RA-1 Policy and Procedures
Develop and review risk assessment policy at least annually.
6
artefacts
1
held by a system
2
at each review
hard
to go live
Policy repository / GRC workspace
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
- Vulnerability scan reports for internal, external, and authenticated scopes · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
- Penetration test report with retest evidence · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
- Risk acceptance memos signed by accountable executives · Policy repository / GRC workspace
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Control implementation statement for RA-1 citing the system mission and inheritance from common controls · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Risk register with likelihood, impact, and treatment owners · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Threat intelligence feed subscriptions and triage workflow · Policy repository / GRC workspace
First move
Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling on a schedule; put the documents under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a dated record with a named reviewer.
Common gaps auditors find
- High severity vulnerabilities exceed remediation SLA without risk acceptance
- Risk register entries lack named owner or due date
- Penetration tests scope narrow and exclude key applications
- Scan coverage gaps for containerised and ephemeral workloads
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 sheetPS-9 Position Descriptions. Incorporate security and privacy roles and responsibilities into organizational position descriptions · RA-2 Security Categorization