EvidenceSheet

11.4.6 Service provider segmentation testing every six months

Where a service provider relies on segmentation to separate the CDE from other networks, it must run penetration tests on those segmentation controls: twice a year at a minimum, plus whenever segmentation controls or methods change; covering every segmentation control or method in use; in line with the penetration testing methodology the entity has defined; confirming the controls or methods are operational and effective and keep every out-of-scope system separated from the CDE; confirming the effectiveness of any isolation separating systems of different security levels (Requirement 2.2.3 refers); carried out by a tester who is qualified, whether an internal resource or an external third party; and with organizational independence of the tester (a QSA or ASV is not required). Applicability: applies only when the assessed entity is a service provider. Objective under the customized approach: where segmentation is used, technical testing, including after any changes, confirms it keeps working to wall off out-of-scope systems from the CDE.

Source: PCI DSS v4.0.1, 11.4.6. 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.

4
artefacts
1
held by a system
2
at each review
moderate
to go live
Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
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

  • Change records for segmentation changes with linked retest results · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Two segmentation test reports in the last 12 months, no more than six months apart · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
  • Tester qualification and independence evidence · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Scope showing every segmentation method and out-of-scope network tested · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

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

11.4.5 Annual segmentation penetration testing · 11.4.7 Multi-tenant providers support customer penetration testing