What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on SC-5(3) Denial-of-service Protection | Detection and Monitoring?

System and communications protection policy; Procedures addressing denial-of-service protection; System design documentation; System monitoring tools and techniques documentation; System configuration settings and associated documentation; System audit records.

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · SC - System and Communications Protection

`SC-5(3)` Denial-of-service Protection | Detection and Monitoring

(a) Employ the following monitoring tools to detect indicators of denial-of-service attacks against, or launched from, the system: organization-defined monitoring tools; and (b) Monitor the following system resources to determine if sufficient resources exist to prevent effective denial-of-service attacks: organization-defined system resources.

Source: NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, SC-5(3). 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

Test of Mechanisms/tools implementing system monitoring for denial-of-service attacks · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

System audit records · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

System and communications protection policy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Procedures addressing denial-of-service protection · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System design documentation · Document repository
System monitoring tools and techniques documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System configuration settings and associated documentation · Policy repository / GRC workspace
System security plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your SIEM / log platform 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 monitoring tools detect indicators of denial-of-service attacks against or from the system
System resources are not monitored to confirm sufficient resources exist to prevent effective attacks

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

SC-5(2) Denial-of-service Protection | Capacity, Bandwidth, and Redundancy · SC-6 Resource Availability