# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CP-10(6) — Component Protection

- Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-10-6-component-protection
- 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) › CP — Contingency Planning
- Last updated: 2026-06-05
- Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com)

**NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5**·Control `CP-10(6)`·high·Component: **Contingency Planning**

## What this control requires

> Protect recovery/reconstitution components (e.g., router tables, compilers) using physical/technical controls to ensure integrity and availability. This control supports the Physical Security System capability within the Contingency Planning family.
> 
> — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control CP-10(6)

### In plain English

Protect recovery/reconstitution components (e.g., router tables, compilers) using physical/technical controls to ensure integrity and availability. In practice, this means you can prove you security 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 **Contingency Planning**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control CP-10(6)) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles.

## How to implement

#### Cloud Posture

**CSPM.** Run Wiz / Prisma / Defender for Cloud / Security Command Center over every account; auto-ticket findings above your accepted-risk threshold.

#### Network Security

**AWS.** VPC Flow Logs to S3, default-deny security groups, AWS Network Firewall for north-south, and Transit Gateway for hub-and-spoke segmentation.

**Azure.** NSGs with deny-by-default, Azure Firewall Premium with TLS inspection, Private Endpoints for PaaS, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud's secure score for drift.

**GCP.** VPC Service Controls perimeters around sensitive APIs, Cloud NGFW Enterprise for L7 inspection, Private Service Connect for managed services.

#### 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.

### Operational checklist

-   **Security.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
-   **Configuration.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
-   **Physical.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
-   **Network.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
-   **Protection.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
-   **Scope:** management, system, e, controls, protection, configuration, components, recovery reconstitution.

## Evidence to collect

-   **Infra Scan.** Continuous infrastructure-posture telemetry — AWS Config, Azure Policy compliance, GCP Organisation Policy, Wiz / Prisma findings.

Infrastructure posture tooling (AWS Config, Azure Policy, Nessus) verifies platform hardening. Focus: Component Protection.

## Common pitfalls

-   Treating CSPM findings as a backlog instead of a hot queue: findings older than the policy SLA accumulate until the auditor asks why.
-   Default-allow egress rules; East-West traffic with no segmentation; jump hosts on the public internet with password auth.
-   Manual cloud-console changes that never make it back to Terraform — drift accumulates until the next outage forces a reconciliation.

## 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 3.4.12** — System and Component Configuration for High-Risk Areas](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-4-12-system-and-component-configuration-for-high-risk-areas)
-   [**BSI C5:2020 COS-05** — Networks for administration](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/cos-05-networks-for-administration)
-   [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.22** — Segregation of networks](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-22-segregation-of-networks)

## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5

-   [**Control CP-10(4)** — Restore Within Time Period](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-10-4-restore-within-time-period)
-   [**Control CP-6(2)** — Recovery Time And Recovery Point Objectives](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-6-2-recovery-time-and-recovery-point-objectives)
-   [**Control SC-7(16)** — Prevent Discovery Of System Components](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-7-16-prevent-discovery-of-system-components)
-   [**Control SC-7(29)** — Separate Subnets To Isolate Functions](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-7-29-separate-subnets-to-isolate-functions)
-   [**Control SI-13(5)** — Failover Capability](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-13-5-failover-capability)
-   [**Control CP-9(5)** — Transfer To Alternate Storage Site](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-9-5-transfer-to-alternate-storage-site)

## 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 CP-10(6)`

Topics: network securitycloud postureconfiguration managementbackup recovery

## 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.