Should you immediately decide to select an enclave approach for CMMC? The real answer is that it depends. It’s an important strategic decision to make early on in your compliance journey. Understanding the pros and cons of the enclave approach—and the alternatives—will help inform which direction you choose. It comes down to balancing security with operational efficiency and productivity. Ideally, you are not giving up one for the other.
Read on for an actionable exploration of these strategies to help you make an informed choice.
What Are CMMC Enclave and Enterprise-Wide Approaches for CUI?
- Secure Enclave: Enclaves are segmented portions of an organization’s IT environment, isolated to manage Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). This method simplifies compliance by limiting the scope of controls to the specific environment handling CUI.
- Enterprise-Wide: This approach extends security controls across the entire organization, ensuring comprehensive compliance. While this can be more resource-intensive, it simplifies management, eliminates silos, and provides a uniform security posture.
Key Factors to Consider: Evaluation Parameters
Counting the Costs: What’s the Cost for CMMC Compliance?
- The DoD estimates that the cost of compliance for CMMC1 could exceed $100K, including preparedness for CMMC Level 2 with a C3PAO assessment and submitting annual affirmations of compliance. In reality, it can far exceed this estimate.
- Enclave-based approaches are generally less expensive upfront, as the organization focuses resources on reduced compliance boundaries within the infrastructure. However, managing corporate networks and CMMC enclaves can increase complexity and operational costs over time.
- Enterprise-wide security requires a more significant initial investment, but it offers potential long-term savings by reducing redundancy and ensuring seamless integration of compliance measures.
Complexity Matters: Navigating Operational Challenges
- Enclaves are ideal for organizations with limited CUI exposure. They can isolate compliance obligations to specific teams, departments, projects, or divisions. This approach is particularly beneficial for contractors, where federal contract work represents a small portion of their overall business.
- Enterprise-wide implementations are better suited for organizations with diverse operations or organizations with applications that do not lend themselves well to a enclave approach, often CAD applications can keep organizations with an enterprise-wide approach regardless of organizational size or complexity.
Built for Growth: How Flexible Is Your Security Plan?
- Enclaves provide flexibility by allowing specific compliance adjustments without impacting the entire IT ecosystem. However, scaling enclave-based solutions across an expanding organization can become cumbersome.
- Enterprise-wide systems are inherently scalable, ensuring that any expansion of operations or integration of new systems does not compromise compliance efforts.
Real-World Scenarios: Where do you fit?
Organizations seeking CMMC compliance should consider the percentage of their business that is derived from federal contracts, industry, and operational requirements. For instance:
- A defense subcontractor managing limited CUI might benefit more from an enclave approach, isolating compliance obligations and minimizing their attack surface.
- A contractor working with extensive supply chains would likely find enterprise-wide security indispensable for maintaining compliance and operational efficiency.
Choosing between enclave and enterprise-wide security for CMMC compliance is not a one-size-fits-all decision. By aligning your approach with your operational scope, resource availability, and compliance requirements, your organization can achieve a secure, efficient, and sustainable pathway to compliance.
Guidance: Who Should Choose Each Approach?
Based on companies who are already on the path to compliance:
Best for Enclave-Based Security
- Organizations exploring defense work or with limited DoD contracts, where isolating compliance efforts can provide value.
- Organizations with clearly defined boundaries for CUI management.
- Teams seeking a cost-effective, low-maintenance entry point to meet initial CMMC compliance requirements.
- Organizations seeking to minimize compliance-related risks by reducing the scope of exposed systems.
Best for Enterprise-Wide Security
- Organizations with extensive DoD contracts where CUI is deeply embedded across teams, departments, or locations.
- Businesses seeking long-term compliance strategies to reduce management overhead.
- Companies aiming to eliminate silos and foster an integrated, organization-wide security culture.
The Pros and Cons: Enclave vs. Enterprise-Wide Security
Choosing between an enclave-based or enterprise-wide security approach isn't just about cost or convenience—it's about aligning your strategy with your organization's unique needs. Let's break down the pros and cons of each approach to help you make an informed decision.
Enclave Security: A Laser-Focused Compliance Strategy
PROs: Keep It Small, Keep It Simple
- Cost-Effective Compliance: Enclave-based security saves resources while still meeting CMMC requirements by limiting the scope to only systems and environments handling Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).
- Minimized Disruption: Focused security controls reduce the impact on non-CUI-related operations, making it easier for teams to adjust.
- Quick Wins for Resource Challenges: Address compliance with precision without overextending your capabilities.
CONs: Small Scope, Big Maintenance
- Management Overhead: Isolating and managing an enclave can lead to complexity, especially as your organization grows or your systems interconnect. Organizations may also find that they are double-paying for licensing with an enclave, which is an acceptable cost on a small scale, but as users and applications increase in the enclave, it becomes a financial and management challenge.
- Silos in Security: Creating an enclave can lead to inconsistent application of controls across your organization, increasing the risk of gaps.
- Scaling Challenges: If your operations expand or you take on more contracts requiring compliance, scaling enclave-based solutions can become cumbersome and costly.
Enterprise-Wide Security: The All-In-One Compliance Powerhouse
PROs: One System, One Standard
- Comprehensive Coverage: By applying security measures organization-wide, this approach eliminates silos, ensuring a consistent security posture across all departments.
- Future-Proof Scalability: Enterprise-wide security is more straightforward to scale, making it ideal for organizations with complex or expanding operations.
- Streamlined Management: A single system of controls simplifies management, saving time and reducing the potential for oversight.
CONs: Big Investment, Big Commitment
- Higher Upfront Costs: Implementing organization-wide security requires a significant initial investment, making it less attractive for companies with tight budgets.
- Operational Disruption: Deploying enterprise-wide controls may require significant adjustments to existing systems and workflows, potentially slowing down operations in the short term.
- Not Always Necessary: If your organization only handles limited CUI, this approach could be overkill, wasting resources that could be better allocated.
If your organization needs guidance, consider working with a trusted partner to assess your needs and implement tailored solutions. Systems Engineering, for example, provides comprehensive advisory and implementation services for both approaches, helping businesses navigate the complexities of CMMC compliance. Talk with our RP experts to help cut through the noise and set a clear path for success that's right for your business.
1 View Page 48, Table 31 in the Federal Register (PDF)