Skip to main content

SAT-06: Cyber Threat Environment Situational Awareness

SAT 8 — High Identify

Mechanisms exist to provide role-based security, compliance and resilience awareness training that is current and relevant to the cyber threats that users might encounter in day-to-day business operations.

Renumbered: Formerly SAT-03.6 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization provide role-based security, compliance and resilience awareness training that is current and relevant to the cyber threats that users might encounter in day-to-day business operations?

General (32)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC2.2-POF8
BSI Standard 200-1 4.2 6.0
CSA IoT SCF 2 TRN-02
IMO Maritime Cyber Risk Management 3.5.3.6 3.5.4.2
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 OR-3.3
NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 GOVERN 2.2
NIST 800-53 R5.2 AT-02(06)
NIST SP 800-66 R2 164.308(a)(5)
NIST 800-82 R3 AT-02(06)
NIST 800-161 R1 AT-2(6)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 AT-2(6)
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) 3.2.3
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.02.01.a.01 03.02.01.a.02 03.02.01.a.03 03.02.02.a.01 03.02.02.a.02 03.06.04.a.02
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.02.01.a.01[01] A.03.02.01.a.02 A.03.02.01.b[02] A.03.02.02.a.01[01] A.03.02.02.a.02 A.03.06.04.a.02
NIST 800-172 R3 03.02.01E
NIST 800-172A R3 DS-A.03.02.01E.a.01 DS-A.03.02.01E.a.03
NIST 800-218 PO.2.2
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) PR.AT-01 PR.AT-02
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3 12.6.3 12.6.3.1 12.6.3.2
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 12.6.3.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3 12.6.3.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C-VT (source) 12.6.3.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3 12.6.3 12.6.3.1 12.6.3.2
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3 12.6.3 12.6.3.1 12.6.3.2
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ P2PE (source) 9.5.1 9.5.1.3
SCF DPMP 2026 1.6
Shared Assessments SIG 2025 P.4
SPARTA 4.0 CM0041
SWIFT CSF 2025 7.2
TISAX ISA 6.0.3 2.1.4
US (11)
EMEA (10)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany C5 2026 HR-03.03B.3
EMEA EU DORA 2023 Article 13.6
EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 8.1.2(b) 8.1.2(c) 8.2.3(b)
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 2024 2601 2602 2603 3106
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L1 2024 2603
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L2 2024 2601 2602 2603 3106
EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 - L3 2024 2601 2602 2603 3106
EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 1-9-2
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 1-10-3-3 1-10-3-4
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 1-8-2-2 2-13-1-8
APAC (3)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia CCM 2026 PRO-14
APAC Singapore CCOP CII 2026 3.1.5 9.1.1(b)
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 12.1.3
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 2025 03.02.01.A.01 03.02.01.A.02 03.02.01.A.03 03.02.02.A.01 03.02.02.A.02 03.06.04.A.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

Security Awareness & Training (SAT) 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 SAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with SAT 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 SAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Security Awareness & Training-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Security Awareness & Training may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Users are educated on their responsibilities to protect TAASD assigned to them or under their supervision. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel create/govern security and awareness training to meet specific statutory, regulatory and/or contractual compliance obligations. ▪ Privileged users receive formal security and/or data privacy awareness training to ensure they understand their unique roles and responsibilities. ▪ The responsibility for training users and enforcing policies may be assigned to user's immediate supervisor(s)/manager(s), including the definition and enforcement of the user's specific role(s) and responsibilities. ▪ Security awareness and training methods are role-based (e.g., handling sensitive/regulated data). ▪ Business process owners are required to incorporate vendor-specific security training in support of new technology initiatives. ▪ Security awareness training covers recommended practices for securing laptops and mobile devices while traveling. ▪ Security awareness training covers reporting of unauthorized alterations and evidence of tampering of equipment

Level 3 — Well Defined

Security Awareness & Training (SAT) 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 SAT 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 SAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A security awareness & training team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain SAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of security awareness and training management (e.g., Computer Based Learning (CBL) solutions). ▪ 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 SAT 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 capability exists to provide role-based security, compliance and resilience awareness training that is current and relevant to the cyber threats that users might encounter in day-to-day business operations.

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

  1. SAT-06_A01 literacy training on the cyber threat environment is provided.
  2. SAT-06_A02 system operations reflect current cyber threat information.
  3. SAT-06_A03 the frequency of providing awareness training is defined.
  4. SAT-06_A04 the frequency of updating awareness training is defined.
  5. SAT-06_A05 security literacy training is provided to system users when required by system changes or following <A.03.02.01.ODP[02]: events>.
  6. SAT-06_A06 security literacy training content is updated <A.03.02.01.ODP[03]: frequency>.
  7. SAT-06_A07 security literacy training content is updated following <A.03.02.01.ODP[04]: events>.

Evidence Requirements

E-SAT-04 Recurring User Training

Documented evidence of recurring (e.g., annual) user training for security, compliance and/or resilience topics.

Education

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
  • Internal newsletters

Small

  • US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
  • Internal newsletters

Medium

  • US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
  • Internal newsletters
  • InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

Large

  • US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
  • Internal newsletters
  • InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

Enterprise

  • US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
  • Internal newsletters
  • InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

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.