What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on CM-3(5) Configuration Change Control | Automated Security Response?

System security plan; Configuration management policy; Procedures addressing system configuration change control; Configuration management plan; System design documentation; System architecture and configuration documentation.

What is the most common gap auditors find on CM-3(5)?

No automatic security response occurs when baseline configurations change without authorization

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · CM - Configuration Management

`CM-3(5)` Configuration Change Control | Automated Security Response

Implement the following security responses automatically if baseline configurations are changed in an unauthorized manner: organization-defined security responses.

Source: NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, CM-3(5). 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 NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 in the compliance library.

Base controls and their enhancements. Which apply follows the baseline you are assessed against (for example FedRAMP Moderate or High, or the low, moderate and high baselines of SP 800-53B). Text in square brackets is a parameter your organisation sets.

artefacts

held by a system

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. 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

Procedures addressing system configuration change control · Cloud console / configuration management
Alerts/notifications of unauthorized baseline configuration changes · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

System audit records · Cloud console / configuration management
Test of Organizational processes for configuration change control; automated mechanisms implementing security responses to unauthorized changes to the baseline configurations · Cloud console / configuration management

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

System security plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Configuration management policy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Configuration management plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System design documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System architecture and configuration documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System configuration settings and associated documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 2 system-held artefacts from your Cloud console / configuration management 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

No automatic security response occurs when baseline configurations change without authorization
The security responses to unauthorized baseline changes were never defined

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

CM-3(4) Configuration Change Control | Security and Privacy Representatives · CM-3(6) Configuration Change Control | Cryptography Management