What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on AM-02 Acceptable Use and Safe Handling of Assets Policy?

Acceptable use and handling standard covering every stage of the asset lifecycle; Hardening baselines it references for error handling, logging, encryption and authorisation settings; Support lifecycle list showing how products past vendor support are treated; Device management configuration for installation restrictions, malware protection and remote wipe.

What is the most common gap auditors find on AM-02?

Rules written for laptops with nothing said about virtual machines and container images

BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) · C5: Asset Management

`AM-02` Acceptable Use and Safe Handling of Assets Policy

Document, communicate and issue acceptable use and safe handling instructions spanning approval for acquisition through disposal, classification and labelling, secure configuration, software versions and patching, unsupported software, installation restrictions, malware protection, remote wipe, physical transport, incident handling and irreversible deletion at decommissioning.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), AM-02. 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 BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) in the compliance library.

The edition of the catalogue is not stamped here; check the edition your attestation is issued against.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

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

Device management configuration for installation restrictions, malware protection and remote wipe · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Acceptable use and handling standard covering every stage of the asset lifecycle · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Hardening baselines it references for error handling, logging, encryption and authorisation settings · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Support lifecycle list showing how products past vendor support are treated · Vendor register / contract repository

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Rules written for laptops with nothing said about virtual machines and container images
No stated treatment for software that has passed end of vendor support
Disposal described as reformatting rather than irreversible erasure of the data
Standard approved but never made available to the personnel who handle the assets

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

AM-01 Asset Inventory · AM-03 Commissioning of Hardware