What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on SI-7(15) Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity | Code Authentication?

List of components subject to cryptographic authentication; Pipeline or configuration step performing signature verification before install; Records of components rejected for failing authentication.

What is the most common gap auditors find on SI-7(15)?

Verification applied to vendor packages but not to internally built artefacts

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

`SI-7(15)` Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity | Code Authentication

Implement cryptographic mechanisms to authenticate FedRAMP-defined software or firmware components prior to installation.

Source: FedRAMP High (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline), SI-7(15). 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

Source control / CI pipeline

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

Pipeline or configuration step performing signature verification before install · Source control / CI pipeline

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Records of components rejected for failing authentication · Identity provider / directory

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

List of components subject to cryptographic authentication · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 3 artefacts that already live in a system (Source control / CI pipeline); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Verification applied to vendor packages but not to internally built artefacts
No record kept of verification failures

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-7(7) Integration of Detection and Response · SI-8 Spam Protection