6.3.1 Vulnerability identification and risk ranking
Security vulnerabilities must be identified and managed so that: new vulnerabilities come to light through sources of vulnerability information that the industry recognises, such as alerts issued by national and international computer emergency response teams (CERTs); each vulnerability receives a risk ranking based on industry good practice and its possible impact; the rankings at minimum pick out every vulnerability the environment treats as critical or high-risk; and vulnerabilities in bespoke and custom software and in third-party software (such as operating systems and databases) are all included. It applies to all entities. Applicability: this is separate from, and additional to, the internal and external vulnerability scans (11.3.1, 11.3.2); it is a process to actively watch industry sources and for the entity to assign its own risk ranking to each vulnerability. Objective under the customized approach: new system and software vulnerabilities able to affect cardholder or sensitive authentication data are tracked, catalogued and risk assessed.
Source: PCI DSS v4.0.1, 6.3.1. 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.
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
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
- Evidence that bespoke software libraries and third-party OS and database components are monitored · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
- Tickets or meeting records showing recent advisories were triaged · Vulnerability scanner / patch tooling
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- List of subscribed vulnerability sources such as CERT advisories, vendor bulletins and the NVD · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Documented risk ranking methodology defining high and critical criteria · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Vulnerability register showing ranking, affected components and owners · Policy repository / GRC workspace
First move
Common gaps auditors find
- Entity relies solely on quarterly scan output and does not monitor advisories
- Ranking copies the CVSS score with no consideration of the entity's environment
- Open-source libraries used in bespoke applications are not tracked for advisories
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 sheet6.2.4 Engineering techniques against common software attacks · 6.3.2 Inventory of bespoke software and components