AU-14(3): Remote Viewing and Listening

AU-14(3) requires you to implement a real-time capability for authorized personnel to remotely view and listen to the content of an established user session, typically for security operations, incident response, or help desk support. To operationalize it, define approved use cases, restrict who can initiate monitoring, require strong authorization and audit logging, and retain evidence that the capability is controlled and used appropriately. ¹

Key takeaways:

• You need a controlled, real-time “observe the session” capability (screen and audio where applicable) for approved responders. ¹
• “Authorized users” must be defined, access-controlled, and auditable; ad hoc “shadowing” is a common audit failure point.
• Your evidence has to prove both capability and governance: configuration, access lists, logs, and operating procedures.

The au-14(3): remote viewing and listening requirement is straightforward in wording but easy to implement poorly in practice. Auditors do not only want to hear that your endpoint tool “can do screen share.” They expect you to show that the organization deliberately enabled a monitored, real-time session-observation capability, limited it to specific authorized roles, and can prove who used it, when, and under what approval path. ¹

This requirement tends to show up in federal information systems and contractor environments handling federal data, where responders need to verify what occurred during a user session, provide support, or validate suspected malicious activity. ²

Operationally, the fastest path is to treat AU-14(3) as an “approved remote session observation” control with three pillars: (1) a technical capability (screen and, where relevant, audio), (2) governance (use cases, approvals, and role-based access), and (3) auditability (logs and retention). Done well, AU-14(3) strengthens investigations and reduces time to triage. Done carelessly, it creates insider-risk exposure and privacy disputes that can stall incident response and trigger audit findings.

Regulatory text

Requirement (verbatim): “Provide and implement the capability for authorized users to remotely view and hear content related to an established user session in real time.” ¹

Operator meaning: You must (1) have a working technical method to observe an active user session as it happens and (2) implement it as a controlled operational capability. “Authorized users” is not implicit; you define and enforce it through access control, documented roles, and auditable approvals. ¹

Plain-English interpretation (what AU-14(3) is really asking)

AU-14(3) expects your security or support teams to be able to “see and hear what the user session is doing right now” without needing the user to describe it after the fact. That observation can support:

• Incident response validation (confirming active ransomware behavior, suspicious commands, or data movement).
• Forensic triage (watching an attacker’s active session if containment requires observation first).
• High-risk help desk troubleshooting (validating what a privileged user sees before making changes).

This is not a blanket requirement to record everyone’s screens all the time. It is a capability you can invoke, with governance, for defined scenarios.

Who it applies to (entity and operational context)

Entity scope

• Federal information systems and environments aligned to NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5.
• Contractors and service providers handling federal data in systems assessed against NIST SP 800-53 controls. ²

Operational scope (systems and teams)

• End-user computing (workstations, VDI, privileged admin jump hosts).
• Remote support tooling (enterprise remote assistance, MDM/endpoint management, virtual desktop tooling).
• Security operations and incident response workflows where real-time observation is required.

Where “listening” matters

• Environments where user sessions include audio streams relevant to the session content (for example, softphones, conferencing, recorded training on regulated workflows). If your enterprise environment does not route audio in a way your remote session tool can capture, document the technical boundary and how you meet the intent (for example, session observation for visual actions plus separate logging for voice systems). Your goal is to align to the requirement’s “view and hear” language with an accurate, testable system description. ¹

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

1) Define approved use cases and prohibited use cases

Create a short AU-14(3) standard that answers:

• Approved: incident triage, malware analysis, high-risk troubleshooting, privileged access validation, regulated workflow verification.
• Prohibited: employee productivity monitoring, informal “checking in,” non-work surveillance.

Tie each approved use case to a ticket type or incident category so you can show auditors it is operationalized, not aspirational.

2) Name “authorized users” and enforce it in IAM

Translate “authorized users” into concrete roles, then restrict tool permissions accordingly:

• Typical authorized roles: SOC analysts (tiered), IR lead, endpoint engineering on-call, senior help desk for escalations.
• Enforce least privilege: only a subset can initiate remote view/listen; others can request it via ticket workflow.

Implementation check: the remote session tool should support role-based access and strong authentication; your IAM should map users to groups that grant the permission.

3) Require an approval path that matches risk

Establish a decision matrix that operations can follow quickly:

Scenario	Who can initiate	Approval requirement	Documentation
Active security incident	SOC/IR	Incident commander approval (documented in the incident record)	Incident ID, target asset, start/stop time
Help desk troubleshooting	Escalated support	User consent + ticket	Ticket ID, consent captured, session notes
Privileged session validation	Security engineering	Change ticket approval	Change ID, reason, outcome

If you operate in jurisdictions or HR contexts where consent is required for monitoring, route it through your legal/privacy process. Keep the control language practical: responders need speed, but you still need guardrails.

4) Implement technical controls that make the capability safe

Minimum operational design expectations:

• Session access control: only authorized roles can start remote view/listen; restrict to managed devices and approved network paths.
• Session integrity: tool should identify the target endpoint/user session unambiguously.
• User notification or banner: where feasible and consistent with investigative needs, display that remote assistance/monitoring is active (or document when you suppress notification and who can approve that). This becomes a common audit discussion point.
• Logging: record initiator identity, target, timestamps, and reason code. If your tool can record the session, decide whether recording is required by policy for certain scenarios, then document retention and access.

5) Embed AU-14(3) into IR and support runbooks

Update runbooks so responders do not improvise:

• IR playbooks: “Remote observe suspected compromise” steps, including how to request authorization and where to store artifacts.
• Help desk procedures: how to initiate remote assistance with consent language and ticket updates.
• Privileged access procedures: when remote observation is allowed for admins and who approves.

6) Test the capability and prove it works

Run a controlled test in a non-production environment and at least one production-like endpoint class:

• Can an authorized user start a real-time view?
• If audio is in scope, can they hear relevant session audio, or is audio out-of-scope with documented justification?
• Do logs capture all required details?
• Can you demonstrate access restrictions by showing a non-authorized user cannot initiate it?

Capture screenshots, export logs, and document test results for audit readiness. ¹

Required evidence and artifacts to retain

Keep artifacts that prove capability, authorization, and operation:

1. Policy/standard

• AU-14(3) remote session observation standard with defined use cases and approvals. ¹

2. Role and access evidence

• List of authorized roles/groups.
• IAM group membership exports (point-in-time).
• Tool permission configuration screenshots or configuration exports.

3. Procedure/runbooks

• SOC/IR playbook steps for remote observation.
• Help desk remote support SOP.

4. Logs and records

• Sample remote-view session logs showing initiator, target, timestamps, and reason/ticket reference.
• Ticket/incident records linked to sessions.

5. Testing evidence

• Test plan, results, and remediation notes for gaps found.

A practical note: auditors often accept a small, well-chosen sample that demonstrates control operation, as long as it is consistent and traceable.

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Expect these to come up:

• “Who are the authorized users, exactly, and how is that enforced?” ¹
• “Show me a session log and the matching ticket/incident record.”
• “Is user consent required? If not, who can authorize silent observation, and under what conditions?”
• “Does this apply to privileged sessions on jump hosts? Can you observe them in real time?”
• “How do you cover ‘listening’? Is audio technically possible in your session tooling?”

Fastest way to answer: keep a one-page control narrative with screenshots of tool settings, IAM mapping, and a redacted sample session log tied to a ticket.

Frequent implementation mistakes (and how to avoid them)

1. Mistake: Treating remote support as equivalent without governance.
   Fix: document AU-14(3) use cases, restrict initiators, and require ticket linkage.

2. Mistake: “Authorized users” defined in policy but not enforced in the tool.
   Fix: implement RBAC groups, and test that non-authorized users cannot start sessions.

3. Mistake: No evidence of real-time operation (only capability statements).
   Fix: retain test artifacts and a small set of real operating examples with redaction.

4. Mistake: Ignoring audio scope.
   Fix: either implement audio observation where session content includes audio, or document why audio is not technically applicable and what compensating visibility exists. Anchor the decision to the system boundary and risk assessment language, not preference. ¹

Enforcement context and risk implications

No public enforcement cases were provided in the source catalog for AU-14(3), so this page does not list specific case citations.

Risk-wise, AU-14(3) is a double-edged control: it improves response capability, but it can introduce privacy, insider-risk, and abuse concerns if you do not control who can initiate sessions and how actions are recorded. From a GRC perspective, the risk is less about failing to buy a tool and more about failing to govern an already-present capability.

Practical 30/60/90-day execution plan

First 30 days (Immediate)

• Assign a control owner (usually SOC lead or endpoint tooling owner) and a GRC reviewer for evidence quality.
• Inventory tools that can perform remote view/listen (remote support, EDR remote session, VDI shadowing).
• Draft the AU-14(3) standard: approved use cases, authorized roles, approvals, logging expectations. ¹
• Decide audio scope per system boundary and document it.

Next 60 days (Near-term)

• Implement RBAC and IAM group mapping for initiators and approvers.
• Update IR and help desk runbooks to require ticket/incident linkage.
• Enable and validate logging fields (initiator, target, start/stop, reason).
• Run a controlled functional test; capture artifacts.

By 90 days (Operationalize and sustain)

• Perform a tabletop + live drill where AU-14(3) is invoked under an incident scenario.
• Start a light-touch recurring review: authorized-user list review, log spot checks, and confirmation the tool remains enabled after upgrades.
• Put evidence collection on a schedule so audits do not become a scramble.

If you manage many third parties (MSPs, outsourced SOC, managed help desk), add contract language and access controls so third-party personnel fit your “authorized users” definition and your logs capture their identity.

Using Daydream to keep AU-14(3) audit-ready

Daydream becomes useful when AU-14(3) fails for the most common reason: missing implementation evidence. Map AU-14(3) to a named control owner, attach the procedure, and set recurring evidence tasks for access list exports, configuration snapshots, and session log samples. That turns an “we can do it” statement into an assessment-ready control record. ¹

Frequently Asked Questions

Does AU-14(3) require recording sessions, or just real-time viewing/listening?

The text requires real-time capability to view and hear session content. Recording can be a policy choice to strengthen auditability, but it is not explicitly stated in the requirement text. ¹

Who counts as an “authorized user” for AU-14(3)?

You define the roles, then enforce them through access control in the remote session tool and IAM. Auditors expect a concrete list (roles/groups) and proof that non-authorized users cannot initiate remote observation. ¹

What if our tooling cannot capture audio from the user session?

Document the technical boundary and whether “listening” is applicable to your session types. If audio is part of the user session content in your environment, treat audio as in-scope and implement it, or document compensating visibility and a risk-based exception approved through governance. ¹

Do we need user consent before remote viewing/listening?

AU-14(3) does not specify consent mechanics. Set a policy that aligns to your legal/privacy requirements and your investigative model, then make it operational with tickets, approvals, and user notifications where required by your internal rules. ¹

How do we show an auditor that AU-14(3) is “implemented,” not just available?

Provide tool configuration evidence (RBAC, logging enabled), a runbook that requires authorization and ticket linkage, and a redacted sample log tied to a real ticket or a controlled test. ¹

Can a third-party help desk or MSSP perform remote viewing under AU-14(3)?

Yes, if they are treated as authorized users under your policy, access is restricted to named identities and roles, and their sessions are logged and reviewable. Make sure contracts and access provisioning align to your authorization and audit requirements. ¹

Footnotes

1. NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 OSCAL JSON

2. NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5