Control statement
Mark [Organization-defined: system hardware components] indicating the impact level or classification level of the information permitted to be processed, stored, or transmitted by the hardware component.
Discussion
Hardware components that may require marking include input and output devices. Input devices include desktop and notebook computers, keyboards, tablets, and smart phones. Output devices include printers, monitors/video displays, facsimile machines, scanners, copiers, and audio devices. Permissions controlling output to the output devices are addressed in [AC-3](#ac-3) or [AC-4](#ac-4) . Components are marked to indicate the impact level or classification level of the system to which the devices are connected, or the impact level or classification level of the information permitted to be output. Security marking refers to the use of human-readable security attributes. Security labeling refers to the use of security attributes for internal system data structures. Security marking is generally not required for hardware components that process, store, or transmit information determined by organizations to be in the public domain or to be publicly releasable. However, organizations may require markings for hardware components that process, store, or transmit public information in order to indicate that such information is publicly releasable. Marking of system hardware components reflects applicable laws, executive orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards.
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 Component Marking 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 physical access, facility protection, environmental safeguards, and visitor accountability.
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
- badge and visitor logs
- physical access reviews
- facility diagrams and sensor records
- environmental and power test results
Common failure patterns
- logical security assumptions invalidated by physical access
- tailgating and visitor exceptions normalized
- critical infrastructure not included in access reviews
- environmental alarms not integrated into response
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
[Organization-defined: system hardware components] are marked indicating the impact level or classification level of the information permitted to be processed, stored, or transmitted by the hardware component.
Examine
- Physical and environmental protection policy
- procedures addressing component marking
- list of component marking security attributes
- component inventory
- information types and their impact/classification level
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with component marking responsibilities
- organizational personnel with component inventory responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information categorization/classification responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
Test
- Organizational processes for component marking
- automated mechanisms supporting and/or implementing component marking
Related controls
These relationships come from the official OSCAL catalog. They indicate useful dependencies or context, not automatic inheritance or equivalence.
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.