Where the highest ASIL is (B), C or D, a functional safety assessment shall be performed per 6.4.9 to judge the functional safety achieved by the item or the contribution of the developed element, planned per 6.4.6.5 f), planned at the latest at the start of system-level product development, performed progressively during development and completed before release for production; the appointed assessors shall provide a report with a judgement of the functional safety achieved and shall be given the authority to perform the assessment at their discretion, including the breadth and depth of the safety activities and results assessed, the information of 6.4.9.3 and the support needed; assistants of at least I1 independence may support them. The scope shall include the safety plan and all its work products, the processes functional safety needs, the appropriateness and effectiveness of the safety measures implemented, any rationale for the achievement of functional safety, the safety case argument and the rationale for closing safety anomalies; the assessment shall consider the planning of the other confirmation measures, the results of confirmation reviews and the functional safety audit, previous assessment recommendations and corrective actions, and supplier assessment results under the development interface agreement; the report shall recommend acceptance, conditional acceptance with the acceptance conditions stated and corrective actions taken to resolve them, or rejection, in which case suitable corrective action shall follow and the assessment repeated.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
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.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.