Information Security News: ITL Bulletin for December 2008

[InfoSec News <alerts () infosecnews org>]

Forwarded from: Elizabeth Lennon <elizabeth.lennon (at) nist.gov>

ITL BULLETIN FOR DECEMBER 2008
GUIDE TO INFORMATION SECURITY TESTING AND ASSESSMENT 
 
Shirley Radack, Editor
Computer Security Division
Information Technology Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
U.S. Department of Commerce

A comprehensive approach to information security testing and assessment 
is essential to the secure operation of an organization’s information 
technology (IT) systems. By applying technical testing and examination 
techniques, organizations can identify and assess the vulnerabilities of 
their systems and networks, and then take steps to improve their overall 
security. 
The Information Technology Laboratory of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST) recently published a new guide to help 
organizations conduct their information security assessments. Issued in 
September 2008, the guide presents the key elements of security testing 
and assessments, explains the specific techniques that can be applied, 
and recommends effective methods for implementing testing and assessment 
practices. 
NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-115, Technical Guide to Information 
Security Testing and Assessment: Recommendations of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology
NIST SP 800-115, Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and 
Assessment, was written by Karen Scarfone and Murugiah Souppaya of NIST, 
and by Amanda Cody and Angela Orebaugh of Booz Allen Hamilton. The new 
guide replaces NIST SP 800-42, Guideline on Network Security Testing. 
NIST SP 800-115 presents the basic technical aspects of conducting 
information security assessments. It discusses technical testing and 
examination methods that an organization might use as part of an 
assessment, and helps organizations to apply the techniques effectively 
to their systems and networks. The guide stresses the importance of 
organizational support to the technical assessment process through sound 
planning, careful analysis of findings, and regular reporting of results 
and recommendations to management officials. 

Topics covered in the guide include detailed descriptions of technical 
examination techniques such as review of documentation, review of logs, 
network sniffing, and file integrity checking; techniques such as 
network discovery and vulnerability scanning for identifying targets and 
analyzing them for potential vulnerabilities; and techniques used to 
validate the existence of vulnerabilities, such as password cracking and 
penetration testing. 
The appendices provide a comprehensive collection of supporting 
information and resources to help organizations implement their security 
testing and assessments. These include: 
* information about publicly available “live” operating system 
 distributions, which allow an assessor to boot a computer using a CD 
 containing tools for security testing;
* a template for creating Rules of Engagement (ROE), the detailed 
 guidelines and constraints established before the start of a security 
 test concerning the execution of information security testing;
* information about application security testing and examination 
 techniques;
* recommendations for performing remote access testing;

* a list of resources to assist organizations in managing the security 
 assessment process;
* a glossary of terms used throughout the guide; and

* a list of acronyms and abbreviations. 

NIST SP 800-115 is available from the NIST website: 
http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html.


 
Information Security Assessments: Methodologies and Techniques

The assessment process enables organizations to determine how 
effectively the implementers and the components of information systems 
are meeting their specific security goals and objectives. The elements 
that can be assessed, called the assessment objects, include the host 
computer, the entire system, the network, a particular procedure, or a 
person. Assessment methods that can be employed include:
Testing: exercising one or more assessment objects under specified 
conditions to compare actual and expected behaviors; 
Examination: checking, inspecting, reviewing, observing, studying, or 
analyzing one or more assessment objects to facilitate understanding, 
achieve clarification, or obtain evidence; and 
Interviewing: conducting discussions with individuals or groups within 
an organization to facilitate understanding, achieve clarification, or 
identify the location of evidence. 
Several accepted methodologies for conducting different types of 
information security assessments are listed in Appendix E of the guide. 
Organizations may want to consider using more than one methodology in 
conducting their assessments. 
NIST has developed a process for federal organizations that, under the 
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002, are 
required to select and implement cost-effective security controls, based 
on considerations of risk, and to conduct security testing and 
assessments of the controls that have been implemented. See the More 
Information section at the end of this bulletin for references 
concerning the federal government’s assessment policies. Another widely 
used assessment methodology referenced in Appendix E is the Open Source 
Security Testing Methodology Manual (OSSTMM), developed by the Institute 
for Security and Open Methodologies. 
  
Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Security Assessments
NIST SP 800-115 discusses using a phased information security assessment 
methodology to make the most efficient use of organizational staff and 
resources in carrying out information security assessments. 
In the planning phase, organizations gather the information that is 
needed to conduct the assessment and establish the assessment approach. 
A project management plan should be developed to address goals and 
objectives, scope, requirements, team roles and responsibilities, 
limitations, success factors, assumptions, resources, timeline, and 
deliverables.
In this phase, organizations develop a security assessment policy to 
provide direction for their assessment activities. Planning should also 
include deciding which systems should be assessed and the frequency of 
the assessments; these decisions should be based on risk considerations, 
expected benefits, scheduling and regulatory requirements, and the 
availability of resources. Testing and examination techniques should be 
selected based on the requirements, and a plan that documents all 
activities and resources should be developed. 
In the execution phase, organizations identify vulnerabilities and 
validate them when appropriate. This phase addresses activities 
associated with the assessment methods and techniques that were decided 
upon in the planning phase and identified in the assessment plan or ROE. 
The activities may differ depending on type of assessment, but upon 
completion of this phase, assessors will have identified system, 
network, and organizational process vulnerabilities.
Proper coordination within the organization is a paramount consideration 
in this phase to facilitate the assessment process and to reduce the 
risks. If a security incident is detected during the assessment process, 
assessors should follow the organization’s reporting procedures about 
such activities. Analysis of vulnerabilities should take place during 
the assessment process, as well as after the assessment is completed. 
This allows individual vulnerabilities to be addressed immediately and 
enables the organization to analyze the root causes of vulnerabilities. 
Officials can then deal with program weaknesses, such as insufficient 
management of software patches, architectural and policy weaknesses, and 
inadequate training procedures.
During this phase, organizations should make sure that all of the data 
associated with the assessments has been protected. Information about 
system vulnerabilities is sensitive and should be collected, stored, 
and, if necessary, transmitted securely. After the completion of the 
assessment, data that is no longer needed by the organization should be 
destroyed in accordance with good security practices. 
In the post-execution phase, organizations apply the information 
provided by the assessment to improve their overall information 
security. Actions should be recommended to mitigate the vulnerabilities, 
and a report incorporating the recommendations should be prepared. Most 
important, the recommended actions should be carried out. 
  
Testing and Examination Techniques
Many technical security testing and examination techniques can be used 
to assess the security posture of systems and networks. No single 
technique can provide a complete picture of the security of a system or 
network; techniques can be combined to assure robust security 
assessments. 
Review techniques are used to evaluate systems, applications, networks, 
policies, and procedures to discover vulnerabilities, and are generally 
conducted manually. They include documentation, log, ruleset (a 
collection of rules that govern network traffic or system activity), and 
system configuration review; network sniffing; and file integrity 
checking. 
Target identification and analysis techniques can identify systems, 
ports, services, and potential vulnerabilities. These techniques may be 
performed manually but they are generally performed using automated 
tools. They include network discovery, network port and service 
identification, vulnerability scanning, wireless scanning, and 
application security examination. 
Target vulnerability validation techniques corroborate the existence of 
vulnerabilities and may be performed manually or by using automatic 
tools, depending on the specific technique used and the skill of the 
test team. They include password cracking, penetration testing, social 
engineering, and application security testing.
  
Comparing Tests and Examinations
Examinations primarily involve the review of documents such as policies, 
procedures, security plans, security requirements, standard operating 
procedures, architecture diagrams, engineering documentation, asset 
inventories, system configurations, rulesets, and system logs. 
Examinations are conducted to determine whether a system is properly 
documented, and to gain insight on aspects of security that are only 
available through documentation. This documentation identifies the 
intended design, installation, configuration, operation, and maintenance 
of the systems and network. 
Testing involves hands-on work with systems and networks to identify 
security vulnerabilities, and can be executed across an entire 
enterprise or on selected systems.  The use of scanning and penetration 
techniques can provide valuable information on potential 
vulnerabilities, and predict the likelihood that an adversary or 
intruder will be able to exploit them. Testing also allows organizations 
to measure levels of compliance in areas such as patch management, 
password policy, and configuration management.
Testing can provide a more accurate picture of an organization’s 
security posture than what is gained through examinations; however, it 
is more intrusive and can impact systems or networks in the target 
environment. Tests known to create denial of service conditions and 
other disruptions can be excluded to help reduce these negative 
impacts.  Testing does not provide a comprehensive evaluation of the 
security posture of an organization, and may be costly in terms of staff 
time and resources. Also, testing is less likely than examinations to 
identify weaknesses related to security policy and configuration. In 
many cases, combining testing and examination techniques can provide a 
more accurate view of security.
  
Approaches to Testing
External security testing is conducted from outside the organization’s 
security perimeter, allowing the environment’s security posture to be 
examined with the goal of revealing vulnerabilities that could be 
exploited by an external attacker. 
External testing often begins with reconnaissance techniques that search 
public registration data, Domain Name System (DNS) server information, 
newsgroup postings, and other publicly available information to collect 
information that may help the assessor to identify vulnerabilities. The 
assessor uses network discovery and scanning techniques to determine 
external hosts and listening services. Initial attacks are generally 
focused on commonly used and allowed application protocols. Servers that 
are externally accessible are tested for vulnerabilities that might 
allow access to internal servers and private information. External 
security testing also concentrates on discovering access method 
vulnerabilities, such as wireless access points, modems, and portals to 
internal servers. 
Internal security testing is conducted from the internal network, and 
the assessor assumes the identity of a trusted insider or an attacker 
who has penetrated the perimeter defenses. This kind of testing can 
reveal vulnerabilities that could be exploited and demonstrates the 
potential damage that could result. Internal security testing also 
focuses on system-level security and configuration. 
Assessors who perform internal testing are often granted some level of 
access to the network, normally as general users, and are provided with 
information that users with similar privileges would have. This level of 
temporary access depends on the goals of the test, and can be up to and 
including the privileges of a system or network administrator.  Working 
from the level of access they have been granted, assessors attempt to 
gain additional access to the network and systems by increasing their 
access privileges, such as user-level to administrator-level 
privileges. 
Internal testing is less limited than external testing because it takes 
place behind perimeter defenses, even though there may be internal 
firewalls, routers, and switches in place that pose limitations. 
Examination techniques such as network sniffing may be used in addition 
to testing techniques. When both internal testing and external testing 
are performed, the external testing usually takes place first. This 
approach avoids assessors acquiring insider information that might not 
be available to an attacker. 
Overt security testing, also known as white hat testing, involves 
performing external and/or internal testing with the knowledge and 
consent of the organization’s IT staff, enabling comprehensive 
evaluation of the network or system security posture. The IT staff can 
provide guidance to limit the testing’s impact, and useful training 
opportunities for staff members are created.
Covert security testing, also known as black hat testing, takes an 
adversarial approach to testing without the knowledge of the 
organization’s IT staff but with the full knowledge and permission of 
upper management. Some organizations designate a trusted third party to 
ensure that the target organization does not initiate response measures 
associated with the attack without first verifying that an attack is 
indeed underway. This type of test is useful for testing technical 
security controls, the IT staff’s response to perceived security 
incidents, and staff knowledge and implementation of the organization’s 
security policy. The testing may be conducted with or without warning, 
and enables the organization to examine the damage or impact an 
adversary could cause, but it does not identify every vulnerability or 
test every security control. 
Overt testing is less expensive and less risky than covert testing, 
which is often time-consuming and costly due to its stealth 
requirements. However, covert testing provides a better indication of 
the everyday security of the target organization. 
  
NIST Recommendations
NIST recommends that organizations apply the following policies in 
planning and implementing their security assessment activities: 
Establish an information security assessment policy to identify the 
organization’s requirements for carrying out assessments, and to 
identify the appropriate individuals who will ensure that assessments 
are conducted in accordance with the requirements.  The organizational 
requirements for assessments should be specified, providing the roles 
and responsibilities of individuals, the need for adherence to an 
established assessment methodology, the assessment frequency, and 
documentation requirements. 
Implement a repeatable and documented assessment methodology to provide 
for consistency and structure to the assessment process, to expedite the 
transition of new assessment staff members, and to address resource 
constraints associated with assessments. Using a repeatable and 
documented methodology enables organizations to maximize the value of 
assessments while minimizing possible risks introduced by certain 
technical assessment techniques. These risks can range from not 
gathering sufficient information on the organization’s security posture 
for fear of impacting system functionality to affecting the system or 
network availability by executing techniques without the proper 
safeguards in place. Organizations can minimize the risk caused by 
certain assessment techniques by using skilled assessors, developing 
comprehensive assessment plans, logging assessor activities, performing 
testing off-hours, and conducting tests on duplicates of production 
systems, such as development systems.  Organizations should determine 
the level of risk that they are willing to accept for each assessment 
and tailor their approaches accordingly. 
Determine the objectives of each security assessment and tailor the 
approach that is adopted. Security assessments have specific objectives, 
acceptable levels of risk, and available resources. No single technique 
can provide a comprehensive picture of an organization’s overall 
security position; therefore, organizations should use a combination of 
techniques, a practice that helps organizations to limit their risks and 
their use of resources.
Analyze findings, and develop risk mitigation techniques to address 
weaknesses. To ensure that the security assessment process provides 
maximum value, organizations should conduct root cause analysis upon 
completion of an assessment to assure that the assessment findings are 
acted upon and implemented in the application of practical techniques 
that will improve overall security. The results may indicate that 
organizations should address not only technical weaknesses, but 
weaknesses in organizational processes and procedures as well. 

More Information on Conducting Information Security Assessments

Security testing and examination is required by FISMA and other 
regulations. NIST has developed a risk-based program for federal 
government agencies that starts with the categorization of federal 
information systems as low-impact, moderate-impact, or high-impact for 
the security objectives of confidentiality, integrity, and availability, 
and the selection of an appropriate set of security controls for their 
information systems.  
These requirements are specified in Federal Information Processing 
Standard (FIPS) 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal 
Information and Information Systems, and FIPS 200, Minimum Security 
Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems. After 
systems are categorized, agencies select an appropriate set of security 
controls from NIST SP 800-53, Recommended Security Controls for Federal 
Information Systems, to satisfy their minimum security requirements.
A companion guide, NIST SP 800-53A, Guide for Assessing the Security 
Controls in Federal Information Systems, introduces the fundamental 
concepts that support the assessment of security controls, including the 
integration of assessments into the system development life cycle and 
the need for an organizational strategy for conducting assessments of 
security controls. NIST SP 800-53A discusses the framework for 
development of assessment procedures, describes the process of assessing 
security controls, and offers assessment procedures for each control. 
NIST SP 800-53A was developed to be used in conjunction with NIST SP 
800-37, Guide for the Security Certification and Accreditation of 
Federal Information Systems. 
For information about NIST standards and guidelines that are listed 
above, as well as other security-related publications, see 
http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/index.html.

Disclaimer

Any mention of commercial products or reference to commercial 
organizations is for information only; it does not imply recommendation 
or endorsement by NIST nor does it imply that the products mentioned are 
necessarily the best available for the purpose.
 

_______________________________________________      
Please help InfoSecNews.org with a donation!
http://www.infosecnews.org/donate.html