What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on PR.DS-10 The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected?

Memory protection technology deployment evidence; Confidential computing usage for regulated data; Application level protections for data in use; Tokenization and masking standards; Audit on data in use exposure during processing.

What is the most common gap auditors find on PR.DS-10?

Data in use unprotected during analytics

NIST CSF 2.0 · PR - Protect

`PR.DS-10` The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected

The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected. Control from NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 framework, domain: PR - Protect.

Source: NIST CSF 2.0, PR.DS-10. 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

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

Memory protection technology deployment evidence · Source control / CI pipeline

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Audit on data in use exposure during processing · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Confidential computing usage for regulated data · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Application level protections for data in use · Document repository
Tokenization and masking standards · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Source control / CI pipeline 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

Data in use unprotected during analytics
Confidential computing pilot only
Masking absent in non production environments
Memory protection disabled for compatibility

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

PR.DS-02 The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-transit are protected · PR.DS-11 Backups of data are created, protected, maintained, and tested