What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on STA-07 SSRM Control Implementation?

List of customer-side or own-side responsibilities derived from provider matrices; Configuration evidence for those responsibilities, for example identity, encryption and logging settings; Internal audit or assessment reports covering the organisation's share; Remediation actions for gaps found.

What is the most common gap auditors find on STA-07?

Organisation assumes the provider covers controls that the matrix assigns to it

CSA CCM v4.1 · STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency, and Accountability

`STA-07` SSRM Control Implementation

The organisation puts in place, runs, and audits or assesses the parts of the shared security responsibility model that it is accountable for.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, STA-07. 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

Configuration evidence for those responsibilities, for example identity, encryption and logging settings · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Internal audit or assessment reports covering the organisation's share · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

List of customer-side or own-side responsibilities derived from provider matrices · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Remediation actions for gaps found · Document repository

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

Organisation assumes the provider covers controls that the matrix assigns to it
Own-side controls implemented but never assessed
No owner for responsibilities that fall between teams

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

STA-06 SSRM Documentation Review · STA-08 Supply Chain Inventory