Control statement
- a.Assign a senior official as the authorizing official for the system;
- b.Assign a senior official as the authorizing official for common controls available for inheritance by organizational systems;
- c.Ensure that the authorizing official for the system, before commencing operations:
- 1.Accepts the use of common controls inherited by the system; and
- 2.Authorizes the system to operate;
- d.Ensure that the authorizing official for common controls authorizes the use of those controls for inheritance by organizational systems;
- e.Update the authorizations [Organization-defined: frequency].
Discussion
Authorizations are official management decisions by senior officials to authorize operation of systems, authorize the use of common controls for inheritance by organizational systems, and explicitly accept the risk to organizational operations and assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation based on the implementation of agreed-upon controls. Authorizing officials provide budgetary oversight for organizational systems and common controls or assume responsibility for the mission and business functions supported by those systems or common controls. The authorization process is a federal responsibility, and therefore, authorizing officials must be federal employees. Authorizing officials are both responsible and accountable for security and privacy risks associated with the operation and use of organizational systems. Nonfederal organizations may have similar processes to authorize systems and senior officials that assume the authorization role and associated responsibilities. Authorizing officials issue ongoing authorizations of systems based on evidence produced from implemented continuous monitoring programs. Robust continuous monitoring programs reduce the need for separate reauthorization processes. Through the employment of comprehensive continuous monitoring processes, the information contained in authorization packages (i.e., security and privacy plans, assessment reports, and plans of action and milestones) is updated on an ongoing basis. This provides authorizing officials, common control providers, and system owners with an up-to-date status of the security and privacy posture of their systems, controls, and operating environments. To reduce the cost of reauthorization, authorizing officials can leverage the results of continuous monitoring processes to the maximum extent possible as the basis for rendering reauthorization decisions.
Organization-defined parameters
These values must be resolved through the organization’s tailoring and governance process. Bracketed parameter references in the control text identify where a decision is required.
From control text to operational evidence
Use Authorization as a testable risk decision. Translate the official statement into accountable people, repeatable processes, configured technology, and evidence that demonstrates the outcome over time. In this family, pay particular attention to assessment independence, authorization evidence, remediation, and continuous monitoring.
Implementation workflow
- Define the control boundary, responsible owner, inherited portions, and systems or processes in scope.
- Resolve each organization-defined parameter before declaring the control implemented.
- Document how the implementation satisfies every clause of the official control statement.
- Collect evidence as a normal byproduct of operation rather than only before an assessment.
- Review exceptions, changes, and monitoring results on a risk-based cadence.
Evidence examples
- assessment plans and reports
- plans of action and milestones
- authorization decisions and risk acceptances
- continuous monitoring results
Common failure patterns
- control status based only on owner assertion
- findings closed without evidence
- assessment scope that misses inherited services
- monitoring data disconnected from authorization decisions
Questions practitioners should ask
- What risk decision is this control intended to support in this system?
- Which parts are implemented locally, inherited, shared, or not applicable—and what evidence supports that decision?
- Do the documented narrative, deployed configuration, operating process, and collected evidence agree?
- What event or threshold requires the implementation to be reviewed or changed?
Assessment objectives and methods
Show the assessment objective
- CA-06a.a senior official is assigned as the authorizing official for the system;
- CA-06b.a senior official is assigned as the authorizing official for common controls available for inheritance by organizational systems;
- CA-06c.
- CA-06c.01before commencing operations, the authorizing official for the system accepts the use of common controls inherited by the system;
- CA-06c.02before commencing operations, the authorizing official for the system authorizes the system to operate;
- CA-06d.the authorizing official for common controls authorizes the use of those controls for inheritance by organizational systems;
- CA-06e.the authorizations are updated [Organization-defined: frequency].
Examine
- Assessment, authorization, and monitoring policy
- procedures addressing authorization
- system security plan, privacy plan, assessment report, plan of action and milestones
- authorization statement
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with authorization responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities
Test
- Mechanisms that facilitate authorizations and updates
Related controls
These relationships come from the official OSCAL catalog. They indicate useful dependencies or context, not automatic inheritance or equivalence.
Control enhancements
Enhancements add specificity, strength, or scope to the base control. Baseline badges show explicit selections in the official SP 800-53B OSCAL profiles.
CA-6(1) — Joint Authorization — Intra-organization
Employ a joint authorization process for the system that includes multiple authorizing officials from the same organization conducting the authorization.
Official discussion
Assigning multiple authorizing officials from the same organization to serve as co-authorizing officials for the system increases the level of independence in the risk-based decision-making process. It also implements the concepts of separation of duties and dual authorization as applied to the system authorization process. The intra-organization joint authorization process is most relevant for connected systems, shared systems, and systems with multiple information owners.
Assessment objectives and methods
- CA-06(01)[01]a joint authorization process is employed for the system;
- CA-06(01)[02]the joint authorization process employed for the system includes multiple authorizing officials from the same organization conducting the authorization.
Examine
- Assessment, authorization, and monitoring policy
- procedures addressing authorization
- system security plan
- privacy plan
- assessment report
- plan of action and milestones
- authorization statement
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with authorization responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities
Test
- Mechanisms that facilitate authorizations and updates
Related controls
CA-6(2) — Joint Authorization — Inter-organization
Employ a joint authorization process for the system that includes multiple authorizing officials with at least one authorizing official from an organization external to the organization conducting the authorization.
Official discussion
Assigning multiple authorizing officials, at least one of whom comes from an external organization, to serve as co-authorizing officials for the system increases the level of independence in the risk-based decision-making process. It implements the concepts of separation of duties and dual authorization as applied to the system authorization process. Employing authorizing officials from external organizations to supplement the authorizing official from the organization that owns or hosts the system may be necessary when the external organizations have a vested interest or equities in the outcome of the authorization decision. The inter-organization joint authorization process is relevant and appropriate for connected systems, shared systems or services, and systems with multiple information owners. The authorizing officials from the external organizations are key stakeholders of the system undergoing authorization.
Assessment objectives and methods
- CA-06(02)[01]a joint authorization process is employed for the system;
- CA-06(02)[02]the joint authorization process employed for the system includes multiple authorizing officials with at least one authorizing official from an organization external to the organization conducting the authorization.
Examine
- Assessment, authorization, and monitoring policy
- procedures addressing authorization
- system security plan
- privacy plan
- assessment report
- plan of action and milestones
- authorization statement
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with authorization responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities
Test
- Mechanisms that facilitate authorizations and updates
Related controls
Authoritative sources
Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by NIST. Official control requirements and interpretations remain with NIST and the responsible authorizing organization.