CIS Controls v8
CIS Control 16: Application Software Security

CIS Controls v8 CIS-16.2: Establish and Maintain a Process to Accept and Address Software Vulnerabilities

Set up and keep a process for receiving and dealing with reports of software vulnerabilities, including a channel for outside parties to submit them. The process covers matters such as a vulnerability handling policy naming the reporting route, the party accountable for handling reports, and steps for intake, assignment, fixing and testing the fix. Within the process, use a system for tracking vulnerabilities that holds severity ratings and measures how long identification, analysis and remediation take. Revisit the documentation each year, or sooner when a major change in the enterprise could affect this Safeguard. Developers of third-party applications should treat this as a policy facing the outside world, one that tells external stakeholders what to expect.

Maintained by Gerard BlokdykVerified against the published standard Control text last updated

What else in your programme already covers this

This control maps to 50 controls across 21 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.

SOC 2 · 7 controls

  • SOC2-CC2.3 CC2.3 Communication with external parties about internal control (COSO principle 15)
  • SOC2-CC3.2 CC3.2 Identifying and analysing risks to objectives (COSO principle 7)
  • SOC2-CC4.2 CC4.2 Evaluating and communicating control deficiencies (COSO principle 17)
  • SOC2-CC5.1 CC5.1 Selecting control activities that mitigate risk (COSO principle 10)
  • SOC2-CC5.2 CC5.2 General controls over technology (COSO principle 11)
  • SOC2-CC7.1 CC7.1 Detecting configuration changes and new vulnerabilities
  • SOC2-CC7.4 CC7.4 Responding to security incidents

PCI DSS 4.0 · 5 controls

  • 10.7.1 10.7.1 Service providers detect critical control failures (superseded)
  • 12.10.1 12.10.1 Incident response plan ready for activation
  • 12.6.1 12.6.1 Formal security awareness program
  • 6.3.1 6.3.1 Vulnerability identification and risk ranking
  • 6.3.3 6.3.3 Timely installation of security patches

CMMC 2.0 · 4 controls

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 · 4 controls

  • NIST-CSF-GV.PO-01 Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is established based on organizational context, cybersecurity strategy, and priorities and is communicated and enforced
  • NIST-CSF-GV.RR-02 Roles, responsibilities, and authorities related to cybersecurity risk management are established, communicated, understood, and enforced
  • NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01 Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded
  • NIST-CSF-PR.PS-02 Software is maintained, replaced, and removed commensurate with risk

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · 4 controls

Australian Information Security Manual · 3 controls

  • ISM-1616 Vulnerability disclosure program
  • ISM-1755 Vulnerability disclosure policy
  • ISM-1756 Vulnerability disclosure processes and procedures

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 · 3 controls

NIST SP 800-218 · 3 controls

C5 (Germany) · 2 controls

  • C5-PSS-02 Identification of Vulnerabilities of the Cloud Service
  • C5-PSS-03 Online Register of Known Vulnerabilities

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 · 2 controls

ISO 27001:2022 · 2 controls

  • 8.25 Secure development life cycle
  • 8.8 Management of technical vulnerabilities

ISO 27701:2019 · 2 controls

  • 6.13.1 Management of information security incidents and improvements
  • 6.9.6 Technical vulnerability management

APRA CPS 234 · 1 control

  • CPS234-28 Escalation of Unremediated Testing Deficiencies

Azure Security Benchmark · 1 control

  • ASBv3-PV-6 Rapidly and automatically remediate vulnerabilities

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) · 1 control

  • CFTC-SS-21 Remediation of Vulnerabilities and Deficiencies

FedRAMP High · 1 control

  • SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation

FedRAMP Moderate · 1 control

  • SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation

ISO 27002:2022 · 1 control

  • 8.8 Management of technical vulnerabilities

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 · 1 control

  • 10.2 Nonconformity and corrective action

NIS2 Directive · 1 control

  • Art.21.2.e Security in acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling and disclosure

NIST SP 800-172 · 1 control

  • 3.14.6e Use Threat Indicator Information for Detection

Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.

Other controls in CIS Control 16: Application Software Security

You are reading one control. How much of CIS Controls v8 have you already done?

CIS Controls v8 CIS-16.2 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of CIS Controls v8 your existing evidence covers. Hold ISO 27001:2022 and 102 of 153 CIS Controls v8 controls already carry evidence.

If you hold ISO 27001:202266.7% covered · 51 gapsIf you hold FedRAMP Moderate62.7% covered · 57 gapsIf you hold NIST SP 800-53 Rev 557.5% covered · 65 gapsIf you hold NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.050.3% covered · 76 gapsIf you hold ISO 27002:202249.7% covered · 77 gapsIf you hold Azure Security Benchmark49% covered · 78 gaps

Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 240 were rejected on the ISO 27001:2022 pair alone.

See the released pairs, $299 eachBrowse the graph free

Query this from an agent

The graph holds this control, the 50 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.

MCP endpointAll CIS Controls v8 controls