JSP 453 Alignment Approach

Purpose

This page defines how we align projects to JSP 453 and related MOD digital, security and assurance expectations without reproducing controlled or sponsor-provided content.

Operating Position

JSP 453 is treated as a project-specific requirement source. The project must obtain the applicable version, chapters, extracts, instructions or policy references through the customer, MOD sponsor or authorised route.

The playbook does not assume that public references are complete. It creates a disciplined way to capture, map, implement and evidence compliance.

Alignment Process

1. Confirm whether the engagement is MOD, defence, defence supplier, defence adjacent, or hosted in a defence environment.

2. Identify the customer security authority, MOD sponsor, accreditor, platform authority and information asset owner.

3. Request the applicable JSP 453 requirements and any related JSPs, security operating procedures or platform standards.

4. Create a JSP 453 alignment register.

5. Map each requirement to architecture, data, identity, hosting, monitoring, operations, supplier and evidence controls.

6. Identify gaps, assumptions and dependencies.

7. Raise deviations through project risk and formal customer approval.

8. Store approvals and implementation evidence in the evidence library.

9. Recheck alignment at design baseline, release, live transition and material change.

Alignment Register Fields

Field	Description
Requirement ID	Customer or JSP reference. Do not expose controlled text outside approved locations.
Requirement summary	Short permitted summary.
Source	MOD sponsor, customer schedule, JSP extract, security instruction or platform requirement.
Classification	Handling caveat for the requirement and evidence.
Control owner	Person accountable for implementation.
Implementation approach	Design or operational control used to meet the requirement.
Evidence	Document, test, architecture decision, approval or log proving implementation.
Status	Not started, in progress, implemented, exception requested, accepted, not applicable.
Residual risk	Risk remaining after control implementation.
Approval authority	Customer, MOD sponsor, accreditor or internal risk owner.

Minimum Controls

• confirm hosting model and platform authority;

• confirm data classification and handling restrictions;

• confirm identity, vetting and access requirements;

• confirm audit, monitoring and evidence requirements;

• confirm reuse, sustainability and operational support expectations;

• confirm whether CSM, Def Stan 05-138, DEFCON 658 or DCC evidence is required;

• confirm supplier and subcontractor flow-down obligations.

Quality Gate

No design baseline, production deployment or customer acceptance should proceed until applicable JSP 453 requirements have been reviewed, mapped and either implemented or formally accepted as residual risk.