03.03.01
Event Logging
Apply event logging to produce reliable logs and review routines that show what happened in the environment for CPCSC Level 2 readiness.
Last updated June 25, 2026
Apply response to audit logging process failures to produce reliable logs and review routines that show what happened in the environment for CPCSC Level 2 readiness. This guide separates the official ITSP.10.171 control language from practical implementation, evidence, auditor questions, and related controls.
Official ITSP.10.171 wording for 03.03.04. Use the Cyber Centre publication and contract requirements as the source of truth for certification, assessment, or procurement submissions.
Contains information sourced from Government of Canada material used under the Open Government Licence - Canada.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures is part of the CPCSC Level 2 Audit and accountability family. This is about keeping logs that are useful enough to reconstruct security-relevant activity and reviewed often enough to catch issues.
For a founder, CISO, engineer, or compliance owner, the practical question is whether response to audit logging process failures is visible in real operating evidence: a setting, workflow, ticket, log, approval, review, or exception record that can survive an external assessment.
Level 2 is different from Level 1 because the evidence has to survive an external assessment. A policy statement helps, but the stronger answer is a record that shows who did the work, when it ran, what system setting or workflow enforced it, and how exceptions were handled.
Define the in-scope systems, owners, users, vendors, and data flows affected by response to audit logging process failures.
Define events to log, centralize logs where possible, synchronize time, protect logs from tampering, and document alert or review workflows.
Translate the formal requirement into one or two operating procedures: who performs it, how often, where it is recorded, and who approves exceptions.
Configure the relevant systems so the control is enforced by identity, endpoint, cloud, network, ticketing, monitoring, vendor, or documentation workflows rather than memory.
Keep evidence in a consistent folder, GRC system, ticket queue, or audit workspace so an assessor can trace the control from requirement to implementation to review.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: logging standard.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: SIEM or log dashboard screenshots.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: event source inventory.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: log review tickets.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: time synchronization settings.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: log retention settings.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: owner assignment and review cadence.
Response to Audit Logging Process Failures: exception, remediation, or POA&M records when the control is not fully implemented.
Where is response to audit logging process failures implemented in the in-scope environment?
Who owns response to audit logging process failures, and how do they know it is operating?
Show the evidence that proves response to audit logging process failures ran during the assessment period.
What happens when response to audit logging process failures fails, is bypassed, or has an exception?
How does this control connect to the system security plan, risk register, POA&M, and related CPCSC controls?
Formal control language is sourced from the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security ITSP.10.171 publication. CPCSC Level 2 assessment context references the Government of Canada CPCSC program overview and ITSP.10.171-01 assessment guidance.
CPCSC Program OverviewITSP.10.171ITSP.10.171-01Open Government Licence - Canada