03.11.09E — Indicators of Compromise

Official NIST requirement content

Security requirement

Discover, collect, and distribute to [Organization-defined: sources], indicators of compromise provided by [Organization-defined: personnel or roles] .

Official NIST discussion

Discussion

Indicators of compromise (IOCs) are forensic artifacts from intrusions that are identified on organizational systems at the host or network level. IOCs provide valuable information on systems that have been compromised. IOCs can include the creation of registry key values. IOCs for network traffic include universal resource locator (URL) or protocol elements that indicate malicious code command and control servers. The rapid distribution and adoption of IOCs can improve information security by reducing the time that systems and organizations are vulnerable to the same exploit or attack. Threat indicators, signatures, tactics, techniques, procedures, and other IOCs may be available via government and non-government cooperatives, including the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST), the Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Center (CERT/CC), the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT), and the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity Information Sharing Program. This requirement enhances SP 800-171 requirement 03.14.06.

Official organization-defined parameters

Tailoring decisions required

Resolve these values through the governing organization’s approved tailoring and risk-management process before declaring the requirement implemented.

sourcesorganization-defined sourcessources that provide indicators of compromise are defined.

personnel or rolesorganization-defined personnel or rolespersonnel or roles to whom indicators of compromise are to be distributed are defined.

Official protection strategy classifications

Protection strategies supported

These classifications are carried from the official SP 800-172 OSCAL record and help explain the enhanced requirement’s defensive purpose.

PS-DLODamage-Limiting Operations

Bare Metal Cyber interpretation

Implementation perspective

Treat Indicators of Compromise 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 threat, vulnerability, likelihood, impact, criticality, and risk-response decisions for the CUI environment.

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

risk assessments and threat models
vulnerability findings and prioritization records
supply-chain risk assessments
risk response and acceptance decisions

Common failure patterns

risk registers detached from technical evidence
vulnerability severity treated as business impact
assessments not updated after material change
accepted risks without owners or expiration

Official NIST SP 800-172A content

Assessment objectives and methods

Assessment objectives (3)

indicators of compromise provided by [Organization-defined: sources] are discovered.
indicators of compromise provided by [Organization-defined: sources] are collected.
indicators of compromise provided by [Organization-defined: sources] are distributed to [Organization-defined: personnel or roles].

Examine

System and information integrity policy
system and information integrity procedures
procedures addressing system monitoring
system design documentation
system monitoring tools and techniques documentation
system configuration settings and associated documentation
system monitoring logs or records
system audit records
system security plan
other relevant documents or records

Interview

System/network administrators
personnel with information security responsibilities
system developers
personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
personnel responsible for monitoring system hosts

Test

Processes for system monitoring
processes for the discovery, collection, distribution, and use of indicators of compromise
mechanisms supporting and/or implementing a system monitoring capability
mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the discovery, collection, distribution, and use of indicators of compromise

Official source-control relationships

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.

Source controlSI-4(24)Open SP 800-53 control →

Source record

Authoritative sources

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.