# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AU-9(5) — Dual Authorization - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-9-5-dual-authorization - 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-9(5)`·high·Component: **Audit and Accountability** ## What this control requires > Enforces dual authorization for movement or deletion of defined audit information, requiring approval from two authorized individuals to prevent collusion. This control supports the Dual Authorization System capability within the Audit and Accountability family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control AU-9(5) ### In plain English Enforces dual authorization for movement or deletion of defined audit information, requiring approval from two authorized individuals to prevent collusion. In practice, this means you can prove you dual management-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-9(5)) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### Incident Response **Runbook.** Maintain a runbook keyed by incident type with named roles (IC, comms, scribe), an out-of-band comms channel, and a 72-hour timeline for external notification. **Tabletop.** Run a quarterly tabletop exercise (ransomware, insider, supply-chain) and feed gaps back into the runbook. #### 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 - **Dual.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Audit.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Information.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Response.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **System.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** management, authorization, information, system, audit information, capability, accountability, movement. ## Evidence to collect - **Ticketing Workflow.** `ticketing_workflow` evidence - **Infra Scan.** Continuous infrastructure-posture telemetry — AWS Config, Azure Policy compliance, GCP Organisation Policy, Wiz / Prisma findings. Workflow metrics (ServiceNow, Jira) show approvals and remediation. Focus: Dual Authorization. ## Common pitfalls - Runbooks that name a role but no person, or list a paging channel that no longer exists. - 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) - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.5.8** — Information security in project management](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-5-8-information-security-in-project-management) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control AU-2** — Event Logging](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-2-event-logging) - [**Control AU-12(3)** — Changes By Authorized Individuals](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-12-3-changes-by-authorized-individuals) - [**Control AU-16(3)** — Disassociability](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-16-3-disassociability) - [**Control AU-6(1)** — Automated Process Integration](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-6-1-automated-process-integration) - [**Control AU-9(7)** — Store On Component With Different Operating System](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-9-7-store-on-component-with-different-operating-system) - [**Control AU-16** — Cross-Organizational Audit Logging](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-16-cross-organizational-audit-logging) ## 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-9(5)` Topics: governance riskchange managementincident responselogging 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.