OpenControls Logo

STIG Viewer

STIGViewer Support

The ALG must implement signature based and/or nonsignature based malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code.

Overview

Finding IDVersionRule IDIA ControlsSeverity
V-263547SRG-NET-000765-ALG-000170SV-263547r981672_ruleCCI-004963medium
Description
System entry and exit points include firewalls, remote access servers, workstations, electronic mail servers, web servers, proxy servers, notebook computers, and mobile devices. Malicious code includes viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware. Malicious code can also be encoded in various formats contained within compressed or hidden files or hidden in files using techniques such as steganography. Malicious code can be inserted into systems in a variety of ways, including by electronic mail, the world wide web, and portable storage devices. Malicious code insertions occur through the exploitation of system vulnerabilities. A variety of technologies and methods exist to limit or eliminate the effects of malicious code. Malicious code protection mechanisms include both signature- and nonsignature-based technologies. Nonsignature-based detection mechanisms include artificial intelligence techniques that use heuristics to detect, analyze, and describe the characteristics or behavior of malicious code and to provide controls against such code for which signatures do not yet exist or for which existing signatures may not be effective. Malicious code for which active signatures do not yet exist or may be ineffective includes polymorphic malicious code (i.e., code that changes signatures when it replicates). Nonsignature-based mechanisms also include reputation-based technologies. In addition to the above technologies, pervasive configuration management, comprehensive software integrity controls, and anti-exploitation software may be effective in preventing the execution of unauthorized code. Malicious code may be present in commercial off-the-shelf software as well as custom-built software and could include logic bombs, backdoors, and other types of attacks that could affect organizational mission and business functions. In situations where malicious code cannot be detected by detection methods or technologies, organizations rely on other types of controls, including secure coding practices, configuration management and control, trusted procurement processes, and monitoring practices to ensure that software does not perform functions other than the functions intended. Organizations may determine that, in response to the detection of malicious code, different actions may be warranted. For example, organizations can define actions in response to malicious code detection during periodic scans, the detection of malicious downloads, or the detection of maliciousness when attempting to open or execute files.
STIGDate
Application Layer Gateway Security Requirements Guide2025-09-15

Related Frameworks

1 mapping across 5 frameworks
SCF0 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 3 hops (15) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

CFG-02Secure Baseline Configurations
1.00
CRY-01Use of Cryptographic Controls
1.00
CRY-01.1Alternate Physical Protection
1.00
CRY-03Transmission Confidentiality
1.00
CRY-04Transmission Integrity
1.00
CRY-05Encrypting Data At Rest
1.00
DCH-01Data Protection
1.00
IAC-21Least Privilege
1.00
END-04Malicious Code Protection (Anti-Malware)
0.50
END-04.1Automatic Antimalware Signature Updates
0.50

+5 more (top 10 by confidence shown)

NIST 800-530 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 2 hops (1) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

SI-3Malicious Code Protection
1.00
NIST 800-1710 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 3 hops (5) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

3.14.1
1.00
3.14.2
1.00
3.14.3
1.00
3.14.4
1.00
3.14.5
1.00
CCI1 mapping
CCI-004963
1.00
NIST CSF 2.00 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 3 hops (7) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

PR.DS-01
1.00
PR.DS-02
1.00
PR.DS-10
1.00
DE.CM-09
0.50
ID.RA-01
0.50
ID.RA-08
0.50
PR.PS-02
0.50

Who does this work

8 NICE work roles and 7 EC-Council certifications.

This is an inference across published mappings, not a single claim by anyone. This check maps to a control, which maps to a Cybersecurity Framework outcome, which NIST assigns to the work roles below. EC-Council separately maps its certifications to those same roles.

A certification prepares someone for a role. It is not evidence that a holder is qualified, and neither NIST nor EC-Council has stated that any certification here addresses this check.

Work-role assignments published by NIST (NICE Framework Components 2.2.0 and the CSF 2.0 OLIR crosswalk). Certification mappings published by EC-Council.

Details

Check Text (C-263547r981672_chk)

Verify the ALG is configured to implement signature based and/or nonsignature based malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code. If the ALG is not configured to implement signature based and/or nonsignature based malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code, this is a finding.

Fix Text (F-67355r981671_fix)

Configure the ALG to implement signature based and/or nonsignature based malicious code protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and eradicate malicious code.