• No results found

ECRC Privacy and Security Subcommittee, DTC and TIF-S Recommendations for Five Central Security Program Initiatives

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "ECRC Privacy and Security Subcommittee, DTC and TIF-S Recommendations for Five Central Security Program Initiatives"

Copied!
8
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

ECRC Privacy and Security Subcommittee, DTC and TIF-S Recommendations for Five Central Security Program Initiatives

ECRC Subcommittee Web Application Vulnerability Scanning

DTC (6/1/0)

TIF (23/3/0)

All campus unit Web applications hosting data protected by law and/or policy will be subject to Web application vulnerability scanning. Web sites hosting information for which unauthorized alteration could damage university reputation, present life/safety risks or increase university liability are also required to be subject to Web vulnerability scans. The security program will acquire/support effective Web

application vulnerability scanning systems. There will be no campus unit use charge for accessing Web application vulnerability scanning systems. The security program will provide use specifications for dynamic

application versus application code vulnerability scanning. If an application test or development environment is required to conduct scanning, the campus unit hosting the Web content is responsible to work with central security staff to conduct the scan(s). Units will provide developers to assist in Web application vulnerability scanning. ITPS resources, if needed by the campus unit, will be available to assist in scanning and/or configuring a virtualized test environment for scans. Campus unit application owners are responsible for timely vulnerability mitigation.

The campus central security program will offer training and guidance for use of Web application vulnerability scanning tools. The central security program will also offer instruction for secure coding for Web applications to campus Web developers.

The central security program should evaluate cost benefit of use Web application firewalls to provide additional privacy and security protection for Web applications and Web sites.

DTC members endorsed the

recommendations from TIF, as outlined to the right and ranked Web application vulnerability scanning the #1 central IT security measure. Highlights from the discussion:

 Clarify/prioritize which Web apps fall under the scope of this

recommendation – e.g., anything with data restricted by policy (PII, FERPA, etc.); public-facing

applications/systems; etc.  Set up a pilot or proof-of-concept

project to assess whether the current Web app vulnerability scanning tool/policy can be successful if applied broadly

 Ensure sufficient staff resources (e.g., Omen’s time) are allocated in support of the scanning service

 Offer training to departments, including on how to interpret scanning results and remediation measures

 Change ‘cost sharing” to “effort sharing” between IET and campus departments

 Revise third bullet in TIF’s recommendation to read “IET is requested to maintain the expertise to assist units with vulnerability evaluation of Web applications."

o

Continue providing a Web application vulnerability scanning service.

o

In consultation with the campus technical community, outline the minimum

requirements for the environment in which Web application development work is done (i.e. separate test and production

environments, secure coding practices, source code vulnerability scanning, etc.).

o

Maintain the expertise to assist units with final vulnerability evaluation of any Web

application before the application becomes "live".

o

Use the team of Web Application Scanning Experts to assist campus Web developers with:

Setting up an environment for secure

Web application development

Training on coding practices and tools for scanning source and completed Web applications

Scanning and assistance with remediation of Web vulnerabilities discovered through the scanning and other processes --- remediation responsibility is of the unit.

o

Code scanning must complement static

scanners, with trained staff to provide code scanning service.

Costs associated with these services are born jointly by IET and campus units developing Web applications.

(2)

Personal Identity Information Scanning

DTC (6/0/0)

TIF (23/1/2)

University owned data with content protected by law and/or policy,

whether residing of university-owned or personally owned computers,

must be protected from unauthorized access. Computers with restricted

university data will be scanned and such information protected from

unauthorized access. Where scanning is not possible or restricted data

must reside on the computer, whole disk encryption will be installed on

the university-owned or personally owned computer. The initial priority

for PII scanning and PII data protection will be university owned

computers.

The security program will initiate a campus information awareness

campaign regarding PII protection.

The central security program will work with the campus technical

community to identify those areas of high risk (including faculty

administered systems) that have not completed recent scanning and

assist with PII scanning and remediation. Units must scan computing

systems with a higher risk of PII storage (e.g., computers used for

personnel administration) annually to ensure PII is protected from

unauthorized access. As appropriate, use of whole disk encryption may

be used to mitigate risks where PII data retention on portable devices is

required.

The central security program will provide assistance to perform PII

scanning in FY12-13. Thereafter, PII scanning assistance will be

performed by unit staff or conducted by ITPS staff on a recharge basis

for units.

DTC members unanimously

endorsed the recommendations

from TIF, as outlined on the right,

and ranked personal identity

information the #2 central IT

security measure. Highlights from

the discussion:

Why are there still so many

sources of PII data across

campus? IET should work with

system owners to remove the

PII data

Which devices should be

scanned for PII (e.g., it’s

impossible to scan personal

devices every time they connect

to the campus network); broad

agreement that all

university-owned devices should be

scanned for PII.

Questions to ECRC P&S

Subcommittee

Does university owned data on

personal devices represent a

risk that must be controlled?

Work with the campus technical

community to identify those areas of high

risk (including faculty administered

systems) that have not completed recent

scanning and assist with PII scanning and

remediation. IET will perform this

campus-wide high-risk clean-up once, and

then maintain the expertise to assist (with

charge-back) those units that continue to

struggle with performing their own

scanning and remediation regularly.

Expand on the existing information

campaign to the general campus to

enlighten faculty/students/staff of what

PII is, and the dangers of storing it. The

campaign should follow the general effort

currently underway to improve the

campus communities' awareness of

smartphone security.

If campus risk managers and the campus

technical community determine that the

steps outlined above still leave an

unacceptable exposure for the campus, a

more restrictive policy, potentially

including exclusion of systems from

network access, should be explored.

The required scanning and remediation

(3)

Campus Vulnerability Scanning

DTC (5/0/0)

TIF (26/0/0)

All campus unit VLANs will be subject to centrally

administered vulnerability scanning conducted over

the network. Campus units are responsible for

responding to scanning system alerts/warnings.

Units must provide staff to respond to

alerts/warning or engage ITPS recharge assistance

for such support.

The central security program will assist campus

units to configure unit VLAN firewalls to support

daily network vulnerability scans.

The campus Computer Vulnerability Scanning

Policy, PPM310-021, will be updated to include a

provision for senior administrators to exempt a

VLAN under their purview from network

vulnerability scans. Such exemptions will be

reviewed by the campus IT Security Coordinator. If

this review indicates the exemption may present

excessive university risk, the exemption will be

forwarded to the ECRC Privacy and Security

Subcommittee for evaluation. The subcommittee

may raise exemption approval to the ECRC.

DTC members endorsed the recommendation from

TIF, as outlined to the right, and ranked campus

vulnerability scanning the #4 central IT security

measure.

Identify campus unit VLAN firewalls that are

blocking participation in the Secalert. Once

identified, IET will work with each campus unit

to determine any technical/business justification

for non-participation. IET will provide technical

assistance to those units that need help

unblocking Secalart scans. Justification for

Secalert bypass must be approved by the

campus unit senior administrator in consultation

with the campus IT Security Coordinator.

Justification will be filed with the campus IT

Security Coordinator and reviewed on an annual

basis.

Revise campus policy 310-021, Campus

Vulnerability Scanning Policy to reflect the policy

change for bypass approval.

(4)

VLAN Firewalls

DTC (5/0/0)

TIF (26/0/0)

The campus technical community, in consultation with IET, will

identify those VLANS that currently have no VLAN firewall or a

poorly supported VLAN firewall. VLAN administrators are

required to install and maintain effective ingress and egress

rules on VLAN firewalls per campus policy. The security

program will identify solutions for improperly firewalled

VLAN's (including hardware, software, maintenance, policy

management, etc.). The security program will consult with

campus VLAN firewall administrators to implement a VLAN

firewall and, where needed, provide one-time VLAN firewall

hardware subsidization. On-going costs of VLAN firewall

support is the responsibility of campus units.

If the campus unit VLAN administrator is unable to comply

with campus Cybersafety requirements for use of VLAN

firewalls, the security program will work with the unit

administrators (i.e. MSO, Chair) to understand the firewall

requirements and the long-term costs. If all other measures

fail to bring the VLAN into CyberSafety compliance, the central

security program will implement a VLAN firewall with a

standard ruleset on behalf of the unit. The installation expense

will be covered by the security program; however,on-going

firewall maintenance will be recharged to the campus unit (up

to $700 per month). Campus units without VLAN firewalls, or

approved exceptions, will be subject to disconnection from the

campus network.

DTC members unanimously

endorsed the recommendations

from TIF, as outlined below, and

ranked VLAN firewalls the #3

central IT security measure.

No ingress/egress traffic should be

permitted to campus unit VLANs

without a VLAN firewall.

o

The campus technical community, in consultation with IET, should work to identify those VLANS that currently either have no firewall or have a poorly supported firewall. VLAN administrators are required to install and maintain ingress and egress VLAN firewalls as part of CyberSafety policy.

o

Identify solutions for these improperly firewalled VLAN's (including hardware, software, maintenance, rules management, etc.).

o

Consult with the VLAN firewall administrators and share the one-time cost of implementing proper firewall solutions with the effected campus unit. On-going costs of VLAN maintenance and programming will be born by the effected campus unit. If the VLAN administrator is unable to comply with Cybersafety requirements, IET will work with the Unit Administrators (i.e. MSO, Chair) on understanding the requirements and the long-term costs. If all other measures fail to bring the VLAN into CyberSafety compliance, IET is authorized to implement a VLAN firewall with a standard ruleset without the unit's permission (at campus expense), and start charging the VLAN owner for on-going firewall maintenance. The time-frame between initial contact with the unit and forced compliance should be set (90-days was suggested).

o

In consultation with the campus technical community, continue to explore more robust, central firewall solutions. As the costs of these solutions decreases to make them an affordable

replacement for the current VLAN-by-VLAN firewall solutions, IET is requested to pilot a solution both within IET and with at least three campus units to determine the feasibility of more central firewall deployment and management. Any solution must include the ability for local firewall administrators to make immediate changes to firewall rules to respond to the immediate needs of their local environment.

(5)

System Integrity Monitoring

DTC (6/0/0)

TIF (25/1/0)

A centrally managed Security Information and

Event Management (SIEM) system will greatly

enhance the campus capability to provide real-time

security analysis, alerts and take preventive action

in response to malicious activity and/or attacks on

campus network, computers or data. These alerts

will reduce campus incident exposure to

privacy/security breaches. The subcommittee

acknowledges that units participating in a centrally

managed SIEM solution will meet the Cyber-safety

audit log security requirements defining log use,

inspection, analysis and retention.

In consultation with the campus technical

community, requirements for a SIEM system will be

developed and released for acquisition in FY12-13.

The initial priority for SIEM deployment will be for

log management within IET systems with

subsequent expansion to campus unit logging

systems in FY13-14.

Tripwire will continue to be licensed for campus

unit use.

DTC members unanimously endorsed the

recommendation from TIF, as outlined to the right,

and ranked system integrity management the #4

central IT security measure.

In consultation with the campus technical

community, evaluate Security Information Event

Management (SEIM) systems. If a system is

chosen for campus use, it should integrate with

FLOW data from the campus network routers,

collect and analyze "syslog" files from IET and

campus unit servers, and send alerts to

interested parties when automated analysis

determines a potential threat.

Work with the ECRC P&S Subcommittee to

determine if unit use of the chosen SEIM system

precludes the unit's "log file monitoring"

Cyber-safety requirement.

(6)

Individual Cost Estimates for Recommended Five Central Security Program Initiatives (new labor adjusted to start 10/2012)

Security service Service Upgrade One-time

FY12-13 Ongoing FY12-13 One-time FY13-14 Ongoing FY13-14

Network and Host Vulnerability Scanning

All campus unit VLANs will be subject to centrally administered vulnerability scanning conducted over the network. Campus units are responsible for responding to scanning system alerts/warnings. Units must provide staff to respond to alerts/warning or engage ITPS recharge assistance for such support.

The central security program will assist campus units to configure unit VLAN firewalls to support daily network vulnerability scans.

The campus Computer Vulnerability Scanning Policy, PPM310-021, will be updated to include a provision for senior administrators to exempt a VLAN under their purview from network

vulnerability scans. The campus IT Security Coordinator will review such exemptions. If this review indicates the exemption may present excessive university risk, the exemption will be forwarded to the ECRC Privacy and Security Subcommittee for evaluation. The subcommittee may raise exemption

approval to the ECRC. $0 $0 $0 $0

System Integrity Monitoring and Reporting

A centrally managed Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system will greatly enhance the campus capability to provide real-time security analysis, alerts and take preventive action in response to malicious activity and/or attacks on campus network, computers or data. These alerts will reduce campus incident exposure to privacy/security breaches. The subcommittee acknowledges that units participating in a centrally managed SIEM solution will meet the Cyber-safety audit log security requirements defining log use, inspection, analysis and retention. In consultation with the campus technical community, requirements for a SIEM system will be developed and released for acquisition in FY12-13. The initial priority for SIEM deployment will be for log management within IET systems with subsequent expansion to campus unit logging systems in FY13-14.

(7)

Web Application Vulnerability Scanning

All campus unit Web applications hosting data protected by law and/or policy will be subject to Web application vulnerability scanning. Web sites hosting information for which unauthorized alteration could damage university reputation, present life/safety risks or increase university liability are also required to be subject to Web vulnerability scans. The security program will acquire/support effective Web application vulnerability scanning systems. There will be no campus unit use charge for accessing Web application vulnerability scanning systems.

The security program will provide use specifications for dynamic application versus application code vulnerability scanning. If an application test or development environment is required to conduct scanning, the campus unit hosting the Web content is responsible to work with central security staff to conduct the scan(s). Units will provide developers to assist in Web application vulnerability scanning. ITPS resources, if needed by the campus unit, will be available to assist in scanning and/or configuring a virtualized test environment for scans.

Campus unit application owners are responsible for timely vulnerability mitigation.

The campus central security program will offer training and guidance for use of Web application vulnerability scanning tools. The central security program will also offer instruction for secure coding for Web applications to campus Web developers.

The central security program should evaluate cost benefit of use Web application firewalls to provide additional privacy and security protection for Web applications and Web sites.

$146,188 $12,500 $0 $29,875 Network Traffic Control In/Out of unit VLANs (Campus Unit VLAN Firewall Management)

The campus technical community, in consultation with IET, will identify those VLANS that currently have no VLAN firewall or a poorly supported VLAN firewall. VLAN administrators are required to install and maintain effective ingress and egress rules on VLAN firewalls per campus policy. The security program will identify solutions for improperly firewalled VLAN's (including hardware, software, maintenance, policy management, etc.). The security program will consult with campus VLAN firewall administrators to implement a VLAN firewall and, where needed, provide one-time VLAN firewall hardware subsidization. On-going costs of VLAN firewall support is the responsibility of campus units.

If the campus unit VLAN administrator is unable to comply with campus Cybersafety requirements for use of VLAN firewalls, the security program will work with the unit administrators (i.e. MSO, Chair) to understand the firewall requirements and the long-term costs. If all other measures fail to bring the VLAN into CyberSafety compliance, the central security program will implement a VLAN firewall with a standard ruleset on behalf of the unit. The security program will cover the installation expense; however, on-going firewall maintenance will be recharged to the campus unit (up to $700 per month). Campus units without VLAN firewalls, or approved exceptions, will be subject to

(8)

Personal Identity Information (PII) Scanning

University owned data with content protected by law and/or policy, whether residing of university-owned or personally university-owned computers, must be protected from unauthorized access. Computers with restricted university data will be scanned and such information protected from unauthorized access. Where scanning is not possible or restricted data must reside on the computer, whole disk encryption will be installed on the university-owned or personally owned computer. The initial priority for PII scanning and PII data protection will be university owned computers.

The security program will initiate a campus information awareness campaign regarding PII protection.

The central security program will work with the campus technical community to identify those areas of high risk (including faculty administered systems) that have not completed recent scanning and assist with PII scanning and remediation. Units must scan computing systems with a higher risk of PII storage (e.g., computers used for personnel administration) annually to ensure PII is protected from unauthorized access. As appropriate, use of whole disk encryption may be used to mitigate risks where PII data retention on portable devices is required.

The central security program will provide assistance to perform PII scanning in FY12-13. Thereafter, PII scanning assistance will be performed by unit staff or conducted by ITPS staff on a recharge basis for units.

PII scanning and whole disk encryption software will be acquired/supported by the central security

program. $303,250 $5,000 $0 $110,790

Total for Five Initiatives

$867,250 $42,500 $201,790 $277,455 Base Security

Program $0 $1,354,898 $0 $1,387,970

References

Related documents

First organic milk in Türkiye, P ı nar Organic Milk, probiotic products, were

ƒ Event correlation engine: Bell Labs/Alcatel-Lucent correlation engine used in fault management systems.. ƒ Intrusion detecting systems used: ƒ Open

While there is no statutory definition for “data brokers,” the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has defined this term to include “companies that collect information, including personal

Indeed the centrality of parenting and bisexual identities, level of sexual identity salience, and experiences of parenting self-efficacy or guilt, bisexual self-esteem or shame,

In summary, action was taken to protect the teacher participants and to comply with the University of Saskatchewan’s ethical guidelines for research. Data were collected through

NWS Information Technology Security Officers (ITSO) and Information System Security Officers (ISSOs) are responsible for ensuring that network vulnerability scans are conducted on

⁞ We audit, design and implement solutions in the areas of IP networking, firewalls, network monitoring, high availability, vulnerability management, security policy

El Conde de las Navas, nacido en Málaga el año 1855, amigo y admirador de Don Juan Valera, bibliófilo, bibliógrafo y bibliómano a un tiempo, lo que le valió el cargo de