KSI-INR-RIRReviewing Incident Response Procedures

The mark says whether an authored AWS recipe fetches evidence for the control; the tier strip shows which Rev5 baselines also require it — where automated KSI evidence doubles as Rev5 control evidence. ▪▪▫ = in the class B, C and D baselines, left to right

• ●recipe— an authored recipe collects evidence for this control
• ◐KSI only— a Key Security Indicator reaches it, but no recipe is authored yet
• ○orphan— no Key Security Indicator reaches it — a person writes it up instead

• ●recipe · 3 recipesIR-04·3IR▪▪▪In baseline B, C, D
• ●recipe · 3 recipesIR-04 (01)·3IR▫▪▪In baseline C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-06IR▪▪▪In baseline B, C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-06 (01)IR▫▪▪In baseline C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-06 (03)IR▫▪▪In baseline C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-07IR▪▪▪In baseline B, C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-07 (01)IR▫▪▪In baseline C, D
• ●recipe · 3 recipesIR-08·3IR▪▪▪In baseline B, C, D
• ●recipe · 1 recipeIR-08 (01)IR▫▫▫In no class baseline
• ●recipe · 1 recipeSI-04 (05)SI▫▪▪In baseline C, D

Collect evidence (1)

Authored AWS recipes whose output is evidence for KSI-INR-RIR. This mapping is this project’s opinion (overlay v3.0.0), versioned separately from the dataset — the upstream FedRAMP rules name none of these tools.

• ◐partialSecurity Hub finding workflow status plus GuardDuty detection coverage, showing incident response procedures are exercised: enabled insights, automated response actions routed through EventBridge, automated notifications, and Systems Manager Automation documents that encode response stepsmonthlycli
  securityhub-incident-review-proceduresAWS Security Hub · Amazon GuardDuty · AWS Systems Manager · Amazon CloudWatch

  IR-4 wants incident handling capability, IR-4.1 wants automated incident handling, IR-6/6.1/6.3 want reporting to authorities with automated support, IR-7/7.1 want response assistance/coordination, IR-8/8.1 want the incident response plan and its updates, and SI-4.5 wants system monitoring. The evidence here is the infrastructure of response, not the act of responding: resolved findings show the workflow was used, enabled GuardDuty features show detection is active, EventBridge rules show automated routing exists, SSM Automation documents show response steps are encoded as code, and CloudWatch alarms show monitoring. What none of this proves is that the procedures are effective, that notifications reached the right authorities within SLA, or that the incident response plan was actually updated after the event. Those are narrative gaps filled by the plan document, notification records, and AARs. The workflow status is the only pass/fail field here — a finding stuck in NEW or NOTIFIED rather than RESOLVED is a control failure. Substitute your detector ID.

Default evidence owed by every indicator (5)

From info.default_artifacts.KSI — no indicator carries its own artifacts; requirement-specific evidence lives on /evidence.

• Explanation of measures (and their objectives) that demonstrate the Key Security Indicator, or an explanation of the reason and resulting risk to customers for not having measures available for that Key Security Indicator.
• Explanation of the cycle for any measures that are implemented persistently (if applicable).
• Verification that the measures demonstrate the Key Security Indicator, or that the reason for not having them is accepted.
• Verification that the automation in place is accurate and sufficient to demonstrate appropriate measures for the Key Security Indicator, or that automation is not necessary for each measure.
• Validation that the measures are accurately produced and are in place and working as intended, or that the reason for not having them is valid.

Defined terms used (3)

Incident

Has the meaning given in 44 USC § 3552 (b)(2) which is "an occurrence that (A) actually or imminently jeopardizes, without lawful authority, the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of information or an information system; or (B) constitutes a violation or imminent threat of violation of law, security policies, security procedures, or acceptable use policies."

Persistently

Occurring in a firm, steady way that is repeated over a long period of time in spite of obstacles or difficulties. Persistent activities may vary between actors, may occur irregularly, and may include interruptions or waiting periods between cycles. These attributes of persistent activities should be intentional, understood, and documented; the status of persistent activities will always be known.

Vulnerability Response

The systematic process of tracking, evaluating, mitigating, monitoring, remediating, assessing exploitation, reporting, and otherwise managing detected vulnerabilities.

• ●1 authored recipeKSI-INR-AARGenerating After Action Reports
• ●1 authored recipeKSI-INR-RIRReviewing Incident Response Proceduresyou are here
• ●1 authored recipeKSI-INR-RPIReviewing Past Incidents