Control statement
- a.Implement [Organization-defined: si-03_odp.01] malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code;
- b.Automatically update malicious code protection mechanisms as new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures;
- c.Configure malicious code protection mechanisms to:
- 1.Perform periodic scans of the system [Organization-defined: frequency] and real-time scans of files from external sources at [Organization-defined: si-03_odp.03] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational policy; and
- 2.[Organization-defined: si-03_odp.04] ; and send alert to [Organization-defined: personnel or roles] in response to malicious code detection; and
- d.Address the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the system.
Discussion
System entry and exit points include firewalls, remote access servers, workstations, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can also be encoded in various formats contained within compressed or hidden files or hidden in files using techniques such as steganography. Malicious code can be inserted into systems in a variety of ways, including by electronic mail, the world-wide web, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of system vulnerabilities. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Malicious code protection mechanisms include both signature- and nonsignature-based technologies. Nonsignature-based detection mechanisms include artificial intelligence techniques that use heuristics to detect, analyze, and describe the characteristics or behavior of malicious code and to provide controls against such code for which signatures do not yet exist or for which existing signatures may not be effective. Malicious code for which active signatures do not yet exist or may be ineffective includes polymorphic malicious code (i.e., code that changes signatures when it replicates). Nonsignature-based mechanisms also include reputation-based technologies. In addition to the above technologies, pervasive configuration management, comprehensive software integrity controls, and anti-exploitation software may be effective in preventing the execution of unauthorized code. Malicious code may be present in commercial off-the-shelf software as well as custom-built software and could include logic bombs, backdoors, and other types of attacks that could affect organizational mission and business functions. In situations where malicious code cannot be detected by detection methods or technologies, organizations rely on other types of controls, including secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. Organizations may determine that, in response to the detection of malicious code, different actions may be warranted. For example, organizations can define actions in response to malicious code detection during periodic scans, the detection of malicious downloads, or the detection of maliciousness when attempting to open or execute files.
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 Malicious Code Protection 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 flaw remediation, malicious-code protection, monitoring, integrity, and trustworthy information handling.
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
- patch and remediation records
- malware protection configuration
- monitoring alerts and response records
- integrity validation and exception reports
Common failure patterns
- patch compliance hides unsupported assets
- alerts generated without response ownership
- exceptions never expire
- integrity monitoring excludes critical configurations
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
- SI-03a.
- SI-03a.[01][Organization-defined: si-03_odp.01] malicious code protection mechanisms are implemented at system entry and exit points to detect malicious code;
- SI-03a.[02][Organization-defined: si-03_odp.01] malicious code protection mechanisms are implemented at system entry and exit points to eradicate malicious code;
- SI-03b.malicious code protection mechanisms are updated automatically as new releases are available in accordance with organizational configuration management policy and procedures;
- SI-03c.
- SI-03c.01
- SI-03c.01[01]malicious code protection mechanisms are configured to perform periodic scans of the system [Organization-defined: frequency];
- SI-03c.01[02]malicious code protection mechanisms are configured to perform real-time scans of files from external sources at [Organization-defined: si-03_odp.03] as the files are downloaded, opened, or executed in accordance with organizational policy;
- SI-03c.02
- SI-03c.02[01]malicious code protection mechanisms are configured to [Organization-defined: si-03_odp.04] in response to malicious code detection;
- SI-03c.02[02]malicious code protection mechanisms are configured to send alerts to [Organization-defined: personnel or roles] in response to malicious code detection;
- SI-03c.01
- SI-03d.the receipt of false positives during malicious code detection and eradication and the resulting potential impact on the availability of the system are addressed.
Examine
- System and information integrity policy
- system and information integrity procedures
- configuration management policy and procedures
- procedures addressing malicious code protection
- malicious code protection mechanisms
- records of malicious code protection updates
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- scan results from malicious code protection mechanisms
- record of actions initiated by malicious code protection mechanisms in response to malicious code detection
- system audit records
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- System/network administrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- organizational personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
- organizational personnel responsible for malicious code protection
- organizational personnel with configuration management responsibilities
Test
- Organizational processes for employing, updating, and configuring malicious code protection mechanisms
- organizational processes for addressing false positives and resulting potential impacts
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing, employing, updating, and configuring malicious code protection mechanisms
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing malicious code scanning and subsequent actions
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.
SI-3(1) — Central Management
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(2) — Automatic Updates
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(3) — Non-privileged Users
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(4) — Updates Only by Privileged Users
Update malicious code protection mechanisms only when directed by a privileged user.
Official discussion
Protection mechanisms for malicious code are typically categorized as security-related software and, as such, are only updated by organizational personnel with appropriate access privileges.
Assessment objectives and methods
malicious code protection mechanisms are updated only when directed by a privileged user.
Examine
- System and information integrity policy
- system and information integrity procedures
- procedures addressing malicious code protection
- list of privileged users on system
- system design documentation
- malicious code protection mechanisms
- records of malicious code protection updates
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- System/network administrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system developers
- organizational personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
- organizational personnel responsible for malicious code protection
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing malicious code protection capabilities
Related controls
SI-3(5) — Portable Storage Devices
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(6) — Testing and Verification
- (a)Test malicious code protection mechanisms [Organization-defined: frequency] by introducing known benign code into the system; and
- (b)Verify that the detection of the code and the associated incident reporting occur.
Official discussion
None.
Organization-defined parameters (1)
Assessment objectives and methods
- SI-03(06)(a)malicious code protection mechanisms are tested [Organization-defined: frequency] by introducing known benign code into the system;
- SI-03(06)(b)
- SI-03(06)(b)[01]the detection of (benign test) code occurs;
- SI-03(06)(b)[02]the associated incident reporting occurs.
Examine
- System and information integrity policy
- system and information integrity procedures
- procedures addressing malicious code protection
- system design documentation
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- test cases
- records providing evidence of test cases executed on malicious code protection mechanisms
- system audit records
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- System/network administrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- organizational personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
- organizational personnel responsible for malicious code protection
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the testing and verification of malicious code protection capabilities
Related controls
SI-3(7) — Nonsignature-based Detection
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(8) — Detect Unauthorized Commands
- (a)Detect the following unauthorized operating system commands through the kernel application programming interface on [Organization-defined: system hardware components]: [Organization-defined: unauthorized operating system commands] ; and
- (b)[Organization-defined: si-03.08_odp.03].
Official discussion
Detecting unauthorized commands can be applied to critical interfaces other than kernel-based interfaces, including interfaces with virtual machines and privileged applications. Unauthorized operating system commands include commands for kernel functions from system processes that are not trusted to initiate such commands as well as commands for kernel functions that are suspicious even though commands of that type are reasonable for processes to initiate. Organizations can define the malicious commands to be detected by a combination of command types, command classes, or specific instances of commands. Organizations can also define hardware components by component type, component, component location in the network, or a combination thereof. Organizations may select different actions for different types, classes, or instances of malicious commands.
Organization-defined parameters (3)
Assessment objectives and methods
- SI-03(08)(a)[Organization-defined: unauthorized operating system commands] are detected through the kernel application programming interface on [Organization-defined: system hardware components];
- SI-03(08)(b)[Organization-defined: si-03.08_odp.03] is/are performed.
Examine
- System and information integrity policy
- system and information integrity procedures
- procedures addressing malicious code protection
- system design documentation
- malicious code protection mechanisms
- warning messages sent upon the detection of unauthorized operating system command execution
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- system audit records
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- System/network administrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- system developers
- organizational personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
- organizational personnel responsible for malicious code protection
Test
- Mechanisms supporting and/or implementing malicious code protection capabilities
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing the detection of unauthorized operating system commands through the kernel application programming interface
Related controls
SI-3(9) — Authenticate Remote Commands
This enhancement is marked withdrawn in the official OSCAL catalog. Related-control metadata below may identify where its intent was incorporated.
SI-3(10) — Malicious Code Analysis
- (a)Employ the following tools and techniques to analyze the characteristics and behavior of malicious code: [Organization-defined: tools and techniques] ; and
- (b)Incorporate the results from malicious code analysis into organizational incident response and flaw remediation processes.
Official discussion
The use of malicious code analysis tools provides organizations with a more in-depth understanding of adversary tradecraft (i.e., tactics, techniques, and procedures) and the functionality and purpose of specific instances of malicious code. Understanding the characteristics of malicious code facilitates effective organizational responses to current and future threats. Organizations can conduct malicious code analyses by employing reverse engineering techniques or by monitoring the behavior of executing code.
Organization-defined parameters (1)
Assessment objectives and methods
- SI-03(10)(a)[Organization-defined: tools and techniques] are employed to analyze the characteristics and behavior of malicious code;
- SI-03(10)(b)
- SI-03(10)(b)[01]the results from malicious code analysis are incorporated into organizational incident response processes;
- SI-03(10)(b)[02]the results from malicious code analysis are incorporated into organizational flaw remediation processes.
Examine
- System and information integrity policy
- system and information integrity procedures
- procedures addressing malicious code protection
- procedures addressing incident response
- procedures addressing flaw remediation
- system design documentation
- malicious code protection mechanisms, tools, and techniques
- system configuration settings and associated documentation
- results from malicious code analyses
- records of flaw remediation events resulting from malicious code analyses
- system audit records
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- System/network administrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
- organizational personnel installing, configuring, and/or maintaining the system
- organizational personnel responsible for malicious code protection
- organizational personnel responsible for flaw remediation
- organizational personnel responsible for incident response/management
Test
- Organizational process for incident response
- organizational process for flaw remediation
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing malicious code protection capabilities
- tools and techniques for the analysis of malicious code characteristics and behavior
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.