Security requirement
Ensure that unencrypted static authenticators are not embedded in applications or other forms of static storage.
Discussion
In addition to applications, other forms of static storage include access scripts and function keys. Organizations exercise caution when determining whether embedded or stored authenticators are encrypted or unencrypted. If authenticators are used in the manner stored, then those representations are considered unencrypted authenticators. This requirement enhances SP 800-171 requirement 03.05.07.
Protection strategies supported
These classifications are carried from the official SP 800-172 OSCAL record and help explain the enhanced requirement’s defensive purpose.
Implementation perspective
Treat No Embedded Unencrypted Static Authenticators as an enhanced CUI protection outcome for elevated threat conditions that must be reflected in the system boundary, documented implementation, operational behavior, and assessment evidence. Pay particular attention to identity proofing, authentication strength, authenticator lifecycle, and resistance to credential compromise.
- Confirm the federal agency selected this enhanced requirement for the critical program or high-value asset and identify the CUI system components, services, users, and external connections in scope.
- Resolve every organization-defined parameter through an approved governance and tailoring process.
- Map each clause of the requirement to an accountable owner, implementation mechanism, and evidence source.
- Verify that inherited and shared implementations are supported by current provider evidence and responsibility boundaries.
- Collect evidence during normal operation and review changes, exceptions, and deficiencies on a risk-based cadence.
Questions to ask
- Which critical-program or high-value-asset CUI, data flows, users, and services are protected by this enhanced requirement?
- Which portions are implemented locally, inherited, shared, or not applicable, and what evidence supports that determination?
- Do the system security plan, deployed configuration, operating process, and assessment evidence tell the same story?
- What change, incident, or threshold should trigger reassessment?
Evidence and validation
- identity proofing records
- authenticator issuance and revocation logs
- MFA and federation configuration
- credential inventories and rotation evidence
Common failure patterns
- MFA applied only to interactive users
- service credentials without ownership or rotation
- weak recovery paths that bypass strong authentication
- federated trust not reviewed after partner changes
Assessment objectives and methods
Assessment objectives (1)
unencrypted static authenticators are not embedded in applications or other forms of static storage.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing authenticator management
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- logical access scripts
- application code reviews for detecting unencrypted static authenticators
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Personnel with authenticator management responsibilities
- personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing authenticator management capabilities
- mechanisms implementing authentication in applications
Source NIST SP 800-53 controls
These controls are referenced by the official SP 800-172 Rev. 3 OSCAL record. Open the corresponding control pages for complete control text, enhancements, D3FEND mappings, and related learning.
Authoritative sources
- NIST SP 800-172 Revision 3 official publication ↗
- NIST SP 800-172A Revision 3 official publication ↗
- NIST OSCAL Content release used for this import ↗
Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by NIST. The official publications, the responsible federal agency, and the governing contract or agreement determine applicability, tailoring, assessment depth, and required implementation.