VPM-08.3: Automated Remediation Status
Automated mechanisms exist to determine the state of system components with regard to flaw remediation.
Renumbered: Formerly VPM-05.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization use automated mechanisms to determine the state of system components with regard to flaw remediation?
General (16)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| CIS CSC 8.1 | 7.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 | 7.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 | 7.4 |
| CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 | 7.4 |
| GovRAMP | SI-02(02) |
| GovRAMP Core | SI-02(02) |
| GovRAMP Moderate | SI-02(02) |
| GovRAMP High | SI-02(02) |
| IEC 62443-2-1 2024 | COMP 3.3 |
| NIST 800-53 R4 | SI-2(2) |
| NIST 800-53 R5.2 | SI-02(02) SI-02(04) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) | SI-02(02) |
| NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) | SI-02(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 | SI-02(02) SI-02(04) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay | SI-02(02) |
| NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay | SI-02(02) |
US (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 | SI-2(2) |
| USA Federal CJIS Security Policy 6.0 | SI-2(2) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (moderate) | SI-02(02) |
| USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) | SI-02(02) |
| USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 | SI-2(CE-2) SI-2(CE-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
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) 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 VPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with VPM 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 VPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Vulnerability management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Vulnerability management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) 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 VPM 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 VPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A vulnerability management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain VPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of vulnerability management operations (e.g., patch management solution and vulnerability scanning 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 VPM 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 automatically determine the state of system components with regard to flaw remediation.
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
- VPM-08.3_A01 automated mechanisms to determine if applicable security-relevant software and firmware updates are installed on system components are defined.
- VPM-08.3_A02 the frequency at which to determine if applicable security-relevant software and firmware updates are installed on system components is defined.
- VPM-08.3_A03 system components have applicable security-relevant software and firmware updates installed frequency using automated mechanisms.
- VPM-08.3_A04 the system components requiring automated patch management tools to facilitate flaw remediation are defined.
- VPM-08.3_A05 automated patch management tools are employed to facilitate flaw remediation to components.
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Check remediation status of patched systems
Small
- Automated remediation verification scans after patching
Medium
- Formal remediation verification process
- Rescan after patching
Large
- Enterprise automated remediation verification scanning
Enterprise
- Enterprise vulnerability management with automated remediation status tracking and verification