| ID | Name | |
| RA-2 | Security Categorization | |
| ID | Name | Description | D3FEND | |
| CM0089 | Assessment & Authorization | Assessment and authorization (A&A) is a structured, formal process through which an organization evaluates the extent to which a system's design and implementation satisfy a defined set of security requirements, and grants or denies authorization for that system to operate based on the assessed risk. For space mission systems, A&A may apply to spacecraft, ground systems, mission networks, supporting infrastructure, common controls, and the interfaces and dependencies among them. The authorization scope and boundary must be defined by the governing risk management framework, mission architecture, information types, applicable requirements, and organizational risk decisions. The assessment phase produces evidence concerning whether selected controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended, and producing the required security outcomes. The resulting authorization package should contain the system security plan, assessment reports, plan of action and milestones, executive risk summary, and other evidence required by the authorizing authority. The authorization decision, made by a designated authority with accountability for accepting the residual risk of operating the system, formally records the organization's acceptance of that risk and establishes the conditions under which the system may operate. Authorization must be supported throughout the system lifecycle by continuous monitoring, security impact analysis, updated risk information, and maintenance of the authorization evidence. Proposed system changes must be assessed before implementation when they could affect the authorization boundary, control implementation, or accepted risk. Significant changes or material deviations from the authorization basis must be reported to the authorizing authority, who determines whether additional assessment, modified authorization conditions, or reauthorization is required. | ||
| ID | Name | Description | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ID | Description | |
| SPARTA ID | Requirement | Rationale/Additional Guidance/Notes |
|---|---|---|
| SPR-282 | The [organization] shall use all-source intelligence analysis of suppliers and potential suppliers of the information system, system components, or system services to inform engineering, acquisition, and risk management decisions.{SV-SP-3,SV-SP-4,SV-AV-7,SV-SP-11}{PM-16,PM-30,RA-2,RA-3(1),RA-3(2),RA-7,SA-9,SA-12(8),SR-5(2)} | * The Program should also consider sub suppliers and potential sub suppliers. * All-source intelligence of suppliers that the organization may use includes: (1) Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Threat Assessment Center (TAC), the enterprise focal point for supplier threat assessments for the DOD acquisition community risks; (2) Other U.S. Government resources including: (a) Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) – Database where government and industry can record issues with suppliers, including counterfeits; and (b) System for Award Management (SAM) – Database of companies that are barred from doing business with the US Government. |
| SPR-286 | The [organization] shall conduct an assessment of risk prior to each milestone review [SRR\PDR\CDR], including the likelihood and magnitude of harm, from the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of the platform and the information it processes, stores, or transmits.{SV-MA-4}{RA-2,RA-3,SA-8(25)} | Major design decisions must reflect updated threat posture. Pre-milestone risk review prevents costly redesign. Structured evaluation supports informed governance. Early risk integration enhances mission confidence. |
| SPR-382 | The [organization] shall categorize the system and information it processes in accordance with FIPS 199.{SV-MA-6}{RA-2} | Impact categorization guides control selection. Formal classification ensures proportional protection. Defined impact levels strengthen risk alignment. Compliance supports federal mandate adherence. |