1. No category

Update on Inspectors General
Information Technology Security
Working Group
I.
Organization
II. CSIRT Procedures
III. Fusion Center – Protocols
IV. IT Security Issues
Phishing
•
Phishing is the act of attempting to acquire information such as
usernames, passwords, and credit card details (and sometimes,
indirectly, money) by masquerading as a trustworthy entity in an
electronic communication.
•
Communications purporting to be from popular social web sites, auction sites, banks,
online payment processors or IT administrators are commonly used to lure
unsuspecting public.
•
Phishing emails may contain links to websites that are infected with malware.
•
Phishing is typically carried out by email spoofing or instant messaging, and it often
directs users to enter details at a fake website whose look and feel are almost
identical to the legitimate one.
South Carolina Dept. of Revenue
• August/September 2012
– DOR employee opens a phishing e-mail with
attachment containing malware
– Hacker obtains employee credentials and spends
several weeks patiently and methodically scouring
the system from a remote location gaining
additional credentials and eventually downloading
74.7 gigabytes of data to the Internet
October 10, 2012 was a bad day
• Federal Secret Service notified the state of the
suspected breach
• The breach was undetected by the agency
• For the next 15 days there was a quiet pursuit
of the case by state and federal investigators
October 26, 2012 was worse
• Governor Nikki Haley held a press
conference to tell the public
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv4cCoUJG8E
South Carolina DOR Issues
Data not encrypted
No multi-password system
Laptops and desktops not encrypted
No use of free state network monitoring
system
• Division of Information Technology
recommended security procedures but state
agencies were not required to follow the
procedures
•
•
•
•
Fixing the problems
• Credit monitoring - $12 million in 1st year
• Password system - $12,000
• 4 months later:
– “state response to hacking is incomplete and
uncertain”
– IG report “statewide cybersecurity is inadequate”
South Carolina – Good News
• December 18, 2013 – and employee from the
Department of Employment and Workforce
downloaded information on 4,658 current and
former employees to a personal device
• December 19, 2013 – law enforcement
notified the agency that security software had
detected the violation
The IT Security Working Group
Organization
•
Co-Chair Mike Blackburn, IG Dept. of Education
•
Co-Chair Al Dennis, IG Dept. of Law Enforcement
•
Co-Chair Walter Sachs, IG Dept. of Management Services
•
Melinda Miguel, Chief Inspector General
•
Kim Mills, CIG Director of Audit (now Marvin Doyal)
•
Rodney MacKinnon, IG Office of Early Learning
•
Sharon Doredant, IG Dept. of Revenue
•
David Merck, IT Auditor Dept. of Children and Families
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
The IT Security Working Group
(expanded)
Organization
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
•
Mike Blackburn, IG (DOE)
•
Julie Leftheris, IG (DHSMV)
•
Al Dennis, IG (FDLE)
•
Margaret Foltz, ISM (SSRC)
•
Walter Sachs, IG (DMS)
•
Bonny Allen, ISM (NSRC)
•
Melinda Miguel, CIG
•
Joe Maleszewski, IG (BOG)
•
Marvin Doyal, CIG, Audit Dir.
•
Mike Phillips, Fusion Center (FDLE)
•
Rodney MacKinnon, IG (OEL)
•
Mark Perez, Fusion Center (FDLE)
•
Sharon Doredant, IG (DOR)
•
Jason Allison (EOG)
•
David Merck, IT Auditor (DCF)
•
Kevin Smith, IT (DEM)
The IT Security Working Group
(Scope and Activities)
Organization
•
•
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
IG IT Security Working Group established in June 2013 to evaluate
issues crossing agencies
Appointed informally by the CIG to include: DMS IG (co-chair),
DOE IG (co-chair), FDLE IG (co-chair), DOR IG, HSMV IG, Chief
Inspector General, CIG Director of Audit
Evaluating the existence and potential standardization of CSIRT
Protocols in the agencies
Briefing from Fusion Center (w/ CIOs and ISMs) and toured the
Fusion Center in June 2013
Holding Periodic Meetings
CIG facilitated the appointment of the MS-ISAC designee
CIG oversaw the movement of inventory housed with what was
formally AEIT to FDLE/EOG
Evaluating the need for Data Sharing Agreements
Evaluating the need for Secret Security Clearance to receive
classified reports from FDLE
Computer Security Incident Response Team
Procedures
Organization
CSIRT
Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
71A-1.014 Incident Response.
(1) Each agency shall establish a Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT) to respond to
suspected computer security incidents by identifying and controlling the incidents, notifying designated
CSIRT responders, and reporting findings to agency management.
(2) The CSIRT membership shall include at a minimum the Information Security Manager, the Chief
Information Officer, and a member from the Inspector General’s Office.
(3) The CSIRT shall develop, document, and implement the agency computer security incident reporting
process.
(4) The CSIRT shall develop, document, and implement the agency computer security incident response
process.
(5) The agency computer security incident response process will include notification procedures to be
followed for incidents where investigation determines non-encrypted personal information was, or is
reasonably believed to have been, accessed by an unauthorized person, as required by Section
817.5681, F.S.
(6) The CSIRT under the direction of the Chief Information Officer or Information Security Manager shall
determine the appropriate response required for each suspected computer security incident.
(7) The agency shall notify the Office of Information Security of computer security incidents including
suspected or confirmed breaches within 24 hours of discovery.
(8) Each suspected computer security incident, including findings and corrective actions, shall be
documented and maintained as specified in the agency computer security incident procedures.
(9) The CSIRT shall convene at least once a quarter.
(10) The CSIRT shall provide regular reports to the agency Chief Information Officer.
(11) Suspected computer security incidents shall be reported according to agency reporting procedures.
(12) Agency workers shall report loss of mobile devices immediately according to agency reporting
procedures.
(13) Agency workers shall immediately report lost security tokens, smart cards, identification badges, or
other devices used for identification and authentication purposes according to agency reporting
procedures.
Computer Security Incident Response Team
Procedures
Organization
CSIRT
Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
• Agencies used Carnegie-Mellon
templates from 2003 training
• Issues:
– IG not a core team member
– ISM has a duel role as the CIO or
reports to the CIO
– Categorization and escalation
protocols are similar, but not uniform
FDLE Fusion Center - Protocols
Organization
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
October Meeting with
Information Security Managers
 FDLE Fusion Center
Update
 Agency Intelligence
Liaison Officers
 IG IT Working Group
Update
 House/Senate
Committee
Meetings
 Incident Reporting
 Administrative
Breach Protocols
 CSIRT Policy Review
 Information Security
Plans
 Information Sharing
(Obstacles and
Opportunities)
 Security Clearances
 MOU
FDLE Fusion Center - Protocols
Organization
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
Class 1 Incident: Informational Incident
This level of incident has a low impact to the agency’s or data center’s information technology
resources and is contained within the agency or data center. The following criteria define Class 1
incidents:
1. Data classification: Unauthorized disclosure of information has not occurred.
2. Legal issues: Lost or stolen hardware that has low monetary value and may be considered
standard business equipment.
3. Business impact: Incident does not involve any mission services.
4. Expanse of service disruption: Incident is localized.
5. Threat potential: There is no threat to other information technology resources.
6. Public interest: Slight potential for public interest.
7. Policy infraction: Security policy violations determined by the agency.
Class 2 Incident: Warning Incident
This level of incident has impacted the agency’s or data center’s information technology
resources and is contained within the agency or data center. The following criteria define Class 2
incidents:
1. Data classification: Unauthorized disclosure of information has not been determined.
2. Legal issues: Lost or stolen hardware with low monetary value and is part of mission critical
systems.
3. Business impact: Incident involves mission services.
4. Expanse of service disruption: Incident affects several business units within the agency.
5. Threat potential: Threat to other information technology resources is possible.
6. Public interest: There is the potential for public interest.
7. Policy infraction: Security policy violations determined by the agency.
FDLE Fusion Center - Protocols
Organization
CSIRT Procedures
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
Class 3 Incident: Critical Incident
This level of incident has impacted the agency critical mission and has the potential to result in
high public interest. The following criteria define Class 3 incidents:
1. Data classification: Unauthorized disclosure of information has occurred.
2. Legal issues: Lost or stolen hardware with high monetary value.
3. Business impact: Incident involves mission critical services.
4. Expanse of service disruption: Disruption is wide spread across the agency.
5. Threat potential: Incident has spread to other systems within the agency.
6. Public interest: There is likely public interest in the incident.
7. Policy infraction: Security policy violations determined by the agency.
Class 4 Incident: Emergency Incident
This level of incident has impacted or has the potential to impact other state information
technology resources or become events of public interest. The following criteria define Class 4
incidents:
1. Data classification: Unauthorized disclosure of confidential information has occurred.
2. Legal issues: Lost or stolen hardware with high monetary value and is part of mission critical
systems; incident investigation transferred to law enforcement.
3. Business impact: Threat to other agency information technology resources is high.
4. Expanse of service disruption: Disruption has spread to other agencies.
5. Threat potential: Incident has spread to third-party information technology resources.
6. Public interest: There is high public interest in the incident.
7. Policy infraction: Security policy violations determined by the agency.
A few minutes with Senator Ring
http://www.flsenate.gov/media/videoplayer?EventID=2443
575804_2014021049
IT Security Issues
•
Organization
•
CSIRT Procedures
•
Fusion Center Protocols
•
IT Security
Issues
•
•
•
•
Focus on broader policy which will allow the rule(s) to focus
more on specifics.
Continue requiring agency “strategic” and “operational” IT
Security Plans. Strategic plans should cover 3-year period.
Continue “bottom up” approach with Statewide Strategic Plan;
ensure sufficient guidance (and possibly templates) are provided
to assist agencies in the completion of their strategic plans.
Clearly define/describe difference between: (a) risk analysis, (b)
gap analysis, and (c) internal audits.
Define “event” and/or “incident”, require all events/incidents to
be reported to FDLE and AEIT/potential successor agency, and
define time frame for reporting such events/incidents.
Agency ISM should conduct internal agency audit; peer review of
audit performed by other agency ISMs.
Requirement to include appropriate security specs in
solicitations/contracts.
Retain IT security rules.
Organization
CSIRT Procedures
Questions/Comments?
Fusion Center Protocols
IT Security Issues
Walter Sachs
Inspector General
Department of Management Services
(850) 413-8740
[email protected]