What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on SI-16 Memory Protection?

SSP SI-16 statement describing memory protections (DEP, ASLR) enabled on hosts and applications; OS configuration or scan results confirming DEP and ASLR enabled; Input validation standards and code review checklist; Security monitoring alert tuning records; Patch management policy with severity based SLAs; Patch deployment reports across server, endpoint, and network estates.

What is the most common gap auditors find on SI-16?

EDR coverage gaps on legacy operating systems

FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline) · SI - System and Information Integrity

`SI-16` Memory Protection

Implement FedRAMP-defined safeguards to protect memory from unauthorized code execution (DEP, ASLR).

Source: FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline), SI-16. 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

easy

to go live

Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

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

OS configuration or scan results confirming DEP and ASLR enabled · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
Security monitoring alert tuning records · SIEM / log platform
Patch deployment reports across server, endpoint, and network estates · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

SSP SI-16 statement describing memory protections (DEP, ASLR) enabled on hosts and applications · Document repository
Input validation standards and code review checklist · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Patch management policy with severity based SLAs · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Automate the pull from your Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling. Scan schedule, findings and remediation age straight from the scanner; patch compliance from the patch console.

Common gaps auditors find

EDR coverage gaps on legacy operating systems
Anti malware signatures not updated on isolated network segments
Input validation handled inconsistently across microservices

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

SI-12 Information Management and Retention · SR-1 Policy and Procedures (SR-1)