Overview
  1. 03.01: Access Control
  2. 03.02: Awareness and Training
  3. 03.03: Audit and Accountability
  4. 03.04: Configuration Management
  5. 03.05: Identification and Authentication
  6. 03.06: Incident Response
  7. 03.07: Maintenance
  8. 03.08: Media Protection
  9. 03.09: Personnel Security
  10. 03.10: Physical Protection
  11. 03.11: Risk Assessment
  12. 03.12: Security Assessment
  13. 03.13: System and Communications Protection
  14. 03.14: System and Information Integrity

Security Requirements for 03.14.01 Flaw Remediation

Organizations identify systems that are affected by announced software and firmware flaws including potential vulnerabilities resulting from those flaws and report this information to designated personnel with information security responsibilities. Security-relevant updates include patches, service packs, hot fixes, and anti-virus signatures. Organizations address flaws discovered during security assessments, continuous monitoring, incident response activities, and system error handling. Organizations can take advantage of available resources such as the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) database or Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) database in remediating flaws discovered in organizational systems.Organization-defined time periods for updating security-relevant software and firmware may vary based on a variety of factors including the criticality of the update (i.e., severity of the vulnerability related to the discovered flaw). Some types of flaw remediation may require more testing than other types of remediation.[SP 800-40] provides guidance on patch management technologies.

Assessment GuidanceExamine 0/9

How an assessor determines this requirement is met. Source: CMMC Assessment Guide – Level 2, Version 2.13 (NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2).

Discussion

All software and firmware have potential flaws. Many vendors work to remedy those flaws by releasing vulnerability information and updates to their software and firmware. OSAs must have a process to review relevant vendor notifications and updates about problems or weaknesses. After reviewing the information, the OSA must implement a patch management process that allows for software and firmware flaws to be fixed without adversely affecting the system functionality. OSAs must define the time frames within which flaws are identified, reported, and corrected for all systems. OSAs should consider purchasing support from their vendors to ensure timely access to updates.

Examples

  1. Example 1

    You know that software vendors typically release patches, service packs, hot fixes, etc. and want to make sure your software is up to date. You develop a policy that requires checking vendor websites for flaw notifications every week [a]. The policy further requires that those flaws be assessed for severity and patched on end-user computers once each week and servers once each month [c, e]. Consistent with that policy, you configure the system to check for updates weekly or daily depending on the criticality of the software [b, e]. Your team reviews available updates and implements the applicable ones according to the defined schedule [f].

Assessment Methods

Examine
The process of reviewing, inspecting, observing, studying, or analyzing assessment objects (e.g., policies, procedures, plans, system designs, mechanisms) to facilitate understanding, achieve clarification, or obtain evidence.Example: An assessor reads the access control policy and inspects system configuration settings to confirm they match.

Not all of the evidence listed is required to meet this requirement — check the items your organization has collected.

Interview
The process of holding discussions with individuals or groups within an organization to facilitate understanding, achieve clarification, or identify the location of evidence.Example: An assessor asks a system administrator to describe how user accounts are approved, reviewed, and disabled.
  • System or network administrators
  • Personnel with information security responsibilities
  • Personnel installing, configuring, and maintaining the system
  • Personnel with responsibility for flaw remediation
  • Personnel with configuration management responsibility
Test
The process of exercising assessment objects (e.g., activities, mechanisms) under specified conditions to compare actual behavior with expected behavior.Example: An assessor attempts to sign in with a disabled account to confirm that access is denied.
  • Organizational processes for identifying, reporting, and correcting system flaws
  • Organizational process for installing software and firmware updates
  • Mechanisms supporting or implementing reporting, and correcting system flaws
  • Mechanisms supporting or implementing testing software and firmware updates

Potential Assessment Considerations

  • Is the time frame (e.g., a set number of days) within which system flaw identification activities (e.g., vulnerability scans, configuration scans, manual review) must be performed defined and documented [a]?
  • Are system flaws (e.g., vulnerabilities, misconfigurations) identified in accordance with the specified time frame [b]?
  • Is the time frame (e.g., a set number of days dependent on the assessed severity of a flaw) within which system flaws must be corrected defined and documented [e]?
  • Are system flaws (e.g., applied security patches, made configuration changes, or implemented workarounds or mitigations) corrected in accordance with the specified time frame [f]?

Key References

NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 3.14.1FAR Clause 52.204-21 b.1.xii

Evidence

  1. 03.14.01.a

    The time within which to identify system flaws is specified

  1. 03.14.01.b

    System flaws are identified within the specified time frame

  1. 03.14.01.c

    The time within which to report system flaws is specified

  1. 03.14.01.d

    System flaws are reported within the specified time frame

  1. 03.14.01.e

    The time within which to correct system flaws is specified

  1. 03.14.01.f

    System flaws are corrected within the specified time frame