Knowledge is Power

Sitewide Search

Search Bare Metal Cyber

Search courses, individual lessons, wiki entries, books, podcasts, magazine articles, Daily Cyber News, and Darwin.

NIST SP 800-53 Learning Center

PL-8 — Security and Privacy Architectures

Read the official control and assessment content, then use the separately labeled Bare Metal Cyber perspective to connect the requirement to implementation, evidence, and sustained operation.

2Enhancements
1Parameters
3Baseline memberships
3Assessment methods

PL — Planning · NIST SP 800-53 Release 5.2.0

ModerateHighPrivacy
Official NIST control content

Control statement

  1. a.Develop security and privacy architectures for the system that:
    1. 1.Describe the requirements and approach to be taken for protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of organizational information;
    2. 2.Describe the requirements and approach to be taken for processing personally identifiable information to minimize privacy risk to individuals;
    3. 3.Describe how the architectures are integrated into and support the enterprise architecture; and
    4. 4.Describe any assumptions about, and dependencies on, external systems and services;
  2. b.Review and update the architectures [Organization-defined: frequency] to reflect changes in the enterprise architecture; and
  3. c.Reflect planned architecture changes in security and privacy plans, Concept of Operations (CONOPS), criticality analysis, organizational procedures, and procurements and acquisitions.
Official NIST discussion

Discussion

The security and privacy architectures at the system level are consistent with the organization-wide security and privacy architectures described in [PM-7](#pm-7) , which are integral to and developed as part of the enterprise architecture. The architectures include an architectural description, the allocation of security and privacy functionality (including controls), security- and privacy-related information for external interfaces, information being exchanged across the interfaces, and the protection mechanisms associated with each interface. The architectures can also include other information, such as user roles and the access privileges assigned to each role; security and privacy requirements; types of information processed, stored, and transmitted by the system; supply chain risk management requirements; restoration priorities of information and system services; and other protection needs. [SP 800-160-1](#e3cc0520-a366-4fc9-abc2-5272db7e3564) provides guidance on the use of security architectures as part of the system development life cycle process. [OMB M-19-03](#c5e11048-1d38-4af3-b00b-0d88dc26860c) requires the use of the systems security engineering concepts described in [SP 800-160-1](#e3cc0520-a366-4fc9-abc2-5272db7e3564) for high value assets. Security and privacy architectures are reviewed and updated throughout the system development life cycle, from analysis of alternatives through review of the proposed architecture in the RFP responses to the design reviews before and during implementation (e.g., during preliminary design reviews and critical design reviews). In today’s modern computing architectures, it is becoming less common for organizations to control all information resources. There may be key dependencies on external information services and service providers. Describing such dependencies in the security and privacy architectures is necessary for developing a comprehensive mission and business protection strategy. Establishing, developing, documenting, and maintaining under configuration control a baseline configuration for organizational systems is critical to implementing and maintaining effective architectures. The development of the architectures is coordinated with the senior agency information security officer and the senior agency official for privacy to ensure that the controls needed to support security and privacy requirements are identified and effectively implemented. In many circumstances, there may be no distinction between the security and privacy architecture for a system. In other circumstances, security objectives may be adequately satisfied, but privacy objectives may only be partially satisfied by the security requirements. In these cases, consideration of the privacy requirements needed to achieve satisfaction will result in a distinct privacy architecture. The documentation, however, may simply reflect the combined architectures. [PL-8](#pl-8) is primarily directed at organizations to ensure that architectures are developed for the system and, moreover, that the architectures are integrated with or tightly coupled to the enterprise architecture. In contrast, [SA-17](#sa-17) is primarily directed at the external information technology product and system developers and integrators. [SA-17](#sa-17) , which is complementary to [PL-8](#pl-8) , is selected when organizations outsource the development of systems or components to external entities and when there is a need to demonstrate consistency with the organization’s enterprise architecture and security and privacy architectures.

Official OSCAL parameters

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.

frequencyfrequency for review and update to reflect changes in the enterprise architecture;
Original Bare Metal Cyber perspective

From control text to operational evidence

Use Security and Privacy Architectures 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 security and privacy planning, architecture, rules of behavior, and lifecycle alignment.

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

  • system security and privacy plans
  • architecture and data-flow diagrams
  • rules-of-behavior acknowledgments
  • plan review and approval records

Common failure patterns

  • plans copied from templates without system specificity
  • diagrams that do not match deployed services
  • inherited controls claimed without provider evidence
  • plans updated only before assessment

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?
Official NIST SP 800-53A content

Assessment objectives and methods

Show the assessment objective
  1. PL-08a.
    1. PL-08a.01a security architecture for the system describes the requirements and approach to be taken for protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of organizational information;
    2. PL-08a.02a privacy architecture describes the requirements and approach to be taken for processing personally identifiable information to minimize privacy risk to individuals;
    3. PL-08a.03
      1. PL-08a.03[01]a security architecture for the system describes how the architecture is integrated into and supports the enterprise architecture;
      2. PL-08a.03[02]a privacy architecture for the system describes how the architecture is integrated into and supports the enterprise architecture;
    4. PL-08a.04
      1. PL-08a.04[01]a security architecture for the system describes any assumptions about and dependencies on external systems and services;
      2. PL-08a.04[02]a privacy architecture for the system describes any assumptions about and dependencies on external systems and services;
  2. PL-08b.changes in the enterprise architecture are reviewed and updated [Organization-defined: frequency] to reflect changes in the enterprise architecture;
  3. PL-08c.
    1. PL-08c.[01]planned architecture changes are reflected in the security plan;
    2. PL-08c.[02]planned architecture changes are reflected in the privacy plan;
    3. PL-08c.[03]planned architecture changes are reflected in the Concept of Operations (CONOPS);
    4. PL-08c.[04]planned architecture changes are reflected in criticality analysis;
    5. PL-08c.[05]planned architecture changes are reflected in organizational procedures;
    6. PL-08c.[06]planned architecture changes are reflected in procurements and acquisitions.

Examine

  • Security and privacy planning policy
  • procedures addressing information security and privacy architecture development
  • procedures addressing information security and privacy architecture reviews and updates
  • enterprise architecture documentation
  • information security and privacy architecture documentation
  • system security plan
  • privacy plan
  • security and privacy CONOPS for the system
  • records of information security and privacy architecture reviews and updates
  • other relevant documents or records

Interview

  • Organizational personnel with security and privacy planning and plan implementation responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy architecture development responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities

Test

  • Organizational processes for developing, reviewing, and updating the information security and privacy architecture
  • mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the development, review, and update of the information security and privacy architecture
Official relationships

Related controls

These relationships come from the official OSCAL catalog. They indicate useful dependencies or context, not automatic inheritance or equivalence.

Official NIST enhancements

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.

Official NIST control enhancement

PL-8(1) — Defense in Depth

Design the security and privacy architectures for the system using a defense-in-depth approach that:

  1. (a)Allocates [Organization-defined: controls] to [Organization-defined: locations and architectural layers] ; and
  2. (b)Ensures that the allocated controls operate in a coordinated and mutually reinforcing manner.
Official discussion

Organizations strategically allocate security and privacy controls in the security and privacy architectures so that adversaries must overcome multiple controls to achieve their objective. Requiring adversaries to defeat multiple controls makes it more difficult to attack information resources by increasing the work factor of the adversary; it also increases the likelihood of detection. The coordination of allocated controls is essential to ensure that an attack that involves one control does not create adverse, unintended consequences by interfering with other controls. Unintended consequences can include system lockout and cascading alarms. The placement of controls in systems and organizations is an important activity that requires thoughtful analysis. The value of organizational assets is an important consideration in providing additional layering. Defense-in-depth architectural approaches include modularity and layering (see [SA-8(3)](#sa-8.3) ), separation of system and user functionality (see [SC-2](#sc-2) ), and security function isolation (see [SC-3](#sc-3)).

Organization-defined parameters (2)
controlscontrols to be allocated are defined;
locations and architectural layerslocations and architectural layers are defined;
Assessment objectives and methods
  1. PL-08(01)(a)
    1. PL-08(01)(a)[01]the security architecture for the system is designed using a defense-in-depth approach that allocates [Organization-defined: controls] to [Organization-defined: locations and architectural layers];
    2. PL-08(01)(a)[02]the privacy architecture for the system is designed using a defense-in-depth approach that allocates [Organization-defined: controls] to [Organization-defined: locations and architectural layers];
  2. PL-08(01)(b)
    1. PL-08(01)(b)[01]the security architecture for the system is designed using a defense-in-depth approach that ensures the allocated controls operate in a coordinated and mutually reinforcing manner;
    2. PL-08(01)(b)[02]the privacy architecture for the system is designed using a defense-in-depth approach that ensures the allocated controls operate in a coordinated and mutually reinforcing manner.

Examine

  • Security and privacy planning policy
  • procedures addressing information security and privacy architecture development
  • enterprise architecture documentation
  • information security and privacy architecture documentation
  • system security plan
  • privacy plan
  • security and privacy CONOPS for the system
  • other relevant documents or records

Interview

  • Organizational personnel with security and privacy planning and plan implementation responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy architecture development responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities

Test

  • Organizational processes for designing the information security and privacy architecture
  • mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the design of the information security and privacy architecture
Related controls
Official NIST control enhancement

PL-8(2) — Supplier Diversity

Require that [Organization-defined: controls] allocated to [Organization-defined: locations and architectural layers] are obtained from different suppliers.

Official discussion

Information technology products have different strengths and weaknesses. Providing a broad spectrum of products complements the individual offerings. For example, vendors offering malicious code protection typically update their products at different times, often developing solutions for known viruses, Trojans, or worms based on their priorities and development schedules. By deploying different products at different locations, there is an increased likelihood that at least one of the products will detect the malicious code. With respect to privacy, vendors may offer products that track personally identifiable information in systems. Products may use different tracking methods. Using multiple products may result in more assurance that personally identifiable information is inventoried.

Organization-defined parameters (2)
controlscontrols to be allocated are defined;
locations and architectural layerslocations and architectural layers are defined;
Assessment objectives and methods

[Organization-defined: controls] that are allocated to [Organization-defined: locations and architectural layers] are required to be obtained from different suppliers.

Examine

  • Security and privacy planning policy
  • procedures addressing information security and privacy architecture development
  • enterprise architecture documentation
  • information security and privacy architecture documentation
  • system security plan
  • privacy plan
  • security and privacy CONOPS for the system
  • IT acquisitions policy
  • other relevant documents or records

Interview

  • Organizational personnel with security and privacy planning and plan implementation responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy architecture development responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with acquisition responsibilities
  • organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities

Test

  • Organizational processes for obtaining information security and privacy safeguards from different suppliers
Related controls
Source record

Authoritative sources