Knowledge is Power

Sitewide Search

Search Bare Metal Cyber

Search courses, individual lessons, wiki entries, books, podcasts, magazine articles, Daily Cyber News, and Darwin.

Cross-Framework Defense Map

SC-3 — Security Function Isolation

Trace this SP 800-53 control to NIST CSF outcomes, CUI requirements, D3FEND defensive techniques, ATT&CK relationships, and related learning resources.

SC — System and Communications Protection · NIST SP 800-53 Release 5.2.0

Open the complete control page →
NIST SP 800-53 control context

SC-3 — Security Function Isolation

Security functions are isolated from nonsecurity functions by means of an isolation boundary implemented within a system via partitions and domains. The isolation boundary controls access to and protects the integrity of the hardware, software, and firmware that perform system security functions. Systems implement code separation in many ways, such as through the provision of security kernels via processor rings or processor modes. For non-kernel code, security function isolation is often achieved through file system protections that protect the code on disk and address space protections that protect executing code. Systems can restrict access to security functions using access control mechanisms and by implementing least privilege capabilities. While the ideal is for all code within the defined security function isolation boundary to only contain security-relevant code, it is sometimes

Read the official statement, discussion, parameters, enhancements, and assessment methods →

Outcome layer

NIST CSF 2.0 informative references

These CSF Subcategories list this base control or one of its enhancements in the imported NIST informative reference.

CUI protection layer

NIST SP 800-171 and SP 800-172

SP 800-171 requirements sourcing this control

No relationship is present in the currently imported source datasets.

SP 800-172 enhanced requirements sourcing this control

No relationship is present in the currently imported source datasets.
Defensive engineering layer

MITRE D3FEND techniques

Adversary layer

MITRE ATT&CK relationships

Curated mitigation mappings

Inferred behavior relationships

Experimental: These relationships are inferred through D3FEND and must be validated against architecture, telemetry, and threat context.

Show 124 additional relationships
Relationship boundaries

Use the map without overclaiming.

A CSF informative reference is not an equivalence statement. A source-control relationship is not proof of implementation. A D3FEND semantic relationship is not a product claim. An inferred ATT&CK link is a hypothesis for engineering analysis.

Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by NIST or MITRE. Informative references and cross-framework relationships support navigation and analysis; they do not establish compliance, applicability, equivalence, control inheritance, or guaranteed mitigation effectiveness.