What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 09 OS generic exploit mitigation (Excellent)?

Test showing a sample legacy application running with DEP and ASLR enforced rather than opted out; Exploit protection settings export showing DEP, ASLR and control flow protections enabled system-wide; Endpoint compliance report for exploit mitigation settings across the OS fleet; Records of application compatibility exceptions and their approval.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 09?

DEP and ASLR left opt-in, so legacy applications run without protection

ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents · Preventing Malware Delivery and Execution

`09` OS generic exploit mitigation (Excellent)

Operating system generic exploit mitigation e.g. Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Address Space Layout Randomisation (ASLR) and Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit (EMET).

Source: ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents, 09. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

easy

to go live

Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Exploit protection settings export showing DEP, ASLR and control flow protections enabled system-wide · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)
Endpoint compliance report for exploit mitigation settings across the OS fleet · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Test showing a sample legacy application running with DEP and ASLR enforced rather than opted out · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)
Records of application compatibility exceptions and their approval · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

none for this control

First move

Automate the pull from your Endpoint management (MDM / EDR). Device compliance report from the MDM (encryption, EDR agent, OS version) on a daily pull.

Common gaps auditors find

DEP and ASLR left opt-in, so legacy applications run without protection
Exploit mitigations disabled for problem applications without documented approval
Exploit protection configured on workstations but never on servers

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 sheet

08 Deny direct internet connectivity (Excellent) · 10 Server application hardening (Very Good)