What is the most common gap auditors find on RS.AN-03?

Procedure assumes on premise scenarios only

`RS.AN-03` Analysis is performed to establish what has taken place during an incident and the root cause of the incident

Q: What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on RS.AN-03 Analysis is performed to establish what has taken place during an incident and the root cause of the incident?

Incident investigation procedure; Forensic analysis reports with timeline reconstruction; Tooling evidence list (memory captures, disk images, log exports); Analyst peer review records; Quality assurance findings on investigation outputs.

Analysis is performed to establish what has taken place during an incident and the root cause of the incident

Source: NIST CSF 2.0, RS.AN-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

Tooling evidence list (memory captures, disk images, log exports) · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Forensic analysis reports with timeline reconstruction · Document repository
Analyst peer review records · Document repository
Quality assurance findings on investigation outputs · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Incident investigation procedure · 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

Procedure assumes on premise scenarios only
Timelines rely on system clocks not synchronized
Memory captures absent for cloud workloads
Peer review skipped under time pressure

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

RC.RP-06 The end of incident recovery is declared based on criteria, and incident-related documentation is completed · RS.AN-06 Actions performed during an investigation are recorded, and the records' integrity and provenance are…