Control statement
Uniquely identify and authenticate organizational users and associate that unique identification with processes acting on behalf of those users.
Discussion
Organizations can satisfy the identification and authentication requirements by complying with the requirements in [HSPD 12](#f16e438e-7114-4144-bfe2-2dfcad8cb2d0) . Organizational users include employees or individuals who organizations consider to have an equivalent status to employees (e.g., contractors and guest researchers). Unique identification and authentication of users applies to all accesses other than those that are explicitly identified in [AC-14](#ac-14) and that occur through the authorized use of group authenticators without individual authentication. Since processes execute on behalf of groups and roles, organizations may require unique identification of individuals in group accounts or for detailed accountability of individual activity. Organizations employ passwords, physical authenticators, or biometrics to authenticate user identities or, in the case of multi-factor authentication, some combination thereof. Access to organizational systems is defined as either local access or network access. Local access is any access to organizational systems by users or processes acting on behalf of users, where access is obtained through direct connections without the use of networks. Network access is access to organizational systems by users (or processes acting on behalf of users) where access is obtained through network connections (i.e., nonlocal accesses). Remote access is a type of network access that involves communication through external networks. Internal networks include local area networks and wide area networks. The use of encrypted virtual private networks for network connections between organization-controlled endpoints and non-organization-controlled endpoints may be treated as internal networks with respect to protecting the confidentiality and integrity of information traversing the network. Identification and authentication requirements for non-organizational users are described in [IA-8](#ia-8).
From control text to operational evidence
Use Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users) 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 identity proofing, authentication strength, credential lifecycle, and trusted identity assertions.
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
- identity-proofing records
- authenticator issuance and revocation logs
- MFA and federation configuration
- credential inventory and rotation evidence
Common failure patterns
- strong authentication applied only to interactive users
- service credentials without ownership or rotation
- weak recovery paths that bypass MFA
- federated trust not reviewed after partner changes
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
- IA-02[01]organizational users are uniquely identified and authenticated;
- IA-02[02]the unique identification of authenticated organizational users is associated with processes acting on behalf of those users.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system security plan, system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- system developers
Test
- Organizational processes for uniquely identifying and authenticating users
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing identification and authentication capabilities
Related controls
These relationships come from the official OSCAL catalog. They indicate useful dependencies or context, not automatic inheritance or equivalence.
Related defensive techniques
D3FEND maps this base control or one of its enhancements to the following defensive techniques. The ontology relation label is preserved and does not by itself prove implementation or effectiveness.
MITRE D3FEND™ and the D3FEND logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Bare Metal Cyber is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.
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.
IA-2(1) — Multi-factor Authentication to Privileged Accounts
Implement multi-factor authentication for access to privileged accounts.
Official discussion
Multi-factor authentication requires the use of two or more different factors to achieve authentication. The authentication factors are defined as follows: something you know (e.g., a personal identification number [PIN]), something you have (e.g., a physical authenticator such as a cryptographic private key), or something you are (e.g., a biometric). Multi-factor authentication solutions that feature physical authenticators include hardware authenticators that provide time-based or challenge-response outputs and smart cards such as the U.S. Government Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card or the Department of Defense (DoD) Common Access Card (CAC). In addition to authenticating users at the system level (i.e., at logon), organizations may employ authentication mechanisms at the application level, at their discretion, to provide increased security. Regardless of the type of access (i.e., local, network, remote), privileged accounts are authenticated using multi-factor options appropriate for the level of risk. Organizations can add additional security measures, such as additional or more rigorous authentication mechanisms, for specific types of access.
Assessment objectives and methods
multi-factor authentication is implemented for access to privileged accounts.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system security plan
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing a multi-factor authentication capability
Related controls
IA-2(2) — Multi-factor Authentication to Non-privileged Accounts
Implement multi-factor authentication for access to non-privileged accounts.
Official discussion
Multi-factor authentication requires the use of two or more different factors to achieve authentication. The authentication factors are defined as follows: something you know (e.g., a personal identification number [PIN]), something you have (e.g., a physical authenticator such as a cryptographic private key), or something you are (e.g., a biometric). Multi-factor authentication solutions that feature physical authenticators include hardware authenticators that provide time-based or challenge-response outputs and smart cards such as the U.S. Government Personal Identity Verification card or the DoD Common Access Card. In addition to authenticating users at the system level, organizations may also employ authentication mechanisms at the application level, at their discretion, to provide increased information security. Regardless of the type of access (i.e., local, network, remote), non-privileged accounts are authenticated using multi-factor options appropriate for the level of risk. Organizations can provide additional security measures, such as additional or more rigorous authentication mechanisms, for specific types of access.
Assessment objectives and methods
multi-factor authentication for access to non-privileged accounts is implemented.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing a multi-factor authentication capability
Related controls
IA-2(3) — Local Access to Privileged Accounts
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
IA-2(4) — Local Access to Non-privileged Accounts
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
IA-2(5) — Individual Authentication with Group Authentication
When shared accounts or authenticators are employed, require users to be individually authenticated before granting access to the shared accounts or resources.
Official discussion
Individual authentication prior to shared group authentication mitigates the risk of using group accounts or authenticators.
Assessment objectives and methods
users are required to be individually authenticated before granting access to the shared accounts or resources when shared accounts or authenticators are employed.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing an authentication capability for group accounts
IA-2(6) — Access to Accounts —separate Device
Implement multi-factor authentication for [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.01] access to [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.02] such that:
- (a)One of the factors is provided by a device separate from the system gaining access; and
- (b)The device meets [Organization-defined: strength of mechanism requirements].
Official discussion
The purpose of requiring a device that is separate from the system to which the user is attempting to gain access for one of the factors during multi-factor authentication is to reduce the likelihood of compromising authenticators or credentials stored on the system. Adversaries may be able to compromise such authenticators or credentials and subsequently impersonate authorized users. Implementing one of the factors on a separate device (e.g., a hardware token), provides a greater strength of mechanism and an increased level of assurance in the authentication process.
Organization-defined parameters (3)
Assessment objectives and methods
- IA-02(06)(a)multi-factor authentication is implemented for [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.01] access to [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.02] such that one of the factors is provided by a device separate from the system gaining access;
- IA-02(06)(b)multi-factor authentication is implemented for [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.01] access to [Organization-defined: ia-02.06_odp.02] such that the device meets [Organization-defined: strength of mechanism requirements].
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing multi-factor authentication capability
Related controls
IA-2(7) — Network Access to Non-privileged Accounts — Separate Device
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
IA-2(8) — Access to Accounts — Replay Resistant
Implement replay-resistant authentication mechanisms for access to [Organization-defined: ia-02.08_odp].
Official discussion
Authentication processes resist replay attacks if it is impractical to achieve successful authentications by replaying previous authentication messages. Replay-resistant techniques include protocols that use nonces or challenges such as time synchronous or cryptographic authenticators.
Organization-defined parameters (1)
Assessment objectives and methods
replay-resistant authentication mechanisms for access to [Organization-defined: ia-02.08_odp] are implemented.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of privileged system accounts
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing identification and authentication capabilities
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing replay-resistant authentication mechanisms
IA-2(9) — Network Access to Non-privileged Accounts — Replay Resistant
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
IA-2(10) — Single Sign-on
Provide a single sign-on capability for [Organization-defined: system accounts and services].
Official discussion
Single sign-on enables users to log in once and gain access to multiple system resources. Organizations consider the operational efficiencies provided by single sign-on capabilities with the risk introduced by allowing access to multiple systems via a single authentication event. Single sign-on can present opportunities to improve system security, for example by providing the ability to add multi-factor authentication for applications and systems (existing and new) that may not be able to natively support multi-factor authentication.
Organization-defined parameters (1)
Assessment objectives and methods
a single sign-on capability is provided for [Organization-defined: system accounts and services].
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing single sign-on capability for system accounts and services
- procedures addressing identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- list of system accounts and services requiring single sign-on capability
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing identification and authentication capabilities
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing single sign-on capability for system accounts and services
IA-2(11) — Remote Access — Separate Device
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
IA-2(12) — Acceptance of PIV Credentials
Accept and electronically verify Personal Identity Verification-compliant credentials.
Official discussion
Acceptance of Personal Identity Verification (PIV)-compliant credentials applies to organizations implementing logical access control and physical access control systems. PIV-compliant credentials are those credentials issued by federal agencies that conform to FIPS Publication 201 and supporting guidance documents. The adequacy and reliability of PIV card issuers are authorized using [SP 800-79-2](#10963761-58fc-4b20-b3d6-b44a54daba03) . Acceptance of PIV-compliant credentials includes derived PIV credentials, the use of which is addressed in [SP 800-166](#e8552d48-cf41-40aa-8b06-f45f7fb4706c) . The DOD Common Access Card (CAC) is an example of a PIV credential.
Assessment objectives and methods
Personal Identity Verification-compliant credentials are accepted and electronically verified.
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- PIV verification records
- evidence of PIV credentials
- PIV credential authorizations
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing acceptance and verification of PIV credentials
IA-2(13) — Out-of-band Authentication
Implement the following out-of-band authentication mechanisms under [Organization-defined: conditions]: [Organization-defined: out-of-band authentication].
Official discussion
Out-of-band authentication refers to the use of two separate communication paths to identify and authenticate users or devices to an information system. The first path (i.e., the in-band path) is used to identify and authenticate users or devices and is generally the path through which information flows. The second path (i.e., the out-of-band path) is used to independently verify the authentication and/or requested action. For example, a user authenticates via a notebook computer to a remote server to which the user desires access and requests some action of the server via that communication path. Subsequently, the server contacts the user via the user’s cell phone to verify that the requested action originated from the user. The user may confirm the intended action to an individual on the telephone or provide an authentication code via the telephone. Out-of-band authentication can be used to mitigate actual or suspected "man-in the-middle" attacks. The conditions or criteria for activation include suspicious activities, new threat indicators, elevated threat levels, or the impact or classification level of information in requested transactions.
Organization-defined parameters (2)
Assessment objectives and methods
[Organization-defined: out-of-band authentication] mechanisms are implemented under [Organization-defined: conditions].
Examine
- Identification and authentication policy
- system security plan
- procedures addressing user identification and authentication
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- system-generated list of out-of-band authentication paths
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system operations responsibilities
- organizational personnel with account management responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system/network administrators
- system developers
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing out-of-band authentication capability
Related controls
Authoritative sources
- FIPS 140-3 ↗
- FIPS 201-2 ↗
- FIPS 202 ↗
- SP 800-63-3 ↗
- SP 800-73-4 ↗
- SP 800-76-2 ↗
- SP 800-78-4 ↗
- SP 800-79-2 ↗
- SP 800-156 ↗
- SP 800-166 ↗
- IR 7539 ↗
- IR 7676 ↗
- IR 7817 ↗
- IR 7849 ↗
- IR 7870 ↗
- IR 7874 ↗
- IR 7966 ↗
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.