SA 8(30) Procedural Rigor

---
name: "SA-8(30)_procedural-rigor"
description: "Implement the security design principle of procedural rigor in [organization-defined]."
category: "configuration"
version: "5.2.0"
author: "cyberstrike-official"
tags:
  - nist
  - sp800-53
  - rev5
  - sa-8-30
  - sa
  - enhancement
tech_stack:
  - any
cwe_ids:
  - CWE-16
chains_with: []
prerequisites:
  - SA-8
severity_boost: {}
---

# SA-8(30) Procedural Rigor

> **Enhancement of:** SA-8

## High-Level Description

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

The principle of procedural rigor states that the rigor of a system life cycle process is commensurate with its intended trustworthiness. Procedural rigor defines the scope, depth, and detail of the system life cycle procedures. Rigorous system life cycle procedures contribute to the assurance that the system is correct and free of unintended functionality in several ways. First, the procedures impose checks and balances on the life cycle process such that the introduction of unspecified functionality is prevented.

Second, rigorous procedures applied to systems security engineering activities that produce specifications and other system design documents contribute to the ability to understand the system as it has been built rather than trusting that the component, as implemented, is the authoritative (and potentially misleading) specification.

Finally, modifications to an existing system component are easier when there are detailed specifications that describe its current design instead of studying source code or schematics to try to understand how it works. Procedural rigor helps ensure that security functional and assurance requirements have been satisfied, and it contributes to a better-informed basis for the determination of trustworthiness and risk posture. Procedural rigor is commensurate with the degree of assurance desired for the system. If the required trustworthiness of the system is low, a high level of procedural rigor may add unnecessary cost, whereas when high trustworthiness is critical, the cost of high procedural rigor is merited.

## What to Check

- [ ] Verify SA-8(30) Procedural Rigor is documented in SSP
- [ ] Confirm control is operating effectively
- [ ] Review evidence of continuous monitoring for SA-8(30)
- [ ] Verify enhancement builds upon base control SA-8

## How to Test

### Step 1: Review Documentation

Examine the System Security Plan (SSP) and related artifacts for SA-8(30) 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

Implement the security design principle of procedural rigor in [organization-defined].

### Implementation Guidance

The principle of procedural rigor states that the rigor of a system life cycle process is commensurate with its intended trustworthiness. Procedural rigor defines the scope, depth, and detail of the system life cycle procedures. Rigorous system life cycle procedures contribute to the assurance that the system is correct and free of unintended functionality in several ways. First, the procedures impose checks and balances on the life cycle process such that the introduction of unspecified functionality is prevented.

Second, rigorous procedures applied to systems security engineering activities that produce specifications and other system design documents contribute to the ability to understand the system as it has been built rather than trusting that the component, as implemented, is the authoritative (and potentially misleading) specification.

Finally, modifications to an existing system component are easier when there are detailed specifications that describe its current design instead of studying source code or schematics to try to understand how it works. Procedural rigor helps ensure that security functional and assurance requirements have been satisfied, and it contributes to a better-informed basis for the determination of trustworthiness and risk posture. Procedural rigor is commensurate with the degree of assurance desired for the system. If the required trustworthiness of the system is low, a high level of procedural rigor may add unnecessary cost, whereas when high trustworthiness is critical, the cost of high procedural rigor is merited.

## Risk Assessment

| Finding                                   | Severity | Impact                                     |
| ----------------------------------------- | -------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| SA-8(30) Procedural Rigor not implemented | Medium   | System and Services Acquisition            |
| SA-8(30) partially implemented            | Low      | Incomplete System and Services Acquisition |

## CWE Categories

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

## References

- [NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 - SA-8(30)](https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/cprt/catalog#/cprt/framework/version/SP_800_53_5_1_1/home?element=sa-8.30)
- [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