THR-14: Tainting
Mechanisms exist to embed false data or steganographic data in files to enable the organization to determine if data has been exfiltrated and provide a means to identify the individual(s) involved.
Renumbered: Formerly THR-08 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization embed false data or steganographic data in files to enable the organization to determine if data has been exfiltrated and provide a means to identify the individual(s) involved?
General (9)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-160 Vol2 R1 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Flow Down | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 | SI-20 |
| NIST 800-172 R3 | 03.14.16E |
| NIST 800-172A R3 | DS-A.03.14.16E |
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
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR 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 THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty 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 THR 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 embed false data or steganographic data in files to enable the organization to determine if data has been exfiltrated and provide a means to identify the individual(s) involved.
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
- THR-14_A01 the systems or system components with data or capabilities to be embedded are defined.
- THR-14_A02 data or capabilities are embedded in systems or system components to determine if organizational data has been exfiltrated or improperly removed from the organization.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size
Small
- Note: Typically not required at this size; canary tokens in sensitive documents (canarytokens.org free)
Medium
- Canary tokens/honey documents (e.g., Thinkst Canary)
- Watermarking of sensitive documents
Large
- Deception platform with tainted data/beacon documents (e.g., Thinkst Canary, Zscaler Deception)
- Document watermarking/steganography
Enterprise
- Enterprise data tainting and deception program (beacon documents, honey records, steganographic marking)
- Integration with DLP and SIEM for exfiltration detection