# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 RA-5(8) — Review Historic Audit Logs - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-8-review-historic-audit-logs - 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) › RA — Risk Assessment - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5**·Control `RA-5(8)`·high·Component: **Risk Assessment** ## What this control requires > Analyze historic audit logs to check if newly identified vulnerabilities in systems were previously exploited, providing insight into intrusion methods, damage scope, and attack duration. This control supports the Forensic Analysis Engine capability within the Risk Assessment family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control RA-5(8) ### In plain English Analyze historic audit logs to check if newly identified vulnerabilities in systems were previously exploited, providing insight into intrusion methods, damage scope, and attack duration. 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 **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 **Risk Assessment**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control RA-5(8)) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### 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. #### 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. #### Vulnerability Management **Scanners.** Pair an unauthenticated scanner (Nessus / Qualys / Tenable.io) for external surface with an authenticated agent for OS/library CVEs on every host. **SLA.** Document remediation SLAs by CVSS / EPSS: critical 7 days, high 30 days, medium 90 days; report monthly trend to leadership. **Containers.** Scan images in CI (Trivy / Grype / Snyk Container) AND at runtime; block deploys on critical findings without exception. ### Operational checklist - **Policy.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Audit.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Review.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Control.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Vulnerability.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** management, analysis, assessment, review, capability, systems, policy, vulnerability. ## Evidence to collect - **Policy Document.** A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document. Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Review Historic Audit Logs. ## Common pitfalls - Per-account logging that nobody stitches together at the org level — incidents that cross accounts go undetected for days. - Policies that no engineer has read; the version in Confluence drifts from the version that's actually being enforced. - Scans that hit only the perimeter; missing authenticated scans of OS, runtime libs and base images so most CVEs are invisible. ## 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. - [**CIS Controls v8 8.2** — Collect Audit Logs](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/cis-controls-v8/8-2-collect-audit-logs) - [**NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3 3.12.1** — Security Assessment](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-12-1-security-assessment) - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.34** — Protection of information systems during audit testing](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-34-protection-of-information-systems-during-audit-testing) - [**SOC 2 (2017 TSC) CC3.3** — Fraud Risk Assessment](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-3-fraud-risk-assessment) - [**HIPAA (45 CFR Part 164) 164.308(a)(1)(ii)(D)** — Security Management Process -Information System Activity Review](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/hipaa/164-308-a-1-ii-d-security-management-process-information-system-activity-review) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control RA-5(2)** — Update Vulnerabilities To Be Scanned](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-2-update-vulnerabilities-to-be-scanned) - [**Control CA-7(1)** — Independent Assessment](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ca-7-1-independent-assessment) - [**Control SA-8(7)** — Reduced Complexity](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sa-8-7-reduced-complexity) - [**Control RA-5(4)** — Discoverable Information](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-4-discoverable-information) - [**Control AU-12(2)** — Standardized Formats](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/au-12-2-standardized-formats) - [**Control RA-5(6)** — Automated Trend Analyses](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-6-automated-trend-analyses) ## 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 RA-5(8)` Topics: governance risklogging monitoringpolicy managementvulnerability management ## 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.