Protect nonlocal maintenance sessions by: Employing [organization-defined] ; and Separating the maintenance sessions from other network sessions with
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add CyberStrikeus/CyberStrike --skill ma-4-4-authentication-and-separation-of --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Ma 4 4 Authentication And Separation Of?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/cyberstrikeus-ma-4-4-authentication-and-separation-of)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: "MA-4(4)_authentication-and-separation-of-maintenance-sessions"
description: "Protect nonlocal maintenance sessions by: Employing [organization-defined] ; and Separating the maintenance sessions from other network sessions with "
category: "configuration"
version: "5.2.0"
author: "cyberstrike-official"
tags:
- nist
- sp800-53
- rev5
- ma-4-4
- ma
- enhancement
tech_stack:
- linux
- windows
cwe_ids: []
chains_with: []
prerequisites:
- MA-4
severity_boost: {}
---
# MA-4(4) Authentication and Separation of Maintenance Sessions
> **Enhancement of:** MA-4
## High-Level Description
**Family:** Maintenance (MA)
**Framework:** NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5
Communications paths can be logically separated using encryption.
## What to Check
- [ ] Verify MA-4(4) Authentication and Separation of Maintenance Sessions is documented in SSP
- [ ] Validate all 3 control requirements are implemented
- [ ] Confirm control is operating effectively
- [ ] Review evidence of continuous monitoring for MA-4(4)
- [ ] Verify enhancement builds upon base control MA-4
## How to Test
### Step 1: Review Documentation
Examine the System Security Plan (SSP) and related artifacts for MA-4(4) implementation details. Verify the organization has documented how this control is satisfied.
### Step 2: Validate Implementation
```
# For cloud environments, use cloud-audit-mcp tools
# For on-premises, review system configurations directly
# Example: Check if account management policies exist
grep -r "account.management\|access.control" /etc/security/ 2>/dev/null
```
### Step 3: Test Operating Effectiveness
Verify the control is actively functioning, not just documented. Check logs, configurations, and operational evidence.
## Tools
| Tool | Purpose | Usage |
| ------------- | --------------------------------- | ----- |
| Manual Review | Documentation and interview-based | N/A |
## Remediation Guide
### Control Statement
Protect nonlocal maintenance sessions by:
Employing [organization-defined] ; and
Separating the maintenance sessions from other network sessions with the system by either:
Physically separated communications paths; or
Logically separated communications paths.
### Implementation Guidance
Communications paths can be logically separated using encryption.
## Risk Assessment
| Finding | Severity | Impact |
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ---------------------- |
| MA-4(4) Authentication and Separation of Maintenance Sessions not implemented | Medium | Maintenance |
| MA-4(4) partially implemented | Low | Incomplete Maintenance |
## CWE Categories
| CWE ID | Title |
| ------ | --------------------- |
| N/A | No direct CWE mapping |
## References
- [NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 - MA-4(4)](https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/cprt/catalog#/cprt/framework/version/SP_800_53_5_1_1/home?element=ma-4.4)
- [NIST SP 800-53A Rev 5 (Assessment Procedures)](https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/53/a/r5/final)
- [NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 Full Catalog](https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/53/r5/upd1/final)
## Checklist
- [ ] Control documented in SSP
- [ ] Implementation evidence collected
- [ ] Operating effectiveness validated
- [ ] Continuous monitoring in place
- [ ] Related controls (none) reviewed
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!