Skip to content
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
43 changes: 43 additions & 0 deletions skills/compliance/pci-dss-review/SKILL.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -138,6 +138,43 @@ PCI DSS v4.0 requires scope confirmation at least every 12 months and upon signi
- All in-scope system components are identified
- Segmentation controls are validated

#### 1.5 Significant Change Scope Impact Analysis (Req 12.5.3)

For each significant change, verify that PCI scope impact was assessed before production release or through a documented emergency-change follow-up.
Comment on lines +141 to +143

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Keep 12.5.3 scoped to service-provider organizational changes

This new gate applies Req 12.5.3 to every significant technical/environment change, but PCI DSS v4.0 12.5.3 is an additional requirement for service providers covering significant organizational-structure changes and communication of the documented scope/control impact review to executive management. For merchants or changes like serverless payment flows, firewall rules, or cloud architecture, this will make the skill cite the wrong requirement and produce false high-severity 12.5.3 findings instead of using 12.5.2 and the applicable testing requirements.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.


**Significant-change triggers to look for:**

- New or changed payment channel, payment page, API, mobile flow, serverless function, queue, storage bucket, or batch process that can store, process, transmit, or redirect CHD/SAD.
- Network, firewall, routing, VPN, Kubernetes, security group, IAM, or DNS changes that affect CDE segmentation or connected-to systems.
- New security-impacting services for the CDE, including identity providers, logging/SIEM, endpoint security, vulnerability scanning, secrets management, backup, monitoring, and admin access paths.
- TPSP additions or responsibility changes, including payment processors, fraud providers, analytics tags, payment page scripts, hosting providers, and managed security providers.
- Cloud architecture changes that alter shared responsibility, inherited controls, region/account/project boundaries, or data residency.

**Evidence required:**

| Evidence Item | What to Verify |
|---|---|
| Change record | Change ID, owner, date, risk classification, and whether PCI impact was considered |
| Data flow update | CHD/SAD flow diagram updated or explicitly confirmed unchanged |
| Scope inventory update | CDE, connected-to, and security-impacting system list updated |
| Segmentation validation | Firewall/route/security group/Kubernetes policy impact reviewed; penetration-test or validation evidence refreshed when segmentation changed |
| TPSP matrix update | Provider inventory, written responsibility acknowledgments, AoC/ROC status, and responsibility matrix updated when providers or duties changed |
| Control evidence refresh | Requirements affected by the change mapped to updated evidence, including Req 1, 6, 10, 11, and 12 where applicable |
| Approval and residual risk | PCI owner, security owner, and business owner sign-off with residual scope risk documented |

**What constitutes a finding:**

| Condition | Severity |
|---|---|
| Significant change deployed with no PCI scope impact analysis | High |
| New CHD/SAD flow not reflected in scope diagrams or system inventory | High |
| Segmentation-affecting change lacks revalidation evidence | High |
| TPSP or payment page responsibility changed without updating provider inventory and responsibility matrix | High |
| Emergency change lacks retrospective scope impact review | Medium |
| Scope reduction claim lacks updated evidence after architecture change | Medium |

**False positive to avoid:** Do not credit annual scope confirmation as proof that mid-cycle significant changes were assessed. Req 12.5.3 requires change-specific evidence that the change was evaluated for PCI DSS scope impact.

---

### Step 2: Requirement-by-Requirement Assessment
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -425,6 +462,12 @@ Note: Not all requirements support the Customized Approach. Requirements with "T
- **Connected-to systems**: [list]
- **Third-party service providers in scope**: [list]

## Significant Change Scope Impact

| Change ID | Trigger | CHD/SAD Flow Impact | Scope Inventory Updated | Segmentation Revalidated | TPSP Matrix Updated | Evidence Refreshed | Owner / Approval | Status |
|-----------|---------|---------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------|---------------------|--------------------|------------------|--------|
| [change] | [payment/network/TPSP/cloud/etc.] | [Yes/No/Unknown] | [Yes/No] | [Yes/No/N/A] | [Yes/No/N/A] | [requirements/evidence] | [owner/date] | [Pass/Partial/Fail] |

## Requirement Assessment Summary

| Req | Title | Sub-Reqs Assessed | In Place | Not in Place | CCW | N/A |
Expand Down
108 changes: 108 additions & 0 deletions skills/compliance/pci-dss-review/tests/scope-change-edge-cases.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
# PCI Scope Change Edge Cases

These fixtures validate PCI DSS v4.0 review behavior for significant-change scope impact analysis under Req 12.5.3.

## Case 1: New Serverless Payment Flow After Annual Review

```yaml
annual_scope_review:
completed: "2026-01-15"
change:
id: CHG-101
deployed: "2026-04-10"
component: payment-webhook-lambda
handles:
- payment_token
- transaction_metadata
pci_scope_impact_review: missing
cde_diagram_updated: false
```

**Expected result:** High severity finding.

**Reason:** A new payment flow was deployed after annual scope confirmation without change-specific PCI scope impact evidence.

## Case 2: Segmentation Change Without Revalidation

```yaml
change:
id: CHG-202
type: firewall_rule_update
affects:
- cde_to_corp_network
- admin_vpn_to_cde
segmentation_validation:
updated_pen_test: false
route_review: partial
security_owner_approval: true
```

**Expected result:** High severity finding.

**Reason:** Segmentation-affecting changes require refreshed validation evidence; approval alone does not prove segmentation remains effective.

## Case 3: TPSP Responsibility Changed

```yaml
provider_change:
id: CHG-303
provider: fraud-analytics-saas
new_data_access:
- transaction_id
- masked_pan
tpsp_inventory_updated: false
responsibility_matrix_updated: false
aoc_reviewed: false
```

**Expected result:** High severity finding.

**Reason:** Provider responsibility and data access changed, but the TPSP inventory, responsibility matrix, and compliance evidence were not refreshed.

## Case 4: Complete Scope Impact Evidence

```yaml
scope_change_impact:
change_id: CHG-404
trigger: new_payment_api
owner: pci-program-manager
reviewed_before_release: true
data_flow_update:
chd_sad_flow_changed: true
diagram_version: cde-flow-v18
scope_inventory:
cde_components_added:
- payment-api
connected_to_systems_added:
- auth-service
- siem-forwarder
segmentation:
affected: true
validation_evidence: seg-test-2026-06-01
tpsp:
affected: true
responsibility_matrix_version: tpsp-raci-v9
aoc_status_reviewed: true
evidence_refresh:
requirements:
- "1"
- "6"
- "10"
- "11"
- "12"
approvals:
security_owner: approved
business_owner: approved
pci_owner: approved
```

**Expected result:** Pass for Req 12.5.3 evidence if implementation evidence matches the record.

**Reason:** The change is explicitly tied to scope, data-flow, segmentation, TPSP, evidence refresh, and owner approval artifacts.

## Review Assertions

- Do not accept annual scope confirmation as proof of mid-cycle change review.
- Confirm payment, network, cloud, TPSP, and security-impacting changes trigger PCI scope impact analysis.
- Confirm segmentation changes refresh validation evidence.
- Confirm scope reduction claims are updated after architecture changes.