EvidenceSheet

PL-2 System Security and Privacy Plans

a. Develop security and privacy plans for the system that: 1. Are consistent with the organization’s enterprise architecture; 2. Explicitly define the constituent system components; 3. Describe the operational context of the system in terms of mission and business processes; 4. Identify the individuals that fulfill system roles and responsibilities; 5. Identify the information types processed, stored, and transmitted by the system; 6. Provide the security categorization of the system, including supporting rationale; 7. Describe any specific threats to the system that are of concern to the organization; 8. Provide the results of a privacy risk assessment for systems processing personally identifiable information; 9. Describe the operational environment for the system and any dependencies on or connections to other systems or system components; 10. Provide an overview of the security and privacy requirements for the system; 11. Identify any relevant control baselines or overlays, if applicable; 12. Describe the controls in place or planned for meeting the security and privacy requirements, including a rationale for any tailoring decisions; 13. Include risk determinations for security and privacy architecture and design decisions; 14. Include security- and privacy-related activities affecting the system that require planning and coordination with organization-defined individuals or groups; and 15. Are reviewed and approved by the authorizing official or designated representative prior to plan implementation. b. Distribute copies of the plans and communicate subsequent changes to the plans to organization-defined personnel or roles; c. Review the plans organization-defined frequency; d. Update the plans to address changes to the system and environment of operation or problems identified during plan implementation or control assessments; and e. Protect the plans from unauthorized disclosure and modification.

Source: NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, PL-2. 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.

10
artefacts
0
held by a system
3
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

  • Records of system security and privacy plan reviews and updates · Data governance / DLP tooling
  • Risk assessments · Document repository
  • Test of Organizational processes for system security and privacy plan development, review, update, and approval; mechanisms supporting the system security and privacy plan · Data governance / DLP tooling

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Security and privacy planning policy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Procedures addressing system security and privacy plan development and implementation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Procedures addressing security and privacy plan reviews and updates · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Enterprise architecture documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • System security plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Privacy plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Security and privacy architecture and design 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

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

PL-1 Policy and Procedures · PL-4 Rules of Behavior