PE-5(1): Access to Output by Authorized Individuals

PE-5(1): Access to Output by Authorized Individuals requires you to prevent printed or otherwise generated system output (paper, labels, reports, receipts, faxes, device-generated files) from being viewed, collected, or removed by anyone who is not explicitly authorized. Operationalize it by controlling where output is produced, locking down who can release or retrieve it, and proving those controls work. ¹

Key takeaways:

• Treat “output” as a data-exfil path; secure printers, shared devices, and output trays like you secure endpoints.
• Combine physical controls (placement, locked bins, badge access) with procedural controls (release/escort, shredding, logs).
• Evidence is the control; document locations, authorized roles, and recurring checks so assessors can validate operation. ²

PE-5(1) sits in the Physical and Environmental Protection family, but it is really a confidentiality control. If sensitive output lands in a common area, anyone passing by can read it, photograph it, or remove it with no system audit trail. That makes “output” a blind spot compared to access-controlled applications and monitored networks.

Most teams already have pieces of this control (printer rooms, clean desk expectations, shredding bins). What usually fails in assessments is the lack of specificity: no inventory of output devices, no definition of “authorized individuals,” and no repeatable procedure that proves only authorized staff can access output. PE-5(1) pushes you to make output handling explicit, risk-based, and testable.

This page translates the pe-5(1): access to output by authorized individuals requirement into an implementation you can assign, validate, and defend in an audit. It focuses on the real friction points: multi-function devices in open areas, shared office printers, third-party print/scan services, and “temporary” printing during incidents or peak operations.

Regulatory text

Excerpt: “NIST SP 800-53 control PE-5.1.” ¹

Operator interpretation (what you must do): Implement controls so that only authorized individuals can access system output. Concretely, you need to (1) identify where output is created or staged, (2) restrict physical access to it, (3) define who is allowed to retrieve it and under what conditions, and (4) keep records that show the restrictions are in place and working. ²

Plain-English interpretation

PE-5(1) requires you to prevent “walk-up” exposure of sensitive information that has left the logical system boundary as output. That includes:

• Printed pages in output trays
• Labels and shipping documents
• Receipts, tickets, and badges
• Fax output (where still used)
• Reports printed in batch jobs
• Device-generated files written to shared folders or removable media as “output” from a system workflow

Your goal: an unauthorized person should not be able to view or remove output during production, staging, pickup, transport, or disposal.

Who it applies to

Entity scope

• Federal information systems and the organizations that operate them. ²
• Contractors and other third parties operating systems that handle federal data, where PE controls are in scope via contract, SSP inheritance, or customer security requirements. ²

Operational scope (where this control bites)

• Offices with shared printers or copiers
• Call centers and operations floors printing customer letters, case files, or reports
• Data centers with batch printing, labeling, or media handling
• Mailrooms and shipping areas printing labels and manifests
• Any environment where third parties (cleaning staff, visitors, building security, maintenance) can physically access output areas

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

Step 1: Define “output” and classify it by risk

1. List output types produced by in-scope systems (reports, invoices, HR letters, case packets, labels).
2. Tag each output type with a sensitivity level that matches your data classification scheme.
3. Decide minimum handling rules per sensitivity level (e.g., “must use secure release printing,” “must be picked up immediately,” “must be stored in locked bin until retrieval”).

Deliverable: Output Handling Standard (one page is fine if it is specific).

Step 2: Inventory output locations and devices

Create an inventory of:

• Printers/MFDs (model, location, network segment, owner)
• Dedicated print rooms
• Mailroom printers and labelers
• Any “output staging” shelves, bins, or trays
• Offsite/third-party print services used for fulfillment or bulk mailing

Deliverable: Output Device & Location Register mapped to systems or business processes.

Step 3: Define “authorized individuals” in a way an auditor can test

Avoid “employees” as a definition. Define authorization by:

• Role (e.g., Claims Ops Specialist, HR Generalist)
• Need-to-know (process-based)
• Training completion (output handling + privacy/security)
• Access approval (manager + data owner where appropriate)

Deliverable: Authorized Output Access Matrix (role → output types → allowed locations).

Step 4: Implement physical and procedural controls per location

Use a location-by-location design. Common control patterns:

A. Secure print release (best for shared printers)

• Require badge/PIN release at the device.
• Jobs do not print until the requester authenticates at the device.
• Configure timeouts and job deletion for unclaimed jobs.

B. Controlled print rooms (best for high-volume sensitive output)

• Put printers inside badge-controlled rooms.
• Keep output bins inside the controlled area.
• Restrict access list to authorized roles only.
• Post handling instructions at point of use.

C. Locked output bins / mailroom chain-of-custody

• Output drops into a locked bin that only authorized staff can open.
• Use sign-out logs when output is transported (to mailroom, to records room).
• Separate duties where practical (print operator vs. approver).

D. Visitor and third-party controls

• Visitors escorted.
• Cleaning/maintenance access restricted during sensitive printing windows, or output secured before access.

Deliverable: Location Control Sheets (controls implemented, owner, how to test).

Step 5: Add operational checks that prove the control works

Assessors will ask, “How do you know this is working now?” Add:

• A recurring walkthrough checklist for output areas (no unattended sensitive output; shred bins present; doors lock; signage intact).
• Exception logging (incidents of misprints, abandoned jobs, found output).
• Spot checks of printer configuration for secure release where required.

Deliverable: Output Area Inspection Log and Exception Register.

Step 6: Train the people who touch output

Training should be short and role-specific:

• How to use secure release printing
• What to do with misprints
• When output must be placed in locked storage
• How to handle urgent print requests (incidents, outages)

Deliverable: Training roster and job aid near printers.

Step 7: Prove third-party coverage where output is outsourced

If a third party prints/mails on your behalf:

• Contract terms should restrict access to authorized personnel and require secure handling.
• Get the third party’s procedure summary and evidence (site controls, access controls, audits).
• Treat it as third-party risk: validate at onboarding and periodically thereafter.

Practical note: If you cannot get strong evidence, reduce the data content in outsourced output (data minimization) or switch providers.

Required evidence and artifacts to retain

Keep evidence that maps directly to “only authorized individuals can access output”:

1. Policy/standard
   • Output Handling Standard (approved, versioned)
2. Inventory
   • Output Device & Location Register
3. Authorization
   • Authorized Output Access Matrix
   • Access lists for badge-controlled rooms (export or screenshots)
4. Configuration evidence
   • Printer/MFD settings showing secure release enabled (where required)
   • Photos of locked bins, controlled room doors, signage (date-stamped if possible)
5. Operational evidence
   • Output Area Inspection Logs
   • Exception Register + remediation tickets
6. Training
   • Training content and completion records
7. Third-party due diligence
   • Contract clauses / security addendum sections
   • Third-party attestations, audit summaries, or assessment results (as available)

If you run Daydream for GRC evidence collection, map PE-5(1) to a named control owner and set recurring evidence tasks (walkthrough logs, access list exports, configuration screenshots). That reduces the “we do it but can’t prove it” gap that causes assessment findings. ²

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Auditors and assessors tend to focus on testability:

• “Show me all locations where sensitive output is printed.” If you cannot produce an inventory, expect sampling findings.
• “How do you define ‘authorized’?” They will reject vague answers; they want a role list or access list.
• “Is secure release configured on shared printers?” They may ask for live demonstration or configuration exports.
• “What happens to misprints and abandoned jobs?” They want a defined process and evidence of disposal controls.
• “How do you control access for visitors and third parties?” They will ask about cleaners, facilities staff, and after-hours access.

Frequent implementation mistakes and how to avoid them

Mistake	Why it fails	Fix
Treating PE-5(1) as “printer policy exists”	Policies don’t prove restricted access	Add device/location inventory + authorization matrix + inspection logs
Assuming “office badge access” is enough	Many offices allow broad access; output sits in open areas	Move sensitive printing to controlled rooms or require secure release
No process for misprints/abandoned jobs	Abandoned output is the most common exposure pattern	Add clear disposal steps + shred bins + exception logging
Outsourced print/mail not addressed	Output risk moved to a third party	Add contract requirements + due diligence evidence + periodic review
Evidence is ad hoc	You cannot sustain audit readiness	Set recurring evidence tasks and owners (Daydream can track this)

Enforcement context and risk implications

No public enforcement cases were provided in the source catalog for this requirement, so this page does not cite enforcement actions. The practical risk remains straightforward: unauthorized access to output is a common root cause in privacy incidents because physical removal or photography often bypasses system logging. Treat PE-5(1) as a confidentiality control that closes a low-tech exfiltration path. ²

A practical 30/60/90-day execution plan

First 30 days (stabilize and scope)

• Assign a control owner (Facilities + Security + IT Print Services usually share it; pick one accountable owner).
• Publish an Output Handling Standard covering: sensitive output definition, authorized roles, misprint handling, disposal, and exceptions.
• Build the Output Device & Location Register for all in-scope sites.
• Identify high-risk locations (shared printers near lobbies, mixed-tenant floors, mailrooms).

Next 60 days (implement and document controls)

• Enable secure release on shared printers that process sensitive output, or relocate sensitive printing to controlled rooms.
• Install locked bins or move output trays behind controlled access for batch output.
• Create Authorized Output Access Matrix and align badge access lists to it.
• Stand up the inspection log and exception register; run the first inspection cycle and document fixes.

By 90 days (prove operation and make it repeatable)

• Run a tabletop test: simulate an abandoned sensitive print job; validate response, logging, and disposal.
• Close gaps found in inspections; document corrective actions.
• Validate third-party print/mail arrangements and collect evidence.
• Operationalize recurring evidence collection (scheduled exports, walkthroughs, training refresh). Daydream can manage the control-to-evidence mapping and recurring tasks so PE-5(1) stays audit-ready without manual chasing. ²

Frequently Asked Questions

Does PE-5(1) only apply to printers?

No. Treat any system “output” that can be accessed physically or through shared staging as in scope, including labels, batch reports, and output bins. If output can be picked up by the wrong person, PE-5(1) applies. ²

What counts as an “authorized individual”?

An authorized individual is someone explicitly approved to access a specific output type, typically by role and need-to-know. Define it in a role-to-output matrix and align physical access lists and procedures to that definition. ²

Is secure release printing mandatory?

NIST does not prescribe a single mechanism in the provided excerpt, but secure release is a strong way to enforce “authorized access” on shared devices. If you do not use secure release, compensate with controlled rooms, locked bins, and documented pickup procedures that are testable. ²

How do we handle high-volume mailroom printing?

Put mailroom printing behind controlled access, use locked staging, and maintain chain-of-custody logs for transport and handoff. Keep exceptions for misprints and reprints, with documented disposal steps. ²

What evidence is most persuasive in an assessment?

Assessors respond well to a complete line of sight: inventory → authorized roles → physical controls → recurring inspection logs → exception remediation. Photos and configuration exports help when paired with dated walkthrough records. ²

How should we cover outsourced printing by a third party?

Treat it as third-party risk: contractually restrict access to authorized personnel, require secure handling, and collect assurance evidence you can retain. If evidence is weak, reduce data content in printed materials or shift the process back in-house. ²

Footnotes

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

2. NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5