SEA-24.2: Change Processing & Storage Locations
Automated mechanisms exist to change the location of processing and/or storage at random time intervals.
Renumbered: Formerly SEA-14.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization use automated mechanisms to change the location of processing and/or storage at random time intervals?
General (10)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) | CC2.1-POF9 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SC-30(3) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | SC-30(03) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | SC-30(03) |
| NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 | SC-30(03) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | SC-30(3) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | SC-30(3) |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | SC-30(3) |
| NIST 800-172 R3 | 03.13.05E |
| NIST 800-172A R3 | DS-A.03.13.05E A.03.13.05E.ODP[01] |
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
Secure Engineering & Architecture (SEA) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with SEA domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Security engineering-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel use an informal process to design, build and maintain secure, compliant and resilient solutions.
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
Secure Engineering & Architecture (SEA) 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 SEA 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 SEA domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A cybersecurity engineering / architecture team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain RSK domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of secure engineering management operations (e.g., project management solution). ▪ 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 SEA 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). ▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the secure engineering principles on all applicable Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to automatically change the location of processing and/or storage at random time intervals.
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
- SEA-24.2_A01 processing and/or storage locations to be changed are defined.
- SEA-24.2_A02 time frequency at which to change the location of processing and/or storage is defined.
- SEA-24.2_A03 the location of processing and/or storage is changed per an organization-defined criteria.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size
Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size
Medium
- Note: Typically not required at this size; consider cloud auto-scaling across zones
Large
- Workload mobility across availability zones/regions (e.g., Kubernetes rescheduling, VMware vMotion)
- Randomized rotation for high-value workloads
Enterprise
- Enterprise moving target defense with automated relocation of processing/storage (e.g., dynamic Kubernetes scheduling, multi-region rotation)
- Ephemeral infrastructure patterns