What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on LOG-14 Failures and Anomalies Reporting?

Health checks and alerts on log source silence or ingestion failure; Notification routing to named accountable parties; Sample incidents of monitoring failure with notification time; Process documentation for monitoring failure handling.

What is the most common gap auditors find on LOG-14?

Log sources stop sending without any alert

CSA CCM v4.1 · LOG - Logging and Monitoring

`LOG-14` Failures and Anomalies Reporting

Define, put in place and assess processes, procedures and technical measures to report anomalies and failures in the monitoring system, with the accountable party notified at once.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, LOG-14. 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

SIEM / log platform

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

Health checks and alerts on log source silence or ingestion failure · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Notification routing to named accountable parties · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Sample incidents of monitoring failure with notification time · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Process documentation for monitoring failure handling · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

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

Common gaps auditors find

Log sources stop sending without any alert
Notifications not reaching the accountable owner
Monitoring failures not tracked to closure

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

LOG-13 Access Control Logs · SEF-01 Security Incident Management Policy and Procedures