What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 1.2 Address Unauthorized Assets?

Written procedure for handling unknown devices naming the weekly cadence and response options; Weekly reconciliation tickets showing each unauthorised device and the action taken; NAC or switch logs showing quarantine or port shutdown events.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 1.2?

Discovery output is produced but nobody acts on unknown devices

CIS Controls v8.1 · CIS Control 1: Inventory and Control of Enterprise Assets

`1.2` Address Unauthorized Assets

Run a process at least weekly that deals with any device found on the network without authorisation. The enterprise chooses the response: take it off the network, block it from connecting remotely, or move it to quarantine. Implementation Groups: IG1, IG2 and IG3 (part of the IG1 essential cyber hygiene baseline, so every enterprise applies it). Asset type: Devices. Security function: Respond.

Source: CIS Controls v8.1, 1.2. 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 CIS Controls v8.1 in the compliance library.

Scope: Implementation Groups: IG1, IG2, IG3. Security function: Respond; asset type: Devices.

Each safeguard shows its Implementation Groups. IG1 is the essential baseline for every enterprise, IG2 adds to it, IG3 is all 153. Version 8.1 adds the Govern security function and asks for more processes to be documented; numbering is unchanged from v8.

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

Weekly reconciliation tickets showing each unauthorised device and the action taken · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)
NAC or switch logs showing quarantine or port shutdown events · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Written procedure for handling unknown devices naming the weekly cadence and response options · Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

Discovery output is produced but nobody acts on unknown devices
Cadence slips to monthly or ad hoc
No record of which response was chosen for each device

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

1.1 Establish and Maintain Detailed Enterprise Asset Inventory · 1.3 Utilize an Active Discovery Tool