Skip to main content

HIPAA Security Rule | 45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C

How Identity and Access Management Supports the HIPAA Security Rule

The HIPAA Security Rule sets administrative, physical and technical safeguards for electronic protected health information (ePHI). Several HIPAA technical safeguards in 45 CFR 164.312, and several other standards, turn on who has access to ePHI and how a person or entity seeking access is verified as the one claimed. This page quotes the standards and implementation specifications in 45 CFR 164.308 through 164.316, shows whether each specification is Required or Addressable, and marks where identity and access management commonly contributes.

The matrix has 65 rows. Of those, 13 are primary identity work, 11 are supporting, and 41 are outside identity scope (GCA classification). Identity contributes most to the technical safeguards in 164.312 and to the access management standards in 164.308(a)(3) and (a)(4). This is one practitioner's mapping. It does not state that any environment meets the rule.

For CIOs and compliance leaders

Information as of Last verified 45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C, sections 164.308 through 164.316, as codified in the eCFR (point-in-time 2026-10-14; source notes cite 78 FR 5694, Jan. 25, 2013 (164.316: 78 FR 5695), and for 164.314 also 78 FR 34266, June 7, 2013) Version 1

Reference material, not a compliance determination. This matrix reflects GCA's practice view as of . It does not certify, warrant or predict the outcome of any assessment, audit or examination. The HIPAA Security Rule, 45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C, controls. Read the full notice.

The matrix

  • Primary
  • Supporting
  • Outside identity scope (GCA classification)

HIPAA Security Rule (45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C) identity traceability matrix. 45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C, sections 164.308 through 164.316, as codified in the eCFR (point-in-time 2026-10-14; source notes cite 78 FR 5694, Jan. 25, 2013 (164.316: 78 FR 5695), and for 164.314 also 78 FR 34266, June 7, 2013). Information as of October 16, 2026.
Requirement Requirement text Required or Addressable / January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Identity relevance (GCA classification) GCA approach Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities Evidence commonly examined
164.308(a)(3)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Workforce security

Implement policies and procedures to ensure that all members of its workforce have appropriate access to electronic protected health information, as provided under paragraph (a)(4) of this section, and to prevent those workforce members who do not have access under paragraph (a)(4) of this section from obtaining access to electronic protected health information.

In practice: New hires, job changes and departures flow through a standard lifecycle that assigns access to patient data by role, and managers review that access periodically.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(9)(i)) written policies and procedures covering access to ePHI and relevant electronic information systems, with review and testing at least once every 12 months under proposed (a)(9)(ii)(E). Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Appropriate access for workforce members and prevention of access for those without authorization. Identity governance is typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage
  • Role Mining Engine

Joiner, mover and leaver lifecycle, role-based access and periodic access review commonly contribute to workforce access that is appropriate to the role.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Joiner, mover and leaver workflow configuration
  • Role catalog and access model
  • Access review campaign export
164.308(a)(3)(ii)(A) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Authorization and/or supervision

Implement procedures for the authorization and/or supervision of workforce members who work with electronic protected health information or in locations where it might be accessed.

In practice: When someone needs access to patient records, a request goes to their manager and the data owner, and the workflow keeps a record of who authorized what.

  • Required or Addressable AddressableAddressable under 164.306(d)(3): assess whether reasonable and appropriate, implement or document why not and implement an equivalent alternative if reasonable and appropriate.
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(9)(ii)(A)) written procedures for authorization and supervision of workforce members, no longer designated addressable. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures for authorizing and supervising workforce members who work with ePHI. Identity governance approval workflows are commonly used to implement it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Request-and-approval workflows record who authorized each workforce member's access and under which role or manager.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Access request and approval records
  • Manager and data owner approval configuration
164.308(a)(3)(ii)(B) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Workforce clearance procedure

Implement procedures to determine that the access of a workforce member to electronic protected health information is appropriate.

In practice: Managers run user access reviews, often quarterly, to confirm that their team's access to ePHI is appropriate and required for their jobs.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(9)(ii)(B)) written procedures to determine that a workforce member's access is appropriate, tied to proposed 164.308(a)(10)(ii)(B). Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures to determine that a workforce member's access is appropriate. Identity governance role assignment and review are commonly used to implement it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage
  • Role Mining Engine

Birthright role assignment, access request policy and manager review commonly document why a workforce member's access is appropriate.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Role assignment rules
  • Access appropriateness review records
164.308(a)(3)(ii)(C) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Termination procedures

Implement procedures for terminating access to electronic protected health information when the employment of, or other arrangement with, a workforce member ends or as required by determinations made as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section.

In practice: When HR records a departure, the leaver workflow removes the person's accounts, and reports flag dormant accounts that slipped through for follow-up.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(9)(ii)(C)(2)) that access be terminated as soon as possible but no later than one hour after employment or other arrangement ends, plus (ii)(D) notification of another covered entity or business associate within 24 hours of a change or termination. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures for terminating access when employment or an arrangement ends. Automated leaver processing is typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

HR-driven leaver workflows, dormant account detection and periodic access review commonly contribute to timely removal of access.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Leaver workflow configuration and sample run
  • Terminated user access removal report
  • Dormant account report
164.308(a)(4)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Information access management

Implement policies and procedures for authorizing access to electronic protected health information that are consistent with the applicable requirements of subpart E of this part.

In practice: A written access policy and a role model define who may reach patient information systems, and the access request workflow applies those rules each time someone asks.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(10)(i)) written policies and procedures for authorizing access to ePHI and relevant electronic information systems, with review and testing at least once every 12 months under proposed (a)(10)(ii)(F). Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Policies for authorizing access to ePHI. Identity governance is typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage
  • Role Mining Engine

Access policy, role model and request workflows commonly contribute to the authorization policies this standard calls for.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Access authorization policy
  • Role model documentation
164.308(a)(4)(ii)(B) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Access authorization

Implement policies and procedures for granting access to electronic protected health information, for example, through access to a workstation, transaction, program, process, or other mechanism.

In practice: A nurse's role grants a defined set of clinical applications automatically, and anything beyond that goes through a request that a manager must authorize.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(10)(ii)(B)) written policies for granting and revising access for each prospective user and technology asset. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Policies for granting access to ePHI. Identity governance and access management are typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage
  • Role Mining Engine

Policy-based provisioning, access request approval and least-privilege role design commonly contribute to the policies and procedures for granting access.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Provisioning policy configuration
  • Access request approvals
  • Separation of duties policy
164.308(a)(4)(ii)(C) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Access establishment and modification

Implement policies and procedures that, based upon the covered entity's or the business associate's access authorization policies, establish, document, review, and modify a user's right of access to a workstation, transaction, program, or process.

In practice: When someone changes departments, a mover workflow updates their access, and periodic review campaigns let managers confirm, document or change what remains.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(10)(ii)(D)) written policies to determine, document, review and modify access, and (a)(10)(ii)(C) authentication management policies. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Policies to establish, document, review and modify a user's access. Access reviews and mover workflows are typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Mover workflows and periodic access review campaigns commonly contribute to establishing, documenting, reviewing and modifying a user's right of access over time.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Access review campaign export with reviewer decisions
  • Mover workflow configuration
  • Access change audit records
164.308(a)(5)(ii)(C) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Log-in monitoring

Procedures for monitoring log-in attempts and reporting discrepancies.

In practice: Sign-in logs record failed and unusual log-in attempts, lockout rules slow guessing, and alerts go to the security team so discrepancies get reported.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(a)(2)(v)) technical controls that disable or suspend access after a reasonable and appropriate predetermined number of unsuccessful authentication attempts. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures for monitoring log-in attempts and reporting discrepancies. Identity provider sign-in telemetry is commonly the principal source.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Sign-in logging, lockout policy and identity threat detection commonly contribute to monitoring log-in attempts and reporting discrepancies.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Sign-in log retention settings
  • Failed log-in alert rules and sample alerts
  • Lockout policy configuration
164.308(a)(5)(ii)(D) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Password management

Procedures for creating, changing, and safeguarding passwords.

In practice: A password policy sets how passwords are created and changed, self-service reset lowers help desk load, and administrator credentials sit in a privileged access vault.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(f)(2)(i), 164.312(f)(2)(ii) and 164.308(a)(11)(ii)(A)(3)) technical controls for unique passwords and multi-factor authentication, and password-safeguarding content in training. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures for creating, changing and safeguarding passwords. Identity provider policy and privileged credential vaulting are commonly the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Password policy, self-service reset, passwordless options and vaulting of privileged credentials commonly contribute to password management.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
  • CyberArk / BeyondTrust / Delinea
Evidence commonly examined
  • Password and authentication policy export
  • Self-service reset configuration
  • Privileged credential vault rotation settings
164.312(a)(1) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Access control

Implement technical policies and procedures for electronic information systems that maintain electronic protected health information to allow access only to those persons or software programs that have been granted access rights as specified in § 164.308(a)(4).

In practice: Applications holding patient records admit only people and software accounts that were granted rights, using directory groups and role-based rules to enforce it.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(a)(1)) deploying technical controls so access is allowed only to users and technology assets that have been granted access rights, and (a)(2)(ii) separating user identities from identities used for administrative and other increased access privileges. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Technical access control for systems holding ePHI, tied to access rights granted under 164.308(a)(4). Identity and access management is typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Directory, role-based access and policy-based access controls commonly contribute to allowing access to ePHI systems only to persons or software programs that have been granted access rights.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Access control policy configuration
  • Role-to-application assignment report
  • Conditional or policy-based access export
164.312(a)(2)(i) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Unique user identification

Assign a unique name and/or number for identifying and tracking user identity.

In practice: Each person has one authoritative identity, administrators use named accounts instead of shared logins, and service accounts have an owner, so activity traces to someone.

  • Required or Addressable RequiredRequired under 164.306(d)(2): the specification must be implemented.
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(a)(2)(i)) assigning a unique name, number and/or other identifier for each user and each technology asset. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Assign a unique name or number for identifying and tracking user identity. Identity and access management is typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

A single authoritative identity per person, named privileged accounts in place of shared accounts, and governed service accounts commonly contribute to unique identification and tracking.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
  • CyberArk / BeyondTrust / Delinea
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity correlation report showing one identity per person
  • Shared account inventory and remediation record
  • Service account ownership register
164.312(a)(2)(ii) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Emergency access procedure

Establish (and implement as needed) procedures for obtaining necessary electronic protected health information during an emergency.

In practice: An emergency access account is kept in a vault, its use triggers an alert, and a reviewer checks afterward why it was needed.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(a)(2)(iii)) written and technical procedures for obtaining necessary ePHI during an emergency. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures for obtaining ePHI during an emergency. Break-glass account design and privileged access controls are commonly the principal means of implementing the technical part.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Break-glass accounts with vaulted credentials, alerting on use and post-use review commonly contribute to controlled emergency access.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • CyberArk / BeyondTrust / Delinea
Evidence commonly examined
  • Break-glass account procedure
  • Alert rule for emergency account use
  • Post-use review record
164.312(d) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Person or entity authentication

Implement procedures to verify that a person or entity seeking access to electronic protected health information is the one claimed.

In practice: Staff sign in through single sign-on with MFA, often phishing-resistant, and access rules can also consider whether the device is known before opening patient systems.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(f)) an Authentication standard covering persons and technology assets, multi-factor authentication for all technology assets in relevant electronic information systems at (f)(2)(ii)(A), and for any action that would change a user's privileges at (f)(2)(ii)(B), with the exceptions in (f)(2)(iii). Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Primary
Why this classification

Procedures to verify that a person or entity seeking access to ePHI is the one claimed. Authentication services are typically the principal means of implementing it.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Multi-factor and phishing-resistant authentication, single sign-on and device-aware access policy commonly contribute to verifying the person or entity seeking access.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Authentication method and MFA policy export
  • Conditional or policy-based access export
  • MFA registration coverage report
164.308(a)(1)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Security management process

Implement policies and procedures to prevent, detect, contain, and correct security violations.

In practice: The security team runs the overall security program; identity contributes the account inventory, access review results and sign-in records that feed its reviews.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Establishes the program that detects and corrects security violations. Primary ownership usually sits with security and compliance leadership.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Identity inventory, access review results and sign-in telemetry commonly feed the risk analysis and review processes this standard calls for.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity and access risk register entries
  • Access review summary reports
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Risk analysis

Conduct an accurate and thorough assessment of the potential risks and vulnerabilities to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of electronic protected health information held by the covered entity or business associate.

In practice: The security team leads the risk assessment; identity adds a count of privileged, orphaned and shared accounts that touch systems holding patient records.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Enterprise risk analysis of ePHI. Primary ownership usually sits with the security official and risk function.

  • Assess

An identity assessment of accounts, privileged access, orphaned and shared accounts commonly contributes inputs to the risk analysis.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity risk assessment report
  • Privileged and service account inventory
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(B) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Risk management

Implement security measures sufficient to reduce risks and vulnerabilities to a reasonable and appropriate level to comply with § 164.306(a).

In practice: Risk owners log fixes such as removing shared accounts, turning on MFA and closing orphaned access as tracked items, each with an owner and a due date.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Selection and tracking of security measures to reduce identified risk. Primary ownership usually sits with the security official.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Identity remediation items such as removing shared accounts, adding MFA and closing orphaned access are commonly tracked as risk management measures.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Risk treatment plan entries referencing identity measures
  • Remediation tracking records
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(D) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Information system activity review

Implement procedures to regularly review records of information system activity, such as audit logs, access reports, and security incident tracking reports.

In practice: Security staff regularly look over audit logs and access reports; identity supplies review campaign results and records of who changed access to patient systems.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Regular review of audit logs, access reports and incident tracking. Primary ownership usually sits with security operations and compliance.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Access reports, review campaign results and identity audit logs are commonly among the records reviewed under this specification.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Periodic access report with reviewer sign-off
  • Identity audit log review records
164.308(a)(4)(ii)(A) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Isolating health care clearinghouse functions

If a health care clearinghouse is part of a larger organization, the clearinghouse must implement policies and procedures that protect the electronic protected health information of the clearinghouse from unauthorized access by the larger organization.

In practice: The clearinghouse sets its own access policies; identity supports them with separate roles, so staff elsewhere in the larger organization do not get its data by default.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.308(a)(10)(ii)(A)) written policies and procedures that also cover the clearinghouse's relevant electronic information systems. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Supporting
Why this classification

Applies only to a clearinghouse that is part of a larger organization. Primary ownership usually sits with the organization's architecture and privacy functions.

  • Assess
  • Implement

Role separation and access policy can commonly support keeping clearinghouse access apart from the larger organization.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Clearinghouse access role definitions
164.308(a)(6)(ii) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Response and reporting

Identify and respond to suspected or known security incidents; mitigate, to the extent practicable, harmful effects of security incidents that are known to the covered entity or business associate; and document security incidents and their outcomes.

In practice: During an incident the security team leads; identity audit trails show what an account did, and administrators can disable that account to help contain it.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Identify, respond to, mitigate and document security incidents. Primary ownership usually sits with security operations.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Identity audit trails and account disablement actions commonly support investigation and containment steps.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity-related incident timelines
  • Account containment action records
164.308(a)(8) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Evaluation

Perform a periodic technical and nontechnical evaluation, based initially upon the standards implemented under this rule and, subsequently, in response to environmental or operational changes affecting the security of electronic protected health information, that establishes the extent to which a covered entity's or business associate's security policies and procedures meet the requirements of this subpart.

In practice: The compliance team runs the periodic evaluation; identity adds completed access review records and control assessments as source material.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Periodic technical and nontechnical evaluation of security policies and procedures. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance and internal audit.

  • Assess
  • Manage
  • Identity Practice Subscription

Identity control assessments and access review records commonly serve as inputs to the periodic evaluation.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity control assessment report
  • Control monitoring dashboards or exports
164.310(a)(2)(iii) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Access control and validation procedures

Implement procedures to control and validate a person's access to facilities based on their role or function, including visitor control, and control of access to software programs for testing and revision.

In practice: Facilities staff control building access; where badges are issued from the identity lifecycle, new hire, transfer and departure events keep badge rights in line with each role.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Role-based physical access and visitor control. Primary ownership usually sits with physical security.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Where physical access badges are provisioned from the identity lifecycle, joiner, mover and leaver events commonly keep physical access aligned with role.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Badge provisioning integration description
  • Physical access review records
164.312(a)(2)(iii) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Automatic logoff

Implement electronic procedures that terminate an electronic session after a predetermined time of inactivity.

In practice: The application team sets inactivity timeouts; the single sign-on service adds idle-session and re-sign-in rules where the platform supports them, so a user returning to an idle session must sign in again.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes (as proposed 164.312(a)(2)(iv)) deploying technical controls that terminate a session after a predetermined period of inactivity that is reasonable and appropriate. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Supporting
Why this classification

Termination of electronic sessions after inactivity. Primary ownership often sits with application and endpoint configuration, with identity session policy as one contributor.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Identity provider session lifetime and re-authentication policy commonly contribute to session termination after inactivity.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Session lifetime and reauthentication interval policy export
164.312(b) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Audit controls

Implement hardware, software, and/or procedural mechanisms that record and examine activity in information systems that contain or use electronic protected health information.

In practice: System owners keep their own application logs; identity adds sign-in records, privileged session records and a history of access changes for systems holding patient records.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Proposed changeProposes to redesignate this standard as proposed 164.312(d), renamed audit trail and system log controls, requiring technology assets and/or technical controls that record and identify activity in relevant electronic information systems, with proposed implementation specifications at 164.312(d)(2) covering real-time monitoring, recording, retention and scope. Proposed, not law. 90 FR 898.
Supporting
Why this classification

Mechanisms that record and examine activity in systems containing ePHI. Primary ownership usually sits with security operations and application owners, with identity logs as one source.

  • Assess
  • Implement
  • Manage

Identity provider and governance audit logs, privileged session records and access change history commonly contribute to the activity records for ePHI systems.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
  • CyberArk / BeyondTrust / Delinea
Evidence commonly examined
  • Identity audit log configuration and retention settings
  • Privileged session recording samples
164.316(b)(2)(i) 316: Policies and procedures and documentation requirements (45 CFR 164.316)

Time limit

Retain the documentation required by paragraph (b)(1) of this section for 6 years from the date of its creation or the date when it last was in effect, whichever is later.

In practice: The records team sets the retention schedule; identity records kept as required documentation, such as review results and request sign-offs, are retained for the same period.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Supporting
Why this classification

Six-year retention of required documentation. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance. Identity review and approval records are commonly retained under the same schedule.

  • Assess
  • Manage

Where access review results and approval records serve as documentation this subpart requires, their retention settings commonly follow the six-year documentation schedule.

Platform families that commonly provide relevant capabilities
  • Entra
  • SailPoint ISC
  • SailPoint IIQ
  • Netwrix IDM
  • Okta / Ping
Evidence commonly examined
  • Retention schedule entry for access review and approval records
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(C) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Sanction policy

Apply appropriate sanctions against workforce members who fail to comply with the security policies and procedures of the covered entity or business associate.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Human resources and compliance policy on sanctions for workforce members. Primary ownership usually sits with HR and compliance.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(2) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Assigned security responsibility

Identify the security official who is responsible for the development and implementation of the policies and procedures required by this subpart for the covered entity or business associate.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Designation of the security official. Primary ownership usually sits with executive leadership.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(5)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Security awareness and training

Implement a security awareness and training program for all members of its workforce (including management).

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Workforce training program. Primary ownership usually sits with security awareness and HR. Some implementation specifications below touch identity.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(5)(ii)(A) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Security reminders

Periodic security updates.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Periodic security updates to the workforce. Primary ownership usually sits with security awareness.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(5)(ii)(B) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Protection from malicious software

Procedures for guarding against, detecting, and reporting malicious software.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Endpoint and malware controls. Primary ownership usually sits with endpoint security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(6)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Security incident procedures

Implement policies and procedures to address security incidents.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Incident handling program. In GCA's classification, primary ownership usually sits with security operations and incident response.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(i) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Contingency plan

Establish (and implement as needed) policies and procedures for responding to an emergency or other occurrence (for example, fire, vandalism, system failure, and natural disaster) that damages systems that contain electronic protected health information.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Business continuity planning. Primary ownership usually sits with continuity and infrastructure teams.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(ii)(A) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Data backup plan

Establish and implement procedures to create and maintain retrievable exact copies of electronic protected health information.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Backup of ePHI. Primary ownership usually sits with infrastructure and operations.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(ii)(B) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Disaster recovery plan

Establish (and implement as needed) procedures to restore any loss of data.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Restoration of lost data. Primary ownership usually sits with infrastructure and operations.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(ii)(C) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Emergency mode operation plan

Establish (and implement as needed) procedures to enable continuation of critical business processes for protection of the security of electronic protected health information while operating in emergency mode.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Continuity of critical processes in emergency mode. Primary ownership usually sits with continuity planning. Emergency access to ePHI is addressed at 164.312(a)(2)(ii).

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(ii)(D) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Testing and revision procedures

Implement procedures for periodic testing and revision of contingency plans.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Periodic testing of contingency plans. Primary ownership usually sits with continuity planning.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(a)(7)(ii)(E) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Applications and data criticality analysis

Assess the relative criticality of specific applications and data in support of other contingency plan components.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Criticality assessment of applications and data. Primary ownership usually sits with application owners and continuity planning.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(b)(1) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Business associate contracts and other arrangements

A covered entity may permit a business associate to create, receive, maintain, or transmit electronic protected health information on the covered entity's behalf only if the covered entity obtains satisfactory assurances, in accordance with § 164.314(a), that the business associate will appropriately safeguard the information. A covered entity is not required to obtain such satisfactory assurances from a business associate that is a subcontractor.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Contractual assurances from business associates. Primary ownership usually sits with legal and vendor management. Third-party access governance is a related identity topic but the requirement is contractual.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.308(b)(3) 308: Administrative safeguards (45 CFR 164.308)

Written contract or other arrangement

Document the satisfactory assurances required by paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section through a written contract or other arrangement with the business associate that meets the applicable requirements of § 164.314(a).

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Documentation of business associate assurances through a written contract. Primary ownership usually sits with legal.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(a)(1) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Facility access controls

Implement policies and procedures to limit physical access to its electronic information systems and the facility or facilities in which they are housed, while ensuring that properly authorized access is allowed.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Physical access to facilities and systems. Primary ownership usually sits with facilities and physical security. In GCA's classification, a physical access requirement that names authorized individuals and badge lifecycle is supporting, because identity provisioning can feed it where a physical access control system connector exists. This row states the facility safeguard itself, so it is outside identity scope.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(a)(2)(i) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Contingency operations

Establish (and implement as needed) procedures that allow facility access in support of restoration of lost data under the disaster recovery plan and emergency mode operations plan in the event of an emergency.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Facility access during restoration. Primary ownership usually sits with facilities and continuity planning.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(a)(2)(ii) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Facility security plan

Implement policies and procedures to safeguard the facility and the equipment therein from unauthorized physical access, tampering, and theft.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Safeguarding the facility and equipment. Primary ownership usually sits with facilities and physical security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(a)(2)(iv) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Maintenance records

Implement policies and procedures to document repairs and modifications to the physical components of a facility which are related to security (for example, hardware, walls, doors, and locks).

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Documentation of physical repairs and modifications. Primary ownership usually sits with facilities.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(b) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Workstation use

Implement policies and procedures that specify the proper functions to be performed, the manner in which those functions are to be performed, and the physical attributes of the surroundings of a specific workstation or class of workstation that can access electronic protected health information.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Policies on workstation functions and surroundings. Primary ownership usually sits with IT policy and facilities.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(c) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Workstation security

Implement physical safeguards for all workstations that access electronic protected health information, to restrict access to authorized users.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Physical safeguards for workstations. Primary ownership usually sits with facilities and endpoint teams.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(d)(1) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Device and media controls

Implement policies and procedures that govern the receipt and removal of hardware and electronic media that contain electronic protected health information into and out of a facility, and the movement of these items within the facility.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Hardware and media movement. Primary ownership usually sits with IT asset management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(d)(2)(i) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Disposal

Implement policies and procedures to address the final disposition of electronic protected health information, and/or the hardware or electronic media on which it is stored.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Final disposition of ePHI and media. Primary ownership usually sits with IT asset management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(d)(2)(ii) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Media re-use

Implement procedures for removal of electronic protected health information from electronic media before the media are made available for re-use.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Removal of ePHI before media re-use. Primary ownership usually sits with IT asset management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(d)(2)(iii) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Accountability

Maintain a record of the movements of hardware and electronic media and any person responsible therefore.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Record of hardware and media movements. Primary ownership usually sits with IT asset management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.310(d)(2)(iv) 310: Physical safeguards (45 CFR 164.310)

Data backup and storage

Create a retrievable, exact copy of electronic protected health information, when needed, before movement of equipment.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Exact copy before equipment movement. Primary ownership usually sits with infrastructure.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(a)(2)(iv) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Encryption and decryption

Implement a mechanism to encrypt and decrypt electronic protected health information.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Encryption of ePHI. Primary ownership usually sits with infrastructure and application security. Key management is usually a separate discipline.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(c)(1) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Integrity

Implement policies and procedures to protect electronic protected health information from improper alteration or destruction.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Protection of ePHI from improper alteration or destruction. Primary ownership usually sits with application and data security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(c)(2) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Mechanism to authenticate electronic protected health information

Implement electronic mechanisms to corroborate that electronic protected health information has not been altered or destroyed in an unauthorized manner.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Corroborating that ePHI has not been altered. Primary ownership usually sits with application and data security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(e)(1) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Transmission security

Implement technical security measures to guard against unauthorized access to electronic protected health information that is being transmitted over an electronic communications network.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Protection of ePHI in transit. Primary ownership usually sits with network and infrastructure security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(e)(2)(i) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Integrity controls

Implement security measures to ensure that electronically transmitted electronic protected health information is not improperly modified without detection until disposed of.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Detection of improper modification in transit. Primary ownership usually sits with network and infrastructure security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.312(e)(2)(ii) 312: Technical safeguards (45 CFR 164.312)

Encryption

Implement a mechanism to encrypt electronic protected health information whenever deemed appropriate.

  • Required or Addressable Addressable
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Encryption of transmitted ePHI. Primary ownership usually sits with network and infrastructure security.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(a)(1) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

Business associate contracts or other arrangements

The contract or other arrangement required by § 164.308(b)(3) must meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii), or (a)(2)(iii) of this section, as applicable.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Contract requirements for business associates. Primary ownership usually sits with legal and vendor management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(a)(2)(i) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

Business associate contracts

The contract must provide that the business associate will— (A) Comply with the applicable requirements of this subpart; (B) In accordance with § 164.308(b)(2), ensure that any subcontractors that create, receive, maintain, or transmit electronic protected health information on behalf of the business associate agree to comply with the applicable requirements of this subpart by entering into a contract or other arrangement that complies with this section; and (C) Report to the covered entity any security incident of which it becomes aware, including breaches of unsecured protected health information as required by § 164.410.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Contract terms a business associate must agree to. Primary ownership usually sits with legal.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(a)(2)(ii) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

Other arrangements

The covered entity is in compliance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section if it has another arrangement in place that meets the requirements of § 164.504(e)(3).

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Alternative arrangements that meet 164.504(e)(3). Primary ownership usually sits with legal.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(a)(2)(iii) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

Business associate contracts with subcontractors

The requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this section apply to the contract or other arrangement between a business associate and a subcontractor required by § 164.308(b)(4) in the same manner as such requirements apply to contracts or other arrangements between a covered entity and business associate.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Flow-down to subcontractors. Primary ownership usually sits with legal and vendor management.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(b)(1) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

Requirements for group health plans

Except when the only electronic protected health information disclosed to a plan sponsor is disclosed pursuant to § 164.504(f)(1)(ii) or (iii), or as authorized under § 164.508, a group health plan must ensure that its plan documents provide that the plan sponsor will reasonably and appropriately safeguard electronic protected health information created, received, maintained, or transmitted to or by the plan sponsor on behalf of the group health plan.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Plan document requirements for group health plans. Primary ownership usually sits with plan administration and legal.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.314(b)(2) 314: Organizational requirements (45 CFR 164.314)

The plan documents of the group health plan must be amended to incorporate provisions to require the plan sponsor to— (i) Implement administrative, physical, and technical safeguards that reasonably and appropriately protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the electronic protected health information that it creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of the group health plan; (ii) Ensure that the adequate separation required by § 164.504(f)(2)(iii) is supported by reasonable and appropriate security measures; (iii) Ensure that any agent to whom it provides this information agrees to implement reasonable and appropriate security measures to protect the information; and (iv) Report to the group health plan any security incident of which it becomes aware.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Plan sponsor obligations. Primary ownership usually sits with plan administration and legal.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.316(a) 316: Policies and procedures and documentation requirements (45 CFR 164.316)

Policies and procedures

Implement reasonable and appropriate policies and procedures to comply with the standards, implementation specifications, or other requirements of this subpart, taking into account those factors specified in § 164.306(b)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), and (iv). This standard is not to be construed to permit or excuse an action that violates any other standard, implementation specification, or other requirements of this subpart. A covered entity or business associate may change its policies and procedures at any time, provided that the changes are documented and are implemented in accordance with this subpart.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Written policies and procedures for the Security Rule. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.316(b)(1) 316: Policies and procedures and documentation requirements (45 CFR 164.316)

Documentation

(i) Maintain the policies and procedures implemented to comply with this subpart in written (which may be electronic) form; and (ii) If an action, activity or assessment is required by this subpart to be documented, maintain a written (which may be electronic) record of the action, activity, or assessment.

  • Required or Addressable Standard
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Written documentation of policies and required actions. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.316(b)(2)(ii) 316: Policies and procedures and documentation requirements (45 CFR 164.316)

Availability

Make documentation available to those persons responsible for implementing the procedures to which the documentation pertains.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Availability of documentation to implementers. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
164.316(b)(2)(iii) 316: Policies and procedures and documentation requirements (45 CFR 164.316)

Updates

Review documentation periodically, and update as needed, in response to environmental or operational changes affecting the security of the electronic protected health information.

  • Required or Addressable Required
  • January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law) Not mapped by GCA
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
Why this classification

Periodic review and update of documentation. Primary ownership usually sits with compliance.

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable

Summary

Primary
13
Identity platforms or processes are typically the principal means of implementing the requirement.
Supporting
11
Another discipline owns the requirement. Identity configuration or evidence contributes.
Outside identity scope (GCA classification)
41
Listed for completeness, with a one-line note on what the requirement is.

How to read the matrix

Required or Addressable
Under 45 CFR 164.306(d)(2), required implementation specifications must be implemented. Under 164.306(d)(3), for an addressable specification the entity must assess whether it is a reasonable and appropriate safeguard in its environment, then implement it if reasonable and appropriate or, if not, document why and implement an equivalent alternative measure if reasonable and appropriate. Standard means the row is a standard. Standards carry no Required or Addressable label, and under 164.306(c) a covered entity or business associate must comply with the applicable standards.
January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law)
Proposed, not law. HHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking at 90 FR 898 on January 6, 2025 that would restructure the Security Rule, including proposed lead-in text requiring implementation of all listed safeguards in place of the required and addressable distinction. As of 2026-10-16 no final rule has been published and the proposal has not been withdrawn. The 2026 Unified Agenda lists RIN 0945-AA22 under Long-Term Actions with final action projected for July 2027. Proposed change marks rows where GCA has mapped a specific proposed provision. Not mapped by GCA means GCA has not mapped a specific proposed provision to the row, not that the proposal leaves the row unchanged.
Identity relevance

Identity relevance is a GCA classification of whether identity capabilities are typically the principal means of implementing a requirement (Primary), contribute to a requirement owned by another discipline (Supporting), or usually sit outside identity work (Outside identity scope (GCA classification)).

It describes where primary implementation ownership usually sits. It is not a statement about whether identity configuration could be relevant to a particular incident, finding or environment. Every "Outside identity scope (GCA classification)" classification carries a rationale, and other classifications show one where GCA has recorded it, under "Why this classification" beside the label.

Platform families
Product families that commonly provide capabilities relevant to a requirement. A blank cell means GCA has not mapped a platform family to the requirement. It does not mean a product lacks a capability.
Evidence
Examples of artifacts commonly examined. The list is not complete, and it is not a statement that any artifact is sufficient. Assessors determine sufficiency.

Sources

  1. 45 CFR 164.308 Administrative safeguards U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  2. 45 CFR 164.310 Physical safeguards U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  3. 45 CFR 164.312 Technical safeguards U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  4. 45 CFR 164.314 Organizational requirements U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  5. 45 CFR 164.316 Policies and procedures and documentation requirements U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  6. 45 CFR 164.306 Security standards: General rules (required and addressable implementation specifications at paragraph (d)) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, via the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
  7. HIPAA Security Rule To Strengthen the Cybersecurity of Electronic Protected Health Information, notice of proposed rulemaking, 90 FR 898 (January 6, 2025), RIN 0945-AA22 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, via the Federal Register
  8. Unified Agenda entry for RIN 0945-AA22 (HIPAA Security Rule to Strengthen the Cybersecurity of Electronic Protected Health Information), 2026 Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, reginfo.gov

Important notice

Purpose. This HIPAA Security Rule identity traceability matrix is general educational reference material, written by Robert Ivey and published by GCA Technology Services ("GCA") to help organizations plan identity and access management work. It is not legal, audit, accounting or compliance advice, and it is not a substitute for advice from qualified professionals who know your environment.

No compliance determination. Whether an organization meets a requirement is decided by the applicable assessor, auditor, certifying body or regulator, applying the governing requirements to that organization's actual systems, policies and evidence. Nothing in this matrix states or implies that any organization, product, service or configuration meets or complies with any requirement, or that any assessment, audit, examination or certification will have any particular outcome.

Classifications are practice opinion. Relevance classifications, offering mappings, platform mappings and evidence examples are the author's professional judgment as of the date shown. They are not regulatory classifications and are not statements of the standard of care. Other qualified practitioners may reasonably classify requirements differently, and the right answer for a given environment depends on its facts.

Evidence examples are illustrative. Evidence listed is an example of artifacts commonly examined. It is not a complete list, and it is not a statement that any artifact is sufficient. Assessors determine sufficiency.

Source text controls. Requirement text and references come from the sources listed on this page. Where this matrix differs from a source, the source controls. Regulations, guidance and assessment methods change, so confirm current requirements with the issuing authority before relying on them.

Products and services. Platform names identify product families that commonly provide capabilities relevant to a requirement. A blank cell means GCA has not mapped that platform family to the requirement. It does not mean the product lacks a capability. GCA makes no representation about any third party's products, features, roadmaps or government authorization status, including FedRAMP, DoD Impact Levels and similar programs. Confirm capabilities with the vendor and authorization status with the authorizing program.

GCA services. Offering descriptions identify the type of GCA service that addresses an area. The scope, deliverables, terms and outcomes of any GCA engagement are defined only by a signed agreement and Statement of Work, and this page does not change those terms.

No relationship; no reliance. Reading or using this matrix does not create a client, advisory or other relationship with GCA or the author. To the fullest extent permitted by law, this material is provided "as is," without warranties of any kind, express or implied, including accuracy, completeness, merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, and GCA is not liable for any decision made or action taken in reliance on it.

No client data. This matrix contains no client data. Any example organization is fictitious.

Proposed changes, not law. Rows showing "Proposed change" under "January 2025 NPRM (proposed, not law)" summarize amendments HHS proposed to the HIPAA Security Rule at 90 FR 898 (January 6, 2025). As of , no final rule has been published. The Security Rule in force at 45 CFR Part 164, Subpart C controls.

Version 1 · Prepared · Last reviewed · Reviewed every 90 days · View changelog

Microsoft and Microsoft Entra are trademarks of the Microsoft group of companies. SailPoint, IdentityIQ and Identity Security Cloud are trademarks or product names of SailPoint Technologies, Inc. or its affiliates. Netwrix is a trademark of Netwrix Corporation. Okta is a trademark of Okta, Inc. Ping Identity is a trademark of Ping Identity Corporation. CyberArk is a trademark of Palo Alto Networks, Inc. or its affiliates. BeyondTrust is a trademark of BeyondTrust Corporation. Delinea is a trademark of Delinea Inc. HHS does not endorse this page. All other trademarks belong to their respective owners. These names identify products and programs only and do not imply endorsement by, sponsorship by or affiliation with any of these companies or programs, except where a GCA partnership is expressly stated elsewhere on gca.net.

Changelog

  1. Version 1: First publication.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this page say our environment meets the HIPAA Security Rule?

No. The page is a practice mapping. Whether an organization meets a requirement is decided by the applicable assessor, auditor or regulator, applying the rule to that organization's systems, policies and evidence.

What is the difference between Required and Addressable?

Required specifications must be implemented. For an Addressable specification, the entity assesses whether it is a reasonable and appropriate safeguard in its environment, then implements it or documents why not and implements an equivalent alternative measure if that is reasonable and appropriate.

What did HHS propose in January 2025?

HHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking at 90 FR 898 on January 6, 2025. It is proposed, not law. As of October 16, 2026, HHS has not published a final rule or withdrawn the proposal. The 2026 Unified Agenda lists the rule as a Long-Term Action with a projected final action date of July 2027. That date is a projection, not a commitment.