-53 R5.2 PE-14(02)
NIST 800-82 R3 PE-14(02)
US (2)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 PE-14-IS.1 PE-14-IS.2
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) PE-14(02)
EMEA (2)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2026 PS-07.02B
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 13.2.2(c)

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

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with PES domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Physical security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ Physical security controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards), focusing on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs). ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity 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) 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 PES domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PES 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 PES domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Physical security / facilities management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Physical security / facilities management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Physical security controls and technologies primarily focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.

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 trigger an alarm or notification of temperature and humidity changes that be potentially harmful to personnel or equipment.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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

  1. PES-29.1_A01 personnel or roles to be notified by environmental control monitoring when environmental changes are potentially harmful to personnel or equipment is/are defined.
  2. PES-29.1_A02 environmental control monitoring is employed.
  3. PES-29.1_A03 personnel or roles are notified when changes are potentially harmful to personnel or equipment.

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Temperature sensor with phone/email alert in equipment area

Small

  • Temperature/humidity sensor with threshold alerts to IT staff

Medium

  • Environmental monitoring with threshold alarms to IT and facilities
  • Escalation procedure for HVAC failure

Large

  • Data center environmental alerting integrated with NOC/on-call
  • Automated escalation on threshold breach

Enterprise

  • Enterprise DCIM alerting integrated with operations center and building management
  • Automated response procedures for environmental excursions

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.