255 items found
Weaknesses
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
Insecure handling of login information can enable attackers to circumvent the application's authentication system.
Explanation
Poorly written login forms can lead to the following vulnerabilities:

1. Theft of credential information
a. Login forms designed to use the GET HTTP method can reveal sensitive information to attackers in the query string.
b. Transmission of login information in cleartext leaves it vulnerable to information theft.
c. Serving login forms over an insecure connection can allow an attacker to intercept and tamper with the login form itself and circumvent any protections offered by the original login form
d. Processing unvalidated data in the page containing the login form can enable attackers to install malicious scripts and capture sensitive information
2. Authentication bypass
a. Failing to validate user-submitted data in a login form can leave the application vulnerable to SQL Injection attacks, which enables an attacker to completely bypass the authentication system
3. Session hijacking
a. In the absence of adequate protections against Cross-Site Request Forgery and Cross-Frame Scripting vulnerabilities, attackers can hijack legitimate user sessions.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark normal
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 311
[6] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SC
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A9 Insecure Communications
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A9 Insufficient Transport Layer Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 8.1.6 General Data Protection (L3)
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M3 Insufficient Transport Layer Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2023 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 8.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 4.1, Requirement 6.3.1.4, Requirement 6.5.9, Requirement 8.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 4.1, Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 8.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[31] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 311
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3330 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3330 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3330 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3330 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3330 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3330 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3330 CAT I
desc.dynamic.xtended_preview.often_misused_login
Abstract
The Mule configuration specifies a TLS connection without the server certificate validation check.
Explanation
Certification verification is essential to confirm the counterpart's identity for secure communication. A tls:context element defines a set of TLS connection configurations. Among the configurations, the tls:trust-store element specifies a file that contains certificates from trusted Certificate Authorities that a client uses to verify a certificate presented by a server. By default, the Mule runtime engine verifies the server certificate for every TLS connection.

However, if the value of the insecure attribute of the tls:trust-store element is true, server certificates are accepted without verification.

Example 1: The following Mule configuration sets the insecure attribute to true. As a result, the Mule runtime engine does not verify the server certificate of any connection with the TLS context named demoTlsContext. Such a connection is susceptible to a man-in-the-middle attack.

...
<tls:context name="demoTlsContext">
...
<tls:trust-store ... insecure="true" ... />
...
<tls:context/>
...
References
[1] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark partial
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark confidentiality
[6] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark partial
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 297
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000185, CCI-001941, CCI-001942, CCI-002418, CCI-002420, CCI-002421, CCI-002422
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM, SC
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API7 Server Side Request Forgery, API8 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 9.2.1 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 4.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.1, Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.3 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7.1 - Use of Cryptography
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.3 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7.1 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.3 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7.1 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-001810 CAT I, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-001810 CAT I, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-001810 CAT I, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
desc.configuration.xml.mule_misconfiguration_server_identity_verification_disabled
Abstract
The template defines an Azure Monitor log profile that does not collect all Activity Log administrative events.
Explanation
A lack of audit records limits the ability to detect and respond to security related incidents and prevents forensic investigation.

Example 1: The following example template defines an Azure Monitor log profile that does not collect all Activity Log administrative events.

targetScope = 'subscription'

resource example 'microsoft.insights/logprofiles@2016-03-01' = {
...
properties: {
...
categories: [ 'Write' ]
}
}
References
[1] Microsoft Azure Activity log
[2] Microsoft Overview of Azure platform logs
[3] Microsoft Azure Activity Log event schema - Administrative Category
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 4.0
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark complete
[6] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[7] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[8] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[9] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark partial
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10, Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Application Misconfiguration (WASC-15)
desc.structural.bicep.azure_arm_misconfiguration_insufficient_application_insights_monitoring.base
Abstract
The template defines an Azure Monitor log profile that does not collect all Activity Log administrative events.
Explanation
A lack of audit records limits the ability to detect and respond to security related incidents and prevents forensic investigation.

Example 1: The following example template defines an Azure Monitor log profile that does not collect all Activity Log administrative events.

{
"name": "string",
"type": "microsoft.insights/logprofiles",
"apiVersion": "2016-03-01",
...
"properties": {
...
"categories": [
"Write"
],
...
}
}
References
[1] Microsoft Azure Activity log
[2] Microsoft Overview of Azure platform logs
[3] Microsoft Azure Activity Log event schema - Administrative Category
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 4.0
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark complete
[6] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[7] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[8] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[9] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark partial
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10, Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Application Misconfiguration (WASC-15)
desc.structural.json.azure_arm_misconfiguration_insufficient_application_insights_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base
Abstract
A configuration sets up a resource that lacks monitoring.
Explanation
Any delayed response to breaches undermines an organization's ability to limit the impact of a breach.

Configuration settings that undermine monitoring capabilities include but are not limited to:
- deliberately disabling monitoring
- not enabling optional monitoring
- not specifying relevant events to export to monitoring services
- exempting actions of specific users, groups, processes, and geographical regions from monitoring
References
[1] Paul Cichonski,Tom Millar,Tim Grance,Karen Scarfone NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2 - Computer Security Incident Handling Guide
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Azure Kubernetes Service Benchmark 5.0
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service Benchmark 3.0
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Amazon Web Services Foundations Benchmark 1
[5] Standards Mapping - CIS Google Kubernetes Engine Benchmark integrity
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
desc.structural.iac.misconfiguration_insufficient_monitoring.base