What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on DSP-17 Sensitive Data Protection?

Sensitive data handling standard by lifecycle stage; Encryption, access control and DLP configurations for sensitive data; Sample tracing of a sensitive data type through its lifecycle; DLP alerts and responses; Breach records and remediation.

What is the most common gap auditors find on DSP-17?

Protection strong at rest but weak in exports and reports

CSA CCM v4.1 · DSP - Data Security and Privacy Lifecycle Management

`DSP-17` Sensitive Data Protection

Processes, procedures and technical measures are defined and put in place to keep sensitive data protected at every stage from creation to destruction.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, DSP-17. 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

moderate

to go live

Identity provider / directory

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

Encryption, access control and DLP configurations for sensitive data · Identity provider / directory
DLP alerts and responses · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Breach records and remediation · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Sensitive data handling standard by lifecycle stage · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Sample tracing of a sensitive data type through its lifecycle · Document repository

First move

Start with the 2 of 5 artefacts that already live in a system (Identity provider / directory); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Protection strong at rest but weak in exports and reports
DLP in monitor-only mode
Sensitive data types not defined

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

DSP-16 Data Retention and Deletion · DSP-18 Disclosure Notification