A.8.14 Technological
Redundancy of information processing facilities
Structured attributes from ISO/IEC 27002:2022 — control type · CIA properties · cybersecurity concept · operational capability · security domain. What do these mean?
Mapped NIST 800-53 r5 controls (12)
Our AI-authored reading (authority llm_unverified, under review) of how this ISO control and each NIST 800-53 control relate. Not an ISO or NIST product.
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- CP-10mostlyaligns with — Both controls require duplicating processing capabilities and establishing activation procedures so that operations can continue after primary-component failure.
- CP-7mostlyaligns with — Both controls mandate geographically or physically separate alternate processing sites that mirror primary systems to sustain availability.
- CP-2partialaligns with — Both controls require organizations to plan and document how redundant resources will be activated to meet availability objectives.
- CP-4partialaligns with — Both controls stress testing failover mechanisms to verify that redundant components function as intended.
- SC-24partialaligns with — Both controls emphasize designing systems to transition into a known, secure operational state when a component fails.
Aligned NIST CSF 2.0 outcomes (8)
NIST CSF 2.0 outcomes this ISO control aligns with — our AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review).
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- PR.IR-03fullcovers — The ISO control's mandate to design and implement redundant architectures, failover procedures, and testing directly fulfills the CSF outcome of achieving resilience requirements in both normal and adverse situations.
- PR.IR-04mostlyaligns with — By requiring duplicated processing facilities and load-balancing mechanisms, the ISO control ensures adequate resource capacity to maintain availability during component failures.
- ID.AM-08partialaligns with — The control's emphasis on maintaining redundant systems throughout their life cycle supports the CSF outcome of managing assets across their entire operational lifespan.
- ID.IM-04partialaligns with — The requirement to test failover procedures and maintain redundant facilities aligns with the CSF outcome of establishing and maintaining incident response and operational continuity plans.
Related weaknesses / CWE (19)
Weakness classes this ISO control helps prevent or mitigate — our AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review).
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- CWE-1050partialmitigates — Redundancy can absorb some resource spikes but does not prevent the loop defect.
- CWE-1251partialmitigates — Redundancy mechanisms can reduce the impact of mirrored-region divergence but do not guarantee ongoing synchronization.
- CWE-400partialmitigates — By duplicating processing facilities and load-balancing across instances, the control reduces the likelihood that a single resource-exhaustion attack will render the service unavailable.
- CWE-407partialmitigates — Redundancy of processing facilities can absorb resource exhaustion from inefficient algorithms.
- CWE-409partialmitigates — Redundancy helps availability but does not address the root cause of the weakness.
- CWE-410partialmitigates — Redundancy of processing facilities mitigates resource exhaustion by providing failover capacity.
- CWE-770partialmitigates — Architectural redundancy and automatic failover limit the impact of an attacker who forces excessive allocations, because spare capacity can absorb the load until the primary instance recovers.
- CWE-1072nonenone — Redundancy of processing facilities may mitigate availability impact of connection exhaustion but does not require connection pooling.
- CWE-1088nonemitigates — Redundancy and failover mechanisms can mitigate the impact of a hung synchronous call but do not enforce timeouts.
- CWE-1250nonenone — Redundancy mechanisms can reduce divergence risk but do not guarantee consistency across independent state copies.
- CWE-1304nonenone — Redundancy of processing facilities may mitigate impact but does not address integrity verification of configuration state.
- CWE-1334nonemitigates — Redundancy of information processing facilities directly addresses the loss of hardware redundancy that CWE-1334 exploits.
- CWE-920nonenone — Redundancy provisions can indirectly reduce power spikes but do not address power-consumption limits.
Control IDs, short titles and the structured attribute table (control type, CIA properties, cybersecurity-concept, operational capability, security domain) are facts from ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A / ISO/IEC 27002:2022. The full implementation guidance prose lives in ISO/IEC 27002:2022 — not reproduced here. Cross-walks to NIST 800-53, NIST CSF 2.0, OWASP ASVS, CWE, MITRE ATT&CK and OWASP Web Top 10 are our own AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review), not an ISO, NIST, MITRE or OWASP product — how ours compare.