NIST Special Publication 800-70
Revision 4

National Checklist Program for IT
Products – Guidelines for Checklist
Users and Developers
Stephen D. Quinn
Murugiah Souppaya
Melanie Cook
Karen Scarfone

This publication is available free of charge from:https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

C O M P U T E R

S E C U R I T Y

NIST Special Publication 800-70
Revision 4

National Checklist Program for IT
Products – Guidelines for Checklist
Users and Developers
Stephen D. Quinn
Murugiah Souppaya
Melanie Cook
Computer Security Division
Information Technology Laboratory
Karen Scarfone
Scarfone Cybersecurity
Clifton, VAThis publication is available free of charge from:https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4
February 2018

U.S. Department of Commerce
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Walter Copan, NIST Director and Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Authority
This publication has been developed by NIST in accordance with its statutory responsibilities under theFederal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014, 44 U.S.C. § 3551 et seq., Public Law(P.L.) 113-283. NIST is responsible for developing information security standards and guidelines, including
minimum requirements for federal information systems, but such standards and guidelines shall not apply
to national security systems without the express approval of appropriate federal officials exercising policy
authority over such systems. This guideline is consistent with the requirements of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular A-130.
Nothing in this publication should be taken to contradict the standards and guidelines made mandatory andbinding on federal agencies by the Secretary of Commerce under statutory authority. Nor should theseguidelines be interpreted as altering or superseding the existing authorities of the Secretary of Commerce,
Director of the OMB, or any other federal official. This publication may be used by nongovernmentalorganizations on a voluntary basis and is not subject to copyright in the United States. Attribution would,
however, be appreciated by NIST.
National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-70 Revision 4
Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 800-70 Rev. 4, 52 pages (February 2018)
CODEN: NSPUE2This publication is available free of charge from:https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an
experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or
endorsement by NIST, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best
available for the purpose.
There may be references in this publication to other publications currently under development by NIST in accordancewith its assigned statutory responsibilities. The information in this publication, including concepts and methodologies,
may be used by federal agencies even before the completion of such companion publications. Thus, until eachpublication is completed, current requirements, guidelines, and procedures, where they exist, remain operative. For
planning and transition purposes, federal agencies may wish to closely follow the development of these new
publications by NIST.
Organizations are encouraged to review all draft publications during public comment periods and provide feedback
to NIST. Many NIST cybersecurity publications, other than the ones noted above, are available athttps://csrc.nist.gov/publications.

Comments on this publication may be submitted to:
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Attn: Computer Security Division, Information Technology Laboratory
100 Bureau Drive (Mail Stop 8930) Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930
Email: checklists@nist.gov

All comments are subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Reports on Computer Systems Technology
The Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST) promotes the U.S. economy and public welfare by providing technical leadership for the Nation’s
measurement and standards infrastructure. ITL develops tests, test methods, reference data, proof ofconcept implementations, and technical analyses to advance the development and productive use of
information technology. ITL’s responsibilities include the development of management, administrative,
technical, and physical standards and guidelines for the cost-effective security and privacy of other thannational security-related information in federal information systems. The Special Publication 800-series
reports on ITL’s research, guidelines, and outreach efforts in information system security, and its
collaborative activities with industry, government, and academic organizations.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Abstract
A security configuration checklist is a document that contains instructions or procedures for configuring
an information technology (IT) product to an operational environment, for verifying that the product has
been configured properly, and/or for identifying unauthorized changes to the product. Using thesechecklists can minimize the attack surface, reduce vulnerabilities, lessen the impact of successful attacks,
and identify changes that might otherwise go undetected. To facilitate development of checklists and to
make checklists more organized and usable, NIST established the National Checklist Program (NCP).
This publication explains how to use the NCP to find and retrieve checklists, and it also describes thepolicies, procedures, and general requirements for participation in the NCP.

Keywords
change detection; checklist; information security; National Checklist Program (NCP); security
configuration checklist; Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP); software configuration;
vulnerability

iiNIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Acknowledgments
The authors, Stephen Quinn, Murugiah Souppaya, and Melanie Cook of the National Institute ofStandards and Technology (NIST), and Karen Scarfone of Scarfone Cybersecurity wish to thank allindividuals and organizations who have contributed to this revision of SP 800-70. Contributors include
Harold Booth, Bob Byers, and David Waltermire of NIST; Harold Owen, Christopher Turner, and Chuck
Wergin of CocoaSystems Inc.; and Tim Lusby and Dragos Prisaca of G2, Inc.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

The authors acknowledge the following individuals and organizations that assisted in the development ofearlier revisions of SP 800-70:• Apple• Booz Allen Hamilton: Paul Cichonski, Anthony Harris, and Paul M. Johnson• Center for Internet Security (CIS): Clint Kreitner• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)• Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA): Terry Sherald• Department of Energy (DOE)• G2, Inc.: Greg Witte• Microsoft Corporation: Chase Carpenter, Kurt Dillard, and Jesper Johansson• National Security Agency (NSA): Paul Bartock, Trent Pitsenbarger, and Neal Ziring• NIST: John Banghart, Matt Barrett, Harold Booth, David Ferraiolo, Timothy Grance, Blair
Heiserman, Jeffrey Horlick, Arnold Johnson, Suzanne Lightman, Mark Madsen, Edward Roback,
Ron Ross, Michael Rubin, Carolyn Schmidt, Matt Scholl, and John Wack (co-author of theoriginal version)• Sun Microsystems: Glenn Brunette• Symantec Corporation
NIST would also like to express appreciation and thanks to the Department of Homeland Security for its
sponsorship and support of the NIST National Checklist Program for IT Products.

Audience
This document was created for current and potential checklist developers and users in both the public andprivate sectors. Checklist developers include information technology (IT) vendors, consortia, industry,
government organizations, and others in the public and private sector organizations. Checklist users
include end users, system administrators, and IT managers within government agencies, corporations,
small businesses, and other organizations, as well as private citizens.
It is assumed that readers of this document are familiar with general computer security concepts.

Trademark Information
Microsoft and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the
United States and other countries.
All other names are registered trademarks or trademarks of their respective companies.

iii

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... vi
1.

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
1.2

2.

The NIST National Checklist Program............................................................................... 2

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.

Standalone Environment ............................................................................................. 6
Managed Environment ................................................................................................ 6
Specialized Security-Limited Functionality Custom Environment ............................... 7
Legacy Environments ................................................................................................. 7
United States Government Environment .................................................................... 8

Checklist Usage .................................................................................................................. 9
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5

5.

Security Configuration Checklists ............................................................................... 2
Benefits of Using Security Checklists ......................................................................... 3
Overview of NIST National Checklist Program ........................................................... 4
Types of Checklists Listed by NCP ............................................................................. 4

Operational Environments for Checklists ........................................................................ 6
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5

4.

Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................... 1
Document Organization .............................................................................................. 1

Determining Local Requirements .............................................................................. 10
Browsing and Retrieving Checklists .......................................................................... 10
Reviewing, Customizing and Documenting, and Testing Checklists ........................ 12
Applying Checklists to IT Products ........................................................................... 13
Providing Feedback on Checklists ............................................................................ 14

Checklist Development..................................................................................................... 16
5.1

5.2

Developer Steps for Creating, Testing, and Submitting Checklists .......................... 16
5.1.1 Initial Checklist Development ........................................................................ 16
5.1.2 Checklist Testing ........................................................................................... 17
5.1.3 Checklist Documented ................................................................................... 18
5.1.4 Checklist Submitted to NIST .......................................................................... 20
NIST Steps for Reviewing and Finalizing Checklists for Publication......................... 20
5.2.1 NIST Screening of the Checklist Package ..................................................... 21
5.2.2 Public Review and Feedback for the Candidate Checklist ............................ 21
5.2.3 Final Listing on Checklist Repository ............................................................. 21
5.2.4 Checklist Maintenance and Archival .............................................................. 21

Appendix A.

References .................................................................................................... 23

Appendix B.

Checklist Program Operational Procedures .............................................. 24

1. Overview and General Considerations .......................................................................... 25
2. Checklist Submission and Screening ............................................................................. 26
3. Candidate Checklist Public Review ............................................................................... 27
4. Final Checklist Listing .................................................................................................... 27
5. Final Checklist Update, Archival, and Delisting.............................................................. 28
6. Record Keeping ............................................................................................................. 28
Appendix C.

Participation and Logo Usage Agreement Form ....................................... 29

iv

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

Appendix D.

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Additional Requirements for USGCB Baselines ....................................... 32

D.1 Developer Steps for Creating, Testing, and Submitting USGCB Baselines ............. 32
D.2 NIST Steps for Reviewing and Finalizing USGCB Baselines for Publication............ 35
D.3 Field Testing Report Template .................................................................................. 35
Appendix E.

Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................... 37

Appendix F.

Glossary ........................................................................................................ 39

Appendix G.

Change Log .................................................................................................. 42

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

List of Figures
Figure 1: Checklist User Process Overview .................................................................................. 9

List of Tables
Table 1: Checklist Description Form Fields ................................................................................ 18v

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Executive Summary
A security configuration checklist (also called a lockdown, hardening guide, or benchmark) is a series of
instructions or procedures for configuring an IT product to a particular operational environment, forverifying that the product has been configured properly, and/or for identifying unauthorized changes tothe product. The IT product may be commercial, open source, government-off-the-shelf (GOTS), etc.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Checklists can comprise templates or automated scripts, patch information, Extensible Markup Language(XML) files, and other procedures. Checklists are intended to be tailored by each organization to meet its
particular security and operational requirements. Typically, checklists are created by IT vendors for theirown products; however, checklists are also created by other organizations, such as academia, consortia,
and government agencies. The use of well-written, standardized checklists can markedly reduce thevulnerability exposure of IT products. Checklists can be particularly helpful to small organizations and toindividuals with limited resources for securing their systems.
NIST maintains the National Checklist Repository, which is a publicly available resource that contains
information on a variety of security configuration checklists for specific IT products or categories of IT
products. The repository, which is located at https://checklists.nist.gov/, contains information that
describes each checklist. The repository also hosts copies of some checklists, primarily those developedby the federal government, and has links to the location of other checklists. Users can browse and search
the repository to locate a particular checklist using a variety of criteria. Having a centralized checklist
repository makes it easier for organizations to find the current, authoritative versions of security
checklists and to determine which ones best meet their needs.
This document is intended for users and developers of security configuration checklists. For checklist
users, this document makes recommendations for how they should select checklists from the NIST
National Checklist Repository, evaluate and test checklists, and apply them to IT products. For checklist
developers, this document sets forth the policies, procedures, and general requirements for participation in
the NIST National Checklist Program (NCP).
Major recommendations made in this document for checklist users and developers include the following:
Organizations should apply checklists to operating systems and applications to reduce the numberof vulnerabilities that attackers can attempt to exploit and to lessen the impact of successful attacks.
There is no checklist that can make a system or product 100 percent secure, and using checklists does not
eliminate the need for ongoing security maintenance, such as patch installation. However, using checklists
that emphasize both hardening of systems against software flaws (e.g., by applying patches andeliminating unnecessary functionality) and configuring systems securely will typically reduce the numberof ways in which the systems can be attacked, resulting in greater levels of product security andprotection from future threats. Checklists can also be used to verify the configuration of some types of
security controls for system assessments, such as confirming compliance with certain Federal Information
Security Modernization Act (FISMA) requirements or other sets of security requirements.
Federal agencies are required to use appropriate security configuration checklists from the NCP whenavailable. In January 2017, Part 39 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) was updated. Paragraph(c) of section 39.101 states, “In acquiring information technology, agencies shall include the appropriate
information technology security policies and requirements, including use of common security
configurations available from the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s website athttps://checklists.nist.gov. Agency contracting officers should consult with the requiring official to ensure
the appropriate standards are incorporated.” [1] Also, FISMA requires each Federal agency to determineviNIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

minimally acceptable system configuration requirements and to ensure compliance with them [2].
Accordingly, Federal agencies, as well as vendors of products for the Federal government, should acquireor implement and share such checklists using the NIST repository. NIST encourages checklist developers
to assert mappings to the security controls delineated in NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-53 tofacilitate FISMA compliance checking for Federal agencies. 1
Organizations should consider the availability of security configuration checklists during their IT productselection processes.
When selecting checklists, checklist users should carefully consider each checklist’s degree ofautomation, source, use of standards, and other relevant characteristics.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

NIST recognizes that some checklists are more automated and standards-based than others. For example,
non-automated checklists provide prose-based descriptions of how a person can manually alter a
product’s configuration. Automated checklists are machine-readable. Automated checklists that fully
adhere to the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP), which are also known as SCAP content,
have all security settings documented in standardized SCAP formats; have undergone syntactic testing
using the NIST SCAP Content Validation Tool (SCAPVal) 2 for compliance to the SCAP-related
specifications; and include mappings between low-level security settings and high-level security
requirements.
When multiple checklists are available for a particular product, organizations should take into
consideration the degree of automation and use of standards of each checklist. Generally, SCAP
checklists can be used more consistently and efficiently than others. There may be other significant
differences among checklists; for example, one checklist may include software bundled with an operating
system (e.g., web browser and email client) while another checklist addresses that operating system only.
Another example is the assumptions on which the checklists are based (e.g., operational environment). A
checklist user should identify such differences and determine which checklist(s) seem appropriate andmerit further analysis.
Checklist source is particularly important for users from Federal civilian agencies, who should first searchfor government-authorized or mandated checklists (e.g., mandated by Part 39 of the FAR [1]). In general,these users should search for NIST-produced checklists, which are tailored for civilian agency use. If no
NIST-produced checklist is available, then agency-produced checklists from the Defense Information
Systems Agency (DISA) or the National Security Agency (NSA) should be used if available. If formal
government-authorized checklists do not exist, organizations are encouraged to use vendor-produced
checklists. If vendor-produced checklists are not available, other checklists that are posted on the NCP
website may be used.
Checklist users should customize and test checklists before applying them to production systems.
A checklist that is not mandatory for an organization to adopt should be considered a starting point for an
organization to customize. Although the settings are based on sound knowledge of security threats andvulnerabilities, they cannot take into account organization-specific security and operational requirements,
existing security controls, and other factors that may necessitate changes. Organizations should carefully
evaluate the checklist settings and give them considerable weight, then make any changes necessary toadapt the settings to the organization’s environment, requirements, policies, and security objectives. This
1

2

Organizations are also encouraged to include information in their checklists that supports mapping to other sets ofrequirements, such as HIPAA.
SCAPVal is available for download for each SCAP version on the SCAP specification website athttps://scap.nist.gov/revision/index.html.

vii

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

is particularly true for checklists intended for an environment with significantly different security needs.
All deviations from the checklist settings should be documented for future reference, and include thereason behind each deviation and the impact of deviating from the setting.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Before applying a checklist that will be used to alter product settings, users should first test it on noncritical systems, preferably in a controlled non-operational environment. Each checklist in the NIST
repository has been tested by its developer, but there are often significant differences between adeveloper’s testing environment and an organization’s operational environment, and some of thesedifferences may affect checklist deployment. In some cases, a security control modification can have anegative impact on a product’s functionality and usability, or on other products or security controls.
Consequently, it is important to perform testing to determine the impact on system security, functionality,
and usability; to document the results of testing; and to take appropriate steps to address any significant
issues.
Checklist users should take their operational environments into account when selecting checklists,and checklist developers should target their checklists to one or more operational environments.
Checklists are significantly more useful when they can run in common operational environments. The
NCP has identified several broad and specialized operational environments, such as Standalone andManaged, and at least one of the environments should be common to most of the audiences. Thoroughly
identifying and describing these environments will make it easier for users to select the security checklists
that are most appropriate for their particular operating environments, and will allow developers to bettertarget their checklists to the general security characteristics associated with their operating environments.
NIST strongly encourages IT product vendors to develop security configuration checklists for theirproducts and contribute them to the NIST National Checklist Repository.
NIST encourages IT product vendors to develop security configuration checklists for their products, since
the vendors have the most expertise on the possible security configuration settings and the best
understanding of how the settings relate to and affect each other.
Vendors that create security configuration checklists should submit them for inclusion in the National
Checklist Repository through the NCP. The NCP provides a process and guidance for developing
checklists in a consistent fashion. For checklist developers, steps include initial development of thechecklist, checklist testing, documenting the checklist according to the guidelines of the NCP, andsubmitting a checklist package to NIST. NIST screens the checklist according to program requirements
and then releases the checklist for public review, which lasts 30 days. After the public review period andsubsequent resolution of issues, the checklist is listed on the NIST checklist repository with its
information. Checklist maintenance may potentially be performed by the vendor, resulting in the releaseof updated checklists. NIST retires or archives checklists as they become outdated or incorrect.

viii

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

1.

Introduction

1.1

Purpose and Scope

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

This document describes the use, benefits, and management of checklists, and explains how to use the
NIST National Checklist Program (NCP) to find and retrieve checklists. The document also describes thepolicies, procedures, and general requirements for participation in the NCP.
1.2

Document Organization

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Section 2 contains an overview of checklists and describes the advantages of the NIST NCP and how it
works.
Section 3 provides additional details on pre-defined checklist operational environments that are used in
the NCP to help developers create checklists that are consistent with security practices. The materialpresented in Section 3 can also help checklist users select the checklists that best match their own
operational environments.
Section 4 contains information for potential checklist users. It describes how to use the NCP to find andretrieve checklists that best match the identified needs. It also contains guidance on how to implement
checklists, including how to analyze the specific operating environment and then tailor checklists asapplicable.
Section 5 provides guidance for current and prospective checklist developers. This guidance contains
information on the procedures for preparing and submitting a checklist to NIST for inclusion in the
checklist repository.
Appendix A lists references for this document.
Appendix B contains the programmatic and legal requirements that must be satisfied to participate in the
NCP.
Appendix C contains the NCP participation and logo usage agreement form.
Appendix D details additional requirements that United States Government Configuration Baseline(USGCB) checklists must meet.
Appendix E contains a list of acronyms used in this document.
Appendix F presents a glossary of the terms used in this document.
Appendix G provides the change log for the most recent release of the document.

1

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

2.

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

The NIST National Checklist Program

There are many threats to users’ computers, and new vulnerabilities in IT products (e.g., operating
systems and applications) are discovered daily. Patches may not be immediately available for new
vulnerabilities, causing the need to rapidly deploy temporary mitigation through reconfiguration until
patches are available. Also, because IT products often are intended for a wide variety of audiences,
restrictive security settings are usually not enabled by default, which means that many IT products are
immediately vulnerable in their default configuration. It is a complicated, arduous, and time-consuming
task even for experienced system administrators to know what a reasonable set of security settings is formany different IT products.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Although the solutions to IT security are complex, one simple yet effective tool is the security
configuration checklist. To facilitate development of security configuration checklists and to meet therequirements of the Cyber Security Research and Development Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-305)(CSRDA) [3], NIST developed the National Checklist Program (NCP) for IT Products. This section
contains an overview of the NCP. It begins by describing the contents of checklists and giving examplesof the types of IT products for which checklists are often created. It next explains the benefits of using
security configuration checklists, such as improving the base level of security for an organization. It also
explains the goals and benefits of the NCP, which include increasing the quality, usability, andavailability of checklists.
2.1

Security Configuration Checklists

A security configuration checklist (also referred to as a lockdown guide, hardening guide, security guide,
security technical implementation guide [STIG], or benchmark) 3 is essentially a document that contains
instructions or procedures for configuring an IT product to an operational environment, for verifying thatthe product has been configured properly, and/or for identifying unauthorized configuration changes tothe product. The IT product may be commercial, open source, government-off-the-shelf (GOTS), etc.
Using well-written, standardized configuration checklists can reduce the vulnerability exposure of IT
products and be particularly helpful to small organizations and individuals in securing their systems.
Checklists can be developed not only by IT vendors, but also by other organizations with technicalcompetence in IT product security. A security configuration checklist might include any of the following: Configuration files that automatically set or verify various security-related settings (e.g., executables,
security templates that modify settings, Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) XML(Extensible Markup Language) files, and scripts). 4
 Documentation (e.g., text file) that guides the checklist user to manually configure an IT product Documents that explain the recommended methods to securely install and configure a device
 Policy and programmatic documents that set forth guidelines for such things as auditing,authentication mechanisms (e.g., passwords), and perimeter security.

3

4

From this point on in this document, the term checklist (used according to CSRDA terminology) is used to describe asecurity configuration checklist.
More information about SCAP can be found at https://scap.nist.gov/ and all versions of NIST Special Publication (SP) 800126, The Technical Specification for the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) [4].

2

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Not all instructions in a security configuration checklist need to strictly address security settings.
Checklists can also include specialized security functions, such as looking for artifacts of an attack on ahost, or administrative practices such as enabling energy saving features.
Typically, a system administrator or end user follows the instructions in the checklist to configure a
product or system to the level of security implemented in the checklist, or to verify that a product orsystem is already configured properly. The system administrator may need to modify the checklist toincorporate the local security policy.
Examples of the types of devices and software for which security checklists are intended are as follows: General-purpose operating systems and mobile operating systems
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

 Common applications such as email clients, web browsers, word processors, personal firewalls, andantivirus software Infrastructure devices such as routers, switches, firewalls, virtual private network (VPN) gateways,
intrusion detection systems (IDS), wireless access points, and telecommunication systems
 Application servers such as Domain Name System (DNS), Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol(DHCP), web, Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), and database servers
 Other network devices such as scanners, printers, and copiers.
2.2

Benefits of Using Security Checklists

Security checklists, when developed correctly, can help users configure IT products so that they havemore protection than the defaults provide. Applying checklists to operating systems and applications can
reduce the number of vulnerabilities that attackers can attempt to exploit and lessen the impact of
successful attacks. Using checklists improves the consistency and predictability of system security,
particularly in conjunction with user training and awareness activities and other supporting security
controls. Additional benefits associated with using checklists include the following: Provides a base level of security to protect against common and dangerous local and remote threats(e.g., malware, denial-of-service attacks, unauthorized access, and inappropriate usage)
 Verifies the configuration of certain technical security controls for system assessments, such asconfirming compliance with certain Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA)
requirements or other sets of requirements, and understanding the exposure caused by
misconfigurations
 Significantly reduces the time required to research and develop appropriate security configurations
for installed IT products Allows smaller organizations to leverage outside resources to implement recommended practice
security configurations
 Reduces the likelihood of public loss of confidence or embarrassment resulting from a compromise of
systems (for example, a major breach of personally identifiable information (PII)).
Although using security checklists for security compliance purposes can significantly improve overalllevels of security in organizations, using a checklist cannot make a system or a product 100 percent
secure. However, using checklists that emphasize hardening of systems against the hidden software flaws
will typically result in greater levels of product security and protection from future threats (e.g., zero-day

3NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

vulnerabilities). IT vendors that configure their products using checklists that adhere to the FISMAassociated security control requirements will provide more consistency in configuration settings within
the federal agencies. This configuration will also provide a much more cost-effective method forestablishing and verifying the minimum configuration settings, even if the agencies must modify thechecklists to fine-tune the configuration settings for their specific applications and operational
environments.
2.3

Overview of NIST National Checklist ProgramThis publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Many organizations have created checklists; however, these checklists vary widely in terms of quality andusability, and they may become outdated as software updates and upgrades are released. Without a central
checklist repository, finding security checklists can be difficult. In addition, checklists may differ
significantly from one another in terms of the purpose of the checklist or the level of security provided.
Also, it may be difficult to determine if the checklist is current or how the checklist should be
implemented.
To facilitate development of security checklists for IT products and to make checklists more organized
and usable, NIST established the NCP. The goals of the NCP are to— Facilitate development and sharing of checklists by providing a formal framework for vendors andother checklist developers to submit checklists to NIST Provide guidance to developers to help them create standardized, high-quality checklists that conformto common operational environments
 Help developers and users by providing guidelines for making checklists better documented and more
usable Encourage software vendors and other parties to develop checklists
 Provide a managed process for the review, update, and maintenance of checklists
 Provide an easy-to-use repository of checklist information
 Provide checklist content in a standardized format
 Encourage the use of automation technologies for applying checklists.
Federal agencies are required to use appropriate security configuration checklists from the NCP whenavailable. In January 2017, Part 39 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) was updated. Paragraph(c) of section 39.101 states, “In acquiring information technology, agencies shall include the appropriate
information technology security policies and requirements, including use of common security
configurations available from the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s website athttps://checklists.nist.gov. Agency contracting officers should consult with the requiring official to ensure
the appropriate standards are incorporated.” [1]2.4

Types of Checklists Listed by NCP

The NCP deals with checklists that are tied to specific IT products, such as a checklist for a specific brandand model of a router. Some checklists may guide a user to other checklists. For example, a checklist for a
database product may reference the checklist for the operating system on which the database product runs.
The NCP includes two major groups of checklists:

4

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

 Automated. An automated checklist is one that is used through one or more tools that automaticallyalter or verify settings based on the contents of the checklist. Many checklists are written in
Extensible Markup Language (XML), and there are special tools that can use the contents of the XML
files to check and alter system settings. 5 For example, the Security Content Automation Protocol(SCAP) is commonly used to express checklist content in a standardized way that can be processedby tools that support SCAP. 6
 Non-Automated. As the name implies, a non-automated checklist is one that is designed to be used
manually, such as prose instructions that describe the steps an administrator should take to secure asystem or to verify its security settings.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Security configuration checklists in the NCP can help organizations meet FISMA requirements. FISMA
requires each agency to determine minimally acceptable system configuration requirements and to ensurecompliance with them. Checklists can also map specific technical control settings to the corresponding
NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-53 controls, which can make the verification of compliance moreconsistent and efficient. Accordingly, federal agencies, as well as vendors of products for the federal
government, are encouraged to acquire or develop and to share such checklists using the NIST repository.
The development and sharing of checklists can reduce what would otherwise be a “reinvention of thewheel” for IT products that are widely used in the federal government, such as common operating
systems, servers, and client applications.
The NIST checklist repository (located at https://checklists.nist.gov/) contains information on automatedand non-automated checklists that have been developed and screened to meet the requirements of the
NCP. The repository also hosts copies of some checklists, primarily those developed by the federal
government, and has pointers to the other checklists’ locations. Users can browse checklist descriptions tolocate and retrieve a particular checklist using a variety of different fields. A mailing list for the checklist
program is available at https://nvd.nist.gov/general/email-list.

5

6

The Extensible Checklist Configuration Description Format (XCCDF) is an XML-based format for automating tool usage
and eliminating interpretation issues. The XCCDF XML format can be used for both technical checklists (e.g., operating
systems, software applications, and hardware configurations) and non-technical checklists (e.g., physical security for IT
systems). More information on XCCDF is available from NIST Interagency Report (IR) 7275 Revision 4, Specification for
the Extensible Configuration Checklist Description Format (XCCDF) Version 1.2, which is available for download athttps://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.7275r4. Another XML-based format for checklists is the Open Vulnerability andAssessment Language (OVAL), which is used to exchange technical details about how to check for the presence ofvulnerabilities and configuration issues on systems. More information on OVAL is available at https://oval.cisecurity.org.
For more information on the validation of products’ SCAP support and a list of SCAP-validated products, see
https://scap.nist.gov/validation/index.html.

5

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

3.

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Operational Environments for Checklists

To ensure that as many users as possible receive value from checklists, it is recommended that checklist
authors create checklists for a broad operational environment unless there is a compelling reason to focus
on a specialized operational environment. The NCP identifies several broad and specialized operational
environments, at least one of which should be common to most audiences. Identifying and describing
these environments allows developers to better target their checklists to the general security requirements
associated with the environments, and allows end users to more easily select the checklists that are mostappropriate for their environments.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

This section describes the operational environments defined for the NCP, and the general threat
description and fundamental technical security practice for each environment. The two broad operational
environments are referred to as Standalone (or Small Office/Home Office [SOHO]) and Managed (orEnterprise). Three typical Custom environments, which could be subsets of the broader environments, areSpecialized Security-Limited Functionality (SSLF), Legacy, and United States Government.
Users of IT products may find it useful to consult this section of the document when initially identifying
their own security requirements and needs (outlined in detail in Section 4). Developers may find thissection useful when building checklists because tailoring checklist development to these environments
and their policies will enable developers to create security compliance checklists for diverse products but
still adhere to the general uniform technical security practices and settings associated with theenvironments. This is discussed in detail in Section 5. Before submitting a checklist to NIST, developers
should ensure they have the most recent version of this document because updates to the criteria for
operational environments may occur periodically. The most recent version is available as a separate file athttps://checklists.nist.gov/. 7
3.1

Standalone Environment

The Standalone environment describes individually managed devices (e.g., desktops, laptops,
smartphones, tablets), as opposed to Managed environments (see Section 3.2), which are based on
centrally managed devices (i.e., many devices managed by a single organization). Standalone
environments are typically the least secured. The individuals who maintain Standalone systems are notassumed to use the same enterprise security controls and possess the same general security expertise as
trained administrators. Less secure environments often occur when functionality is the main focus and notenough emphasis is placed on balancing device security and functionality. Accordingly, Standalone
checklists should be relatively simple to understand and implement by home users or novice systemadministrators.
3.2

Managed Environment

The Managed environment, also referred to as Enterprise, comprises centrally managed IT products,
everything ranging from servers and printers to desktops, laptops, smartphones, and tablets. Managed
checklists are intended for advanced end users and system administrators. The managed nature of typicalManaged environments gives administrators centralized control over various settings on devices.
Authentication, account, and policy management can also be administered centrally to maintain aconsistent security posture across an organization.

7

NIST may, as new information becomes available, update the criteria and information for the operational environments aswell as other criteria contained in this document.

6

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

The Managed environment is more restrictive and provides less functionality than the Standalone
environment. However, because of the supported and controlled 8 nature of the Managed environment, it
is typically easier to use more functionally restrictive settings in Managed environments than inStandalone environments. Managed environments also tend to implement several layers of defense (e.g.,
firewalls, antivirus servers, IDSs, patch management systems, and email filtering), which provides greater
protection for systems.
3.3

Specialized Security-Limited Functionality Custom Environment

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

A Custom environment contains systems in which the functionality and degree of security do not fit theother types of environments. Specialized Security-Limited Functionality (SSLF) is a typical Custom
environment that is highly restrictive and secure; it is usually reserved for systems that have the highest
threats and associated impacts. Typical examples of such systems are outward-facing web, email, andDNS servers, other publicly accessed systems, and firewalls. It also encompasses computers that containconfidential information (e.g., central repository of personnel records, medical records, and financial
information) or that perform vital organizational functions (e.g., accounting, payroll processing, and air
traffic control). These systems might be targeted by third parties for exploitation, but also might betargeted by trusted parties inside the organization. Because systems in an SSLF environment are at highrisk of attack or data exposure, security takes precedence over functionality. The systems’ data content or
mission purpose is of such value that aggressive tradeoffs in favor of security outweigh the potential
negative consequences to other useful system attributes such as legacy applications or interoperability
with other systems.
An SSLF environment could be a subset of another environment. For example, three desktops in a
Managed environment that hold the organization’s confidential employee data could be thought of as an
SSLF environment within a Managed environment. In addition, a laptop used by a mobile worker (e.g.,organization management) might be an SSLF environment in a Standalone environment. An SSLF
environment might also be a self-contained environment outside any other environment, such as agovernment security installation processing sensitive data.
SSLF checklists are intended for experienced security specialists and seasoned system administrators who
understand the impact of implementing strict technical security practices. If home users and other users
who do not have security expertise attempt to apply SSLF checklists to their systems, they typicallyexperience unwanted limitations on system functionality and cause possibly irreparable system damage.
3.4

Legacy Environments

A Legacy environment is another example of a Custom environment. A Legacy environment contains
older systems or applications that may need to be secured to meet today’s threats, but they often use older,less secure communication mechanisms and need to be able to communicate with other systems. Nonlegacy systems operating in a Legacy environment may need less restrictive security settings so that they
can communicate with legacy systems and applications. Legacy environments are often subsets of otherenvironments.

8This is not meant to imply that checklists should not be customized within Managed environments. For example, it may be
prudent to make exceptions for groups of users with a specific need to deviate from a particular checklist setting, rather thaneither have the entire enterprise deviate from the setting because of the needs of a subset of users, or prevent the subset ofusers from performing their duties.

7

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

3.5

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

United States Government Environment

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

A United States Government environment is another example of a Custom environment. This
environment contains federal government systems. These systems need to be secured according toprescribed configurations as mandated by policy. For example, the Federal Desktop Core Configuration(FDCC) is a security configuration policy mandated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The original checklists developed in support of the FDCC policy exist for multiple versions of Microsoft
Windows, Windows Firewall, and Internet Explorer. These checklists are broader than previous
checklists, incorporating settings for Web browsers, personal firewalls, and other software. The
configuration settings also include non security-related settings aimed at improving performance, energy
efficiency, compatibility, and interoperability. The settings are largely based on the configuration settings
recommended by Microsoft in its security guides, but they have been customized to take into accountfederal government security requirements. Many federal systems have been required to use thesechecklists by OMB’s FDCC mandate.
Since that time, the US government has focused on developing a new set of security configuration
checklists to augment the existing checklists in support of the FDCC policy. These new checklists are
known as the United States Government Configuration Baseline (USGCB). Like the original checklists,
the USGCB checklists also support the FDCC policy, and the USGCB checklists address a wide variety
of security and non-security settings that are largely based on settings recommended by product vendors
but customized to meet federal requirements. The USGCB initiative was created in 2010 by theTechnology Infrastructure Subcommittee (TIS) of the CIO Council Architecture and Infrastructure
Committee (AIC) as an evolution of the FDCC policy. The USGCB checklists are referred to as“baselines” because they define minimum sets of configurations that must be implemented. New USGCB
baselines were released to replace the original FDCC checklists (Windows XP, Windows Vista, andInternet Explorer 7), and the original FDCC checklists were deprecated at that time. USGCB checklists
have also been created for other platforms, namely Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop.
The USGCB configuration settings are intended to be deployed primarily to managed systems. The
original checklists in support of the FDCC policy and USGCB baselines are intended to be applied tosystems primarily through automated tools. Organizations should thoroughly test all checklists andbaselines before deploying them in operational environments because a number of their settings, such as
cryptographic algorithm options and wireless services, may impact system functionality. After
deployment, settings may also be checked through automated means for compliance with checklists andbaselines.

8

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

4.

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Checklist Usage

This section describes a high-level process for checklist users to follow when retrieving and using
checklists. Although all checklist users, ranging from home users to system administrators, have theirown specific requirements, the process described will apply to most situations. This section includes
guidance on conducting an initial analysis of local environment threats and risks, and lists the potential
impacts of such attacks. It then describes a process for selecting and retrieving checklists through the
NIST checklist repository, and recommends steps for analyzing, tailoring, and applying the checklist.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Figure 1: Checklist User Process Overview

Figure 1 shows the general process for using checklists. The general steps involved in acquiring and using
checklists are simple and straightforward—
1. Users gather their local requirements (e.g., IT products, the operating environment, andassociated security needs) and then acquire or purchase the IT product that best suits their needs.
2. Users browse the checklist repository to retrieve checklists that match the user’s operational
environment and security requirements. If a product is intended to be secure by default, it is still
important to check the NIST checklist repository for updates to that checklist.
3. Users review the checklists and select the checklist that best meets their requirements, then tailor
and document the checklist as necessary to take into account local policies and functional
requirements, test the checklist, and provide feedback to NIST and checklist developers.
4. Users prepare to deploy the checklist, such as making configuration or data backups, and thenapply the checklist in production.
The following sections describe the details of the activities included in each of these steps.

9

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

4.1

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Determining Local Requirements

Organizations usually conduct a requirements analysis before actually selecting and purchasing aparticular IT product. Such an analysis would include identifying the needs of the organization (what the
product must do) and the security requirements for the product (e.g., relevant security policies). Individual
end users can conduct the same process, although it could be quite informal. Because it is difficult to add
security later, it is best to assess requirements upfront when incorporating security into IT operations, bigor small.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

When planning security, it is essential to first define the threats that must be mitigated. Organizations thatuse checklists should conduct risk assessments to identify the specific threats against their systems anddetermine the effectiveness of existing security controls in counteracting the threats; they then should
perform risk mitigation to decide what additional measures (if any) should be implemented, as discussed
in NIST SP 800-37 Revision 1, Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal
Information Systems: A Security Life Cycle Approach [6]. Performing risk assessments and mitigation
helps organizations better understand their needs and decide whether or not they need to modify orenhance selected checklists.
The risk mitigation methodology includes steps that are straightforward and simple, even for anindividual home user who may not be especially savvy with regard to IT security. Important steps include
the following: Identify Functional Needs. What must the product do? Identifying upfront the end user’s
requirements, such as remote access for telecommuters or a web server to make internal information
available to employees, is necessary to ensure that the security controls selected are appropriate; thatis, that they implement an appropriate security solution and still allow the system to meet its
requirements for functionality.
 Identify Threats and Vulnerabilities. A threat is the potential for a particular threat-source tosuccessfully exercise a particular vulnerability. A vulnerability is a weakness that can be accidentally
triggered or intentionally exploited. The goal of this step is to identify potential threat-sources that are
applicable to the IT product or system being considered, as well as the vulnerabilities that could be
exploited by the potential threat-sources.
 Identify Security Needs. The goal of this step is to determine the controls needed to minimize or
eliminate the likelihood (or probability) of a threat exercising a product or system vulnerability. It
answers the question, “What security features must the product provide?” Armed with thisinformation, the organization can make wiser choices about which IT product best meets its needs.
NIST has also written several documents and guides to help federal agencies when selecting information
security products and when acquiring and using tested/evaluated products. Another key resource available
at NIST for identifying vulnerability-related information about IT products is the National Vulnerability
Database (NVD). 9 This website provides a search engine for identified system vulnerabilities andinformation on patches that are available to correct the vulnerabilities.
4.2

Browsing and Retrieving Checklists

After determining local requirements and identifying an IT product, a checklist user is ready to browse
the NIST checklist repository. To help users obtain checklists that can be processed by SCAP-validated
products, the checklists are categorized by content type (degree of automation and standardization) and9

https://nvd.nist.gov/

10

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

authority (the organization responsible for producing the original security configuration guidance
represented by the checklist). Users can browse the checklists based on the content type, IT product, or
authority and through a keyword search that searches the checklist name and summary for user-specified
terms. The search results show the detailed checklist information and a link to any SCAP content for the
checklist, as well as links to any supporting resources associated with the checklist. Selecting a particularchecklist will show a description template that includes extensive information to help users decide
whether the checklist will suit their specific purposes. Depending on a user’s needs, role, and skills (e.g.,home user versus enterprise administrator), some fields in the description will be more important thanothers.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Some checklists address more than one application or operating system, such as several products from asingle organization. To help users navigate the site from the checklist detail page, a Checklist Group link
is available; it represents the grouping of checklists based on a common source material. For example, the
DISA (Defense Information Systems Agency) Desktop Checklist contains configuration settings for
multiple products including browsers and antivirus products. The NCP decomposes the checklist
information according to these individual targets, but keeps them conveniently linked to the same source
document via the Checklist Group.
In some cases, multiple checklists are available for a particular version of a product. Such checklists areoften similar, but they have important differences, such as the degree of automation provided, theintended audience (e.g., providing general recommendations versus complying with Federal agencyspecific requirements), and the checklist purpose (reconfiguring a product versus identifying a successful
compromise of the product). To assist checklist users in being able to readily identify the majordifferences among checklists, NIST categorized checklists by content type, such as: Prose. Prose checklists provide narrative descriptions of how a person can manually alter a product’s
configuration.
 Automated. Automated checklists document their security settings in a machine-readable format,
either standard or proprietary. An example is a product-specific configuration script. These checklists
may include some elements of SCAP (for example, they may contain CCE [Common Configuration
Enumeration] identifiers), but do not fully adhere to the SCAP specification.
 SCAP Content. SCAP content checklists adhere to the SCAP specification in NIST SP 800-126 fordocumenting security settings in machine-readable standardized SCAP formats. SCAP content
checklists can be processed by SCAP-validated products, which have been validated by an accredited
independent testing laboratory as conforming to applicable SCAP specifications and requirements.
SCAP content that is available on the National Checklist Program repository has been evaluated with
the NIST SCAP Content Validation Tool (SCAPVal) 10. This evaluation ensures the checklist
conforms to the SCAP specification. The SCAPVal tool does not evaluate the checklist for logic
errors such as use of an “equal to” operator when “equal to or greater than” should have been used.
Some SCAP content checklists have been vetted with at least one governance organization authority.
These SCAP checklists are known to run on SCAP-enabled tools and include low-level security
setting mappings (for example, standardized identifiers for individual security configuration issues)that can be externally mapped to high-level security requirements as represented in various security
frameworks (e.g., SP 800-53 controls for FISMA). The USGCB checklists described in Section 3.5
are examples of vetted SCAP content checklists.
10

SCAPVal is available for download for each SCAP version on the SCAP specification website athttps://scap.nist.gov/revision/index.html. This tool validates the correctness of the SCAP data stream according to the SCAP
version specified in the corresponding version of SP 800-126 [4].

11

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

When multiple checklists are available for a particular product, organizations should take into
consideration the degree of automation and use of standards of each checklist. Generally, SCAPexpressed checklists can be used more consistently and efficiently than others. There may be othersignificant differences among checklists; for example, one checklist may include software bundled with
an operating system (e.g., web browser and email client) while another checklist addresses that operating
system only. Another example is the assumptions on which the checklists are based (e.g., operational
environment). A checklist user should identify such differences and determine which checklist(s) seemappropriate and merit further analysis.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Checklist source is particularly important for users from Federal civilian agencies, who should first searchfor government-authorized or mandated checklists. In general, these users should search for NISTproduced checklists, which are tailored for civilian agency use. If no NIST-produced checklist isavailable, then agency-produced checklists from the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) or the
National Security Agency (NSA) should be used if available. If formal government-authorized checklists
do not exist, organizations are encouraged to use vendor-produced checklists. If vendor-produced
checklists are not available, other checklists that are posted on the NCP website may be used.
Organizations often submit checklists with associated alphanumeric version identifiers (e.g., R1.2.0).
Unfortunately, these identifiers do not have universal meanings. Some organizations may change theversion number when new checks are added, old technology is deleted, patches are added, or simply
based on a review date. Conversely, other organizations may update their checklist and not change theversion numbers. To clarify updates to checklists, NCP uses the concept of a “Checklist Revision.” A
Checklist Revision indicates that something has changed even if the version identifier did not change.
For example, if the organization does not change the version number on the document, but the content has
been updated (e.g., patches were added for a given month), the current checklist will be listed as archived
and the checklist with the updated patch content will show as the current checklist. Likewise, if thesubmitting organization updates the version identifier, then the NCP will list the current checklist asarchived and link to the new checklist. From the checklist detail page, a user can navigate to the checklist
history via the “Archived Revisions” link.
4.3

Reviewing, Customizing and Documenting, and Testing Checklists

Checklist users should download all documentation for the checklist and review it carefully. The
documentation should explain any required preparatory activities, such as backing up a system. Because achecklist may not exactly match a user’s specific requirements, reviewing a checklist is useful indetermining whether the checklist may need to be tailored 11 and whether the system or product will
require further changes after applying the checklist.
The user’s review can identify the impact on an organization’s current policies and practices if a given
security checklist is used. An organization may determine that some aspects of the checklist do notconform to certain organization-specific security and operational needs and requirements. Organizations
should carefully evaluate the checklist settings and give them considerable weight, then make anychanges necessary to adapt the settings to the organization’s environment, requirements, policies, andsecurity objectives. 12 This is particularly true for checklists intended for an environment with significantly
different security needs. Organizations should tailor the checklists to reflect local rules, regulations, andmandates; for example, federal civilian agencies would need to ensure that checklists reflect compliancewith encryption requirements from Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140, Security
11

12

If multiple checklists are available for the same product, the checklist user may wish to compare the settings or steps in theselected checklist to the other checklists to see which settings or steps differ and determine if any of these alternate
recommendations should be used.
This may not be applicable to checklists that are mandatory for an organization to adopt.

12

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Requirements for Cryptographic Modules. Because the checklist may be used many times within theorganization, the checklist itself might need to be modified. This is especially likely if the checklist
includes a script or template to be applied to systems.
At this point, all deviations from the settings in the checklist should be documented for future reference.
The documentation should include the reason behind each deviation, including the impact of retaining thesetting and the impact of deviating from the setting. This documentation helps in managing changes to thechecklist over the life cycle of the product being secured. Feedback on the checklist can be sent to NIST
as well as to the checklist developers. Feedback is especially important to developers in gauging whether
the checklist is well written and the settings are applicable to the targeted environment.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Before applying a checklist that will be used to alter product settings, users should first test it on noncritical systems, preferably in a controlled non-operational environment. Such testing may be difficult forhome or small business users who do not have extra systems and networks for testing purposes. Each
checklist in the NIST checklist repository has been tested by its developer, but there are often significant
differences between a developer’s testing environment and an organization’s operational environment,
and some of these differences may affect checklist deployment. The testing configuration of the IT
product should match the deployment configuration. In some cases, a security control modification canhave a negative impact on a product’s functionality and usability, or on other products or security
controls. For example, installing a patch could inadvertently break another patch, or enabling a firewall
could inadvertently block antivirus software from updating its signatures or disrupt patch management
software. Consequently, it is important to perform testing to determine the impact on system security,
functionality, and usability; to document the results of testing; and to take appropriate steps to address any
significant issues. Section 4.4 contains recommendations for performing backups and other suggestions toprevent or recover from potential damage or unwanted effects that could occur if applying an untested
checklist.
Before using a checklist to verify product settings without altering them, users should test it. If thechecklist is automated, users should also test the tool or tools that will be used with the checklist to ensurethat they do not inadvertently disrupt the functionality of the system or alter the configuration of the
product. Checklist testing should be performed to identify discrepancies between the expected and actual
settings, which could indicate errors in the checklist, such as environment-specific characteristics forwhich the checklist was not modified.
4.4

Applying Checklists to IT Products

A checklist can be applied to an IT product in one of two ways: modifying the product’s settings orverifying the existing settings. The following provides recommendations for both ways of applying
checklists:
 Setting Modification–

Even after reviewing and testing a checklist, users should handle deployment carefully tominimize any issues that might arise from applying the checklist.

–

For users who are unable to test a checklist in a non-operational environment (e.g., home users), it
is important to carefully review the checklist documentation completely and to determine if an
initial backup is required. The Rollback Capability field in the checklist description will indicate
whether the results of applying the checklist can be reversed to return the product to its original
configuration. Regardless of this setting, it is strongly recommended that a user back up the IT
product’s configuration before installing the checklist recommendations.

13

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4–

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

At a minimum, users should back up all critical data files in their computing environment. If
possible, the user should make a full backup of the system to ensure that the system can berestored to its pre-checklist state if necessary. (Making a full backup is recommended before
making any major system change; it does not apply only to implementing a checklist.) Largeorganizations should also follow this procedure and, if possible, first select several operational
systems as pilots to provide “real-world” testing for the checklist before enterprise-wide
deployment.

 Setting Verification–

Even after reviewing and testing a checklist, users should handle verification carefully to ensurethat product settings are not inadvertently altered.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

After initially applying a checklist, an organization may need to acquire and apply revised versions of thechecklist in the future. Depending on the product being secured, a checklist may be updated periodically
based on a set schedule or updated as needed, frequently or infrequently. For selected checklists, NIST
may maintain a mailing address list of users, and users who subscribe to the list will receive
announcements of updates or other issues connected with the checklist. Instructions for subscribing to themailing address list will be included in the selected checklist’s description on the checklist repository. An
organization that acquires an updated checklist would perform the same steps already described in thissection while taking advantage of knowledge gained and documented from applying previous versions of
the checklist.
4.5

Providing Feedback on Checklists

NIST welcomes all “bug” reports, comments, and suggestions from checklist users in regard to individual
checklists or the repository itself. Such feedback should be directed to checklists@nist.gov. 13
Some of the questions that checklist users may want to consider when evaluating a checklist include thefollowing: Documentation–

Does it explain the security objectives?

–

Does it contain a complete, clear, and concise description of the checklist settings?

 Recommended Practices–

Are the checklist settings consistent with recommended practices?

–

Do the checklist settings take into account recent vulnerabilities?

 Impact of Settings–

13

Has the checklist developer tested the checklist settings on the product in an operationallyrealistic environment and determined that the application of the checklist settings causes the
product to meet the security objectives of the checklist?

Checklist users who want to publish their own version of a checklist may act in a checklist developer role and submit it to
the NIST checklist repository, provided that there are no intellectual property restrictions on the original checklist that would
prohibit doing so.

14

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS–

Do any of the checklist settings cause the product to become inoperable or unstable?

–

Do any of the checklist settings reduce product functionality? If so, is this documented?

 Ease of Implementation

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4–

Is the checklist straightforward to apply?

–

Are the instructions concise, sound, and complete?

–

Is the required skill level identified?

–

Are procedures to verify that the installation is successful included?

–

Is there guidance for uninstalling the checklist or restoring the product to the state before
installation?

–

If the checklist cannot be rolled back, does the documentation recommend other preparatory
measures such as backups?

 Assistance–

Is checklist-related help available?

–

Does the documentation contain information for troubleshooting if errors occur or if the checklist
settings cause the product to operate incorrectly?

–

Is there assistance available for qualified users of the product?

 If the checklist developer is NOT the IT product’s vendor, does the documentation indicate whether
the checklist has been sponsored or endorsed by the IT product’s vendor?

15

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

5.

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Checklist Development

This section describes the general process for developing security configuration checklists and submitting
them to the NCP. It includes an overview of the process NIST will follow to screen the checklist
submissions and publish them in its repository, and the process NIST and developers will follow to
update the checklist or to archive the checklist. Individual developers and organizations that want tosubmit checklists to NIST should review the appendices of this document, which contain theadministrative requirements for participation in the NCP. Before submitting a checklist to NIST,
developers should ensure they have the most recent version of this document. The most recent version isavailable as a separate file at https://nvd.nist.gov/ncp/participation.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

The checklist life cycle comprises the following steps:
1. Initial Checklist Development: The developer 14 becomes familiar with the procedures andrequirements of the checklist program, and then performs the initial development of the checklist,
including selection of a target environment.
2. Checklist Testing: The developer tests the checklist in the target environment and corrects any
problems with the checklist.
3. Checklist Documented: The developer documents the checklist according to the guidelines ofthe program.
4. Checklist Submitted to NIST: The developer submits the checklist and documentation package
to NIST for screening and public review.
5. NIST Screening: NIST screens the checklist package’s information and confirms that any SCAP
data stream content is well-formed, then addresses any issues with the developer prior to public
review.
6. Public Review and Feedback: NIST holds a 30-day public review of the candidate checklist,
then the developer addresses comments as necessary.
7. Final Listing on Checklist Repository: NIST lists the checklist on repository as final andannounces the checklist’s availability.
8. Checklist Maintenance and Archival: Anyone can provide feedback on the checklist
throughout its life. The developer updates the checklist periodically as necessary. The checklist isarchived when it is no longer being maintained or is no longer needed.
Each step should be carried out to ensure the checklist is accurate, tested, and documented during its
development and subsequent publication, update, or archival. The following sections describe
considerations for each step. USGCB checklists for the US Government environment follow the steps inthis section, but they must meet additional requirements as detailed in Appendix D.
5.1

Developer Steps for Creating, Testing, and Submitting Checklists

The first four steps in the development methodology listed above involve the developer creating, testing,documenting and submitting checklists. Sections 5.1.1 through 5.1.4 describe each of these steps ingreater detail.
5.1.1

Initial Checklist Development

During initial checklist development, a developer becomes familiar with the requirements of the checklist
program and all procedures involved during the checklist life cycle (as described throughout this section).
14

For simplicity, the rest of this document uses the term “developer” to refer to the individual, individuals, or institution that isdeveloping a checklist.

16

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

At this point, a developer would presumably agree to the requirements for participation in the NCP before
continuing to develop the checklist. The participation requirements are described in this document, but arepresented in administrative and programmatic terms in Appendix B, which is intended less for technicaldevelopers and more for those in developer organizations who must formally agree to NCP requirements.
The participation agreement is contained in Appendix C. 15
After agreeing to NCP requirements, the developer decides in which operational environment (seeSection 3) the checklist should be implemented, and builds the checklist accordingly. The output of thisstep is an initial checklist for the product.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

NIST recognizes that detailed checklist development cannot be covered extensively in this document.
Developers may find publications on commonly accepted technical security principles and practices, as
catalogued in NIST SP 800-53 [7] and NIST SP 800-27, Engineering Principles for Information
Technology Security (A Baseline for Achieving Security) [5], to be helpful when developing a checklist.
There are also many publications related to SCAP available at https://scap.nist.gov/.
In terms of vulnerability coverage, the security objectives should take into account the most up-to-datevulnerabilities and generally be consistent with recognized sources of vulnerability-related information,
including the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) United States Computer Emergency Readiness
Team (US-CERT), the Computer Emergency Response Team/Coordination Center (CERT/CC), and
NIST’s NVD. 16
Developers of checklists for products that are used by the federal government should consult the FISMAassociated security control requirements. NIST SP 800-53 [7] provides a catalog of security controls,
using groups of the controls to create three minimum security control sets for federal information
systems—low, moderate, and high impact as specified in FIPS 199, Standards for Security
Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems [9]. Developers of IT products that will
be used in federal information systems are encouraged to help federal agencies meet the mandatory
requirements in FISMA by creating checklists that provide recommended configuration settings in avariety of operational environments or for information systems of differing impact levels, as described in
FIPS 199 and SP 800-53. Developers are also encouraged to consider requirements imposed by the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and other sources.
5.1.2

Checklist Testing

Before a checklist is submitted to NIST, it should be fully tested in a configuration that meets the target
environment and platform. The checklist should be tested with a variety of applications and hardware
platforms, if applicable. Ideally, at least some testing should be performed in a production or mirrored
production environment. The testing data does not need to be submitted to NIST; however, the developer
should retain the data for review as appropriate.
Selecting the most appropriate set of security controls can be a daunting task because many security
controls have limited system functionality and usability. In some cases, a security control can have anegative impact on other security controls. For example, installing a patch could inadvertently breakanother patch. Therefore, it is important to perform testing for all security controls to determine what
impact they have on system security, functionality, and usability, and to take appropriate steps to address
any significant issues.
15

16

The latest updates to these sections and to this document are available at https://nvd.nist.gov/ncp/participation. This updated
material should be consulted before formally agreeing to participate in the program.
US-CERT website is https://www.us-cert.gov/. CERT/CC website is https://www.cert.org/. NVD is at https://nvd.nist.gov/.

17

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

NIST has produced SP 800-115, Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and Assessment [8], tohelp administrators in testing systems for vulnerabilities and configuration problems. Although thispublication is focused more on testing systems than testing individual IT products, it may be useful tochecklist developers.
5.1.3

Checklist Documented

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

The quality of checklist documentation often makes a major difference in the checklist’s effectiveness.
The checklist documentation should clearly explain how to use the checklist, with concise, sound, andcomplete instructions. The skill level required to use the checklist should be identified, as well as thetargeted environment. The documentation should also explain the significance of individual settings,
including any changes to product functionality. If applicable, the documentation should also include
procedures to verify that the checklist installation is successful, as well as guidance for uninstalling thechecklist or restoring the product to its state before installation of the checklist. In some cases, it may not
be possible to roll back checklist settings, in which case the checklist documentation should recommend
procedures such as backups and system restoration as applicable.
The testing methodology, such as how the checklist was tested and what platforms were used, should be
documented. The checklist documentation should also contain information for troubleshooting if errors
occur or if the checklist settings cause the product to operate incorrectly. Ideally, assistance is availablefor (registered) users of the product if there are problems.
Checklist developers must complete an online checklist description form for each checklist. 17 Table 1
shows the fields in the checklist description form that developers are to complete.
Table 1: Checklist Description Form Fields
Field Name

17

Description

Checklist Name

The name of the checklist.

VersionThe version or release number of the checklist.

Publication Date

States the date when the actual checklist document was published, in the format
MM/DD/YYYY.

Product Category

The main product category of the IT product (e.g., firewall, IDS, operating system, webserver).

TargetThe set of specific IT systems or applications for which a checklist has been created.

CPE Name

The CPE representation of a specific Target.

Checklist RoleThe primary use or function of the IT product as described by the checklist (e.g., client
desktop host, web server, bastion host, network border protection, intrusion detection).

Checklist Summary

Summarizes the purpose of the checklist and its settings.

Known Issues

Summarizes issues that may arise after application of the checklist to help users
pinpoint any functional and operational problems caused by the checklist.

Audience

The intended audience that should be able to install, test, and use the checklist,
including suggested minimum skills and knowledge required to correctly use thechecklist.

An offline version of the checklist description form can be downloaded from the NCP Participation Materials site on the
checklist repository at https://nvd.nist.gov/ncp/participation.

18

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Field Name

Description

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Target Operational
Environment

The IT product’s operational environment, such as Standalone, Managed, or Custom(with description, such as Specialized Security-Limited Functionality, Legacy, or UnitedStates Government). Generally only applicable for security compliance/vulnerability
checklists.

Checklist TypeThe type of checklist, such as Compliance, Vulnerability, and Specialized.

Checklist Installation
Tools

Describes the functional tools required to use the checklist to configure the system, if
they are not included with the checklist.

FIPS 140-2 Compliance

Whether the product can operate in a FIPS 140-2 validated mode (yes or no).

Regulatory Compliance

Whether the checklist is consistent with various regulations and standards (e.g., Healthinformation Portability and Accountability Act [HIPAA], Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act [GLBA],FISMA [such as mappings to NIST SP 800-53 controls], ISO 27001, Sarbanes-Oxley,
Department of Defense [DoD] 8500, Federal Risk and Authorization Management
Program [FedRAMP], Committee on National Security Systems Instruction [CNSSI]
1253, Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies [COBIT] 5, the NIST
Cybersecurity Framework, the Center for Internet Security [CIS] Controls).

Authority

The organization responsible for producing the original security configuration guidance
represented by the checklist. Authorities are ranked according to their “Authority Type.”
Within the NCP website, authorities are grouped with their authority types through thesyntax of Authority Type: Authority.

Author

The organization responsible for creating the checklist in its current format. In mostcases an organization will represent both the author and authority of a checklist, but
this is not always true. For example, if an organization produces validated SCAP
content for a NIST publication, the organization that created the SCAP content will belisted as the Author, but NIST will remain the Authority.

Rollback Capability

Whether the changes in product configuration made by applying the checklist can berolled back and, if so, how to roll back the changes.

Testing Information

Platforms on which the checklist was tested. Can include any additional testing-related
information such as summary of testing procedures used. Should specify any
operational testing performed in production or mirrored production environments.

Comments, Warnings,
Miscellaneous

Any additional information that the checklist developer wishes to convey to users.

Disclaimer

Legal notice pertaining to the checklist.

Product Support

Vendor will accept support calls from users who have applied this checklist on their IT
product; warranty for the IT product has not been affected. Required for usage of NCPlogo if the submitter is the product vendor. If the submitter is not the product vendor, thesubmitter should describe any agreement that they may have with the product vendor.

Point of Contact

An email address where questions, comments, suggestions, and problem reports canbe sent in reference to the checklist. The point of contact should be an email addressthat the checklist developer monitors for checklist problem reports.

SponsorStates the name of the IT product manufacturer organization and individuals who
sponsor the submitted checklist if it is submitted by a third-party entity.

LicensingStates the license agreement (e.g., the checklist is copyrighted, open source, General
Public License [GPL], free software, shareware).

SCAP Content

A link to the machine-readable content representing the configuration guidance. This
guidance is expressed using SCAP.

Supporting Resource

A link to any supporting information, or content, relating to the guidance. This field canhold data ranging from an English prose representation of the actual guidance, toconfiguration scripts that apply guidance specific settings on a target.

Dependency/
Requirement

Indicate that another checklist or guide is required to properly use and implement thecurrent checklist.

References

Any supporting references chosen by the developer that were used to produce thechecklist or checklist documentation.

19

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

The developer needs to complete the fields as indicated to describe the checklist accurately and minimize
user confusion as to what the checklist accomplishes.
In summary, well-structured checklist documentation includes the following, as appropriate: Statement of the security objectives, including the expected behavior of the product after applying thechecklist
 The intended audience (e.g., end user, system administrator) and the level of technical skill required
to use the checklist

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

 Explanation of the checklist settings, including each setting’s effect on operation of the product andany functionality the settings enable or disable Backup procedures or any other initial steps required before applying the checklist
 As appropriate, step-by-step instructions for applying the checklist (e.g., screen shots, illustrated
procedures) and verifying that the installation is successful
 Troubleshooting instructions or other information and references.
5.1.4

Checklist Submitted to NISTAt this point, the checklist developer has completed, tested, and documented the checklist. The developer
now submits the package of materials to NIST. The package includes the following: Checklist and configuration files, templates, scripts, etc.
 Completed checklist description
 Checklist documentation
 Identification of the developer point of contact
 Signed participation agreement.
The participation agreement and other requirements are outlined in detail in Appendix B, which also
includes the appropriate NIST contact information.
Checklist packages are submitted to NIST through the NCP Submission website. The website walks thechecklist developer through a series of screens that collect all of the information and materials needed forchecklist submission. In addition, the website allows checklist developers to view the checklists they havesubmitted, see tasks that have been assigned to them (such as fixing errors on a previously submitted
checklist), update existing checklists, and perform other actions. NIST also provides web services for
submitting, fetching, and maintaining checklists. To request access to the NCP Submission website or
associated web services, email checklists@nist.gov.
5.2

NIST Steps for Reviewing and Finalizing Checklists for Publication

The NIST process for screening and publishing a checklist, which corresponds to steps 5 through 8 in the
checklist life cycle, is described in the following sections.

20

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

5.2.1

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

NIST Screening of the Checklist Package

This step involves determining if the appropriate checklist materials are sufficiently accurate andcomplete to be publicly reviewed. NIST screens the checklist information for completeness and accuracy,and ensures that checklist content is well-formed if it is SCAP-expressed. NIST may contact thedeveloper with questions about the submitted materials during the screening period.
5.2.2

Public Review and Feedback for the Candidate Checklist

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

After the checklist package has been screened and the developer has addressed any issues, NIST will post
it as a candidate draft and announce it for public review for a period of 30 days. This allows the public toreview and test the checklist, and to provide the checklist developers and NIST with comments andfeedback. Information from comments and feedback may be incorporated in a revision of the checklist to
improve its quality. When a candidate checklist has completed the review process, its information isadded to the checklist repository.
A checklist reviewer emails checklists@nist.gov to provide comments as well as other information about
the reviewer’s test environment, procedures, and other relevant information. Depending on the review, thechecklist developer may need to respond to comments. NIST may also consult independent expert
reviewers as appropriate. Typical reasons for using independent reviewers include the following: NIST may decide that it does not have the expertise to determine whether the comments have beenaddressed satisfactorily.
 NIST may disagree with the proposed issue resolutions and seek reviews from third parties to get
additional perspectives.
At the end of the public review period, NIST will give the developer 30 days to respond to comments.
5.2.3

Final Listing on Checklist Repository

After any outstanding issues are addressed, NIST lists the final checklist and announces that the checklist
is now listed on the repository. At this time, the developer (e.g., IT product vendor) may be eligible to use
the checklist logo on the IT product’s promotional material if the developer provides assistance for the
checklist. Requirements for use of the logo are described in Appendix C.
5.2.4

Checklist Maintenance and Archival

Throughout a checklist’s life cycle, anyone can provide comments or ask questions regarding thechecklist by mailing checklists@nist.gov; NIST will pass feedback to the checklist developer. Dependingon the product and how frequently updates occur, NIST may maintain a mailing address for the associatedchecklists. Users who subscribe to the mailing list can receive announcements of updates or other issues
connected with a checklist. The selected checklist’s description (on the checklist repository) will contain
instructions for subscribing to the mailing address list.
After the final checklist is listed, NIST will periodically review the checklist to determine if it is still
relevant or if changes need to be made to it. If the developer decides to update the checklist at any time,
NIST will announce that the checklist is in the process of being updated. If the revised checklist contains
major changes, it will be accepted as if it were a new submission, and will be required to undergo thesame review process as a new submission.

21

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

At NIST’s or the developer’s discretion, the checklist can be removed from the repository or marked as anarchive. Typical reasons for such actions would be that the product is no longer supported or is obsolete,or that the developer no longer wishes to provide support for the checklist.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

22

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix A. References
This appendix contains a list of documents referenced by this publication.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4[1]

Part 39 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR),
https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/FARTOCP39.html[2]

Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014, Public Law 113-283,
https://www.congress.gov/113/plaws/publ283/PLAW-113publ283.pdf[3]Cyber Security Research and Development Act of 2002, Public Law 107-305, 116 Stat.
2367, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ305/pdf/PLAW-107publ305.pdf[4]

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-126, The Technical Specification for the Security
Content Automation Protocol (SCAP), all versions available athttps://csrc.nist.gov/publications/sp800.

[5]NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-27 Revision A, Engineering Principles for Information
Technology Security (A Baseline for Achieving Security), June 2004,
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-27rA[6]

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-37 Revision 1, Guide for Applying the Risk
Management Framework to Federal Information Systems: A Security Life Cycle
Approach, February 2010 (updated 6/5/2014), https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-37r1[7]

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-53 Revision 4, Security and Privacy Controls forFederal Information Systems and Organizations, April 2013 (updated 1/22/2015)
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-53r4[8]

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-115, Technical Guide to Information Security Testingand Assessment, September 2008, https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-115[9]Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 199, Standards for Security
Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, February 2004,
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.FIPS.199[10]

Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) Instruction No. 4009, Committee on
National Security Systems (CNSS) Glossary, April 6, 2015,
https://www.cnss.gov/CNSS/issuances/Instructions.cfm

23

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix B. Checklist Program Operational ProceduresThis publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Operational Proceduresfor
The NIST National Checklist Programfor Information Technology Products
Version 1.4

This document sets forth the policies, procedures and general requirements for the NIST National
Checklist Program for Information Technology Products. This document is intended for those individuals
in developer organizations who would need to formally agree to the program’s requirements.
This document is organized as follows: Section 1 – general considerations for the NIST National Checklist Program Section 2 – procedures for initial screening of a checklist prior to public review
 Section 3 – procedures for the public review of a candidate checklist
 Section 4 – final acceptance procedures
 Section 5 – maintenance and delisting procedures
 Section 6 – record keeping
The following terminology is used in this appendix:
 Candidate is a checklist that has been screened and approved by NIST for public review.
 FCL refers to the final checklist list—the listing of all final checklists on the NIST repository.
 Final is a checklist that has completed public review, has had all issues addressed by the checklist
developer and NIST, and has been approved for listing on the repository according to the proceduresof this section.

24

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

 Checklist refers to a checklist for a specific product and version.
 Checklist Developer or Developer is an individual or organization that develops and owns a checklist
and submits it to the National Checklist Program.
 Independent Qualified Reviewers are tasked by NIST with making a recommendation to NIST
regarding public review or listing of the checklist. They work independently of other reviewers andare considered expert in the technology represented by the checklist.
 Logo refers to the NIST National Checklist Program logo.
 National Checklist Program, Program, or NCP is used in place of the NIST National Checklist
Program for Information Technology Products.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

 NIST Checklist Repository or Repository refers to the website that maintains the checklists, thedescriptions of the checklists, and other information regarding the National Checklist Program.
 Public Reviewer is any member of the general public who reviews a candidate checklist and sends
comments to NIST.
 Operational Environments refer to the operational environments outlined in this document.
References to documents that form a basis for the requirements of this program are as follows: FIPS 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems,
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.FIPS.199
 NIST SP 800-27 Revision A, Engineering Principles for Information Technology Security (ABaseline for Achieving Security), https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-27rA NIST SP 800-53 Revision 4, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems andOrganizations, https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-53r4
 NIST SP 800-70 Revision 4, National Checklist Program for IT Products—Guidelines for Checklist
Users and Developers, https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4
1. Overview and General Considerations
This section focuses on general considerations for all parts of the National Checklist Program.
(a) Checklist Lifecycle Overview: Checklists typically have the following lifecycle:
1. Checklist developers inquire about the program and download a submission package. The
developer subsequently contacts NIST with a tested checklist, supporting information, and asigned agreement to the requirements of the NCP. Checklist submission requirements andprocedures are discussed in Section 2.
2. NIST verifies that all information is complete and performs a high-level screening on the
checklist package. Checklists meeting the requirements for listing receive further
consideration and are referred to as “candidate checklists.” Section 2 discusses screening
criteria and procedures.
3. NIST lists the candidate checklist on the repository for public review for a period of 30 days,
as discussed in Section 3.

25

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

4. NIST forwards comments from public reviewers to the developer. The developer addresses
the issues as appropriate, and the checklist is listed on the FCL, as discussed in Section 4.
5. NIST periodically reviews each final checklist to determine whether its listing should
continue, be updated, or be archived, as discussed in Section 5.
(b) Intellectual Property Rights: Developers retain intellectual property rights to their checklists.

(c) Confidential Information: NIST does not anticipate the need to receive confidential informationfrom checklist developers. If it becomes necessary to disclose confidential information to NIST, NIST
and the developer must enter into a separate confidentiality agreement prior to such disclosure.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4(d) Independent Qualified Reviewers: NIST may decide to seek technical advice from independent
qualified experts who will review checklist submissions to determine whether they meet the program
requirements. The reviewers are tasked with making a recommendation to NIST regarding a
subsequent public review or final listing of the checklist. Typical but not exclusive of the reasons forusing independent reviewers include the following:
1. NIST does not possess the expertise to determine whether issues have been addressedsatisfactorily.
2. NIST disagrees with proposed issue resolutions.
(e) Terminating Consideration of a Checklist Submission: NIST or the developer may terminate
consideration of checklist submissions at any time. If NIST terminates consideration, the points ofcontact are asked to respond within 10 business days. Typical but not exclusive of the reasons forterminating consideration of checklist submissions include the following:
1. The submission package does not meet the screening criteria.
2. The developer fails to address issues raised at other times.
3. The developer violates the terms and conditions of participation in the program.
2. Checklist Submission and Screening
This section outlines the procedures and requirements for submitting checklists to NIST and the process
by which NIST determines if checklists are suitable for public review. When checklists meet thescreening criteria, they receive further consideration in a public review and are referred to as “candidate
checklists.” NIST then follows the subsequent procedures.
(a) Notification of Checklist Program Requirements: NIST maintains on the repository a complete setof information for developers. The information outlines the requirements for participation in the
program and describes materials and timeframes.
(b) Materials Required From the Developer: Developers provide the following information:
1. Contact information for an individual from the submitting organization who will serve as thepoint of contact for questions and comments pertaining to the checklist, and contact
information for a backup or deputy point of contact. The information must include postal
address, direct telephone number, and email address.

26

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

2. The checklist, documentation, and description template.
3. The participation agreement, which must be printed, signed, and sent to NIST. NIST accepts
emailed PDF copies of the participation agreement, facsimiles, or copies via regular mail.
4. Participation fees. Currently, there is no fee to checklist developers. NIST reserves the rightto charge fees for participation in the future. Fees are not retroactive.
(c) Preliminary Screening Checklist Contents: NIST performs a preliminary screening to verify thatchecklist packages meet the basic program requirements. NIST will not typically perform an in-depth
analysis of the content of the checklist, such as its reflection of recommended security andengineering practices, although NIST reserves the right to do so.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

3. Candidate Checklist Public Review
NIST follows the subsequent procedures when listing candidate checklists for public review.
(a) Public Review Period: NIST lists candidate checklists for a 30-day comment period. NIST reserves
the right to extend the review cycle, particularly for long or complicated checklists. NIST uses thefollowing disclaimer (or very similar words) in conjunction with candidate checklists:
NIST does not guarantee or warrant the checklist’s accuracy or completeness. NIST is not
responsible for loss, damage, or problems that may be caused by using the checklist.
(b) Accepting Comments from Reviewers: Public reviewers email checklists@nist.gov to provide theircomments as well as information about their test environment, procedures, and other relevant
information. The contents of these emails are considered public records.
(c) Maintaining Records: NIST may maintain copies of correspondence and feedback between the
public and developers by creating a unique email address for each checklist. If so, NIST will archive
the information.
(d) Addressing Comments: After the end of the public review period, the developer has 30 days torespond to comments.
4. Final Checklist Listing
After NIST determines that a checklist and the associated developers have met all requirements for final
listing, NIST lists checklists in the FCL and refers to them as “final checklists.” NIST then follows thesubsequent procedures.
(a) Finalizing Checklists: NIST lists the checklist in the FCL. NIST may send announcements tovarious email lists maintained by NIST or other organizations. NIST uses the following disclaimer (orvery similar words) for final checklists:
NIST does not guarantee or warrant the checklist’s accuracy or completeness. NIST is not
responsible for loss, damage, or problems that may be caused by using the checklist.
(b) Handling Comments: NIST continues to accept comments about final checklists by maintaining acentral email address on the repository, checklists@nist.gov. NIST lists the procedures to be used for

27

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

contacting the developer, along with the contact information for the developer, such as an email
address or URL. If at any time the point of contact changes, NIST must be notified immediately.
5. Final Checklist Update, Archival, and Delisting
NIST follows the subsequent procedures for periodic update, archival, and delisting of final checklists.
(a) Periodic Reviews: NIST periodically reviews each checklist to identify changes in its status. NIST
may contact developers, as appropriate, to determine if there are changes in the status of a checklist,
in which case developers have 30 days to respond and indicate whether checklists should be updated,archived, or delisted.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4(b) Updates: NIST may indicate on the FCL when checklists are under review. Developers have 60 days
after the review to submit the updated material to NIST. Depending on the magnitude of updates,
NIST may screen the checklist and schedule a public review.
(c) Archival: A developer may no longer want to provide support for the checklist, a product may nolonger be supported, or there may be another reason to archive a checklist. At the developer or
NIST’s discretion, the checklist can remain in the repository, but it will be reclassified as an archive.
(d) Delisting: When delisting occurs, such as when a developer fails to respond to inquiries from NIST
about the status of a checklist, NIST removes the checklist from the FCL. NIST may send
announcements to various email lists maintained by NIST or other organizations.
6. Record Keeping
NIST maintains information associated with the program and requires that participants in the checklist
program also maintain certain records, as follows.
(a) NIST Records: During the period that a checklist has been submitted to NIST, and during the periodthat a checklist is listed on the FCL as a final or archived checklist, and for three years thereafter 18,
NIST will maintain the following:
1. The checklist description template, as listed on the repository
2. The checklist and checklist description, as listed on the repository
3. All comments submitted as part of the public review
4. All comments submitted to NIST regarding the checklist.
(b) Developer Records: During the period that a checklist has been submitted to NIST, and during theperiod that a checklist is listed on the FCL as a final or archived checklist, the developer will maintainthe following:
1. The checklist description template, as listed on the repository
2. The checklist and checklist description, as listed on the repository
3. Test reports and other evidence of checklist testing.

18

This is for three years after the most recent update to the checklist.

28

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix C. Participation and Logo Usage Agreement Form
This appendix contains the terms and requirements for participation in the NIST National Checklist
Program (NCP) and for use of the NIST National Checklist Program logo. Prior to submission of achecklist to NIST, developers should ensure they have the most recent version of this appendix. The mostrecent version is available as a separate file at https://nvd.nist.gov/ncp/participation.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Participation and Logo Usage Agreement Formfor
The NIST National Checklist Program for
Information Technology Products
Version 1.5
February 15, 2018

The phrase “NIST National Checklist Program for Information Technology Products” and the NIST
National Checklist Program logo are intended for use in association with specific versions of information
technology (IT) products for which a checklist has been created and has met the requirements of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Checklist Program for Information
Technology Products for final listing on its checklist repository. You may participate in the NIST
National Checklist Program and use the phrase and logo provided that you agree in writing to thefollowing terms and conditions:
1. You will follow the rules and requirements of the program as outlined in the NIST Operational
Procedures for the NIST National Checklist Program (Appendix B of NIST SP 800-70
Revision 4).
2. You will respond to comments and issues raised by a public review of your checklist submission
within 30 days of the end of the public review period. Any comments from reviewers and yourresponses may be made publicly available.
3. You agree to maintain the checklist and provide a timely response (within 10 business days) torequests from NIST for information or assistance with regard to the contents of the checklist.

29

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

4. You agree to maintain checklist-related records according to the requirements of the NIST
National Checklist Program, as listed in Appendix B of NIST SP 800-70 Revision 4, item 6.b.
5. You will hold NIST harmless in any subsequent litigation involving the checklist submission.
6. You may terminate your participation in the NIST National Checklist Program at any time. You
will provide two business weeks’ notice to NIST of your intention to terminate participation.
NIST may terminate its consideration of a checklist submission or your participation in the NIST
National Checklist Program at any time. NIST will contact you two business weeks prior to its
intention to terminate your participation. You may, within one business week, appeal the rejection
and provide supporting evidence.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

7. You may not use the name of NIST or the Department of Commerce on any advertisement,
product, or service that is directly or indirectly related to this agreement. By accepting thisagreement, NIST does not directly or indirectly endorse any product or service provided, or to beprovided, by you, your successors, assignees, or licensees. You may not in any way imply that
this agreement is an endorsement of any such product or service. You may not combine use of thelogo with other Marks, phrases, or logos in such a way that would imply endorsement by NIST.
8. The phrase “NIST National Checklist Program for Information Technology Products” and the
NIST National Checklist Program logo are Registered Marks of NIST, which retains exclusive
rights to their use. NIST reserves the right to control the quality of the use of the phrase “NISTNational Checklist Program for Information Technology Products” and the NIST National
Checklist Program logo.
9. Your permission for advertising participation in the NIST National Checklist Program and use of
the logo is conditional on and limited to those products and the specific product versions forwhich a checklist is made currently available by NIST through the NIST National Checklist
Program on its Final Checklist List.
10. Your permission for advertising participation in the NIST National Checklist Program and use of
the logo is conditional on and limited to those checklist developers who provide assistance andhelp to users of the checklist with regard to proper use of the checklist and that the warranty forthe product and the specific product versions is not changed by use of the checklist.
11. Your use of the logo on product reports, letterhead, brochures, marketing material, and productpackaging must be accompanied by the following: “TM: a Registered Mark of NIST, which does
not imply product endorsement by NIST or the U.S. Government.”
12. The dimensional requirements for the size, placement, color, and other aspects of the logo are
specified in NIST SP 800-70 Revision 4.
13. NIST reserves the right to charge a participation fee in the future. No fee is required at present.
No fees will be made retroactive.
14. NIST may terminate the NIST National Checklist Program at its discretion. NIST may terminate
your participation in the Program for any violation of the terms and conditions of the program orfor statutory or regulatory reasons.

30

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

By signature below, the developer agrees to the terms and conditions contained herein.

Organization or company name:Name and title of organization authorized person:

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Signature:

Date:

31

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix D. Additional Requirements for USGCB Baselines
As mentioned in the Section 5 introduction, USGCB baselines have additional requirements that
supplement those presented in Section 5. This appendix details these additional requirements and presents
them based on the NCP Checklist Development Steps from Sections 5.1 and 5.2.
D.1

Developer Steps for Creating, Testing, and Submitting USGCB Baselines

A new USGCB baseline’s development is led by any US federal agency, which is referred to in thisappendix as the champion agency.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

This portion of the appendix lists additional requirements related to creating, testing, and submitting
USGCB baselines that the champion agency must follow. See Section 5.1 for the base requirements.
D.1.1

Initial Baseline Development

Each baseline originates from existing SCAP compliance and vulnerability final checklist posted on the
National Checklist Program (NCP) website. Based on this checklist, an agency may tailor these settings to
its enterprise environment. If the settings may be applicable to a broad range of federal systems, theagency should consider sending a representative to the Federal CIO Governance Committee for USGCB
to discuss promotion of the settings to a USGCB baseline. USGCB baselines should be consistent withthe guidance from NIST SP 800-53 Revision 4, which states that a baseline is “chosen based on the
security category and associated impact level of information systems determined in accordance with FIPS
Publication 199 and FIPS Publication 200, respectively.”
USGCB settings are compiled by platform; a single platform may include one or more versions (e.g.,
Windows 7 32-bit and Windows 7 64-bit). The champion agency must ensure that a discrete setting isdefined for each baseline configuration. Providing general guidance does not meet the settingsrequirement for a USGCB candidate. NIST recognizes that some configurations may be site specific anddefining discrete settings that could be mandated for all Federal agencies is not a trivial task. During thecreation of the candidate settings, the champion agency should remember that these settings are intended
to be used by all Federal agencies; therefore, the USGCB settings may be considered a common subset
applicable to all. USGCB candidates should reflect the minimum or core set of configurations that are
applicable for all Federal agencies. Agencies using a USGCB baseline may customize it, making thesettings more restrictive or appending additional settings. In the case of configurations applicable to abroad number of environments but not appropriate for all, USGCB introduces the notion of “Conditional”
status. For example, the use of wireless technologies may be allowed at some sites, but not at others. The
baseline would provide discrete wireless configurations applicable only to sites where wirelesstechnology is allowed.
Developing a viable USGCB baseline requires expertise with the IT product and the ability to balance
security and operational needs. During baseline development, discrete settings are defined, reviewed, andtested with the goal of arriving at a baseline that provides protection while allowing operational
functionality. The champion agency should draw on field experience and available security configuration
resources, such as government security guidelines, product security guidelines, and industry
recommendations when developing baseline settings. Each baseline should be referenced to a security
guide, such as a DISA STIG/checklist, an NSA security configuration guide, or a vendor security guide.
Champion agencies should also engage the product vendor during the baseline creation phase to ensure
supportability and applicability. After settings are selected, the champion agency considers how eachsetting functions (e.g., registry value or file version) and identifies available methods for assessing

32

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

compliance or determining a setting’s value. As the baseline is created, the developers will test thesystem’s behavior when settings are changed (e.g., examine the registry value, daemon, or service status).
Each USGCB candidate must be expressed as SCAP content. NIST recommends producing SCAP at thecurrent version of SCAP to take advantage of the latest specification features and SCAP productvalidation 19. If the SCAP content is produced in a version other than the latest, the SCAP content mustcomply with the requirements of the revision of NIST SP 800-126 commensurate with the corresponding
SCAP version, and the SCAP content must pass validation using the current version of the NIST SCAP
Content Validation Tool (SCAPVal).

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Using the latest version of SCAP is generally advantageous because the baseline can take advantage ofnewer specifications for more accurate checking, but it is not mandatory to use the latest SCAP version.
The champion agency should identify all baseline settings that do not have Open Vulnerability andAssessment Language (OVAL) checks, and then work with the product vendor to ensure that futureversions of OVAL support these checks. Similarly, the champion agency should identify all
configurations that do not have CCE identifiers and work with NIST and the content provider to ensureeach configuration setting has a populated CCE. 20 Where automated OVAL checks are not possible or
CCE identifiers cannot reasonably be supplied, each instance should be noted by the champion agency inthe known issues document that is included with the USGCB candidate submission.
In addition to configuration checks, the champion agency should include up-to-date patch content, and thechampion agency should continue to update the patch content before, during, and after baseline
submission.
D.1.2

Baseline Testing

There are two major aspects to USGCB candidate testing: verifying that the SCAP content is compliant
with SCAP technical requirements, and evaluating the baseline settings in an operational environment.
The champion agency should validate and test all SCAP content using the NIST SCAP Content
Validation Tool (SCAPVal). SCAPVal is revised periodically as the SCAP specifications are updated.
SCAP content testing must also include at least one validated SCAP validated product; the productchosen is at the discretion of the champion agency. If possible, validated product testing should simulate
the environment that USGCB consumers will experience. A list of current SCAP Validation products canbe found at https://scap.nist.gov/validation/index.html.
Testing with SCAP validated products should include assessing a system in three configurations:

Exact compliance: The configuration settings are equal to the discrete settings defined in the baseline.

Reduced compliance: The configuration settings are less restrictive than those defined in the baseline.

Enhanced compliance: The configuration settings are more restrictive than those defined in thebaseline.

In addition to verifying baseline compliance with SCAP requirements, the champion agency should also
test the baseline in an operational enterprise environment of considerable size that is representative of atypical Federal agency’s operational enterprise environment. This testing ensures the viability of thebaseline in an operational environment. NIST recommends testing the baseline for a minimum of threemonths. Evidence of field testing should be documented and include information about the location,

19

20

For additional information on SCAP product validation, see the Frequently Asked Questions at
https://scap.nist.gov/validation/faq.html.
For more information about CCE, visit https://nvd.nist.gov/config/cce.

33

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

duration, number of systems, issues identified, and successful resolution to known issues. The Field
Testing Report template is provided in Appendix D.3.
During the testing period, the baseline will be refined, arriving at a viable USGCB candidate baseline thatis secure while accommodating operational requirements. The concept of leveraging a field tested
configuration that provides security benefit without negative impact in an operational environment isparamount to the USGCB process. If baseline adjustments are needed to accommodate mission needs, thebaseline should be updated and redeployed to the same group of operational systems for additional fieldtesting.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

The configuration methods and materials are to be used for automating the configuration of test systems.
The intended use of the configuration materials is facilitating lab setup for USGCB end users who test thebaseline prior to deploying on operational systems. The format of these configuration materials may vary
between products. For example, Microsoft provides Group Policy Objects (GPOs), whereas Red Hat may
provide kickstart scripts.
The champion agency should work with the vendor and the author of the content during baseline
development and ensure the configuration automation materials produce a system that is USGCB
compliant. NIST recommends the vendor choose the method and materials for configuration support. All
configuration methods and materials in the USGCB candidate package should be fully tested, if possible
during the field testing activities, and include end user instructions. At a minimum, test cases should
ensure the methods and materials function as expected and produce a system that is compliant with the
USGCB candidate. It is preferable that these materials be supported by the product vendor.
The USGCB candidate settings should be reviewed and the results documented in the Field Testing
Report template located in D.3. During this review, the tester determines whether the baseline will haveoperational impact, addresses known issues discovered during field testing, and determines how to assesseach setting with OVAL. If the product vendor participates in the settings review and SCAP content
refinement, the vendor is encouraged to do the following:Highlight settings that may have operational impact on systems



Determine how each configuration setting can most accurately be assessed using an SCAP checking
language (e.g., OVAL, Open Checklist Interactive Language [OCIL])

D.1.3

Baseline Documented

In addition to the baseline documentation already mentioned, such as the SCAP content and theautomated configuration materials, other documentation is required for USGCB baselines.
Each baseline must be documented in a human-readable format, such as a settings spreadsheet, which lists
a discrete setting for every configuration in the baseline. NIST recognizes that inherent differences in
products will dictate variations in the settings documentation; however, the following fields are required:

CCE Identifier – List the CCE identifier corresponding to this setting, if availableDescription of the setting – Include information needed to manually configure or assess. This willvary between products. For example, Windows documents define the Policy Path and Policy Setting
Name, whereas Red Hat documents define the Technical Mechanism and Configuration Details.



Setting – List the discrete setting recommended for the baselineCategory – Use this column to indicate “Conditional” settings if appropriate

Additional information may be included in the settings spreadsheet to provide explanation or technicaldetails about the setting. Refer to https://usgcb.nist.gov for complete settings spreadsheets.

34

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

D.1.4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Baseline Submitted to NIST

Once the configuration baseline is defined, SCAP content is developed, and field testing is complete, thechampion agency will submit the USGCB candidate package to the NIST checklist repository. A
complete USGCB candidate submission must include the following:This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Baseline settings spreadsheet



SCAP content: automated checklist with validated SCAP data streams

Known issues spreadsheet, which lists all issues with the settings or SCAP data streams

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document that addresses the questions that baseline consumers
are most likely to have

Automated configuration materials (discussed below)

Field testing report

D.2

NIST Steps for Reviewing and Finalizing USGCB Baselines for Publication

This portion of the appendix lists additional requirements related to NIST screening and publishing
USGCB baselines. See Section 5.2 for the base requirements.
D.2.1

NIST Screening of the Baseline Package

NIST reviews the USGCB candidate submission and determines whether the submission meets all
requirements for candidacy, namely the elements required for all NCP submissions plus the required
USGCB elements, as listed in Appendix D.1.4. If the submission meets the requirements, NIST will post
the USGCB candidate according to the NIST open document vetting process, which is analogous toposting other content on CSRC (csrc.nist.gov). After the public comment period, NIST will conduct
comment adjudication and then provide the candidate USGCB baseline along with the adjudicatedcomments to the Federal CIO Governance Committee for final consideration. Follow the steps defined in
Section 5.2.
D.2.2

Final Listing on Checklist Repository, Maintenance, and Archival

After the Federal CIO Governance Committee CCB approves the final configuration, OMB, the ISIMC,
and the CIO Council formally release the USGCB final version and may provide a date for mandated
implementation. The final USGCB is posted to https://usgcb.nist.gov. This final package includes therequisite settings documentation, SCAP content, automated configuration scripts or virtual disk images,
an FAQ document, and a known issues document.
During maintenance, NIST coordinates with the product vendor, ensuring all automated configuration
files are kept current in accordance with the vendor’s update cycle as per Appendix B, item 5a.
D.3

Field Testing Report Template

The following is the Field Testing Report template required for all USGCB candidate submissions.

35

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

This Field Testing Report verifies successful testing of a USGCB candidate configuration in an
operational environment. This report must be included with the USGCB candidate package submitted to
the NIST National Checklist Program.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Champion Agency
Champion Agency
Point of Contact Name
POC Email
POC Phone
Field Testing Site Location(Organization and location)
Field Testing TechnicalPoint of Contact Name
POC Email
POC Phone
Dates of field testing
Number of systems tested at fieldsite
Issue identified with the baseline 21
Resolution to issue

21

Extend this template as needed in order to report all issues and the corresponding resolution.

36

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix E. Acronyms and Abbreviations
Selected acronyms and abbreviations used in the guide are defined below.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

AIC
CCB
CCE
CERT/CC
CMVP
CNSSI
COBIT
CPE
CSRDA
CVE
CVSS
DHCP
DHS
DISA
DNS
DoD
FAQ
FCL
FDCC
FedRAMP
FIPS
FISMA
GLBA
GPL
GPO
HIPAA
IA
IATF
IDS
IP
IR
IT
ITL
NCP
NIST
NSA
NVD
OCIL
OMB
OVAL
SCAP
SCAPVAL
SMTP
SNMP
SP
SSLF
STIG

Architecture and Infrastructure Committee
Change Control Board
Common Configuration Enumeration
Computer Emergency Response Team/Coordination Center
Cryptographic Module Validation Program
Committee on National Security Systems Instruction
Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies
Common Platform Enumeration
Cyber Security Research and Development Act of 2002
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures
Common Vulnerability Scoring System
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
Department of Homeland Security
Defense Information Systems Agency
Domain Name System
Department of Defense
Frequently Asked Questions
Final Checklist List
Federal Desktop Core Configuration
Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program
Federal Information Processing Standards
Federal Information Security Modernization Act
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
General Public License
Group Policy Object
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
Information Assurance
Information Assurance Technical Framework
Intrusion Detection System
Internet Protocol
Interagency Report
Information Technology
Information Technology Laboratory
National Checklist Program
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Security Agency
National Vulnerability Database
Open Checklist Interactive Language
Office of Management and Budget
Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language
Security Content Automation Protocol
Security Content Automation Protocol Validation Tool
Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
Simple Network Management Protocol
Special Publication
Specialized Security-Limited Functionality
Security Technical Implementation Guide
37

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

TIS
US-CERT
USGCB
VPN
XCCDF
XML

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Technology Infrastructure Subcommittee
United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team
United States Government Configuration Baseline
Virtual Private Network
Extensible Configuration Checklist Description Format
Extensible Markup Language

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

38

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix F. Glossary
Selected terms used in this guide are defined below. Definitions for some terms have been adapted from
[10].

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Audience

The intended audience that should be able to install, test, and use thechecklist, including suggested minimum skills and knowledge required tocorrectly use the checklist.

Author

The organization responsible for creating the checklist in its current format.
In most cases an organization will represent both the author and authority ofa checklist, but this is not always true. For example, if an organization
produces validated SCAP content for a NIST publication, the organizationthat created the SCAP content will be listed as the Author, but NIST willremain the Authority.

Authority

The organization responsible for producing the original security
configuration guidance represented by the checklist.

Authority TypeThe type of organization that is the authority for the checklist. The three
types are Governmental Authority, Software Vendor, and Third Party (e.g.,security organizations).

Automated Checklist

A checklist that is used through one or more tools that automatically alter orverify settings based on the contents of the checklist. Automated checklists
document their security settings in a machine-readable format, either
standard or proprietary.

Candidate Checklist

Checklist that has been screened and approved by NIST for public review.

Checklist

A document that contains instructions or procedures for configuring an IT
product to an operational environment, for verifying that the product has
been configured properly, and/or for identifying unauthorized configuration
changes to the product. Also referred to as a security configuration
checklist, lockdown guide, hardening guide, security guide, security
technical implementation guide (STIG), or benchmark.

Checklist Developer

An individual or organization that develops and owns a checklist andsubmits it to the National Checklist Program.

Checklist Group

Represents the grouping of checklists based on a common source material.
Commonly used if an organization packages multiple sets of productguidance under the same name.

Checklist Revision

Represents a change to the checklist content that does not affect theunderlying rule/value configuration guidance put forth by the content. A
scenario that would require a new checklist revision is when SCAP content
is created for a prose checklist. This revision would change the checklist's
content type from Prose to SCAP Content. A new checklist revision would
be created to accommodate this change, while still maintaining the Prosechecklist revision for interested parties.

Checklist RoleThe primary use or function of the IT product as described by the checklist(e.g., client desktop host, web server, bastion host, network borderprotection, intrusion detection).

39

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Checklist TypeThe type of checklist, such as Compliance, Vulnerability, and Specialized.

Content TypeThe form of the checklist content in terms of the degree of automation andstandardization. Examples include Prose, Automated, and SCAP Content.

Custom Environment

An environment containing systems in which the functionality and degreeof security do not fit the other types of environments.

Final Checklist

A checklist that has completed public review, has had all issues addressedby the checklist developer and NIST, and has been approved by NIST for
listing on the repository.

Final Checklist List
(FCL)

The listing of all final checklists on the NIST repository.

Independent Qualified
Reviewer

A Reviewer tasked by NIST with making a recommendation to NIST
regarding public review or listing of the checklist.

Legacy Environment

A Custom environment containing older systems or applications that may
need to be secured to meet today’s threats, but often use older, less securecommunication mechanisms and need to be able to communicate with othersystems.

Logo

The NIST National Checklist Program logo.

ManagedEnvironment

Environment comprising centrally managed IT products, everything ranging
from servers and printers to desktops, laptops, smartphones, and tablets.

NIST Checklist
Repository

The website that maintains the checklists, the descriptions of the checklists,and other information regarding the National Checklist Program. Also
known as the repository. https://checklists.nist.gov

Non-Automated
Checklist

A checklist that is designed to be used manually, such as English prose
instructions that describe the steps an administrator should take to secure asystem or to verify its security settings.

Operational
Environment

The type of environment in which the checklist is intended to be applied.
Types of operational environments are Standalone, Managed, and Custom(including Specialized Security-Limited Functionality, Legacy, and UnitedStates Government).

Product Category

The main product category of the IT product (e.g., firewall, IDS, operating
system, web server).

Prose Checklist

A checklist that provides a narrative descriptions of how a person canmanually alter a product’s configuration.

Public Reviewer

A member of the general public who reviews a candidate checklist andsends comments to NIST.

Review Status

The status of the checklist within the internal NCP review process. Possible
status options are: Candidate, Final, Archived, or Under Review. A status of"Final" signifies that NCP has reviewed the checklist and has accepted it for
publication within the program.

SCAP Content
Checklist

An automated checklist that adheres to the SCAP specification in NIST SP
800-126 for documenting security settings in machine-readable
standardized SCAP formats.

40

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Specialized SecurityLimited Functionality(SSLF) Environment

A Custom environment that is highly restrictive and secure; it is usuallyreserved for systems that have the highest threats and associated impacts.

Standalone
Environment

Environment containing individually managed devices (e.g., desktops,
laptops, smartphones, tablets).

TargetThe set of specific IT systems or applications for which a checklist has beencreated.

Target Operational
Environment

The IT product’s operational environment, such as Standalone, Managed, orCustom (with description, such as Specialized Security-Limited
Functionality, Legacy, or United States Government). Generally only
applicable for security compliance/vulnerability checklists.

United States
Government
Environment

A Custom environment that contains federal government systems to be
secured according to prescribed configurations as mandated by policy.

41

NIST SP 800-70 REV. 4

NATIONAL CHECKLIST PROGRAM FOR IT PRODUCTS

Appendix G. Change Log
Revision 4 Release 1 – February 15, 2018
• Made minor editorial changes throughout the document.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-70r4

Revision 4 Release 0 – August 1, 2017
• Revised front matter for the document.
• Made minor editorial changes throughout the document.
• Removed the checklist “tier” and “SCAP Expressed” concepts throughout the document.
Included removing several fields from Table 1 in Section 5.1.3, which lists the checklist
description form fields that developers are to complete.
• Revised the descriptions of checklist content types in Section 4.2 (examples are Prose,
Automated, and SCAP Content).
• Renamed the “Target Product” checklist description form field to “Target”, and renamed “Target
Audience” to “Audience” in Table 1 in Section 5.1.3.
• Updated Appendix B to reference NIST SP 800-70 Revision 4 instead of Revision 3, use updated
URLs, and loosen the requirement in 5(c).
• Updated Appendix C to reference NIST SP 800-70 Revision 4 instead of Revision 3.
• Recompiled the glossary.
Revision 3 Release 1 – December 8, 2016
• Revised the Executive Summary and Section 4.2 to reflect that federal civilian agencies should
use government-authorized or mandated checklists if they are available.
• Replaced the description in Section 3.5 of the Sector-Specific environment with the United States
Government environment description. Changed the name of this environment throughout the
publication.
• Selected reference URLs have been updated in Appendix A and throughout the publication.

42