# NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SI-14 — Non-Persistence - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-14-non-persistence - 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) › SI — System and Information Integrity - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5**·Control `SI-14`·high·Component: **System and Information Integrity** ## What this control requires > Implement non-persistent system components and services that are initialized in a known state and terminated periodically or at the end of a session. This reduces the attack surface and mitigates the risks from advanced persistent threats (APTs) by limiting the time adversaries have to exploit vulnerabilities. Non-persistence is achieved through techniques like system refreshes, reimaging, or virtualization. This control supports the System Hardening, Virtualization capability within the System and Information Integrity family. > > — NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, Control SI-14 ### In plain English Implement non-persistent system components and services that are initialized in a known state and terminated periodically or at the end of a session. 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 **System and Information Integrity**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Control SI-14) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### 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. - **Information.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Session.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Time.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **System.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** management, information, system, virtualization, time, components, services, capability. ## Evidence to collect - **Policy Document.** A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document. Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Non-Persistence. ## Common pitfalls - 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. - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.8** — Management of technical vulnerabilities](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-8-management-of-technical-vulnerabilities) ## Related controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 - [**Control SI-13(3)** — Manual Transfer Between Components](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-13-3-manual-transfer-between-components) - [**Control PM-32** — Purposing](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/pm-32-purposing) - [**Control SI-7(16)** — Time Limit On Process Execution Without Supervision](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-7-16-time-limit-on-process-execution-without-supervision) - [**Control SI-13(1)** — Transferring Component Responsibilities](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-13-1-transferring-component-responsibilities) - [**Control SI-2(3)** — Time To Remediate Flaws And Benchmarks For Corrective Actions](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-2-3-time-to-remediate-flaws-and-benchmarks-for-corrective-actions) - [**Control SI-13** — Predictable Failure Prevention](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/si-13-predictable-failure-prevention) ## 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 SI-14` Topics: governance riskpolicy 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.