Skip to main content

TDA-05: Secure Software Development Practices (SSDP)

TDA 10 — Critical Protect

Mechanisms exist to develop applications based on Secure Software Development Practices (SSDP).

Renumbered: Formerly TDA-06 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, TDA-05 was Developer Architecture & Design. That control is now TDA-04.

Control Question: Does the organization develop applications based on Secure Software Development Practices (SSDP)?

General (53)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) PI1.1 PI1.2 PI1.2-POF1 PI1.2-POF2 PI1.2-POF3 PI1.3 PI1.3-POF1 PI1.3-POF2 PI1.3-POF3 PI1.3-POF4 PI1.3-POF5 PI1.4 PI1.4-POF1 PI1.4-POF2 PI1.4-POF3 PI1.4-POF4 PI1.5 PI1.5-POF1 PI1.5-POF2 PI1.5-POF3 PI1.5-POF4
CIS CSC 8.1 16.0 16.1 16.5 16.10 16.11
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 16.1 16.5 16.10 16.11
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 16.1 16.5 16.10 16.11
CSA CCM 4.1.0 AIS-04 AIS-06
CSA IoT SCF 2 SDV-05
GovRAMP SA-01 SA-15
GovRAMP Low SA-01
GovRAMP Low+ SA-01
GovRAMP Moderate SA-01
GovRAMP High SA-01 SA-15
IEC 62443-2-1 2024 ORG 2.3
IEC 62443-4-1 2018 SD-4 SD-4(a) SD-4(b) SD-4(c) SD-4(d) SD-4(e) SD-4(f) SD-4(g) SI-2 SI-2(a) SI-2(b) SI-2(c) SI-2(d) SI-2(e) SI-2(f)
ISO/SAE 21434 2021 RQ-10-06
ISO 27002 2022 8.25 8.26 8.27 8.28 8.30
ISO 27017 2015 14.2.1 14.2.5
ISO 27018 2025 8.25 8.26 8.27 8.28 8.30
ISO 42001 2023 A.6.1.3 A.6.2.3
MITRE ATT&CK 16 T1078 T1078.001 T1078.003 T1078.004 T1195.001 T1213.003 T1528 T1552 T1552.001 T1552.002 T1552.004 T1552.006 T1558.004 T1574.002
MPA Content Security Program 5.3.1 OR-1.2 TS-1.13
NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) 4.D(2)(e)
NIST 800-53 R4 SA-1 SA-15
NIST 800-53 R5.2 SA-01 SA-04(03) SA-15
NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) SA-01
NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) SA-01 SA-15
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) SA-01 SA-15
NIST 800-53B R5 (privacy) (source) SA-01
NIST 800-82 R3 SA-01 SA-04(03) SA-15
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay SA-01
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay SA-01 SA-15
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay SA-01 SA-15
NIST 800-161 R1 SA-1 SA-15
NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline SA-1
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 1 SA-1
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 SA-1 SA-15
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 SA-1 SA-15
NIST 800-171 R2 (source) NFO - SA-1
NIST 800-171 R3 (source) 03.16.01
NIST 800-171A (source) 3.13.2[b] 3.13.2[e]
NIST 800-171A R3 (source) A.03.16.01
NIST 800-218 PO.1 PW.1 PW.1.3 PW.4.2 PW.5 PW.5.1 PW.6.1 PW.6.2 RV.3.4
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) PR.PS-06
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 CT.DP-P1
OWASP Top 10 2025 A01:2025 A02:2025 A03:2025 A04:2025 A05:2025 A06:2025 A07:2025 A08:2025 A09:2025 A10:2025
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 6.2 6.2.1 6.2.4
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 6.2.1 6.2.4
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 6.2.1 6.2.4
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 6.2.1 6.2.4
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 6.2.1 6.2.4
SCF DPMP 2026 5.12 7.1
SPARTA 4.0 CM0017 CM0043
UL 2900-1 2017 4.1(f)
UL 2900-2-2 2016 11.3 11.3(a) 11.3(b) 11.3(c) 11.3(d) 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8
US (20)
EMEA (14)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany BAIT 2017 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10
EMEA Germany C5 2026 DEV-01.01B DEV-01.01B.1 DEV-01.01B.2 DEV-01.01B.3 DEV-01.03B DEV-02.01B DEV-02.01B.1 DEV-02.01AC PSS-01.02B.11
EMEA Spain CCN-STIC 825 mp.sw.1 mp.info.4 mp.s.2
EMEA EU Cyber Resiliency Act 2024 Article 24(1)
EMEA EU Cyber Resiliency Act Annex I 2024 Annex I, Part I(2)(e) Annex I, Part I(2)(f) Annex I, Part I(2)(h) Annex I, Part I(2)(i) Annex I, Part I(2)(j) Annex I, Part I(2)(k)
EMEA EU DORA RTS 2024 Article 16.1(a)
EMEA EU NIS2 2022 Article 21.3
EMEA UK CAF 4.0 A4.b
EMEA LUX CCSF 20/750 2020 3.6.2-69
EMEA Saudi Arabia IoT CGIoT-1 2024 2-14-3
EMEA Saudi Arabia CSCC-1 2019 1-3-2-3 2-13-1 2-13-2
EMEA Saudi Arabia ECC-1 2018 1-6-3-1
EMEA Saudi Arabia SACS-002 2022 VII.B.TPC-74
EMEA Saudi Arabia SAMA CSF 1.0 2017 3.3.6.4 3.3.6.5 3.3.6.5.a 3.3.6.5.b 3.3.6.5.c 3.3.6.5.d 3.3.6.5.e 3.3.6.5.f 3.3.6.5.g
APAC (10)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia IoT Code of Practice 2024 4.0 6.0
APAC Australia ISM June 2026 ISM-0401 ISM-1239 ISM-1419 ISM-1552 ISM-1849 ISM-1922 ISM-2032 ISM-2035 ISM-2041 ISM-2045 ISM-2063 ISM-2064 ISM-2065 ISM-2066 ISM-2067 ISM-2120
APAC India RBI Digital Payments 2021 4.c 14.0 20.0 31.0 56.i
APAC India RBI PA 2025 Annex 1.1.18
APAC Japan ISMAP 14.1.1.1 14.2.1.2 14.2.1.9 14.2.1.10
APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 10.12(b) A5-E1(c) A8-2(c)
APAC New Zealand HISF MLHSP 2023 HHSP50 HML50
APAC New Zealand HISF Suppliers 2023 HSUP42
APAC New Zealand NZISM 3.9 14.4.5.C.01
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.2.1 6.2.2
Americas (4)

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

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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 TDA domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TDA 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 TDA domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Technology development and acquisition-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Technology development and acquisition management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Secure development practices mostly conform to industry-recognized standards for secure engineering of Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) (e.g., OWASP, NIST SP 800-218 and NIST SP 800-160). ▪ An application development team, or similar function, uses a structured process to design, build and maintain secure configurations for test, development, staging and production environments.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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 TDA 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 TDA domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A software development team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TDA domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of technology development and acquisition management (e.g., project management software, software escrow solution and software testing tools). ▪ 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 TDA 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 develop applications based on Secure Software Development Practices (SSDP).

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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

Technology Development & Acquisition (TDA) 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. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes. ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.

Assessment Objectives

  1. TDA-05_A01 software development techniques that promote effective cybersecurity / data privacy are identified.
  2. TDA-05_A02 testing, evaluation, assessment, verification and validation methods are defined.
  3. TDA-05_A03 cybersecurity / data privacy requirements to be satisfied by the process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations are defined.
  4. TDA-05_A04 identified software development techniques that promote effective cybersecurity / data privacy are employed.
  5. TDA-05_A05 quality control processes are defined.
  6. TDA-05_A06 frequency at which to review the development process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations is defined.
  7. TDA-05_A07 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that explicitly addresses security requirements.
  8. TDA-05_A08 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that explicitly addresses privacy requirements.
  9. TDA-05_A09 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that identifies the standards used in the development process.
  10. TDA-05_A10 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that identifies the tools used in the development process.
  11. TDA-05_A11 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that documents the specific tool used in the development process.
  12. TDA-05_A12 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that documents the specific tool configurations used in the development process.
  13. TDA-05_A13 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process that documents, manages and ensures the integrity of changes to the process and/or tools used in development.
  14. TDA-05_A14 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process in which the development process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations are reviewed frequently to determine that the process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations selected and employed satisfy security requirements.
  15. TDA-05_A15 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to follow a documented development process in which the development process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations are reviewed frequently to determine that the process, standards, tools, tool options and tool configurations selected and employed satisfy privacy requirements.
  16. TDA-05_A16 the developer of the system, system component or system service is required to demonstrate the use of a system development life cycle process that includes organization-defined system security engineering methods.

Evidence Requirements

E-TDA-01 Secure Software Development Principles (SSDP)

Documented evidence of a Secure Software Development Principles (SSDP). This is program-level documentation in the form of a runbook, playbook or a similar format provides guidance on organizational practices that support existing policies and standards.

Technology Design & Acquisition

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) practices
  • OWASP's Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS)
  • Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS)

Small

  • Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) practices
  • OWASP's Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS)
  • Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS)

Medium

  • Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) practices
  • OWASP's Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS)
  • Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS)

Large

  • Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) practices
  • OWASP's Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS)
  • Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS)

Enterprise

  • Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) practices
  • OWASP's Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS)
  • Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS)

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.