# BSI C5:2020 OPS-23 — Managing Vulnerabilities, Malfunctions and Errors - System Hardening - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ops-23-managing-vulnerabilities-malfunctions-and-errors-system-hardening - Section: [Compliance](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance) › [BSI C5:2020 (Cloud Computing Compliance Criteria)](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020) › Operations Security (OPS) - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **BSI C5:2020**·Criterion `OPS-23`·high·Component: **Operations Security** ## What this control requires > Hardens production environment components per industry standards, documenting requirements. Verifies immutable images for compliance, retaining configuration logs to ensure secure configurations protect cloud customer data from attacks. > > — BSI C5:2020, Criterion OPS-23 ### In plain English Hardens production environment components per industry standards, documenting requirements. In practice, this means you can prove you risk - configuration-level controls on a defined cadence. ## Why it matters BSI C5 is the default cloud-security baseline German public-sector buyers and many DAX-listed enterprises expect; gaps here directly block procurement in the DACH region and frequently appear as must-have items in EU public-tender documents. This control is rated **high**. Auditors expect a named owner, a remediation SLA, and a tooling artefact that evidences continuous operation. ## What an auditor looks for A C5 attesting auditor (under ISAE 3000 / IDW PS 860) tests both the design and — for a Type 2 — the operating effectiveness over the attestation period. For each criterion they look for both the Basic and any in-scope Additional objectives. Within **Operations Security**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Criterion OPS-23) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### Configuration Management **Policy-as-code.** Codify the control as Service Control Policies (AWS), Azure Policy initiatives, or Organisation Policy (GCP) so the platform enforces what the document promises. **IaC.** Gate Terraform / Pulumi / CloudFormation changes with Checkov / tfsec / OPA so misconfigurations never reach production. **Drift.** Run a CSPM (Wiz / Prisma / Defender for Cloud / Security Command Center) over every account and route findings to a single risk register. #### Cloud Posture **CSPM.** Run Wiz / Prisma / Defender for Cloud / Security Command Center over every account; auto-ticket findings above your accepted-risk threshold. #### Policy Management **Docs.** Keep each policy in version-controlled Markdown alongside the code that implements it; ship a signed PDF snapshot at each annual review and link the SHA into the SoA. ### Operational checklist - **Risk.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Security.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Data.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Policy.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Secure.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** - configuration, cloud customer data, management. ## Evidence to collect - **Policy Document.** A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document. Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Managing Vulnerabilities, Malfunctions and Errors - System Hardening. ## Common pitfalls - Manual cloud-console changes that never make it back to Terraform — drift accumulates until the next outage forces a reconciliation. - Treating CSPM findings as a backlog instead of a hot queue: findings older than the policy SLA accumulate until the auditor asks why. - Policies that no engineer has read; the version in Confluence drifts from the version that's actually being enforced. - Scans that hit only the perimeter; missing authenticated scans of OS, runtime libs and base images so most CVEs are invisible. ## How it maps to other frameworks Computed from shared tags, control component and key-operation subjects — handy when you are reconciling controls across an audit. - [**NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3 3.4.6** — Least Functionality](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-4-6-least-functionality) - [**CIS Controls v8 3.12** — Segment Data Processing and Storage Based on Sensitivity](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/cis-controls-v8/3-12-segment-data-processing-and-storage-based-on-sensitivity) - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.8** — Management of technical vulnerabilities](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-8-management-of-technical-vulnerabilities) - [**NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-9** — Configuration Management Plan](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cm-9-configuration-management-plan) - [**SOC 2 (2017 TSC) CC3.1** — Objective Setting](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-1-objective-setting) ## Related controls in BSI C5:2020 - [**Criterion OPS-18** — Managing Vulnerabilities, Malfunctions and Errors - Concept](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ops-18-managing-vulnerabilities-malfunctions-and-errors-concept) - [**Criterion OPS-22** — Testing and Documentation of known Vulnerabilities](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ops-22-testing-and-documentation-of-known-vulnerabilities) - [**Criterion OPS-19** — Managing Vulnerabilities, Malfunctions and Errors - Penetration Tests](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ops-19-managing-vulnerabilities-malfunctions-and-errors-penetration-tests) - [**Criterion AM-02** — Acceptable Use and Safe Handling of Assets Policy](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/am-02-acceptable-use-and-safe-handling-of-assets-policy) - [**Criterion COM-03** — Internal audits of the information security management system](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/com-03-internal-audits-of-the-information-security-management-system) - [**Criterion OIS-05** — Contact with Relevant Government Agencies and Interest Groups](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ois-05-contact-with-relevant-government-agencies-and-interest-groups) ## References - [Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik (BSI) — BSI C5:2020](https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/Topics/CloudComputing/Compliance_Criteria_Catalogue/Compliance_Criteria_Catalogue_node.html) - Catalogue identifier: `Criterion OPS-23` Topics: governance riskconfiguration managementcloud posturepolicy managementvulnerability management ## Related compliance guidance - [SOC 2 compliance: a practical implementation guide for cloud-native SaaS teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria): Configuration checks like this one are the technical half of a SOC 2 / ISO 27001 programme — the guide shows where they fit, what else an auditor expects, and how to evidence them. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 compliance: a practical implementation guide](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022): ISO 27001 Annex A.8 (technological controls) is where cloud hardening evidence lands; the guide shows how to run the ISMS around it.