Safeguard 13.2: Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Detection Solution

“Safeguard 13.2: deploy a host-based intrusion detection solution requirement” is straightforward on paper: put host-based detection on systems so you can detect suspicious activity that network controls miss. In real operations, most control failures happen in three places: incomplete agent coverage, noisy detections that teams mute without governance, and lack of evidence that anyone reviews alerts or follows up.

This requirement page is written for a Compliance Officer, CCO, or GRC lead who needs to translate CIS Safeguard 13.2 into an implementable control with clear ownership, minimum operational steps, and an evidence trail that survives an audit. CIS Controls v8 is a framework standard (not a law), so you are usually meeting it because a customer, regulator, insurer, or internal policy adopted it. That means your goal is defensible implementation: you can explain what is deployed, where it is deployed, how it is monitored, and how you know it remains deployed over time. (CIS Controls v8)

The guidance below assumes you may already run EDR. If you do, your fastest path is to map your existing EDR operating model to 13.2 and fill the evidence gaps, rather than rebuilding tooling. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Regulatory text

Framework excerpt: “CIS Controls v8 safeguard 13.2 implementation expectation (Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Detection Solution).” (CIS Controls v8)

Operator interpretation (what you must do):

1. Deploy a host-based detection capability (agent or equivalent) on in-scope endpoints and servers so you can detect suspicious behavior locally, not only at the network perimeter. (CIS Controls v8)
2. Operate it continuously: confirm the agents are healthy, detections are generated, alerts are reviewed, and response actions are tracked. “Installed” without monitoring is an incomplete control in practice. (CIS Controls v8)
3. Prove it with evidence: document coverage, configurations, and a repeatable review cadence so you can demonstrate ongoing control operation. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Plain-English interpretation

Safeguard 13.2 means: put an intrusion detection capability on hosts (workstations and servers) and run it like a program. The detection can be “classic HIDS” (file integrity monitoring, log-based rules) or EDR-style behavioral detection, as long as it is host-based and you can show it detects and reports suspicious activity from the endpoint itself. (CIS Controls v8)

From a GRC perspective, auditors and customers will test two things:

• Coverage: are the right assets protected (including remote laptops, cloud VMs, and privileged jump hosts)?
• Operation: do alerts flow to a monitored queue, get reviewed, and result in documented actions?

Who it applies to (entity and operational context)

This applies to enterprises and technology organizations implementing CIS Controls v8 as a control baseline. (CIS Controls v8)

Operationally, it applies wherever you have:

• Corporate endpoints (managed laptops/desktops)
• Servers (on-prem, cloud IaaS, critical SaaS management jump boxes)
• High-risk populations (admins, developers with production access, finance endpoints)
• Systems handling sensitive data or supporting critical services

If you have multiple subsidiaries or environments, scope is where teams usually get stuck. Start with: “All managed endpoints and servers that authenticate to corporate identity or process company data.” Then document exceptions. (CIS Controls v8)

What you actually need to do (step-by-step)

1) Define scope and ownership (control design)

• Name a control owner (Security Ops, IT, or a shared model). Compliance should be the accountability driver, not the alert triage team.
• Define in-scope asset classes: endpoints, servers, cloud VMs, VDI, containers (if agent-based coverage is feasible), and any “specials” (OT, labs).
• Decide what “HIDS” is in your environment:
  • If you already have EDR deployed, treat it as the HIDS control and document the mapping. (CIS Controls v8)
  • If you run file integrity monitoring (FIM) and host log agents with correlation, document that combination as your HIDS capability. (CIS Controls v8)

Deliverable: a one-page control statement for Safeguard 13.2 that defines scope, tooling, and responsible teams. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

2) Standardize the technical implementation (control build)

• Select the agent(s) and standardize by platform: Windows, macOS, Linux; separate server and workstation policies if needed.

• Define baseline policies:

  • Prevention vs detection mode (where applicable)
  • Tamper protection settings
  • Local logging level and retention on host (if used)
  • Alert severity mapping (what is “high,” “medium,” “low” in your SOC queue)

• Integrate alerting:

  • Route alerts to a monitored system (SIEM, SOAR, ticketing, or the EDR console with on-call coverage).
  • Ensure identity context is captured (host, user, process lineage) to support investigation.

Control intent: host-based signals must produce actionable alerts that someone can review. (CIS Controls v8)

3) Deploy and measure coverage (control rollout)

• Roll out by rings: IT, security, then general population; separately handle servers with change control.
• Track coverage with an authoritative inventory (CMDB, endpoint management, cloud inventory) and reconcile with the HIDS/EDR console.
• Create an exceptions process for:
  • Incompatible systems
  • High-availability servers where agent install must be scheduled
  • Third-party managed systems where you may only get logs, not an agent

Practical test: you should be able to produce a list of in-scope assets and show which have an active agent and last check-in timestamp. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

4) Tune detections and define “done” criteria (control operation)

Out-of-box policies often create noise. Noise causes silent failure because teams start ignoring alerts.

• Define tuning governance:

  • Who can create exclusions
  • Approval requirements for exclusions on critical assets
  • Time-bounded exclusions with review dates

• Define minimum operational workflows:

  • Alert triage (acknowledge, classify, assign)
  • Investigation notes (what was checked)
  • Containment actions (isolation, kill process, block hash)
  • Closure codes (true positive, benign positive, false positive, needs tuning)

Deliverable: written alert handling SOPs tied to the HIDS/EDR tool. (CIS Controls v8)

5) Establish recurring evidence capture (audit readiness)

CIS adoption often fails on evidence, not implementation. Your evidence program should be automatic where possible. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Minimum recurring checks to operationalize:

• Agent health/coverage review
• Alert review and case tracking
• Exception and exclusion review
• Access review for HIDS/EDR admin roles

If you use Daydream for control operations, map Safeguard 13.2 to a documented control and schedule recurring evidence capture (coverage exports, alert queue screenshots/exports, and exception approvals) so audits become retrieval, not reconstruction. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Required evidence and artifacts to retain

Keep evidence that proves design, implementation, and ongoing operation. A tight evidence set beats a sprawling folder.

Control design artifacts

• Control narrative for Safeguard 13.2: objective, scope, system owners, tooling used (EDR/HIDS), and alert monitoring model. (CIS Controls v8)
• RACI chart or equivalent ownership record (who deploys, who monitors, who approves exceptions).

Implementation artifacts (point-in-time)

• Deployment standard or configuration baseline (policy settings, tamper protection approach).
• Rollout plan and change records for server deployment (where applicable).
• Inventory-to-agent reconciliation report showing coverage and gaps. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Operating artifacts (recurring)

• Agent health reports (check-in status, inactive agents list) with tickets showing remediation.
• Alert review evidence: queue exports, case records, ticket links, investigation notes.
• Exclusion/exception register with approver, rationale, scope, and review dates.
• Access logs or role assignments for the HIDS/EDR console (admin rights are sensitive).

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Use these as your pre-audit self-test.

1. “Show me coverage.”
   Expect requests for a current asset list, an agent deployment list, and reconciliation logic. Gaps must have tickets or documented exceptions. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

2. “Who monitors alerts and how fast?”
   If you lack a SOC, define an on-call rotation or MSSP model and show evidence of alert review. Avoid claiming “24/7” unless you can prove it.

3. “How do you prevent alert fatigue?”
   Auditors look for a tuning process and controlled exclusions, especially on critical servers.

4. “How do you know agents can’t be disabled?”
   Show tamper protection settings and admin access restrictions, plus detection for agent stoppage events if supported.

5. “What happens on a true positive?”
   Provide a recent case record (sanitized if needed) that shows triage, containment, and closure.

Frequent implementation mistakes and how to avoid them

Mistake	Why it fails audits	Avoidance pattern
Treating purchase/contract as “deployment”	Tool spend is not control operation	Keep deployment metrics and health checks as standing evidence. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)
Coverage reported from the tool only	Tool consoles can be incomplete without inventory reconciliation	Reconcile against endpoint management/CMDB and document the method.
Uncontrolled exclusions	Exclusions become permanent blind spots	Require approvals for high-risk scopes; review exclusions on a schedule.
No ownership for alert queue	Alerts age out or get ignored	Assign queue ownership and back-up coverage; document it in the SOP.
Ignoring servers until “later”	Servers are common attack paths and often least monitored	Run a server deployment track with change control from the start.

Enforcement context and risk implications

No public enforcement cases were provided for this specific CIS safeguard in the supplied sources, and CIS Controls v8 itself is a framework standard rather than a regulator. (CIS Controls v8)

Your real risk is downstream: customers and regulators often expect endpoint detection and response capabilities as part of a reasonable security program. If you cannot prove host-based detection coverage and monitoring, a post-incident review can treat that as a control gap. The operational implication is simple: if an attacker lives on a host, network-only monitoring may miss it.

A practical 30/60/90-day execution plan

First 30 days (stabilize control design and visibility)

• Confirm what product(s) satisfy “host-based intrusion detection” in your environment and document the mapping to Safeguard 13.2. (CIS Controls v8)
• Define scope: endpoints, servers, and critical sub-populations; create an exception register template.
• Establish ownership for deployments, alert monitoring, and exclusion approvals.
• Produce a first-pass coverage report by reconciling asset inventory to agent presence. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Days 31–60 (drive coverage and operational workflows)

• Deploy to remaining endpoint populations and begin the server rollout track.
• Stand up alert triage workflows (ticketing/case management) and write the SOP used by the team.
• Implement exclusion governance (who, how, approvals) and review existing exclusions for risk.
• Start recurring evidence capture (coverage export + alert review artifact) in a system of record such as Daydream. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

Days 61–90 (prove ongoing operation and reduce noise)

• Tune detections based on real alert outcomes; document tuning decisions and approvals.
• Run a tabletop-style walk-through of a host alert: detection → triage → containment → closure; save the artifacts.
• Audit your own control: sample endpoints and servers, verify agent health, verify alert review, verify exception documentation.
• Publish a short control status update to leadership: coverage gaps, exception themes, and resourcing needs.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does EDR count as a host-based intrusion detection solution for Safeguard 13.2?

Yes if it provides host-based detection signals and you monitor and respond to alerts as an operating control. Document your mapping of your EDR capabilities to Safeguard 13.2 and retain recurring evidence of coverage and alert handling. (CIS Controls v8)

What assets are typically considered “in scope”?

Managed endpoints and servers are the baseline scope, including remote laptops and cloud VMs. If you exclude systems (legacy, third-party managed, OT), keep a formal exception with compensating monitoring. (CIS Controls v8)

What evidence do auditors ask for most often?

Coverage proof (asset inventory matched to agent check-ins) and proof of alert review (cases/tickets with investigation notes). Also expect questions on exclusions and who can administer the tool. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

We don’t have a SOC. Can we still meet the requirement?

Yes, but you must define who reviews alerts, how they are notified, and where actions are recorded. An MSSP arrangement can work if you retain their reporting and your internal follow-up records. (CIS Controls v8)

How do we handle systems where agents cannot be installed?

Put them in an exceptions register with owner, rationale, and compensating controls (for example, enhanced logging to a central system). Review exceptions on a recurring basis and close them when constraints change. (CIS Controls Navigator v8)

How should we document exclusions without creating audit risk?

Require an approval step for exclusions on critical assets and record the reason, scope, and review date. Keep exclusions time-bounded where possible and re-validate that they do not hide malicious behavior. (CIS Controls v8)