PATCHOS-ML2 Patch Operating Systems (ML2)
The same set of requirements as ML1, applied consistently across the in-scope estate. ACSC defines ML2 for Patch Operating Systems primarily through tightened evidence quality and breadth of coverage rather than addition
8
artefacts
0
held by a system
5
at each review
hard
to go live
Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
- Monthly SLA compliance report by OS class to risk committee · Vendor register / contract repository
- Cloud workload coverage evidence (Defender for Cloud, AWS Inspector, GCP Security Health) with patch states · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
- Remote endpoint coverage evidence (Intune compliance, last-seen, last-patch-applied) · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
- Quarterly governance committee minutes covering patching KPIs · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
- Out-of-cycle patch deployment evidence for emergency CVE response · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Reconciliation between asset inventory, vulnerability scanner inventory and patch tool inventory (three-way match) · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Risk acceptance register for any host outside SLA with executive owner, compensating control and expiry · Vendor register / contract repository
- Network device coverage including HA pairs and legacy devices · Policy repository / GRC workspace
First move
This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.
Common gaps auditors find
- Three-way reconciliation drifts because asset discovery, scanner and patch tool use different identifiers
- Risk acceptance register exists but with no expiry, accumulating perpetual exemptions
- Cloud workloads patched by an automation that is not audited
- Remote endpoints excluded from one-month SLA because of unreliable VPN
- Network device HA pair patched on different schedules
- SLA reported as a percentage but not by criticality
Do this for your whole sheet
Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.
Build my evidence sheetPATCHOS-ML1 Patch Operating Systems (ML1) · PATCHOS-ML3 Patch Operating Systems (ML3)