# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AU-7 — Audit Record Reduction And Report Generation - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-7-audit-record-reduction-and-report-generation - Section: [Compliance](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance) › [NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 Controls](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5) › AU — Audit and Accountability - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5**·Control `AU-7`·high·Component: **Audit and Accountability** ## What this control requires > Provides audit record reduction and report generation to support on-demand review, analysis, and reporting, and after-the-fact investigations, without altering original audit record content or time ordering. This control supports the Audit Reduction Tool capability within the Audit and Accountability family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control AU-7 ### In plain English Provides audit record reduction and report generation to support on-demand review, analysis, and reporting, and after-the-fact investigations, without altering original audit record content or time ordering. In practice, this means you can prove you audit time-level controls on a defined cadence. ## Why it matters SP 800-53 is the catalogue every U.S. federal authorisation (FedRAMP, FISMA, CMMC) and most regulated industries point at. A missing control surfaces as a Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M) item that an Authorizing Official must approve before the Authority To Operate is granted or renewed. 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 3PAO (FedRAMP) or Independent Assessor (NIST RMF) tests against NIST SP 800-53A assessment procedures. For each control they expect a documented implementation that addresses every assessment objective (Examine, Interview, Test) and an implementation summary in the System Security Plan. Within **Audit and Accountability**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control AU-7) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### Secure Development **Pipeline.** Require code review, SAST (Semgrep / Snyk Code), SCA (Dependabot / Renovate), secret-scanning and IaC scanning in the merge pipeline. **Branch protection.** Protected branches enforce reviews, signed commits and passing CI before merge; document the protection rules as the control evidence. #### Code Review Testing **Pipeline.** Require at least one human reviewer plus passing CI (lint, type, unit, security scan) before merge — protected branches enforce this. #### Logging Monitoring **AWS.** Org-trail CloudTrail to a central log archive account, GuardDuty in every region, and Security Hub for cross-source correlation. **Azure.** Pipe every diagnostic setting into a central Log Analytics workspace; onboard Microsoft Sentinel for SIEM/SOAR. **GCP.** Aggregate audit logs in a dedicated logging project with sink to BigQuery; enable Security Command Center Premium and route findings to Chronicle SIEM. ### Operational checklist - **Audit.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Review.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Content.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Audit Record.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Time.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** time, analysis, generation, review, capability, content, accountability, tool capability. ## Evidence to collect - **Code Repo Scan.** Source-control evidence — branch protection, required reviewers, CI status, SCA / SAST reports. Source control pipelines (GitHub, GitLab) enforce SDLC guardrails. Focus: Audit Record Reduction And Report Generation. ## Common pitfalls - CI security checks set to warn-only; the merge button is faster than the security feedback. - Per-account logging that nobody stitches together at the org level — incidents that cross accounts go undetected for days. ## 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 3.3.6** — Audit Record Reduction and Report Generation](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-3-6-audit-record-reduction-and-report-generation) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control AU-6(3)** — Correlate Audit Record Repositories](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-6-3-correlate-audit-record-repositories) - [**Control AU-6** — Audit Record Review, Analysis, And Reporting](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-6-audit-record-review-analysis-and-reporting) - [**Control SA-14** — Criticality Analysis](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sa-14-criticality-analysis) - [**Control AU-9(2)** — Store On Separate Physical Systems Or Components](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-9-2-store-on-separate-physical-systems-or-components) - [**Control RA-5(11)** — Public Disclosure Program](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-11-public-disclosure-program) - [**Control SA-12(13)** — Critical Information System Components](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sa-12-13-critical-information-system-components) ## References - [NIST Computer Security Resource Center — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5](https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/risk-management/sp800-53-controls) - Catalogue identifier: `Control AU-7` Topics: governance risksecure developmentcode review testingdevsecopslogging monitoring ## Related compliance guidance - [NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5: a practical implementation guide for cloud teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5): Start with the full NIST SP 800-53 implementation guide — scope, roadmap, evidence and how the assessment runs. - [NIST SP 800-171 and CMMC: a practical guide to protecting CUI in the cloud](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3): If your obligation is protecting CUI in your own systems for a federal or defence contract, this derived subset — not the full catalogue — is the requirement. - [SOC 2 compliance: a practical implementation guide for cloud-native SaaS teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria): Most commercial SaaS already hold a SOC 2 Type 2, and FedRAMP 20x Class A is designed for providers that have one.