Control statement
Require the developer of the system, system component, or system service to provide the following training on the correct use and operation of the implemented security and privacy functions, controls, and/or mechanisms: [Organization-defined: training].
Discussion
Developer-provided training applies to external and internal (in-house) developers. Training personnel is essential to ensuring the effectiveness of the controls implemented within organizational systems. Types of training include web-based and computer-based training, classroom-style training, and hands-on training (including micro-training). Organizations can also request training materials from developers to conduct in-house training or offer self-training to organizational personnel. Organizations determine the type of training necessary and may require different types of training for different security and privacy functions, controls, and mechanisms.
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 Developer-provided Training 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 secure acquisition, engineering, development lifecycle, supplier expectations, and system integrity by design.
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
- security requirements in contracts and specifications
- architecture and design review records
- development lifecycle evidence
- supplier assessment and acceptance records
Common failure patterns
- security requirements added after procurement
- supplier claims accepted without evidence
- development exceptions become permanent
- security architecture not tied to testable requirements
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
the developer of the system, system component, or system service is required to provide [Organization-defined: training] on the correct use and operation of the implemented security and privacy functions, controls, and/or mechanisms.
Examine
- System and services acquisition policy
- system and services acquisition procedures
- procedures addressing developer-provided training
- solicitation documentation
- acquisition documentation
- service level agreements
- acquisition contracts for the system, system component, or system service
- organizational security and privacy training policy
- developer-provided training materials
- training records
- system security plan
- privacy plan
- privacy impact assessment
- privacy risk assessment documentation
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with system and service acquisition responsibilities
- organizational personnel with information security and privacy responsibilities
- system developer
- external or internal (in-house) developers with training responsibilities for the system, system component, or information system service
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.