LLMPrompt CM.L2-3.4.9

I am a cybersecurity manager working for an organization that is a DoD contractor. I need to implement various security practices that conform to DoD's CMMC program at level 2. The CMMC program stipulates security practices that are based on NIST Special Publication 800-171 R2. For each security practice of CMMC Level 2, I need to show evidence that my organization is in compliance with CMMC. Each security practice has a security requirement and several assessment objectives that support that high-level security requirement.

I am assessing one of the assessment objectives within the practice CM.L2-3.4.9 – USER-INSTALLED SOFTWARE. The CMMC program has published the following assessment guidance, so take them into account as you formulate your response. Also refer to the attached CMMC Level 2 Assessment Guide, AssessmentGuideL2v2.pdf, for more context and information about the practice.

A. SECURITY REQUIREMENT: Control and monitor user-installed software.

ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES: Determine if: [a] a policy for controlling the installation of software by users is established; [b] installation of software by users is controlled based on the established policy; and [c] installation of software by users is monitored.

C. ASSESSMENT APPROACHES: I have three assessment approaches for assessing any security practice. They are listed as follows:

C1. Examine: The process of checking, inspecting, reviewing, observing, studying, or analyzing one or more assessment objectives to facilitate understanding, achieve clarification, or obtain evidence. The results are used to support the determination of security safeguard existence, functionality, correctness, completeness, and potential for improvement over time.

C2. Interview: The process of conducting discussion with individuals or groups of individuals in an organization to facilitate understanding, achieve clarification, or lead to the location of evidence. The results are used to support the determination of security safeguard existence, functionality, correctness, completeness, and potential for improvement over time.

C3. Test: The process of exercising one or more assessment objects under specified conditions to compare actual with expected behavior. The results are used to support the determination of security safeguard existence, functionality, correctness, completeness, and potential for improvement over time.

D. ASSESSMENT OBJECTS: Each assessment approach can yield potential assessment objects:

D1. Examine: [SELECT FROM: Configuration management policy; procedures addressing user installed software; configuration management plan; system security plan; system design documentation; system configuration settings and associated documentation; list of rules governing user-installed software; system monitoring records; system audit logs and records; continuous monitoring strategy; other relevant documents or records].

D2. Interview: [SELECT FROM: Personnel with responsibilities for governing user-installed software; personnel operating, using, or maintaining the system; personnel monitoring compliance with user-installed software policy; personnel with information security responsibilities; system or network administrators].

D3. Test: [SELECT FROM: Organizational processes governing user-installed software on the system; mechanisms enforcing rules or methods for governing the installation of software by users; mechanisms monitoring policy compliance].

E. DISCUSSION: Users can install software in organizational systems if provided the necessary privileges. To maintain control over the software installed, organizations identify permitted and prohibited actions regarding software installation through policies. Permitted software installations include updates and security patches to existing software and applications from organization-approved “app stores.” Prohibited software installations may include software with unknown or suspect pedigrees or software that organizations consider potentially malicious. The policies organizations select governing user-installed software may be organization-developed or provided by some external entity. Policy enforcement methods include procedural methods, automated methods, or both.

F. FURTHER DISCUSSION: Software that users have the ability to install is limited to items that the organization approves. When not controlled, users could install software that can create unnecessary risk. This risk applies both to the individual machine and to the larger operating environment. Policies and technical controls reduce risk to the organization by preventing users from installing unauthorized software.

G. Example: You are a system administrator. A user calls you for help installing a software package. They are receiving a message asking for a password because they do not have permission to install the software. You explain that the policy prohibits users from installing software without approval [a]. When you set up workstations for users, you do not provide administrative privileges. After the call, you redistribute the policy to all users ensuring everyone in the company is aware of the restrictions.

H. Potential Assessment Considerations: Are user controls in place to prohibit the installation of unauthorized software [a]? Is all software in use on the information systems approved [b]? Is there a mechanism in place to monitor the types of software a user is permitted to download (e.g., is there a white list of approved software) [c]?

I. EVIDENCE TYPES: Finally, I have four evidence types that I can collect. The definitions of the evidence types are as follows:

I1. Artifacts: Tangible and reviewable records that are the direct outcome of a practice or process being performed by a system, person, or persons performing a role in that practice, control, or process. (See CAP Glossary for additional details.)

I2. Document: Any tangible thing which constitutes or contains information and means the original and any copies (whether different from the originals because of notes made on such copies or otherwise) of all writing of every kind and description over which an agency has authority. (See CAP Glossary for additional details.)

I3. Physical Review: An on-premise observation of Evidence.

I4. Screen Share: Live observation ""over the shoulder"" of a user as they share their computer screen while performing a task.

J. KEY REFERENCES: NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 3.4.9