What is the most common gap auditors find on ID.RA-09?

Peer review absent for time pressured assessments

`ID.RA-09` The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use

Q: What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on ID.RA-09 The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use?

Quality assurance procedure for risk assessments; Peer review records on assessment outputs; Source citation requirements for risk inputs; Audit trail of changes to risk records; Independent validation of high impact assessments.

The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use

Source: NIST CSF 2.0, ID.RA-09. 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 CSF 2.0 in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Document repository

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

Audit trail of changes to risk records · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Peer review records on assessment outputs · Document repository
Independent validation of high impact assessments · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Quality assurance procedure for risk assessments · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Source citation requirements for risk inputs · Document repository

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

Peer review absent for time pressured assessments
Sources not cited for risk inputs
Audit trail incomplete
Validation overridden by leadership

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

ID.RA-08 Processes for receiving, analyzing, and responding to vulnerability disclosures are established · ID.RA-10 Critical suppliers are assessed prior to acquisition