MA-02 Controlled Maintenancema-2
Whether an AWS call fetches evidence for this control, and what to run. Its Rev5 baselines, the indicators that reach it and the FedRAMP guidance attached to it open below.
Nothing names itNo recipe names MA-02. 7 reach an indicator it shares, which is adjacency and not coverage — worth reading, not worth recording as evidence for this control.
Collect evidence (0)
Authored AWS and pipeline recipes whose output is evidence for MA-02. This mapping is this project’s opinion (AWS overlay v3.0.0, pipeline overlay v0.8.0), versioned separately from the dataset — the upstream FedRAMP rules name none of these tools.
No authored recipe names MA-02. The nearest authored work is below.
Systems Manager Maintenance Windows and their execution history prove scheduled maintenance was defined, ran, and what it touched — the schedule, the tasks, the targets and the outcome of each run. The approval before the work, the review of maintenance records afterwards, and all physical maintenance and component replacement, which is AWS's responsibility, are outside that output.
A recipe would call:
This project’s assessment (automation register v0.9.0, reviewed 2026-08-04), versioned separately from the dataset and from the evidence overlays. It is an opinion about the AWS surface on that date, and the surface moves.
The KSIs that reach it are KSI-CMT-LMC, KSI-SVC-EIS — that is where the authoring would land. Browse /collect for the whole authored corpus.
Reaches the same indicator, not MA-02
These recipes prove a KSI that reaches it. None of them claims MA-02 — treat them as neighbours worth reading, not as coverage.
- Who changed what, when, and from which state to which — CloudTrail's record of every mutating API call and Config's per-resource configuration history, plus, where Change Manager is in use, the change-request executions that carry the approval via KSI-CMT-LMCaws
- Every running instance built from an image you never approved and every node carrying denylisted software, together with proof that an automated action was configured for those findings and a record of what it did when one fired via KSI-CMT-LMCaws
- For every change that reached the assessed branch, the automated verification that ran against it — which workflows ran, on which commit, and what each concluded — together with the two things that decide whether those runs were a condition of the change or merely adjacent to it: the rule that made the checks required, and the platform's own per-push record of whether that rule held, failed, or was bypassed. The runs alone are activity; the rule and the per-push record are what make them a gate. via KSI-CMT-LMCpipeline
- AWS Config compliance results proving the network boundary is controlled — no security group exposes SSH to the internet, groups open to 0.0.0.0/0 only allow authorized ports, and every VPC's default security group denies all traffic via KSI-SVC-EISaws
- AWS Config compliance results proving continuous security monitoring is switched on account-wide — GuardDuty threat detection enabled (optionally centralized to a delegated admin) and Security Hub aggregating control findings via KSI-SVC-EISaws
What NIST requires of MA-02
The control statement from NIST 800-53 Rev5, verbatim. Square brackets are organization-defined parameters — yours to set, not FedRAMP's to dictate.
a. Schedule, document, and review records of maintenance, repair, and replacement on system components in accordance with manufacturer or vendor specifications and/or organizational requirements; b. Approve and monitor all maintenance activities, whether performed on site or remotely and whether the system or system components are serviced on site or removed to another location; c. Require that [personnel or roles] explicitly approve the removal of the system or system components from organizational facilities for off-site maintenance, repair, or replacement; d. Sanitize equipment to remove the following information from associated media prior to removal from organizational facilities for off-site maintenance, repair, or replacement: [information]; e. Check all potentially impacted controls to verify that the controls are still functioning properly following maintenance, repair, or replacement actions; and f. Include the following information in organizational maintenance records: [information].
NIST SP 800-53 Rev5 catalog 5.2.0, from usnistgov/oscal-content at 78650f0. The FedRAMP dataset carries no control text; this is borrowed and pinned.
Rev5 baseline membership
Membership is the whole relationship — a baseline is a set of control ids. Class A carries no baseline at all. The Low/Moderate/High labels are an interpretation from control counts, not a dataset fact.
KSI indicators reaching this control (2)
Under 20x, these indicators are how this control is demonstrated — automated KSI evidence stands in for narrative control evidence.
Pages exist for the 209 controls reached by at least one KSI. Baseline-only controls are the orphans on /coverage. Control titles and full text live in the NIST catalog, not this dataset.