What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 1.2.8 NSC configuration files secured and consistent?

Access control lists or repository permissions for stored NSC configuration files and infrastructure-as-code repositories; Comparison of backed-up or startup configurations against running configurations; Integrity monitoring or version control history for NSC configuration files; Records of where configuration backups and archives are stored and who can reach them.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 1.2.8?

Infrastructure-as-code repository for security groups is readable and writable by all developers

PCI DSS v4.0.1 · Req 1: Network Security Controls

`1.2.8` NSC configuration files secured and consistent

Configuration files for network security controls must be (a) protected against unauthorised access and (b) kept in line with the configurations actually running on the network. Applicability: a configuration file means anything, file or setting, that sets up or synchronises NSCs, including scripts, automated and system-based controls, settings, infrastructure as code and other parameters held in backups, archives or remote storage. Customized approach objective: NSCs cannot be set up or altered using configuration objects, files included, that are not trusted.

Source: PCI DSS v4.0.1, 1.2.8. 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 PCI DSS v4.0.1 in the compliance library.

Version 4.0.1 is the active version; 4.0 has been retired. Appendix A1 applies only to multi-tenant service providers, A2 only to card-present POS POI terminals that still use SSL or early TLS, and A3 only when a payment brand or acquirer requires it. Which requirements apply to you follows your validation type.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

easy

to go live

Cloud console / configuration management

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

Comparison of backed-up or startup configurations against running configurations · Cloud console / configuration management
Integrity monitoring or version control history for NSC configuration files · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Records of where configuration backups and archives are stored and who can reach them · Backup / DR tooling

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Access control lists or repository permissions for stored NSC configuration files and infrastructure-as-code repositories · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Automate the pull from your Cloud console / configuration management. Configuration snapshots and change history from the cloud console or IaC repository, diffed against the baseline.

Common gaps auditors find

Infrastructure-as-code repository for security groups is readable and writable by all developers
Startup configuration differs from running configuration, so a reboot would restore an outdated ruleset
Configuration backups stored on a shared file server without access restriction

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

1.2.7 Six-monthly review of NSC configurations · 1.3.1 Inbound CDE traffic restricted