What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on I&S-05 Production and Non-Production Environments?

Architecture or account structure showing separate production and non-production environments; Access control lists showing different access to each environment; Data masking or synthetic data procedure and tool configuration; Approval records for any use of production data outside production; Data classification inventory per environment.

What is the most common gap auditors find on I&S-05?

Production copies restored into test without masking

CSA CCM v4.1 · I&S - Infrastructure Security

`I&S-05` Production and Non-Production Environments

Keep production and non-production environments apart to lower the chance of sensitive production data turning up in non-production use, and sanitise or otherwise protect production data before any approved non-production use of it.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, I&S-05. 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

Data masking or synthetic data procedure and tool configuration · Cloud console / configuration management

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Approval records for any use of production data outside production · Cloud console / configuration management

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Architecture or account structure showing separate production and non-production environments · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Access control lists showing different access to each environment · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Data classification inventory per environment · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Cloud console / configuration management 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

Production copies restored into test without masking
Same administrator credentials valid in both environments
No approval step for copying production data

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

I&S-04 OS Hardening and Base Controls · I&S-06 Segmentation and Segregation