What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on AU-9 Protection of Audit Information?

SSP AU-9 statement describing how logs are made immutable or write-once and who may administer the logging tools; Log bucket or SIEM access policy export restricting delete and modify rights to a small named group; Audit and accountability policy with retention periods defined; List of auditable events and log source inventory; SIEM ingestion configuration showing all in scope systems; Log review procedures with assigned analyst owners.

What is the most common gap auditors find on AU-9?

Privileged user activity not isolated for independent review

FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline) · AU - Audit and Accountability

`AU-9` Protection of Audit Information

Protect audit information and tools from unauthorized access, modification, deletion.

Source: FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline), AU-9. 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 FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline) in the compliance library.

A FedRAMP baseline is a subset of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, enhancements included.

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

Log bucket or SIEM access policy export restricting delete and modify rights to a small named group · SIEM / log platform
SIEM ingestion configuration showing all in scope systems · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

SSP AU-9 statement describing how logs are made immutable or write-once and who may administer the logging tools · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Audit and accountability policy with retention periods defined · Policy repository / GRC workspace
List of auditable events and log source inventory · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Log review procedures with assigned analyst owners · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 2 of 6 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

Privileged user activity not isolated for independent review
Critical log sources missing from the SIEM with no detection coverage
Audit log retention shorter than the policy mandated period

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

AU-8 Time Stamps · AU-9(2) Store on Separate Physical Systems or Components