home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- NCSL BULLETIN
- OCTOBER, 1990
-
-
- REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCY
- COMPUTER SECURITY AND PRIVACY PLANS (CSPP): A SUMMARY REPORT
-
-
- Sensitive information and information resources have become
- increasingly important to the functioning of the federal
- government. The protection of such information is integral to
- the government serving the public trust. Concern that federal
- agencies were not protecting their information caused Congress to
- enact Public Law 100-235, "Computer Security Act of 1987" (the
- Act). The Act reaffirmed the National Institute of Standards and
- Technology's (NIST) computer security responsibilities. These
- responsibilities include developing standards and guidelines to
- protect sensitive unclassified information. Other
- responsibilities include providing new governmentwide programs in
- computer security awareness training and security planning.
-
- The Act required federal agencies to conduct educational programs
- to increase staff awareness of the need for computer security.
- The first-year activity included agencies identifying their
- computer systems containing sensitive information. These
- agencies prepared and submitted security plans for those systems
- to the NIST and National Security Agency (NSA) review team for
- advice and comment. This document summarizes a report on the
- review of the computer security and privacy plans that were
- submitted by federal agencies.
-
- How The Reviews Were Conducted
-
- The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued OMB Bulletin 88-
- 16, "Guidance for Preparation and Submission of Security Plans
- for Federal Computer Systems Containing Sensitive Information,"
- to guide agencies on preparing and submitting computer security
- plans. The bulletin specified the information that was to appear
- in each plan. The bulletin further requested that agencies
- identify systems as major application or general ADP support
- systems. Finally, the bulletin provided the agency the option of
- identifying any needs for guidance or technical support. This
- option also included making any comments the agency thought
- appropriate. Although a four-part format appeared, agencies were
- able to use latitude as long as all pertinent information was
- present. This permitted agencies with existing programs to
- submit current related documents. Submission of an agency
- overview was optional and most agencies chose not to provide one.
-
- The joint NIST/NSA review team examined 1,583 plans for 63
- federal civilian agencies and 27,992 plans from 441 Department of
- Defense (DoD) organizations. Most DoD submissions consisted
- mainly of accreditation documentation prepared for other computer
- security planning purposes. During the review process, the
- review team recorded data about the systems for analysis. The
- conclusions made in this report stem principally, but not
- exclusively, from the civilian agency submissions.
-
- Major Findings
-
- The review team arrived at a number of conclusions about the
- plans and the plan review process, seeing both many positive
- signs and some areas for improvement. These findings include:
-
- o The civilian agency CSPPs basically conformed with the
- guidance given by OMB Bulletin 88-16. Many controls to
- protect sensitive systems were already in place or
- planned. These controls appeared consistent with
- identified system functions, environment, and security
- needs. However, some respondents appeared to have just
- "checked the boxes," perhaps presenting a falsely
- optimistic picture.
-
- o Many agencies appeared to report on isolated systems
- rather than all systems subject to the Computer
- Security Act and OMB Bulletin 88-16.
-
- o Agencywide guidance on how to prepare the plans was not
- clear. There was also some question whether a high-
- level official reviewed the plans. Also unclear is the
- distribution of agency-level computer security policy
- and guidance. Further, most plans did not reflect the
- joint involvement of ADP, computer security, and
- applications communities in computer security planning.
-
- o Significantly, the plans rarely addressed the security
- concerns on networking, interfaces with other systems,
- and the use of contractors and their facilities. This
- may reflect a general confusion about the boundaries
- and limits of responsibility for a given system.
-
- o Many plans equated sensitivity only with privacy or
- confidentiality and did not fully address requirements
- for integrity and availability.
-
- o Most plans did not communicate an appreciation for the
- role of risk management activities in computer security
- planning.
-
- o Although most agencies said they had computer security
- awareness and training, many did not show that all
- applicable employees received periodic training.
-
- o Finally, the CSPP submission and review effort raised
- the level of federal awareness regarding the need to
- protect sensitive information and the importance of
- computer security planning.
-
-
-
-
- Recommendations for Agencies
-
- Based on the needs that became apparent during the plan review,
- the review team recommends the following:
-
- o Agency management should ensure that computer security
- has the highest level of management involvement. This
- involvement is also important in the computer security
- planning process. Computer security benefits from the
- multiple perspectives of and input from agency
- information resources management, computer security,
- and functional, user, and applications personnel.
-
- o Agency management should identify and describe the
- security needs of their systems which contain sensitive
- information.
-
- o Agency management should recognize the importance of
- computer security and its required planning. This
- recognition should be aggressively communicated to
- their staffs, perhaps using their computer security and
- awareness training programs as one of the vehicles.
-
- o Agencies should incorporate computer security planning
- with other information systems planning activities.
-
- o Agencies should consider the protection requirements
- for integrity and availability on an equal basis with
- that of confidentiality.
-
- o Agencies should assess risks, and select and implement
- realistic controls throughout the system life cycle.
- This involves awareness of technology changes with
- regard to system hardware and software. This awareness
- also requires a knowledge of new technology and new
- methods for protecting and recovering from system
- threats. In addition, agencies should fully document
- in-place controls to ease periodic reevaluation,
- internal audit, and oversight agency review.
-
- o Agencies should implement certification and
- accreditation programs. There is a lack of awareness
- of guidance regarding certification and accreditation,
- including FIPS PUB 102, "Guideline for Computer
- Security Certification and Accreditation." There is
- also a lack of knowledge of the certification
- requirements in OMB Circular A-130, "Management of
- Federal Information Resources." Agencies may use OMB
- Circular A-130 as the basis for these programs.
-
- o Agencies should clarify the boundaries and limits of
- responsibility for each system, and should include, in
- any planned risk assessment activity, full
- consideration of the telecommunications and networking
- environment and relationships with contractors and
- other organizations.
-
- o Agencies should stress security awareness and training
- for their employees. This includes all employees
- involved in the design, management, development,
- operation, or use of federal computer systems
- containing sensitive information.
-
- o Agencies should develop computer security policy and
- operative guidance. Such policy and guidance should
- fully reflect and comprehensively address an
- encompassing view of computer security. The Computer
- Security Act, OMB Circular A-130, and OMB Bulletins 88-
- 16 and 89-17, "Federal Information Systems and
- Technology Planning," and their successors all contain
- this view. The policy should directly address the full
- scope of computer security planning and risk management
- activities. It must incorporate an application system
- perspective and give more detailed consideration to
- confidentiality, integrity, and availability protection
- requirements.
-
- What NIST is Doing
-
- NIST is evolving a strategy for helping federal agencies in
- identifying and protecting sensitive information systems. This
- strategy shifts emphasis to the implementation of computer
- security plans, particularly those developed under OMB Bulletin
- 88-16. It provides for visits by OMB, NIST, and NSA staff. This
- group will provide direct comments, advice, and technical aid
- focused on the agency's implementation of the Act.
-
- In addition to the agency visits described above, NIST has
- initiated the following computer security projects to help
- agencies more easily and effectively comply with the Computer
- Security Act:
-
- o NIST will develop standardized specifications and
- language for federal government computer security
- services contracts.
-
- o NIST will develop a guidance document on computer
- security in the ADP procurement cycle.
-
- o NIST has recently published guidance on the use of
- Trusted Systems.
-
- o NIST will develop guidance on computer security
- planning.
-
- o NIST has developed, and will continue to operate, a
- computer incident response center in order to address
- viruses, worms, and other malicious software attacks.
-
- o NIST will support and coordinate computer security
- resource and response centers nationwide.
-
- o NIST will enhance and operate the National Computer
- Systems Laboratory (NCSL) Computer Security Bulletin
- Board System.
-
- o NIST will operate the NIST/NSA Risk Management
- Laboratory and prepare further guidelines on risk
- management.
-
- o NIST will develop guidance and recommendations on
- assuring information integrity in computer systems.
-
- In addition to the above plans, NIST has already developed a
- number of guidelines and other resources to help federal managers
- secure their computer systems.
-
- Future Directions
-
- Federal managers have computer security requirements that are
- similar to their counterparts in the private sector. We believe
- that private sector organizations can learn and benefit from the
- federal experience in implementing the Computer Security Act. In
- both environments, a vigorous computer security awareness program
- is important at all levels in the organization. Also, in both
- environments, the active involvement of user, management, ADP,
- and computer security communities in computer security planning
- could help end some of the existing and potential barriers to
- effective computer security. Such collective involvement would
- also help ensure cost-effective control measures commensurate
- with system function, system sensitivity, security requirements,
- and analyzed and considered risks.
-
- Agencies need to be aware of developments taking place in the
- national and international standards arena on system
- interoperability and data interchange. These developments will
- impact information system product availability, protection
- requirements, and protection alternatives as agencies do their
- near-, mid-, and long-term IRM and computer security planning.
-
- Finally, because agency awareness of problems is fundamental to
- the solution, this project has been valuable. Computer security
- officers say that the CSPP preparation and review activity has
- raised the level of awareness in all parts of their organizations
- and has made it easier for them to promote computer security.
- The CSPP review project significantly raised the level of federal
- awareness about the protection of sensitive information and the
- importance of computer security planning. In the final analysis,
- this contribution may be among the most meaningful results of the
- project.
-
-
- The complete report of the CSPP review project will be published
- as an NIST Interagency Report (NISTIR), and will be available
- from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) U.S.
- Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
- VA 22161. Telephone: (703) 487-4650 FTS 737-4650. For
- information about the report findings, contact Dennis Gilbert,
- National Institute of Standards and Technology, A216, Technology
- Building, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Telephone: (301) 975-3872.
-
- Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
-