# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CP-3(1) — Simulated Events - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-3-1-simulated-events - 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-3(1)`·high·Component: **Contingency Planning** ## What this control requires > Incorporate simulated events (e.g., cyberattacks, disasters) in contingency training to prepare personnel for real crises, enhancing response effectiveness. This control supports the Simulation capability within the Contingency Planning family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control CP-3(1) ### In plain English Incorporate simulated events (e.g., cyberattacks, disasters) in contingency training to prepare personnel for real crises, enhancing response effectiveness. In practice, this means you can prove you security personnel-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-3(1)) 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. ### Operational checklist - **Security.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Review.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Response.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Control.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Testing,.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** personnel, e, review, events, capability, response, security, code. ## 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: Simulated Events. ## Common pitfalls - CI security checks set to warn-only; the merge button is faster than the security feedback. ## 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 3.14.2** — Malicious Code Protection](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-14-2-malicious-code-protection) - [**SOC 2 (2017 TSC) CC1.4** — Competence and Training](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc1-4-competence-and-training) - [**CIS Controls v8 16.12** — Implement Code-Level Security Checks](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/cis-controls-v8/16-12-implement-code-level-security-checks) - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.28** — Secure coding](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-28-secure-coding) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control AT-2(3)** — Social Engineering And Mining](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/at-2-3-social-engineering-and-mining) - [**Control AT-2(4)** — Suspicious Communications And Anomalous System Behavior](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/at-2-4-suspicious-communications-and-anomalous-system-behavior) - [**Control CP-10** — System Recovery And Reconstitution](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/cp-10-system-recovery-and-reconstitution) - [**Control MA-3** — Maintenance Tools](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ma-3-maintenance-tools) - [**Control CA-7** — Continuous Monitoring](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ca-7-continuous-monitoring) - [**Control SA-14** — Criticality Analysis](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sa-14-criticality-analysis) ## 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-3(1)` Topics: awareness trainingsecure developmentcode review testingdevsecopssecurity training ## 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.