How often the periodic evaluations under 5.2.3 are carried out for components considered not at risk from malware must be fixed by a targeted risk analysis of the entity, and that analysis must be performed according to every element specified in Requirement 12.3.1. Criteria such as environment complexity and the number of system types to evaluate can inform the chosen period. Applicability: this was advisory only up to 31 March 2025 and is now required and fully assessed. Objective under the customized approach: systems with no known malware risk get re-evaluated at a frequency that matches the entity's risk. Future-dated: treated as a best practice up to 31 March 2025 and mandatory since then.
This control maps to 18 controls across 12 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.
PCI DSS 4.0 5.2.3.1 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of PCI DSS 4.0 your existing evidence covers. Hold ISO 27001:2022 and 139 of 280 PCI DSS 4.0 controls already carry evidence.
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. 415 were rejected on the ISO 27001:2022 pair alone.
The graph holds this control, the 18 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.