NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 PE-6(2) — Automated Intrusion Recognition And Responses

What this control requires

The control requires recognizing specific types of intrusions and initiating predefined response actions using automated mechanisms. These responses may include alerting organizational personnel, law enforcement, or triggering physical security mechanisms like door locks. This integrated system helps ensure a coordinated and swift response to physical security threats. This control supports the Automated Intrusion Detection and Response Systems capability within the Physical and Environmental Protection family.

In plain English

The control requires recognizing specific types of intrusions and initiating predefined response actions using automated mechanisms. In practice, this means you can prove you policy 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 critical in the source catalogue. Treat gaps here as production incidents in the risk register, not housekeeping.

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 Physical and Environmental Protection, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control PE-6(2)) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles.

How to implement

Physical Security

Inheritance. For cloud-only operations, inherit physical controls from the provider's SOC 2 / ISO 27001 report and document the inheritance in the SoA.

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

• Policy. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Security. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Detection. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Physical. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Protection. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Scope: management, actions, enforcement, system, personnel, protection, capability, security mechanisms.

Evidence to collect

• Policy Document. A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document.

Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Automated Intrusion Recognition And Responses.

Common pitfalls

• Policies that no engineer has read; the version in Confluence drifts from the version that's actually being enforced.

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 3.3.5 — Audit Record Review, Analysis, and Reporting
• HIPAA (45 CFR Part 164) 164.512(f)(5) — Disclosures for law enforcement purposes: crime on premises

Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5

• Control SC-49 — Hardware-Enforced Separation And Policy Enforcement
• Control SC-50 — Software-Enforced Separation And Policy Enforcement
• Control PE-19 — Information Leakage
• Control SA-8(26) — Performance Security
• Control SC-46 — Cross Domain Policy Enforcement
• Control PE-18(1) — Facility Site

References

• NIST Computer Security Resource Center — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5
• Catalogue identifier: Control PE-6(2)

Topics: governance riskphysical securitypolicy management