What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on DCS-02 Off-Site Equipment Disposal Policy and Procedures?

Approved off-site equipment disposal procedure distinguishing reuse, resale and physical destruction; Certificates of destruction or sanitisation from the disposal vendor, tied to asset serial numbers; Disposal register sample matched to the asset inventory for laptops, removable drives and field equipment; Sanitisation method standard referenced (for example NIST SP 800-88 purge or destroy) and tool output logs; Review history showing annual and change-driven updates.

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

Laptops and devices used by remote staff returned to stock without verified wiping

CSA CCM v4.1 · DCS - Datacenter Security

`DCS-02` Off-Site Equipment Disposal Policy and Procedures

Policies and procedures govern how equipment used away from the organisation's premises is securely disposed of. Equipment that is not physically destroyed must go through a data destruction method that makes the information unrecoverable. Each year, and again after any significant change, the documents are revisited.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, DCS-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 CSA CCM v4.1 in the compliance library.

Version 4.1 adds 11 controls (among them API security, log sanitisation and a service bill of materials) and renumbers several domains. CSA accepts v4.0.x during its transition; if your STAR assessment is still on v4.0.1, check the numbering against it.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

Review history showing annual and change-driven updates · Data governance / DLP tooling

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Certificates of destruction or sanitisation from the disposal vendor, tied to asset serial numbers · Vendor register / contract repository
Disposal register sample matched to the asset inventory for laptops, removable drives and field equipment · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Approved off-site equipment disposal procedure distinguishing reuse, resale and physical destruction · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Sanitisation method standard referenced (for example NIST SP 800-88 purge or destroy) and tool output logs · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Data governance / DLP tooling on a schedule; put the documents under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Laptops and devices used by remote staff returned to stock without verified wiping
Destruction certificates list quantities but not serial numbers, so they cannot be matched to the inventory
No defined method for devices that cannot be wiped, such as failed drives

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

DCS-01 Physical and Environmental Security Policy and Procedures · DCS-03 Off-Site Transfer Authorization Policy and Procedures