What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on RS.MI-01 Incidents are contained?

Containment playbook by incident type; Network isolation tooling deployment evidence; Account suspension workflow; Containment effectiveness review post incident; Approval records for containment actions with business impact.

What is the most common gap auditors find on RS.MI-01?

Containment delayed pending approvals

NIST CSF 2.0 · RS - Respond

`RS.MI-01` Incidents are contained

Incidents are contained. Control from NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 framework, domain: RS - Respond.

Source: NIST CSF 2.0, RS.MI-01. 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

Network isolation tooling deployment evidence · Source control / CI pipeline

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Containment effectiveness review post incident · Document repository
Approval records for containment actions with business impact · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Containment playbook by incident type · Document repository
Account suspension workflow · 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

Containment delayed pending approvals
Tooling exists but operators untrained
Effectiveness review absent
Approvals not captured

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

RS.MA-05 The criteria for initiating incident recovery are applied · RS.MI-02 Incidents are eradicated