LLMResponse CM.L2-3.4.9.c

Evidence Prioritization for CM.L2-3.4.9, Objective C

Based on the CMMC Level 2 Assessment Guide and your requirements, I'll provide guidance on how to prioritize evidence types and assessment approaches for demonstrating compliance with assessment objective "[c] installation of software by users is monitored."

Evidence Type Ranking

From most valuable to least valuable for this specific assessment objective:

1. **Artifacts** - This would be your highest priority evidence type because monitoring activities generate tangible outputs. Key artifacts include system logs showing installation attempts, monitoring tool reports, alerts generated when unauthorized software is detected, and audit records.

2. **Screen Share** - Demonstrating live monitoring dashboards, log review processes, or alert systems provides compelling evidence of active monitoring. This shows not just that logs exist, but that they're actively being used.

3. **Documents** - Monitoring procedures, schedules for review, and documentation of monitoring tools provide context for how monitoring is conducted, but don't directly prove monitoring is occurring.

4. **Physical Review** - While potentially useful for examining physical monitoring stations or security operations centers, this is generally less critical for software installation monitoring.

Assessment Approach Prioritization

1. **Test** - This should be your primary approach because it directly demonstrates monitoring capabilities:

  - Show how attempted software installations are captured in logs
  - Demonstrate alert mechanisms when unauthorized software is detected
  - Test reporting capabilities for software inventory changes

2. **Examine** - This would be your secondary approach to verify the implementation:

  - System monitoring records
  - System audit logs showing installation attempts
  - Continuous monitoring strategy documentation
  - Reports generated from monitoring systems

3. **Interview** - While still important, interviews provide supporting rather than primary evidence:

  - Personnel responsible for monitoring compliance with software policy
  - System administrators who review monitoring data
  - Security personnel who respond to unauthorized installation alerts

Implementation Recommendation

1. Start with testing the monitoring mechanisms by demonstrating:

  - A software installation attempt and showing how it appears in logs or alerts
  - The regular review process for installation logs
  - How unauthorized installations are detected and reported

2. Follow with examination of historical monitoring data:

  - Audit logs showing past installation attempts
  - Reports showing software inventory changes over time
  - Documentation of responses to unauthorized installation attempts

3. Support with interviews of personnel who explain:

  - How often monitoring data is reviewed
  - Who receives alerts about unauthorized installations
  - What actions are taken when unauthorized software is detected

For objective [c], the focus is on proving that monitoring actually occurs, not just that monitoring capabilities exist. Evidence should demonstrate both the technical capability to capture installation events and the organizational processes to review and act on that information.