CMMC 3.4.2 (Security Configuration Enforcement): Evidence Examples & What Assessors Actually Check

Control: NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 §3.4.2 · CMMC Practice: CM.L2-3.4.2 · Updated June 2026

Plain-English answer

3.4.2 requires you to establish security configuration settings for your IT products and enforce them. Establishing usually means adopting a hardening baseline (CIS Benchmarks or DISA STIGs). Enforcing means pushing those settings centrally and detecting drift — not hoping each machine was set up correctly. It builds directly on the baseline from 3.4.1.

Who this applies to

Every organization seeking CMMC Level 2 for a CUI environment.

Why it matters

Misconfiguration is one of the most common ways systems get compromised. Hardened, enforced settings shrink the attack surface. It carries a weighted SPRS deduction if unmet (verify the exact value against the DoD Assessment Methodology).

Control lineage

  • CMMC Practice: CM.L2-3.4.2
  • NIST 800-171 Rev. 2: §3.4.2 — establish and enforce security configuration settings for information technology products employed in organizational systems.
  • NIST 800-171A objectives: [a] security configuration settings for IT products are established and included in the baseline configuration; [b] those security configuration settings are enforced.

What the assessor will EXAMINE

  • The documented secure configuration settings (the hardening standard adopted, e.g., CIS/STIG).
  • The enforcement mechanism — group policy / Intune configuration profiles / MDM / config management tooling.
  • Compliance/drift reports showing systems match the settings.
  • Configuration-management policy and the SSP narrative for 3.4.2.

What the assessor will INTERVIEW & TEST

  • Interview: "What hardening standard do you use, and how is it enforced and monitored for drift?" — name the benchmark + the enforcement + the drift report.
  • Test: Inspect a sampled endpoint/server against the documented settings.
  • Test: Review a compliance report to confirm enforcement holds across the fleet, not just one machine.

Evidence examples (produce these)

  • Documented secure-configuration standard (CIS Benchmark / STIG profile adopted).
  • Enforcement configuration export (GPO / Intune profile / config-management policy).
  • Compliance/drift report per system, dated, showing conformance.
  • SSP section 3.4.2 referencing the above.

Platform-specific

  • Microsoft GCC High: Intune security baselines / configuration profiles + compliance reporting; Defender for Cloud secure-config recommendations.
  • Endpoints generally: MDM/RMM-enforced CIS settings with a conformance report.

Common failure patterns

  • Settings are "documented" but not centrally enforced — objective [b] fails.
  • No recognized hardening baseline; settings are ad hoc and undefendable.
  • Enforced on workstations but not servers (or vice versa) — partial coverage.
  • No drift detection, so machines silently fall out of compliance.

SPRS impact & POA&M

SPRS: 3.4.2 carries a weighted deduction (verify the exact value). POA&M: confirm 3.4.2's POA&M eligibility against current CMMC rules before assuming it can be deferred.

Assessor-ready summary

You're good on 3.4.2 when a recognized hardening standard is documented and included in your baseline; settings are centrally enforced across in-scope systems; drift is detected and reported; and the SSP matches the enforcement.

Are your hardened settings actually enforced — and can you prove it fleet-wide? Get a configuration-enforcement evidence map →

Related: 3.4.1 Baseline Configuration · All control pages · Calculate your SPRS score

Athena prepares organizations for CMMC Level 2; certification rests with C3PAOs/DIBCAC. CIS Benchmarks and DISA STIGs are the property of their respective owners. Verify all control facts against NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2, NIST SP 800-171A, and current CMMC rules.