`PR.IR-03` Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations

Q: What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on PR.IR-03 Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations?

Resilience architecture patterns for critical services; Failover and failback tested with evidence; Capacity planning and load testing reports; Chaos engineering exercise outcomes; Resilience targets traced to business outcomes.

Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations. Control from NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 framework, domain: PR - Protect.

Source: NIST CSF 2.0, PR.IR-03. 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

Capacity planning and load testing reports · Cloud console / configuration management

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Failover and failback tested with evidence · Backup / DR tooling
Chaos engineering exercise outcomes · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Resilience architecture patterns for critical services · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Resilience targets traced to business outcomes · Document repository

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Cloud console / configuration management 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

Failback never tested
Resilience patterns inconsistent across teams
Chaos engineering absent in production
Targets not refreshed against business change

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.IR-02 The organization's technology assets are protected from environmental threats · PR.IR-04 Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained