What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on IA-5(14) Authenticator Management | Managing Content of PKI Trust Stores?

Identification and authentication policy; Procedures addressing authenticator management; System security plan; Organizational methodology for managing content of PKI trust stores across installed all platforms; System design documentation; System configuration settings and associated documentation.

What is the most common gap auditors find on IA-5(14)?

PKI trust stores on browsers, operating systems and applications are managed separately with no organization-wide methodology

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · IA - Identification and Authentication

`IA-5(14)` Authenticator Management | Managing Content of PKI Trust Stores

For PKI-based authentication, employ an organization-wide methodology for managing the content of PKI trust stores installed across all platforms, including networks, operating systems, browsers, and applications.

Source: NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, IA-5(14). 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

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Test of Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing PKI-based authenticator management capability; mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the PKI trust store capability · Key management / PKI

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Identification and authentication policy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Procedures addressing authenticator management · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System security plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Organizational methodology for managing content of PKI trust stores across installed all platforms · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System design documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System configuration settings and associated documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Enterprise security architecture documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Enterprise architecture documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

PKI trust stores on browsers, operating systems and applications are managed separately with no organization-wide methodology
Trust stores contain certificates the organization has not approved

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

IA-5(13) Authenticator Management | Expiration of Cached Authenticators · IA-5(15) Authenticator Management | GSA-approved Products and Services