YOU SEE, I am such a good procrastinator that JUST procrastinated on getting to the REAL subject of this article, security, IA updates.

A fellow IA Analyst wrote me with questions that got right to the heart of IA, change.

She asked about AFI 33-202.
And I said:

Right as I felt I had mastered the contents of 33-202, the airforce moved to 33-210 (to replace all its C&A stuff). I believe 33-202 is now obsolete and replaced with 33-200 & 33-202 and others.. last time I was with the AF, anyway.

What about IT LEAN?
I said:

As for IT Lean, you can find that on AF Knowledge Now site and I think they have links to it on EITDR. If you are interested in IT Lean you’ll be REALLY interested in 33-210:
33-210

But if you are working with the Air Force and want more on the IT LEAN process you should be digging into AFCAP, Air Force Certification & Accreditation Program, an AF version of IT Lean.

CNSS 1253:
A lot of people also ask me to send them a copy of the CNSSI 12-53. But it is actually OUT. Its the CNSSI 1253. I, personally, have not had any clear direction (currently NO direction) on how to start moving some of the CNSSI to the systems I work on. I suspect that the Govt. will start this within the next couple of years and start phasing out DIACAP.. but who the hell knows what a bureaucracy of their size will do next!

Lastly, my fellow IA Analyst asked me about EITDR
and I said:

You’ll find the EITDR POCs on the Air Force Portal or Knowledge Now. Log on to the Air Force Portal (if you don’t have an account get one.. you may have to get sponsor by the Govt to get it). Once on the AF Portal search for EITDR and they’ll have tons of stuff on it. Waaaaay more stuff than you want to read. You’ll also find the person you need to start the EITDR process with.

I stumbled upon your site and am new to security working for a contractor. I’m attempting to complete a DIACAP POA&M and need to map SRR findings to IA controls – any idea where I might find this information?

The SRR finding reference the DOD Unix STIG and NIPR STIG. It doesn’t seem to completely match up the the DIACAP IA Controls, but that is where a good system security engineer/ IA analyst comes in.

Once you’ve got your SRR results, IA Control compliance and mitigation depends on your situation. There are a few that map directly (like Screen Saver) but most of the SRR findings will fall under one or two of the IA Controls.

Hope this helps.

The DoD has had the same IA controls since DoD 8510.1-M, controls since DoD 8510.1-M, Department of Defense Information Technology System Certification & Accreditation Process (DITSCAP), July 31, 2000 – it was developed late last century.

The DoD has a total of 157 IA controls spread across 8 subject areas in 4 classes:

DC – Security Design & Configuration

IA – Identification and Authentication

EC – Enclave & Computing

EB – Enclave Boundary Defense

PE – Physical & Environmental

PR – Personnel

CO – Continuity

VI – Vulnerability

There is a huge change coming in certification & accreditation for the DoD coming. The IA controls are being expanded and changed. The last two DIACAP classes I’ve been to mentioned that there is a big change coming. Essentially, all the IA Controls (security controls, safeguards, countermeasures.. whatever your organization is calling them) are getting expanded. All federal organizations will have security controls that look more like what is in the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-53. This is all being placed in the Committee on National Security Systems Instruction (CNSSI) 1253. As of 25 June 2009, the CNSSI 1253 is still in draft.

The draft has 17 families & identifiers in three security control classes.

TABLE 1: SECURITY CONTROL CLASSES, FAMILIES, AND IDENTIFIERS
IDENTIFIER FAMILY CLASS

AC Access Control Technical

AT Awareness and Training Operational

AU Audit and Accountability Technical

CA Certification, Accreditation, and Security Assessments Management

CM Configuration Management Operational

CP Contingency Planning Operational

IA Identification and Authentication Technical

IR Incident Response Operational

MA Maintenance Operational

MP Media Protection Operational

PE Physical and Environmental Protection Operational

PL Planning Management

PS Personnel Security Operational

RA Risk Assessment Management

SA System and Services Acquisition Management

SC System and Communications Protection Technical

The CNSSI has about 500 controls with pretty good granularity.

One of the really cool thing about 1253 was the security control mapping. It’s a table that matches up 800-53, DCID 6/3 and DODI 8500.2.

Stuff I learned from people in the class:

-AFCA is changing its name (to what?)

DOD is going to put the new IA controls in NCSSI 12-53 (currently in draft)

-a lot of what I need in there is in NIST 800-53

Marines use something called Exacta

Site called securitycritics.org

33-202 is now completely irrelevant and obsolete (not even mentioned ONCE in the class)

800-30

Feds call Certification &Accreditation (C&A) “Security authorization”

NIST SP 800-37

Day 4:

Validator Activities & Issue Accreditation Decision

Prepare POA&M

Validate Results/Scorecard

Scorecard

Make certification determination

CA/DAA Package review

Day 5:

Validation procedures were discussed. On day five, we looked at how the validators look at a system.

I thought is was interesting. It should help me get through the EITDR/DIACAP process easier.

Maintain Situational Awareness

Maintain IA Posture

Conduct Review

R-Accreditation

Retire system

Day 3:

DIACAP Structure

Terminology Review

Assemble DIACAP Team

Registered System/System Information Profile

Assign IA Controls

Initiate DIACAP Implementation Plan

Day 1 &2:

Getting the Big Picture

DIACAP/AFCAP Policy & Terminology

Roles and Responsibilities for the C&A process

Accreditation & Approval to Connect

Homework: review terminology

In between longer breaks, during lunch and just before class we sneak in episode of the The IT Crowd. Its the first time I’ve watched it so its a real treat for me. Hilarious show.

In the first day of class we’ve taken a high level look at the big picture of the Department of Defense Information Assurance Certification & Accreditation Process (DIACAP) and Air Force Certification & Accreditation Program (AFCAP). It is a very valuable tool for a beginner.

Since I’ve gone through the entire process (with a legacy system) more than once through all the growing pains of Air Force C&A from DITSCAP to DIACAP, I found that I knew about 90% of everything taught. I don’t mind having a refresher, though and quite frankly, I need the CPE’s for my CISSP .

There were a couple of golden nuggets that I’ve been able to get out of some of the old timers. I learned some interesting things about how the Navy, Marines and Army do things.
Navy (as weird as their dumb ass rank system.. yep, I said it.. its dumb) have like three systems: DITPR-DON, DA-DUMB and some other BS, Marines have something called Exacta and the Army has APMS (Army Profile Management System). Also learned cool off topic stuff like history of eMass.

I must admit I’m looking forward to day two.
pros of day 1: Good solid start on basics GREAT for beginners. SecureInfo gets mad props for have a great instructor John M.(don’t know if he wants his full name published.. but he’s highly, highly knowledgeable and very positive).

cons of day 1: Right off the bat I am noticing a huge hole in the training… a lack of in depth teaching of EITDR, which is how the Air Force implements, manages and maintains the entire DIACAP/AFCAP process. I don’t really see how you can teach one without the other these days. I guess contractually, SecureInfo can not touch it since some other company has the contract. But unfortunately, the folks that are new to this are going to suffer. Because if they goto this class without knowing the EITDR they will know why but now how, and if they go to the EITDR class without knowing the DIACAP they will know how but not Why.

Since I’ve been doing the DIACAP stuff for about 2 years now, I’m not certain there is any new information for me to learn.

DIACAP Essentials
The Department of Defense Information Assurance Certification and
Accreditation Process (DIACAP) Essentials course blends lecture and hands-on
exercises to introduce students to DIACAP policy (to include FISMA
requirements of a comprehensive, repeatable, and auditable Information
Security process).

IA Control Validation In-Depth - 3 Days
The IA Control Validation In-Depth course takes the students DIACAP
education and turns the view from an implementor to a Validator perspective
and involves the students in the validation process for the IA Controls
(DoDI 8500.2).

What I am hoping to get from the course is a better handle on the FISMA process.
I don’t feel like I really have a handle on what is supposed to happen with it.

The federal government has a bunch of Certification & Accreditation processes. There is Department of Defense Information Assurance Certification & Accreditation (DIACAP) for the DOD, there’s Director of Central intelligence Directive (DCID) 6/3 for certain classified systems, there is National Information Assurance Certification & Accreditation (NIACAP) for National Security Systems. And under each of these their processes differ according the branch, leadership, organization and/or mission. Each process, organization, branch and mission has a different set of resources that they pull from. DIACAP pertains to military branches and pulls from the DoD 8500 series, many other federal agencies use National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-xx series.

Each agency, organization and/or branch uses their own methods and everyone is happy. The only problem is when a system gets exploited. When it happens there is mass panic and they realize that there are massive holes in the process.

Rumors and Trends

There have been rumors floating around about many of these federal C&A processes merging into one. At their core they are actually pretty similar. Take NIST SP 800-37, C&A of Federal Information Systems and DOD 8510, DIACAP for example. Both have an initial phase where data is gathered on the system and all parties involved with a system are pulled together (see table. 1 for more similarities).

12-37?

The Committee on National Security Systems is preparing instructions for implementing a unified certification and accreditation (C&A) process that could be used on all national security systems, including those in the Defense Department and intelligence community, said Tony Cornish, chairman of the CNSS’ C&A working group.

At the same time, the National Institute of Standards and Technology plans to update its C&A guidance for systems covered by the Federal Information Security Management Act, said Ron Ross, a senior computer scientist and FISMA implementation lead at NIST.

“We are very close to producing a unified C&A process for the entire federal government,” Ross said in July at a government security symposium hosted by Symantec. “Within the next six to eight months, you are going to see a plethora of new things coming out” from CNSS and NIST.

CNSS’ instructions will be incorporated into NIST guidelines in its 800 series of special publications. Ross said a major update of SP 800-53 Rev. 2, “Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems,” is expected in December, and a draft of the first revision of SP 800-37, “Guide for the Security Certification and Accreditation of Federal Information Systems,” is expected to be released for comment soon.

A single, governmentwide approach would make it easier for agencies to share data and cooperate with one another and with states, foreign allies and the private sector.

It could enable reciprocity, or the acceptance of other agencies’ C&A processes, without requiring recertification, and also could streamline acquisition processes by making it easier for vendors and developers to meet one set of standards.

C&A is a process for ensuring that IT systems are operating with an appropriate level of security. In the certification phase, the security of the system is documented; for accreditation, a designated authority signs off on the system’s fitness to go into operation. The concept has been around for some time, but there has been little standardization.

“In the past, we each had our own set of policies, and we didn’t look at each other’s,” said Sherrill Nicely, deputy associate director of national intelligence at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

FISMA requires C&A of information technology systems, but that does not apply to national security systems. And within the national security community, the military and intelligence sectors each have had their own way of doing things.

“Since about 1993, the Defense Department had its program, the Defense IT Security Certification and Accreditation Process,” said Eustace King, DOD chief of acquisition and technology oversight. “It worked pretty well” in a time before DOD’s emphasis on network- centric systems and information sharing, but it lacked enterprise visibility.

That C&A program was replaced with the Defense Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process. DOD was moving to the program in 2006 to harmonize military and intelligence processes when, a year later, it was expanded to include the rest of the national security community by bringing in the CNSS.

Through NIST, C&A procedures eventually will be standardized across all of government. However, policies do not change mind-sets, and old habits still remain one of the primary challenges to a standardized process. At DOD, there is a reluctance to accept reciprocity — that is, to give full credit to another agency’s C&A process without recertification, King said.

The intelligence community faces a similar hurdle, said Sharon Ehlers, an assistant deputy associate director of national intelligence.

“The cultural change has been the biggest challenge,” Ehlers said. “When it is not invented here, people don’t want to look at it.”