6 Best Solutions for Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information & an Alternative Approach

For SaaS vendors, the ability to protect Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) shapes access to the federal market. Federal agencies and their contractors handle CUI across agency, contractor, and sub-processor environments, and no single tool covers all requirements for protecting it.

For SaaS vendors selling into government, that makes CUI protection an ongoing operational posture spanning the entire technology stack, sharpened by Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) requirements, Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Level 2, Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 140-3 validated cryptography, and the FIPS transition timeline.

A complete CUI protection stack includes six categories: discovery, access control, encryption, documentation, continuous monitoring, and authorized hosting, each of which carries a separate authorization burden.

This article compares the six solutions SaaS vendors most commonly evaluate to cover them, followed by Knox as an alternative that consolidates all six layers into a single pre-authorized boundary.

Key Takeaways

• Six protection layers. Discovery, access control, encryption, documentation, continuous monitoring, and authorized hosting each require their own tooling and authorization.
• Moderate baseline minimum. FedRAMP Moderate is the minimum cloud baseline for CUI, and agencies can require FedRAMP High for sensitive workloads based on contract and impact analysis.
• Authorized tools matter. Every cloud tool that handles CUI needs the applicable authorization or equivalency requirement so the assessment boundary is complete and ready for 3PAO review.
• Traditional authorization costs. Traditional FedRAMP authorization can cost upwards of $3.5 million and take 12 to 36 months, whereas inheriting a pre-authorized boundary compresses both cost and timeline.

Protecting CUI Requires an Ongoing Operational Posture

CUI is sensitive but unclassified government data that federal law, regulation, or government-wide policy requires agencies and their contractors to safeguard. Established under Executive Order 13556 and governed by the NIST SP 800-171 Rev3 standard for nonfederal systems, CUI protection obligations apply to federal executive branch agencies and to nonfederal organizations, including defense contractors, SaaS/cloud vendors, and subcontractors, that handle CUI or operate information systems on behalf of an agency. Defense contractors under DFARS 252.204-7012 should note that Rev2, not Rev3, remains the operative standard for that clause until DoD formally transitions.

For SaaS vendors deploying cloud systems that handle CUI, CUI should be safeguarded at a minimum of the Moderate Confidentiality Impact level.

Meeting NIST SP 800-171 Rev3 and FedRAMP requirements means operating six interconnected protection layers, each with its own vendor market and authorization implications:

1. Data discovery and classification to locate CUI across systems, repositories, and data flows and map it to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Registry categories.
2. Identity and access management (IAM) to enforce least-privilege and need-to-know access under the NIST SP 800-171 Rev3 AC and IA control families.
3. FIPS 140-3-validated encryption to protect CUI at rest, in transit, and when shared externally, using CMVP-validated modules.
4. Governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) documentation to produce System Security Plans (SSPs), Plans of Action & Milestones (POA&Ms), control mappings, and machine-readable authorization packages.
5. Continuous monitoring and vulnerability management to sustain authorization through monthly reporting, remediation SLAs, and annual 3PAO assessments.
6. FedRAMP-authorized cloud infrastructure to satisfy the hosting baseline for CUI workloads under FedRAMP Moderate or High.

The six solutions below represent the tools SaaS vendors most commonly evaluate when building each layer of a CUI protection stack. Each solves one piece of the problem; none solves the whole.

Six Solutions for Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information

Assembling a complete CUI protection stack from point solutions is usually a multi-vendor, multi-authorization exercise. The tools below map to the six protection layers introduced above.

1. Varonis Data Security Platform

Varonis Data Security Platform addresses the discovery and classification layer of CUI protection. It scans cloud storage, endpoints, and file shares to identify where CUI resides, maps it to NARA Registry categories, and flags data that still needs required controls before it affects authorization scope. Varonis holds FedRAMP Moderate authorization for its Data Security Platform, making it eligible to operate inside a CUI boundary at the Moderate baseline.

• Automated discovery across cloud storage, endpoints, and file shares.
• Classification tagging tied to NARA Registry CUI categories for accurate SSP scoping.
• Data flow mapping that tracks CUI inside and outside the authorized boundary.
• Alerting on CUI at rest that lacks the required encryption.

Varonis is best for SaaS vendors that need automated CUI discovery at scale and want a FedRAMP Moderate-authorized data security platform to anchor 3PAO scoping conversations. The trade-off is scope: Varonis addresses only the discovery layer, so organizations still need separate solutions for IAM, encryption, GRC, ConMon, and hosting to meet NIST SP 800-171 in full.

2. Okta IDaaS Government High Cloud

Okta IDaaS Government High Cloud governs who can access CUI, under what conditions, and with what privilege, enforcing the least-privilege and need-to-know principles the CUI program requires. Okta IDaaS Government High Cloud carries FedRAMP High authorization; the commercial version of Okta cannot serve as a sub-processor in a CUI environment.

• Multi-factor authentication (MFA) on network access to all CUI accounts, satisfying the AC and IA control families.
• Role-based and attribute-based access control (ABAC) that enforces need-to-know at the data level.
• Privileged access management (PAM) with session recording and logging on elevated accounts.
• Single sign-on (SSO) with identity provider support for federal agency authentication flows.

Okta IDaaS Government High Cloud is best for SaaS vendors serving DoD and civilian agencies that need FedRAMP High-authorized IAM out of the box. The limitation is that it governs access but does not encrypt data, monitor vulnerabilities, or host workloads; vendors still need the remaining five layers of the stack.

3. AWS Key Management Service (KMS)

AWS Key Management Service is a managed key management and encryption service used inside AWS GovCloud FedRAMP boundaries. NIST SP 800-171 requires that cryptographic modules protecting CUI be validated under NIST's Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP), and authorizing officials should confirm the applicable AWS KMS module status in the CMVP active module records for any claimed FIPS 140-3 validated modules, Security Level 3 validation within the AWS GovCloud environment.

• CMVP-validated key management operating inside AWS GovCloud.
• Full key lifecycle coverage: generation, distribution, storage, access, rotation, and destruction.
• Native integration with AWS storage, database, and networking services for at-rest encryption.
• TLS and IPsec support for CUI in transit between systems and external parties.

AWS KMS is best for vendors already building on AWS GovCloud that need integrated encryption without deploying a separate cryptographic module. Its main limitation is ecosystem lock-in: teams operating in multi-cloud or Azure Government environments need parallel encryption tooling, and KMS alone does not satisfy the discovery, IAM, GRC, ConMon, or hosting layers.

4. Drata

Drata is a governance, risk, and compliance automation platform that handles the documentation layer of CUI protection. It automates SSP generation, POA&M tracking, evidence collection, and multi-framework control mapping across NIST SP 800-171, FedRAMP, and CMMC, producing the artifacts that anchor an authorization package.

• Automated SSP generation mapped to NIST SP 800-171 requirements.
• POA&M tracking against remediation timelines and severity classifications.
• Machine-readable package output aligned with FedRAMP 20x's machine-readable requirements.
• Multi-framework mapping across FedRAMP, CMMC, SOC 2, and ISO 27001.
• Evidence collection that supports annual 3PAO reassessments.

Drata is best for SaaS vendors that want to consolidate compliance documentation and evidence workflows across multiple frameworks in a single control environment. The trade-off is that GRC platforms document and manage compliance, but do not, on their own, deliver CUI-compliant cloud operations at FedRAMP Moderate or above. Drata cannot substitute for FedRAMP-authorized hosting, encryption, or IAM; it simply organizes the evidence that those layers produce.

5. Tenable

Tenable provides continuous monitoring and vulnerability management for CUI environments. Its scanning covers operating systems, infrastructure, web applications, and databases, and Tenable One and Tenable Cloud Security integrate with pipelines for continuous visibility and risk-based prioritization aligned with FedRAMP's Continuous Monitoring Playbook.

• Automated vulnerability scanning across operating systems, infrastructure, web applications, and databases.
• Pipeline integration through Tenable One and Tenable Cloud Security for continuous visibility.
• Risk-based prioritization aligned with FedRAMP severity classifications.
• POA&M and inventory updates that feed the monthly ConMon reporting cycle.

Tenable is best for SaaS vendors that need automated vulnerability management aligned with the FedRAMP remediation SLAs defined in the FedRAMP remediation RFC: 30 days for critical and high, 90 days for moderate, and 180 days for low.

The limitation is operational: Tenable produces the scan data, but SaaS vendors still need dedicated security operations capacity to remediate findings, submit monthly reports, and pass annual 3PAO assessments. Underbudgeted programs often lose momentum during post-ATO continuous compliance.

6. Microsoft Azure Government

Microsoft Azure Government is a FedRAMP-authorized cloud infrastructure environment that supports high-impact government workloads. Azure Government holds FedRAMP High authorization and provides the hosting baseline for CUI-handling systems at FedRAMP Moderate and High under the FedRAMP Rev5 baselines.

• FedRAMP High authorization covering sensitive CUI categories.
• Support for DoD workloads and civilian agency requirements under a single infrastructure authorization.
• Inheritable infrastructure-layer controls per FedRAMP control inheritance guidance.
• Native integration with Microsoft Entra ID government tenants and Microsoft 365 GCC High.

Azure Government is best for vendors already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem or serving agencies with Azure requirements. The critical limitation is that hosting on Azure Government does not make an application FedRAMP authorized. Vendors inherit only infrastructure-layer controls and still need their own authorization under the cloud service authorization playbook, their own 3PAO assessment, their own agency sponsor, and a continuous monitoring operation. That distinction is where many do-it-yourself FedRAMP projects lose time.

What if SaaS vendors did not have to assemble and authorize every CUI protection layer themselves?

Knox’s Approach Replaces the Six-Layer Build

Assembling the six-layer stack means selecting, contracting, authorizing, and maintaining six separate tools, each with its own scope, its own inheritance implications, and its own operational overhead. Traditional FedRAMP authorization built this way can cost upwards of $3.5 million and require 12 to 36 months before a vendor signs a federal contract, diverting engineering capacity from product work for up to three years.

Knox reframes the question entirely. Instead of stitching together discovery, IAM, encryption, GRC, ConMon, and hosting vendors, SaaS teams inherit a single pre-authorized FedRAMP boundary via a government cloud platform that covers most required controls out of the box.

• Pre-authorized FedRAMP boundary spanning discovery, access, encryption, documentation, monitoring, and hosting in one operational environment.
• Current support for FedRAMP Moderate, FedRAMP High, and DISA Impact Level 4 (IL-4), with IL-5 authorization in process and estimated completion December 2026.
• The authorization cost is approximately $500,000 per application, roughly 90% lower than the traditional path.
• Timeline to authorization of approximately 90 days versus 12 to 36 months.

Knox is best for SaaS vendors that handle CUI and want to reach federal contract eligibility fast, preserving engineering capacity for product work rather than compliance construction. Vendors inherit Knox's active authorizations rather than building and authorizing each control layer from scratch.

CUI Protection Solutions Compared

The table below summarizes coverage, authorization status, ideal user, and operational scope for each option, so vendors can quickly see how each option fits within an overall CUI strategy.

An Inherited Boundary Reduces the Authorization Timeline

The choice between assembling six-point solutions and inheriting a pre-authorized boundary comes down to engineering capacity, timeline pressure, and total cost of ownership. Vendors with mature compliance programs and dedicated federal engineering teams may extend a best-of-breed stack; vendors optimizing for time-to-contract, predictable cost, and preserved product velocity typically favor an inherited boundary.

If your product handles CUI and federal contracts are on your roadmap, book a meeting to assess your path.

FAQs about Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information

Is FedRAMP Moderate always enough for CUI?

FedRAMP Moderate is the floor, not the ceiling. If contract terms or agency impact analysis require higher assurance, plan for FedRAMP High.

Does encrypting CUI remove its CUI status?

No. Encryption protects the information, but it does not change the designation. The data remains CUI until the applicable decontrol process applies.

Can I use the commercial version of a tool like Okta or Microsoft Entra ID inside a CUI boundary?

Not if the tool processes, stores, or transmits CUI outside the authorized scope. Use the appropriate government-authorized version or assess the tool inside the boundary.

Does hosting on AWS GovCloud mean my application is FedRAMP authorized?

No. Authorized infrastructure provides inherited infrastructure controls only. The application still needs the applicable authorization path, assessment, sponsorship, and ongoing monitoring unless it runs inside an existing authorized boundary.

‍