SA 11 Developer Testing And Evaluation

---
name: "SA-11_developer-testing-and-evaluation"
description: "Require the developer of the system, system component, or system service, at all post-design stages of the system development life cycle, to: Develop "
category: "configuration"
version: "5.2.0"
author: "cyberstrike-official"
tags:
  - nist
  - sp800-53
  - rev5
  - sa-11
  - sa
tech_stack:
  - any
cwe_ids:
  - CWE-16
chains_with:
  - CA-2
  - CA-7
  - CM-4
  - SA-3
  - SA-4
  - SA-5
  - SA-8
  - SA-15
  - SA-17
  - SI-2
prerequisites: []
severity_boost:
  CA-2: "Chain with CA-2 for comprehensive security coverage"
  CA-7: "Chain with CA-7 for comprehensive security coverage"
  CM-4: "Chain with CM-4 for comprehensive security coverage"
---

# SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation

## High-Level Description

**Family:** System and Services Acquisition (SA)
**Framework:** NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5

Developmental testing and evaluation confirms that the required controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended, enforcing the desired security and privacy policies, and meeting established security and privacy requirements. Security properties of systems and the privacy of individuals may be affected by the interconnection of system components or changes to those components. The interconnections or changes—including upgrading or replacing applications, operating systems, and firmware—may adversely affect previously implemented controls. Ongoing assessment during development allows for additional types of testing and evaluation that developers can conduct to reduce or eliminate potential flaws. Testing custom software applications may require approaches such as manual code review, security architecture review, and penetration testing, as well as and static analysis, dynamic analysis, binary analysis, or a hybrid of the three analysis approaches.

Developers can use the analysis approaches, along with security instrumentation and fuzzing, in a variety of tools and in source code reviews. The security and privacy assessment plans include the specific activities that developers plan to carry out, including the types of analyses, testing, evaluation, and reviews of software and firmware components; the degree of rigor to be applied; the frequency of the ongoing testing and evaluation; and the types of artifacts produced during those processes. The depth of testing and evaluation refers to the rigor and level of detail associated with the assessment process. The coverage of testing and evaluation refers to the scope (i.e., number and type) of the artifacts included in the assessment process. Contracts specify the acceptance criteria for security and privacy assessment plans, flaw remediation processes, and the evidence that the plans and processes have been diligently applied. Methods for reviewing and protecting assessment plans, evidence, and documentation are commensurate with the security category or classification level of the system. Contracts may specify protection requirements for documentation.

## What to Check

- [ ] Verify SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation is documented in SSP
- [ ] Validate all 5 control requirements are implemented
- [ ] Confirm control is operating effectively
- [ ] Review evidence of continuous monitoring for SA-11

## How to Test

### Step 1: Review Documentation

Examine the System Security Plan (SSP) and related artifacts for SA-11 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

Require the developer of the system, system component, or system service, at all post-design stages of the system development life cycle, to:
Develop and implement a plan for ongoing security and privacy control assessments;
Perform [organization-defined] testing/evaluation [organization-defined] at [organization-defined];
Produce evidence of the execution of the assessment plan and the results of the testing and evaluation;
Implement a verifiable flaw remediation process; and
Correct flaws identified during testing and evaluation.

### Implementation Guidance

Developmental testing and evaluation confirms that the required controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended, enforcing the desired security and privacy policies, and meeting established security and privacy requirements. Security properties of systems and the privacy of individuals may be affected by the interconnection of system components or changes to those components. The interconnections or changes—including upgrading or replacing applications, operating systems, and firmware—may adversely affect previously implemented controls. Ongoing assessment during development allows for additional types of testing and evaluation that developers can conduct to reduce or eliminate potential flaws. Testing custom software applications may require approaches such as manual code review, security architecture review, and penetration testing, as well as and static analysis, dynamic analysis, binary analysis, or a hybrid of the three analysis approaches.

Developers can use the analysis approaches, along with security instrumentation and fuzzing, in a variety of tools and in source code reviews. The security and privacy assessment plans include the specific activities that developers plan to carry out, including the types of analyses, testing, evaluation, and reviews of software and firmware components; the degree of rigor to be applied; the frequency of the ongoing testing and evaluation; and the types of artifacts produced during those processes. The depth of testing and evaluation refers to the rigor and level of detail associated with the assessment process. The coverage of testing and evaluation refers to the scope (i.e., number and type) of the artifacts included in the assessment process. Contracts specify the acceptance criteria for security and privacy assessment plans, flaw remediation processes, and the evidence that the plans and processes have been diligently applied. Methods for reviewing and protecting assessment plans, evidence, and documentation are commensurate with the security category or classification level of the system. Contracts may specify protection requirements for documentation.

## Risk Assessment

| Finding                                                | Severity | Impact                                     |
| ------------------------------------------------------ | -------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation not implemented | Medium   | System and Services Acquisition            |
| SA-11 partially implemented                            | Low      | Incomplete System and Services Acquisition |

## CWE Categories

| CWE ID | Title         |
| ------ | ------------- |
| CWE-16 | Configuration |

## References

- [NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 - SA-11](https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/cprt/catalog#/cprt/framework/version/SP_800_53_5_1_1/home?element=sa-11)
- [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 (CA-2, CA-7, CM-4, SA-3, SA-4) reviewed