EvidenceSheet
PCI DSS v4.0.1 · Req 6: Secure Systems and Software

6.4.3 Payment page script management

Every script on the payment page that is loaded and run in the consumer's browser must be controlled such that: a method is in place to confirm that each script is authorised; a method is in place to ensure the integrity of each script; and an inventory of all such scripts is kept, with a written business or technical justification explaining why each one is needed. It applies to all entities with payment pages. Applicability: covers scripts loaded from the entity's own environment and from third and fourth parties, and scripts on the entity's pages that embed a TPSP or payment processor payment page or form (for example, via iframes); it does not cover scripts inside the TPSP's or processor's embedded page or form, which that TPSP or processor must manage under this requirement. Objective under the customized approach: unauthorised code cannot run in the payment page as the consumer's browser renders it. Future-dated: treated as a best practice up to 31 March 2025 and mandatory since then.

Source: PCI DSS v4.0.1, 6.4.3. 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.

5
artefacts
2
held by a system
1
at each review
moderate
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

  • Integrity controls configuration such as sub-resource integrity hashes, Content Security Policy or tag manager restrictions · Cloud console / configuration management
  • Output from a script monitoring tool showing detected changes and their handling · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Script authorisation records or workflow approvals · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Payment page script inventory with written justification for each script · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • TPSP attestation or responsibility matrix for embedded payment forms · Vendor register / contract repository

First move

Start with the 2 of 5 artefacts that already live in a system (Cloud console / configuration management); 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

6.4.2 Automated web attack detection and prevention · 6.5.1 Change control procedure for production