# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-48 — Sensor Relocation - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-48-sensor-relocation - 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) › SC — System and Communications Protection - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5**·Control `SC-48`·high·Component: **System and Communications Protection** ## What this control requires > Relocate sensors and monitoring capabilities to different locations under defined conditions or circumstances to prevent adversaries from exploiting blind spots in the organization's monitoring infrastructure. This action impedes lateral movement within the system and can be based on threat intelligence or randomly to confuse adversaries. This control supports the Sensors and Monitoring Systems capability within the System and Communications Protection family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control SC-48 ### In plain English Relocate sensors and monitoring capabilities to different locations under defined conditions or circumstances to prevent adversaries from exploiting blind spots in the organization's monitoring infrastructure. 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 **System and Communications Protection**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control SC-48) 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. #### 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. #### 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. ### Operational checklist - **Security.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Configuration.** 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. - **System.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** management, conditions, organization, system, threat, protection, configuration, capability. ## 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: Sensor Relocation. ## 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. - Manual cloud-console changes that never make it back to Terraform — drift accumulates until the next outage forces a reconciliation. - Default-allow egress rules; East-West traffic with no segmentation; jump hosts on the public internet with password auth. ## 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 3.14.6** — System Monitoring](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-14-6-system-monitoring) - [**BSI C5:2020 OPS-14** — Logging and Monitoring - Storage of the Logging Data](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/bsi-c5-2020/ops-14-logging-and-monitoring-storage-of-the-logging-data) - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.5.34** — Privacy and protection of personal identifiable information (PII)](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-5-34-privacy-and-protection-of-personal-identifiable-information-pii) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control SC-7(5)** — Deny By Default -- Allow By Exception](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-7-5-deny-by-default-allow-by-exception) - [**Control SC-10** — Network Disconnect](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-10-network-disconnect) - [**Control SC-4(1)** — Security Levels](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-4-1-security-levels) - [**Control SC-7(8)** — Route Traffic To Authenticated Proxy Servers](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-7-8-route-traffic-to-authenticated-proxy-servers) - [**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(22)** — Separate Subnets For Connecting To Different Security Domains](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/sc-7-22-separate-subnets-for-connecting-to-different-security-domains) ## 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 SC-48` Topics: logging monitoringcloud infrastructurecloud postureconfiguration managementnetwork securitythreat intelligence ## 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.