--- 1/draft-ietf-sacm-arch-04.txt 2020-05-11 07:13:15.567197561 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-sacm-arch-05.txt 2020-05-11 07:13:16.887231070 -0700 @@ -1,18 +1,18 @@ SACM Working Group A. Montville Internet-Draft B. Munyan Intended status: Standards Track CIS -Expires: May 1, 2020 October 29, 2019 +Expires: 12 November 2020 11 May 2020 Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Architecture - draft-ietf-sacm-arch-04 + draft-ietf-sacm-arch-05 Abstract This document defines an architecture enabling a cooperative Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) ecosystem. This work is predicated upon information gleaned from SACM Use Cases and Requirements ([RFC7632] and [RFC8248] respectively), and terminology as found in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]. WORKING GROUP: The source for this draft is maintained in GitHub. @@ -28,78 +28,106 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on May 1, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on 12 November 2020. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal - Provisions Relating to IETF Documents - (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of - publication of this document. Please review these documents - carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect - to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must - include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of - the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as - described in the Simplified BSD License. + Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ + license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. + Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights + and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components + extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text + as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are + provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3. Architectural Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 3. Architectural Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. SACM Role-based Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Architectural Roles/Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 3.2.1. Orchestrator(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 3.2.2. Repositories/CMDBs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 3.2.3. Integration Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 3.3. Downstream Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 3.3.1. Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 3.3.2. Analytics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.2.1. Orchestrator(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.2.2. Repositories/CMDBs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.2.3. Integration Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.3. Downstream Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 3.3.1. Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 3.3.2. Analytics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.4. Sub-Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.4.1. Collection Sub-Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 3.4.2. Evaluation Sub-Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 4. Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 5. Security Domain Workflows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 5.1. IT Asset Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 5.1.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 13 - 5.2. Vulnerability Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5.2.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 14 - 5.3. Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 5.3.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 16 - 6. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Appendix A. Mapping to RFC8248 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - Appendix B. Example Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 - B.1. Policy Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 - B.2. Software Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 - B.3. Datastream Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 - B.4. Network Configuration Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 - Appendix C. Exploring An XMPP-based Solution . . . . . . . . . . 27 - C.1. Example Architecture using XMPP-Grid and Endpoint Posture - Collection Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 3.4.2. Evaluation Sub-Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 4. Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 4.1. Interaction Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 4.1.1. Broadcast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 4.1.2. Directed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4.2. Management Plane Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4.2.1. Orchestrator Onboarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4.2.2. Component Onboarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 4.3. Component Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 4.3.1. Initiate Ad-Hoc Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 4.3.2. Coordinate Periodic Collection . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 4.3.3. Coordinate Observational/Event-based + Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 4.3.4. Persist Collected Posture Attributes . . . . . . . . 16 + 4.3.5. Initiate Ad-Hoc Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 4.3.6. Queries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 5. Taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 5.1. Orchestrator Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.1. Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.2. Interaction Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.3. Initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.4. Request Payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.5. Receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.6. Process Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1.7. Response Payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.1.8. Response Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2. Component Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.1. Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.2. Interaction Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.3. Initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.4. Request Payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.5. Receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2.6. Process Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 5.2.7. Response Payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 5.2.8. Response Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 5.3. Orchestrator-to-Component Administrative Interface . . . 19 + 5.3.1. Capability Advertisement Handshake . . . . . . . . . 19 + 5.3.2. Directed Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 5.4. [Taxonomy Name] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 5.4.1. Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 6. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + Appendix A. Security Domain Workflows . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 + A.1. IT Asset Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 + A.1.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 24 + A.2. Vulnerability Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 + A.2.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 26 + A.3. Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 + A.3.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) . . . . . . 27 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 1. Introduction The purpose of this draft is to define an architectural approach for a SACM Domain, based on the spirit of use cases found in [RFC7632] and requirements found in [RFC8248]. This approach gains the most advantage by supporting a variety of collection systems, and intends to enable a cooperative ecosystem of tools from disparate sources with minimal operator configuration. @@ -150,69 +178,57 @@ or many providers. Different roles within a cooperative ecosystem may act as both providers and consumers of SACM-relevant information. 3.1. SACM Role-based Architecture Within the cooperative SACM ecosystem, a number of roles act in coordination to provide relevant policy/guidance, perform data collection, storage, evaluation, and support downstream analytics and reporting. - +--------------------+ - | Feeds/Repositories | - | of External Data | - +---------+----------+ - | -******************************************* Boundary of Responsibility ****** - | - +-----------------+ | +--------------------+ - | Orchestrator(s) | | | Repositories/CMDBs | - +---------^-------+ | +----------^---------+ - | | | +--------------------+ - | | | | Downstream Uses | - | | | | +----------------+ | - +-----------v----------v-------------v------+ | | Analytics | | + +-----------------+ +--------------------+ + | Orchestrator(s) | | Repositories/CMDBs | + +---------^-------+ +----------^---------+ + | | +--------------------+ + | | | Downstream Uses | + | | | +----------------+ | + +-----------v------------------------v------+ | | Analytics | | | Integration Service <------> +----------------+ | +-----------^--------------------------^----+ | +----------------+ | | | | | Reporting | | | | | +----------------+ | +-----------v-------------------+ | +--------------------+ | Collection Sub-Architecture | | +-------------------------------+ | +---------------v---------------+ | Evaluation Sub-Architecture | +-------------------------------+ Figure 2: Notional Role-based Architecture As shown in Figure 2, the SACM role-based architecture consists of some basic SACM Components communicating using an integration service. The integration service is expected to maximally align with the requirements described in [RFC8248], which means that the integration service will support brokered (i.e. point-to-point) and proxied data exchange. - The boundary of responsibility is not intended to imply a physical - boundary. Rather, it is intended to be inclusive of various cloud/ - virtualized environments, BYOD and vendor-provided services in - addition to any physical systems the enterprise operates. - 3.2. Architectural Roles/Components This document suggests a variety of players in a cooperative - ecosystem; these players are known as SACM Components. SACM - Components may be composed of other SACM Components, and each SACM - Component plays one, or more, of several roles relevant to the - ecosystem. Roles may act as providers of information, consumers of - information, or both provider and consumer. Figure 2 depicts a - number of SACM components which are architecturally significant and - therefore warrant discussion and clarification. + ecosystem; known as SACM Components. SACM Components may be composed + of other SACM Components, and each SACM Component plays one, or more, + of several roles relevant to the ecosystem. Roles may act as + providers of information, consumers of information, or both provider + and consumer. Figure 2 depicts a number of SACM components which are + architecturally significant and therefore warrant discussion and + clarification. 3.2.1. Orchestrator(s) Orchestration components exists to aid in the automation of configuration, coordination, and management for the ecosystem of SACM components. The Orchestrator performs control-plane operations, administration of an implementing organization's components (including endpoints, posture collection services, and downstream activities), scheduling of automated tasks, and any ad-hoc activities such as the initiation of collection or evaluation activities. The @@ -243,36 +259,36 @@ infrastructure to allow SACM components to communicate using a shared set of interfaces. The Integration Service's brokering capabilities enable the exchange of various information payloads, orchestration of component capabilities, message routing and reliable delivery. The Integration Service minimizes the dependencies from one system to another through the loose coupling of applications through messaging. SACM components will "attach" to the Integration Service either through native support for the integration implementation, or through the use of "adapters" which provide a proxied attachment. - The Integration Service should provide mechanisms for synchronous - "request/response"-style messaging, asynchronous "send and forget" - messaging, or publish/subscribe. It is the responsibility of the - Integration Service to coordinate and manage the sending and - receiving of messages. The Integration Service should allow - components the ability to directly connect and produce or consume - messages, or connect via message translators which can act as a - proxy, transforming messages from a component format to one - implementing a SACM data model. + The Integration Service should provide mechanisms for both + synchronous and asynchronous "request/response"-style messaging, and + a publish/subscribe mechanism to implement event-based messaging. It + is the responsibility of the Integration Service to coordinate and + manage the sending and receiving of messages. The Integration + Service should allow components the ability to directly connect and + produce or consume messages, or connect via message translators which + can act as a proxy, transforming messages from a component format to + one implementing a SACM data model. The Integration Service MUST provide routing capabilities for payloads between producers and consumers. The Integration Service MAY provide further capabilities within the payload delivery pipeline. Examples of these capabilities include, but are not limited to, intermediate processing, message transformation, type - conversion, validation, etc. + conversion, validation, or other enterprise integration patterns. 3.3. Downstream Uses As depicted by Figure 2, a number of downstream uses exist in the cooperative ecosystem. Each notional SACM component represents distinct sub-architectures which will exchange information via the integration services, using interactions described in this draft. 3.3.1. Reporting @@ -289,29 +305,30 @@ effective decision making within the organization. 3.4. Sub-Architectures Figure 2 shows two components representing sub-architectural roles involved in a cooperative ecosystem of SACM components: Collection and Evaluation. 3.4.1. Collection Sub-Architecture - The Collection sub-architecture, in a SACM context, is the mechanism + The Collection sub-architecture is, in a SACM context, the mechanism by which posture attributes are collected from applicable endpoints and persisted to a repository, such as a configuration management database (CMDB). Orchestration components will choreograph endpoint - data collection via interactions using the Integration Service as a - message broker. Instructions to perform endpoint data collection are - directed to a Posture Collection Service capable of performing - collection activities utilizing any number of methods, such as SNMP, - NETCONF/RESTCONF, SSH, WinRM, or host-based. + data collection via defined interactions, using the Integration + Service as a message broker. Instructions to perform endpoint data + collection are directed to a Posture Collection Service capable of + performing collection activities utilizing any number of methods, + such as SNMP, NETCONF/RESTCONF, SSH, WinRM, packet capture, or host- + based. +----------------------------------------------------------+ | Orchestrator(s) | +-----------+----------------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------+ | | Posture Attribute Repository | | +--------------^---------------+ Perform | Collection | | Collected Data @@ -319,50 +336,88 @@ | | +-----------v------------------------------+---------------+ | Integration Service | +----+------------------^-----------+------------------^---+ | | | | v | v | Perform Collected Perform Collected Collection Data Collection Data | ^ | ^ | | | | - +----v-----------------------+ +----v------------------+------+ - | Posture Collection Service | | Endpoint | - +---^------------------------+ | +--------------------------+ | + +----v-----------------------+ +----|------------------|------+ + | Posture Collection Service | | | Endpoint | | + +---^------------------------+ | +--v------------------+----+ | | | | |Posture Collection Service| | | v | +--------------------------+ | Events Queries +------------------------------+ - ^ | + ^ | (PCS resides on Endpoint) | | +---+-------------------v----+ | Endpoint | +----------------------------+ + (PCS does not reside on Endpoint) Figure 3: Decomposed Collection Sub-Architecture 3.4.1.1. Posture Collection Service The Posture Collection Service (PCS) is the SACM component responsible for the collection of posture attributes from an endpoint or set of endpoints. A single PCS may be responsible for management of posture attribute collection from many endpoints. The PCS will interact with the Integration Service to receive collection instructions and to provide collected posture data for persistence to the Posture Attribute Repository. Collection instructions may be supplied in a variety of forms, including subscription to a publish/ subscribe topic to which the Integration Service has published - instructions, via request/response-style synchronous messaging, or - via asynchronous "send-and-forget" messaging. Collected posture - information may then be supplied to the Integration Service via - similar channels. The various interaction types are discussed later - in this draft (TBD). + instructions, or via request/response-style messaging (either + synchronous or asynchronous). + + Four classifications of posture collections MAY be supported. + +3.4.1.1.1. Ad-Hoc + + Ad-Hoc collection is defined as a single colletion of posture + attributes, collected at a particular time. An example of ad-hoc + collection is the single collection of a specific registry key. + +3.4.1.1.2. Continuous/Scheduled + + Continuous/Scheduled collection is defined as the ongoing, periodic + collection of posture attributes. An example of scheduled collection + is the collection of a specific registry key value every day at a + given time. + +3.4.1.1.3. Observational + + This classification of collection is triggered by the observation, + external to an endpoint, of information asserting posture attribute + values for that endpoint. An example of observational collection is + examination of netflow data for particular packet captures and/or + specific information within those captures. + +3.4.1.1.4. Event-based + + Event-based collection may be triggered either internally or + externally to the endpoint. Internal event-based collection is + triggered when a posture attribute of interest is added, removed, or + modified on an endpoint. This modification indicates a change in the + current state of the endpoint, potentially affecting its adherence to + some defined policy. Modification of the endpoint's minimum password + length is an example of an attribute change which could trigger + collection. + + External event-based collection can be described as a collector being + subscribed to an external source of information, receiving events + from that external source on a periodic or continuous basis. An + example of event-based collection is subscription to YANG Push + notifications. 3.4.1.2. Endpoint Building upon [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology], the SACM Collection Sub- Architecture augments the definition of an Endpoint as a component within an organization's management domain from which a Posture Collection Service will collect relevant posture attributes. 3.4.1.3. Posture Attribute Repository @@ -388,453 +443,524 @@ mechanism by which policy, expressed in the form of expected state, is compared with collected posture attributes to yield an evaluation result, that result being contextually dependent on the policy being evaluated. +------------------+ | Collection | +-------------------------------+ | Sub-Architecture | | Evaluation Results Repository | +--------------+ +--------^---------+ +-----------------^-------------+ | Orchestrator | | | -+------+-------+ | | + +------+-------+ (Potentially) | | Perform Store Evaluation Results Perform Collection | Evaluation | | | | | +------v----------------------v--------------------------------+-------------+ | Integration Service | -+--------+----------------------------^----------------------^---------------+ + +--------^----------------------^-----------------------^--------------------+ | | | | | | - Perform Retrieve Posture | - Evaluation Attributes Retrieve Policy + | Retrieve Posture Perform + Retrieve Policy Attributes Evaluation | | | | | | -+--------v-------------------+ +-----v------+ +------v-----+ -| Posture Evaluation Service | | Posture | | Policy | -+----------------------------+ | Attribute | | Repository | - | Repository | +------------+ + +------v-----+ +-----v------+ +--------v-------------------+ + | Policy | | Posture | | Posture Evaluation Service | + | Repository | | Attribute | +----------------------------+ + +------------+ | Repository | +------------+ Figure 4: Decomposed Evaluation Sub-Architecture 3.4.2.1. Posture Evaluation Service The Posture Evaluation Service (PES) represents the SACM component responsible for coordinating the policy to be evaluated and the collected posture attributes relevant to that policy, as well as the comparison engine responsible for correctly determining compliance with the expected state. 3.4.2.2. Policy Repository The Policy Repository represents a persistent storage mechanism for the policy to be assessed against collected posture attributes to - determine if an endpoint meets the defined expected state. Examples + determine if an endpoint meets the desired expected state. Examples of information contained in a Policy Repository would be Vulnerability Definition Data or configuration recommendations as part of a CIS Benchmark or DISA STIG. 3.4.2.3. Evaluation Results Repository The Evaluation Results Repository persists the information representing the results of a particular posture assessment, indicating those posture attributes collected from various endpoints which either meet or do not meet the expected state defined by the assessed policy. Consideration should be made for the context of individual results. For example, meeting the expected state for a configuration attribute indicates a correct configuration of the endpoint, whereas meeting an expected state for a vulnerable software - version indicates an incorrect and therefore vulnerable - configuration. + version indicates an incorrect configuration. 3.4.2.4. Posture Evaluation Workflow Posture evaluation is orchestrated through the Integration Service to - the appropriate Posture Evaluation Service. The PES will, through - coordination with the Integration Service, query both the Posture - Attribute Repository and the Policy Repository to obtain relevant - state data for comparison. If necessary, the PES may be required to - invoke further posture collection. Once all relevant posture - information has been collected, it is compared to expected state - based on applicable policy. Comparison results are then persisted to - an evaluation results repository for further downstream use and - analysis. + the appropriate Posture Evaluation Service (PES). The PES will, + using interactions defined by the applicable taxonomy, query both the + Posture Attribute Repository and the Policy Repository to obtain + relevant state data for comparison. If necessary, the PES may be + required to invoke further posture collection. Once all relevant + posture information has been collected, it is compared to expected + state based on applicable policy. Comparison results are then + persisted to an evaluation results repository for further downstream + use and analysis. 4. Interactions SACM Components are intended to interact with other SACM Components. These interactions can be thought of, at the architectural level, as the combination of interfaces with their supported operations. Each interaction will convey a payload of information. The payload information is expected to contain sub-domain-specific - characteristics and instructions. + characteristics and/or instructions. + +4.1. Interaction Categories Two categories of interactions SHOULD be supported by the Integration - Service; broadcast interactions, and directed interactions. + Service; broadcast and directed. - o *Broadcast*: A broadcast interaction, commonly known as "publish/ - subscribe", allows for a wider distribution of a message payload. - When a payload is published to a topic on the Integration Service, - all subscribers to that topic are alerted and may consume the - message payload. A broadcast interaction may also simulate a - "directed" interaction when a topic only has a single subscriber. - An example of a broadcast interaction could be to publish to a - topic that new configuration assessment content is available. - Subscribing consumers receive the notification, and proceed to - collect endpoint configuration posture based on the new content. +4.1.1. Broadcast - o *Directed*: The intent of a directed interaction is to enable - point-to-point communications between a producer and consumer, - through the standard interfaces provided by the Integration - Service. The provider component indicates which consumer is - intended to receive the payload, and the Integration Service - routes the payload directly to that consumer. Two "styles" of - directed interaction exist, differing only by the response from - the payload consumer: + A broadcast interaction, commonly known as "publish/subscribe", + allows for a wider distribution of a message payload. When a payload + is published to a topic on the Integration Service, all subscribers + to that topic are alerted and may consume the message payload. This + category of interaction can also be described as a "unicast" + interaction when a topic only has a single subscriber. An example of + a broadcast interaction could be to publish Linux OVAL objects to a + posture collection topic. Subscribing consumers receive the + notification, and proceed to collect endpoint configuration posture + based on the new content. - * *Synchronous (Request/Response)*: Synchronous, request/response - style interaction requires that the requesting component block - and wait for the receiving component to respond, or to time out - when that response is delayed past a given time threshold. A - synchronous interaction example may be querying a CMDB for - posture attribute information in order to perform an +4.1.2. Directed + + The intent of a directed interaction is to enable point-to-point + communications between a producer and consumer, through the standard + interfaces provided by the Integration Service. The provider + component indicates which consumer is intended to receive the + payload, and the Integration Service routes the payload directly to + that consumer. Two "styles" of directed interaction exist, differing + only by the response from the payload consumer. + +4.1.2.1. Synchronous + + Synchronous, request/response style interaction requires that the + requesting component block and wait for the receiving component to + respond, or to time out when that response is delayed past a given + time threshold. A synchronous interaction example may be querying a + CMDB for posture attribute information in order to perform an evaluation. - * *Asynchronous (Fire-and-Forget)*: An asynchronous interaction - involves the payload producer directing the message to a - consumer, but not blocking or waiting for a response. This - style of interaction allows the producer to continue on to - other activities without the need to wait for responses. This - style is particularly useful when the interaction payload - invokes a potentially long-running task, such as data - collection, report generation, or policy evaluation. The - receiving component may reply later via callbacks or further - interactions, but it is not mandatory. +4.1.2.2. Asynchronous - Each interaction will convey a payload of information. The payload - is expected to contain specific characteristics and instructions to - be interpreted by receiving components. + An asynchronous interaction involves the payload producer directing + the message to a consumer, but not blocking or waiting for an + immediate response. This style of interaction allows the producer to + continue on to other activities without the need to wait for + responses. This style is particularly useful when the interaction + payload invokes a potentially long-running task, such as data + collection, report generation, or policy evaluation. The receiving + component may reply later via callbacks or further interactions, but + it is not mandatory. -5. Security Domain Workflows +4.2. Management Plane Functions - This section describes three primary information security domains - from which workflows may be derived: IT Asset Management, - Vulnerability Management, and Configuration Management. + Mangement plane functions describe a component's interactions with + the ecosystem itself, not necessarily relating to collection, + evaluation, or downstream analytical processes. -5.1. IT Asset Management +4.2.1. Orchestrator Onboarding - Information Technology asset management is easier said than done. - The [CISCONTROLS] have two controls dealing with IT asset management. - Control 1, Inventory and Control of Hardware Assets, states, - "Actively manage (inventory, track, and correct) all hardware devices - on the network so that only authorized devices are given access, and - unauthorized and unmanaged devices are found and prevented from - gaining access." Control 2, Inventory and Control of Software - Assets, states, "Actively manage (inventory, track, and correct) all - software on the network so that only authorized software is installed - and can execute, and that unauthorized and unmanaged software is - found and prevented from installation or execution." + The Orchestrator component, being a specialized role in the + architecture, onboards to the ecosystem in such a manner as to enable + the onboarding and capabilities of the other component roles. The + Orchestrator must be enabled with the set of capabilities needed to + manage the functions of the ecosystem. - In spirit, this covers all of the processing entities on your network - (as opposed to things like network cables, dongles, adapters, etc.), - whether physical or virtual, on-premises or in the cloud. + With this in mind, the Orchestrator must first authenticate to the + Integration Service. Once authentication has succeeded, the + Orchestrator must establish "service handlers" per the Section 5.2. + Once "service handlers" have been established, the Orchestrator is + then equipped to handle component registration, onboarding, + capability discovery, and topic subscription policy. -5.1.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) + The following requirements exist for the Orchestrator to establish + "service handlers" supporting the Section 5.2: - The Orchestrator + MUST enable the capability to receive onboarding requests via the + "/orchestrator/registration" topic, - The Orchestrator MUST have the + capability to generate, manage, and persist unique identifiers for + all registered components, - The Orchestrator MUST have the + capability to inventory and manage its "roster" (the list of + registered components), - The Orchestrator MUST support making + directed requests to registered components over the component's + administrative interface, as configured by the + "/orchestrator/[component-unique-identifier]" topic. Administrative + interface functions are described by their taxonomy, below. - TBD +4.2.2. Component Onboarding -5.1.1.1. Components + Component onboarding describes how an individual component becomes + part of the ecosystem; registering with the orchestrator, advertising + capabilities, establishing its administrative interface, and + subscribing to relevant topics. - TBD + The component onboarding workflow involves multiple steps: - The + component first authenticates to the Integration Service - The + component then initiates registration with the Orchestrator, per the + Section 5.2 -5.1.1.2. Capabilities + Once the component has onboarded and registered with the + Orchestrator, its administrative interface will have been established + via the "/orchestrator/[component-unique-identifier]" topic. This + administrative interface allows the component to advertise its + capabilities to the Orchestrator and in return, allow the + Orchestrator to direct capability-specific topic registration to the + component. This is performed using the Section 5.3.1 taxonomy. + Further described below, the "capability advertisement handshake" + first assumes the onboarding component has the ability to describe + its capabilities so they may be understood by the Orchestrator (TBD + on capability advertisement methodology). - An IT asset management capability needs to be able to: + * The component sends a message with its operational capabilities + over the administrative interface: "/orchestrator/[component- + unique-identifier]" - o Identify and catalog new assets by executing Target Endpoint - Discovery Tasks + * The Orchestrator receives the component's capabilities, persists + them, and responds with the list of topics to which the component + should subscribe, in order to receive notifications, instructions, + or other directives intended to invoke the component's supported + capabilities. - o Provide information about its managed assets, including uniquely - identifying information (for that enterprise) + * The component subscribes to the topics provided by the + Orchestrator - o Handle software and/or hardware (including virtual assets) +4.3. Component Interactions - o Represent cloud hybrid environments + Component interactions describe functionality between components + relating to collection, evaluation, or other downstream processes. -5.1.1.3. Workflow(s) +4.3.1. Initiate Ad-Hoc Collection - TBD + The Orchestrator supplies a payload of collection instructions to a + topic or set of topics to which Posture Collection Services are + subscribed. The receiving PCS components perform the required + collection based on their capabilities. The PCS then forms a payload + of collected posture attributes (including endpoint identifying + information) and publishes that payload to the topic(s) to which the + Posture Attribute Repository is subscribed, for persistence. -5.2. Vulnerability Management +4.3.2. Coordinate Periodic Collection - Vulnerability management is a relatively established process. To - paraphrase the [CISCONTROLS], continuous vulnerability management is - the act of continuously acquiring, assessing, and taking subsequent - action on new information in order to identify and remediate - vulnerabilities, therefore minimizing the window of opportunity for - attackers. + Similar to ad-hoc collection, the Orchestrator supplies a payload of + collection instructions containing additional information regarding + collection periodicity, to the topic or topics to which Posture + Collection Services are subscribed. - A vulnerability assessment (i.e. vulnerability detection) is - performed in two steps: +4.3.2.1. Schedule Periodic Collection - o Endpoint information collected by the endpoint management - capabilities is examined by the vulnerability management - capabilities through Evaluation Tasks. + Collection instructions include information regarding the schedule + for collection, for example, every day at Noon, or every hour at 32 + minutes past the hour. - o If the data possessed by the endpoint management capabilities is - insufficient, a Collection Task is triggered and the necessary - data is collected from the target endpoint. +4.3.2.2. Cancel Periodic Collection - Vulnerability detection relies on the examination of different - endpoint information depending on the nature of a specific - vulnerability. Common endpoint information used to detect a - vulnerability includes: + The Orchestrator supplies a payload of instructions to a topic or set + of topics to which Posture Collection Services are subscribed. The + receiving PCS components cancel the identified periodic collection + executing on that PCS. - o A specific software version is installed on the endpoint +4.3.3. Coordinate Observational/Event-based Collection - o File system attributes + In these scenarios, the "observer" acts as the Posture Collection + Service. Interactions with the observer could specify a time period + of observation and potentially information intended to filter + observed posture attributes to aid the PCS in determining those + attributes that are applicable for collection and persistence to the + Posture Attribute Repository. - o Specific state attributes +4.3.3.1. Initiate Observational/Event-based Collection - In some cases, the endpoint information needed to determine an - endpoint's vulnerability status will have been previously collected - by the endpoint management capabilities and available in a - Repository. However, in other cases, the necessary endpoint - information will not be readily available in a Repository and a - Collection Task will be triggered to perform collection from the - target endpoint. Of course, some implementations of endpoint - management capabilities may prefer to enable operators to perform - this collection even when sufficient information can be provided by - the endpoint management capabilities (e.g. there may be freshness - requirements for information). + The Orchestrator supplies a payload of instructions to a topic or set + of topics to which Posture Collection Services (observers) are + subscribed. This payload could include specific instructions based + on the observer's capabilities to determine specific posture + attributes to observe and collect. -5.2.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) +4.3.3.2. Cancel Observational/Event-based Collection - TBD + The Orchestrator supplies a payload of instructions to a topic or set + of topics to which Posture Collection Services are subscribed. The + receiving PCS components cancel the identified observational/event- + based collection executing on that PCS. -5.2.1.1. Components +4.3.4. Persist Collected Posture Attributes - TBD + [TBD] Normalization? -5.2.1.2. Capabilities +4.3.5. Initiate Ad-Hoc Evaluation - TBD + [TBD] ### Coordinate Periodic Evaluation [TBD] #### Schedule [TBD] + #### Cancel [TBD] ### Coordinate Change-based Evaluation [TBD] i.e. + if a posture attribute in the repository is changed, trigger an + evaluation of particular policy items -5.2.1.3. Workflow(s) +4.3.6. Queries - TBD + [TBD] Queries should allow for a "freshness" time period, allowing + the requesting entity to determine if/when posture attributes must be + re-collected prior to performing evaluation. This freshness time + period can be "zeroed out" for the purpose of automatically + triggering re-collection regardless of the most recent collection. -5.3. Configuration Management +5. Taxonomy +5.1. Orchestrator Registration - Configuration management involves configuration assessment, which - requires state assessment. The [CISCONTROLS] specify two high-level - controls concerning configuration management (Control 5 for non- - network devices and Control 11 for network devices). As an aside, - these controls are listed separately because many enterprises have - different organizations for managing network infrastructure and - workload endpoints. Merging the two controls results in the - following paraphrasing: Establish, implement, and actively manage - (track, report on, correct) the security configuration of systems - using a rigorous configuration management and change control process - in order to prevent attackers from exploiting vulnerable services and - settings. + The Orchestrator Registration taxonomy describes how an Orchestrator + onboards to the ecosystem, or how it returns from a non-operational + state. - Typically, an enterprise will use configuration guidance from a - reputable source, and from time to time they may tailor the guidance - from that source prior to adopting it as part of their enterprise - standard. The enterprise standard is then provided to the - appropriate configuration assessment tools and they assess endpoints - and/or appropriate endpoint information. +5.1.1. Topic - A preferred flow follows: + N/A - o Reputable source publishes new or updated configuration guidance +5.1.2. Interaction Type - o Enterprise configuration assessment capability retrieves - configuration guidance from reputable source + Directed (Request/Response) - o Optional: Configuration guidance is tailored for enterprise- - specific needs +5.1.3. Initiator - o Configuration assessment tool queries asset inventory repository - to retrieve a list of affected endpoints + Orchestrator - o Configuration assessment tool queries configuration state - repository to evaluate compliance +5.1.4. Request Payload - o If information is stale or unavailable, configuration assessment - tool triggers an ad hoc assessment + N/A - The SACM architecture needs to support varying deployment models to - accommodate the current state of the industry, but should strongly - encourage event-driven approaches to monitoring configuration. +5.1.5. Receiver -5.3.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) + N/A - This section provides more detail about the components and - capabilities required when considering the aforementioned - configuration management workflow. +5.1.6. Process Description -5.3.1.1. Components + Once the Orchestrator has authenticated to the Integration Service, + it must establish (or re-establish) any service handlers interacting + with administrative interfaces and/or general operational interfaces. - The following is a minimal list of SACM Components required to - implement the aforementioned configuration assessment workflow. + For initial registration, the Orchestrator MUST enable capabilities + to: - o Configuration Policy Feed: An external source of authoritative - configuration recommendations. + * Receive onboarding requests via the "/orchestrator/registration" + topic, - o Configuration Policy Repository: An internal repository of - enterprise standard configurations. + * Generate, manage, and persist unique identifiers for all + registered components, - o Configuration Assessment Orchestrator: A component responsible for - orchestrating assessments. + * Inventory and manage its "roster" (the list of registered + components), and - o Posture Attribute Collection Subsystem: A component responsible - for collection of posture attributes from systems. + * Support making directed requests to registered components over the + component's administrative interface, as configured by the + "/orchestrator/[component-unique-identifier]" topic. - o Posture Attribute Repository: A component used for storing system - posture attribute values. + Administrative interfaces are to be re-established through the + inventory of previously registered components, such as Posture + Collection Services, Repositories, or Posture Evaluation Services. - o Configuration Assessment Evaluator: A component responsible for - evaluating system posture attribute values against expected - posture attribute values. +5.1.7. Response Payload - o Configuration Assessment Results Repository: A component used for - storing evaluation results. + N/A -5.3.1.2. Capabilities +5.1.8. Response Processing - Per [RFC8248], solutions MUST support capability negotiation. - Components implementing specific interfaces and operations (i.e. - interactions) will need a method of describing their capabilities to - other components participating in the ecosystem; for example, "As a - component in the ecosystem, I can assess the configuration of - Windows, MacOS, and AWS using OVAL". + N/A -5.3.1.3. Configuration Assessment Workflow +5.2. Component Registration - This section describes the components and interactions in a basic - configuration assessment workflow. For simplicity, error conditions - are recognized as being necessary and are not depicted. When one - component messages another component, the message is expected to be - handled appropriately unless there is an error condition, or other - notification, messaged in return. + Component onboarding describes how an individual component becomes + part of the ecosystem; registering with the orchestrator, advertising + capabilities, establishing its administrative interface, and + subscribing to relevant topics. -+-------------+ +----------------+ +------------------+ +------------+ -| Policy Feed | | Orchestrator | | Evaluation | | Evaluation | -+------+------+ +-------+--------+ | Sub-Architecture | | Results | - | | +---^----------+---+ | Repository | - | | | | +------^-----+ - | | | | | - 1.| 3.| 8.| 9.| 10.| - | | | | | - | | | | | -+------v-----------------v---------------+----------v-------------+-----+ -| Integration Service | -+-----+----------------------------------+----------^---------+------^--+ - | | | | | - | | | | | - 2.| 4.| 5.| 6.| 7.| - | | | | | - | | | | | -+-----v------+ +---v----------+---+ +--v------+--+ -| Policy | | Collection | | Posture | -| Repository | | Sub-Architecture | | Attribute | -+------------+ +------------------+ | Repository | - +------------+ +5.2.1. Topic - Figure 5: Configuration Assessment Component Interactions + "/orchestrator/registration" - Figure 5 depicts configuration assessment components and their - interactions, which are further described below. + "[component-type]" includes "pcs", "repository", "pes", and MORE TBD - 1. A policy feed provides a configuration assessment policy payload - to the Integration Service. +5.2.2. Interaction Type - 2. The Policy Repository, a consumer of Policy Feed information, - receives and persists the Policy Feed's payload. + Directed (Request/Response) - 3. Orchestration component(s), either manually invoked, scheduled, - or event-based, publish a payload to begin the configuration - assessment process. +5.2.3. Initiator - 4. If necessary, Collection Sub-Architecture components may be - invoked to collect neeeded posture attribute information. + Any component wishing to join the ecosystem, such as Posture + Collection Services, Repositories (policy, collection content, + posture attribute, etc), Posture Evaluation Services and more. - 5. If necessary, the Collection Sub-Architecture will provide - collected posture attributes to the Integration Service for - persistence to the Posture Attribute Repository. +5.2.4. Request Payload - 6. The Posture Attribute Repository will consume a payload querying - for relevant posture attribute information. + [TBD] Information Elements, such as - identifying-information - + component-type (pcs, pes, repository, etc) - name - description - 7. The Posture Attribute Repository will provide the requested - information to the Integration Service, allowing further - orchestration payloads requesting the Evaluation Sub- - Architecture perform evaluation tasks. +5.2.5. Receiver - 8. The Evaluation Sub-Architecture consumes the evaluation payload - and performs component-specific state comparison operations to - produce evaluation results. + Orchestrator - 9. A payload containing evaluation results are provided by the - Evaluation Sub-Architecture to the Integration Service +5.2.6. Process Description - 10. Evaluation results are consumed by/persisted to the Evaluation - Results Repository + When the Orchestrator receives the component's request for + onboarding, it will: - Generate a unique identifier, "[component- + unique-identifier]", for the onboarding component, - Persist required + information (TBD probably need more specifics), including the + "[component-unique-identifier]" to its component inventory, enabling + an up-to-date roster of components being orchestrated, - Establish + the administrative interface via the "/orchestrator/[component- + unique-identifier]" topic. - In the above flow, the payload information is expected to convey the - context required by the receiving component for the action being - taken under different circumstances. For example, a directed message - sent from an Orchestrator to a Collection sub-architecture might be - telling that Collector to watch a specific posture attribute and - report only specific detected changes to the Posture Attribute - Repository, or it might be telling the Collector to gather that - posture attribute immediately. Such details are expected to be - handled as part of that payload, not as part of the architecture - described herein. +5.2.7. Response Payload + + [TBD] Information Elements - component-unique-identifier + +5.2.8. Response Processing + + Successful receipt of the Orchestrator's response, including the + "[component-unique-identifier]" indicates the component is onboarded + to the ecosystem. Using the response payload, the component can then + establish its end of the administrative interface with the + Orchestrator, using the "/orchestrator/[component-unique-identifier]" + topic. Given this administrative interface, the component can then + initiate the Section 5.3.1 + +5.3. Orchestrator-to-Component Administrative Interface + + A number of functions may take place which, instead of being + published to a multi-subscriber topic, may require direct interaction + between an Orchestrator and a registered component. During component + onboarding, this direct channel is established first by the + Orchestrator and subsequently complemented by the onboarding + component. + +5.3.1. Capability Advertisement Handshake + + Capability advertisement, otherwise known as service discovery, is + necessary to establish and maintain a cooperative ecosystem of tools. + Using this capability advertisement "handshake", the Orchestrator + becomes knowledgeable of a component's operational capabilities, the + endpoints/services with which the component interacts, and + establishes a direct mode of contact for invoking those capabilities. + +5.3.1.1. Topic + + "/orchestrator/[component-unique-identifier]" + +5.3.1.2. Interaction Type + + Directed (Request/Response) + +5.3.1.3. Initiator + + Any ecosystem component (minus the Orchestrator) + +5.3.1.4. Request Payload + + [TBD] Information Elements - component-type - component-unique- + identifier - interaction-type (capability-advertisement): - list of + capabilities - list of endpoints/services + +5.3.1.5. Receiver + + Orchestrator + +5.3.1.6. Process Description + + Upon receipt of the component's capability advertisement, it SHOULD: + - Persist the component's capabilities to the Orchestrator's + inventory - Coordinate, based on the supplied capabilities, a list of + topics to which the component should subscribe + +5.3.1.7. Response Payload + + [TBD] Information Elements - list of topics to subscribe + +5.3.1.8. Response Processing + + Once the component has received the response to its capability + advertisement, it should subscribe to the Orchestrator-provided + topics. + +5.3.2. Directed Collection + + ### Directed Evaluation ### Heartbeat + +5.4. [Taxonomy Name] + + DESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMY + +5.4.1. Topic + + "/name/of/topic" ### Interaction Type [Directed (Request/Response) + -or- Publish/Subscribe] ### Initiator [Component sending/publishing + the payload] ### Request Payload DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION MODEL OF + REQUEST PAYLOAD; i.e. what elements need to be in whatever format in + the payload. ### Receiver [Component receiving/subscribed-to the + payload] ### Process Description [What the receiver does with the + payload] ### Response Payload DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION MODEL OF + RESPONSE PAYLOAD; i.e. what elements need to be in whatever format in + the payload. ### Response Processing [What the initiator does with + any response, if there is one] 6. Privacy Considerations - TODO + [TBD] 7. Security Considerations - TODO + [TBD] 8. IANA Considerations - TODO: Revamp this section after the configuration assessment workflow + [TBD] Revamp this section after the configuration assessment workflow is fleshed out. IANA tables can probably be used to make life a little easier. We would like a place to enumerate: - o Capability/operation semantics + * Capability/operation semantics - o SACM Component implementation identifiers - o SACM Component versions + * SACM Component implementation identifiers - o Associations of SACM Components (and versions) to specific + * SACM Component versions + + * Associations of SACM Components (and versions) to specific Capabilities - o Collection sub-architecture Identification + * Collection sub-architecture Identification 9. References 9.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-sacm-ecp] Haynes, D., Fitzgerald-McKay, J., and L. Lorenzin, "Endpoint Posture Collection Profile", draft-ietf-sacm- - ecp-05 (work in progress), June 2019. + ecp-05 (work in progress), 21 June 2019, + . [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC8412] Schmidt, C., Haynes, D., Coffin, C., Waltermire, D., and J. Fitzgerald-McKay, "Software Inventory Message and Attributes (SWIMA) for PA-TNC", RFC 8412, DOI 10.17487/RFC8412, July 2018, @@ -842,71 +968,76 @@ [RFC8600] Cam-Winget, N., Ed., Appala, S., Pope, S., and P. Saint- Andre, "Using Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) for Security Information Exchange", RFC 8600, DOI 10.17487/RFC8600, June 2019, . 9.2. Informative References [CISCONTROLS] - "CIS Controls v7.0", n.d., + "CIS Controls v7.0", May 2020, . [draft-birkholz-sacm-yang-content] Birkholz, H. and N. Cam-Winget, "YANG subscribed - notifications via SACM Statements", n.d., + notifications via SACM Statements", May 2020, . [HACK100] "IETF 100 Hackathon - Vulnerability Scenario EPCP+XMPP", - n.d., . + May 2020, + . - [HACK101] "IETF 101 Hackathon - Configuration Assessment XMPP", - n.d., . + [HACK101] "IETF 101 Hackathon - Configuration Assessment XMPP", May + 2020, . [HACK102] "IETF 102 Hackathon - YANG Collection on Traditional - Endpoints", n.d., + Endpoints", May 2020, . - [HACK103] "IETF 103 Hackathon - N/A", n.d., + [HACK103] "IETF 103 Hackathon - N/A", May 2020, . - [HACK104] "IETF 104 Hackathon - A simple XMPP client", n.d., + [HACK104] "IETF 104 Hackathon - A simple XMPP client", May 2020, . [HACK105] "IETF 105 Hackathon - A more robust XMPP client including - collection extensions", n.d., + collection extensions", May 2020, . - [HACK99] "IETF 99 Hackathon - Vulnerability Scenario EPCP", n.d., + [HACK99] "IETF 99 Hackathon - Vulnerability Scenario EPCP", May + 2020, . [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology] Birkholz, H., Lu, J., Strassner, J., Cam-Winget, N., and A. Montville, "Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Terminology", draft-ietf-sacm- - terminology-16 (work in progress), December 2018. + terminology-16 (work in progress), 14 December 2018, + . [NIST800126] Waltermire, D., Quinn, S., Booth, H., Scarfone, K., and D. Prisaca, "SP 800-126 Rev. 3 - The Technical Specification for the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) - SCAP Version 1.3", February 2018, . [NISTIR7694] Halbardier, A., Waltermire, D., and M. Johnson, "NISTIR - 7694 Specification for Asset Reporting Format 1.1", n.d., + 7694 Specification for Asset Reporting Format 1.1", May + 2020, . [RFC5023] Gregorio, J., Ed. and B. de hOra, Ed., "The Atom Publishing Protocol", RFC 5023, DOI 10.17487/RFC5023, October 2007, . [RFC7632] Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security Posture Assessment: Enterprise Use Cases", RFC 7632, DOI 10.17487/RFC7632, September 2015, @@ -915,526 +1046,307 @@ [RFC8248] Cam-Winget, N. and L. Lorenzin, "Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements", RFC 8248, DOI 10.17487/RFC8248, September 2017, . [RFC8322] Field, J., Banghart, S., and D. Waltermire, "Resource- Oriented Lightweight Information Exchange (ROLIE)", RFC 8322, DOI 10.17487/RFC8322, February 2018, . - [XMPPEXT] "XMPP Extensions", n.d., . + [XMPPEXT] "XMPP Extensions", May 2020, + . -Appendix A. Mapping to RFC8248 +Appendix A. Security Domain Workflows - TODO: Consider removing or placing in a separate solution draft. + This section describes three primary information security domains + from which workflows may be derived: IT Asset Management, + Vulnerability Management, and Configuration Management. - This section provides a mapping of XMPP and XMPP Extensions to the - relevant requirements from [RFC8248]. In the table below, the ID and - Name columns provide the ID and Name of the requirement directly out - of [RFC8248]. The Supported By column may contain one of several - values: +A.1. IT Asset Management - o N/A: The requirement is not applicable to this architectural - exploration + Information Technology asset management is easier said than done. + The [CISCONTROLS] have two controls dealing with IT asset management. + Control 1, Inventory and Control of Hardware Assets, states, + "Actively manage (inventory, track, and correct) all hardware devices + on the network so that only authorized devices are given access, and + unauthorized and unmanaged devices are found and prevented from + gaining access." Control 2, Inventory and Control of Software + Assets, states, "Actively manage (inventory, track, and correct) all + software on the network so that only authorized software is installed + and can execute, and that unauthorized and unmanaged software is + found and prevented from installation or execution." - o Architecture: This architecture (possibly assuming some - components) should meet the requirement + In spirit, this covers all of the processing entities on your network + (as opposed to things like network cables, dongles, adapters, etc.), + whether physical or virtual, on-premises or in the cloud. - o XMPP: The set of XMPP Core specifications and the collection of - applicable extensions, deployment, and operational considerations. +A.1.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) - o XMPP-Core: The requirement is satisfied by a core XMPP feature + TBD - o XEP-nnnn: The requirement is satisfied by a numbered XMPP - extension (see [XMPPEXT]) +A.1.1.1. Components - o Operational: The requirement is an operational concern or can be - addressed by an operational deployment + TBD - o Implementation: The requirement is an implementation concern +A.1.1.2. Capabilities - If there is no entry in the Supported By column, then there is a gap - that must be filled. + An IT asset management capability needs to be able to: - +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+ - | ID | Name | Supported By | - +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+ - | G-001 | Solution Extensibility | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | G-002 | Interoperability | XMPP | - | | | | - | G-003 | Scalability | XMPP | - | | | | - | G-004 | Versatility | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | G-005 | Information Extensibility | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | G-006 | Data Protection | Operational | - | | | | - | G-007 | Data Partitioning | Operational | - | | | | - | G-008 | Versioning and Backward Compatibility | XEP-0115/0030 | - | | | | - | G-009 | Information Discovery | XEP-0030 | - | | | | - | G-010 | Target Endpoint Discovery | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | G-011 | Push and Pull Access | XEP-0060/0312 | - | | | | - | G-012 | SACM Component Interface | N/A | - | | | | - | G-013 | Endpoint Location and Network Topology | | - | | | | - | G-014 | Target Endpoint Identity | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | G-015 | Data Access Control | | - | | | | - | ARCH-001 | Component Functions | XMPP | - | | | | - | ARCH-002 | Scalability | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | ARCH-003 | Flexibility | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | ARCH-004 | Separation of Data and Management | | - | | Functions | | - | | | | - | ARCH-005 | Topology Flexibility | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | ARCH-006 | Capability Negotiation | XEP-0115/0030 | - | | | | - | ARCH-007 | Role-Based Authorization | XMPP-Core | - | | | | - | ARCH-008 | Context-Based Authorization | | - | | | | - | ARCH-009 | Time Synchronization | Operational | - | | | | - | IM-001 | Extensible Attribute Vocabulary | N/A | - | | | | - | IM-002 | Posture Data Publication | N/A | - | | | | - | IM-003 | Data Model Negotiation | N/A | - | | | | - | IM-004 | Data Model Identification | N/A | - | | | | - | IM-005 | Data Lifetime Management | N/A | - | | | | - | IM-006 | Singularity and Modularity | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-001 | Element Association | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-002 | Data Model Structure | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-003 | Search Flexibility | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-004 | Full vs. Partial Updates | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-005 | Loose Coupling | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-006 | Data Cardinality | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-007 | Data Model Negotiation | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-008 | Data Origin | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-009 | Origination Time | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-010 | Data Generation | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-011 | Data Source | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-012 | Data Updates | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-013 | Multiple Collectors | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-014 | Attribute Extensibility | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-015 | Solicited vs. Unsolicited Updates | N/A | - | | | | - | DM-016 | Transfer Agnostic | N/A | - | | | | - | OP-001 | Time Synchronization | | - | | | | - | OP-002 | Collection Abstraction | | - | | | | - | OP-003 | Collection Composition | | - | | | | - | OP-004 | Attribute-Based Query | | - | | | | - | OP-005 | Information-Based Query with Filtering | | - | | | | - | OP-006 | Operation Scalability | | - | | | | - | OP-007 | Data Abstraction | | - | | | | - | OP-008 | Provider Restriction | | - | | | | - | T-001 | Multiple Transfer Protocol Support | Architecture | - | | | | - | T-002 | Data Integrity | Operational | - | | | | - | T-003 | Data Confidentiality | Operational | - | | | | - | T-004 | Transfer Protection | | - | | | | - | T-005 | Transfer Reliability | | - | | | | - | T-006 | Transfer-Layer Requirements | | - | | | | - | T-007 | Transfer Protocol Adoption | Architecture | - +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+ + * Identify and catalog new assets by executing Target Endpoint + Discovery Tasks -Appendix B. Example Components + * Provide information about its managed assets, including uniquely + identifying information (for that enterprise) - TODO: Consider removing. + * Handle software and/or hardware (including virtual assets) -B.1. Policy Services + * Represent cloud hybrid environments - Consider a policy server conforming to [RFC8322]. [RFC8322] - describes a RESTful way based on the ATOM Publishing Protocol - ([RFC5023]) to find specific data collections. While this represents - a specific binding (i.e. RESTful API based on [RFC5023]), there is a - more abstract way to look at ROLIE. +A.1.1.3. Workflow(s) - ROLIE provides notional workspaces and collections, and provides the - concept of information categories and links. Strictly speaking, - these are logical concepts independent of the RESTful binding ROLIE - specifies. In other words, ROLIE binds a logical interface (i.e. + TBD - GET workspace, GET collection, SET entry, and so on) to a specific - mechanism (namely an ATOM Publication Protocol extension). +A.2. Vulnerability Management - It is not inconceivable to believe there could be a different - interface mechanism, or a connector, providing these same operations - using XMPP-Grid as the transfer mechanism. + Vulnerability management is a relatively established process. To + paraphrase the [CISCONTROLS], continuous vulnerability management is + the act of continuously acquiring, assessing, and taking subsequent + action on new information in order to identify and remediate + vulnerabilities, therefore minimizing the window of opportunity for + attackers. - Even if a [RFC8322] server were external to an organization, there - would be a need for a policy source inside the organization as well, - and it may be preferred for such a policy source to be connected - directly to the ecosystem's communication infrastructure. + A vulnerability assessment (i.e. vulnerability detection) is + performed in two steps: -B.2. Software Inventory + * Endpoint information collected by the endpoint management + capabilities is examined by the vulnerability management + capabilities through Evaluation Tasks. - The SACM working group has accepted work on the Endpoint Posture - Collection Profile [I-D.ietf-sacm-ecp], which describes a collection - architecture and may be viewed as a collector coupled with a - collection-specific repository. + * If the data possessed by the endpoint management capabilities is + insufficient, a Collection Task is triggered and the necessary + data is collected from the target endpoint. - Posture Manager Endpoint - Orchestrator +---------------+ +---------------+ - +--------+ | | | | - | | | +-----------+ | | +-----------+ | - | |<---->| | Posture | | | | Posture | | - | | pub/ | | Validator | | | | Collector | | - | | sub | +-----------+ | | +-----------+ | - +--------+ | | | | | | - | | | | | | -Evaluator Repository | | | | | | -+------+ +--------+ | +-----------+ |<-------| +-----------+ | -| | | | | | Posture | | report | | Posture | | -| | | | | | Collection| | | | Collection| | -| |<-----> | |<-----| | Manager | | query | | Engine | | -| |request/| | store| +-----------+ |------->| +-----------+ | -| |respond | | | | | | -| | | | | | | | -+------+ +--------+ +---------------+ +---------------+ + Vulnerability detection relies on the examination of different + endpoint information depending on the nature of a specific + vulnerability. Common endpoint information used to detect a + vulnerability includes: - Figure 6: EPCP Collection Architecture + * A specific software version is installed on the endpoint - In Figure 6, any of the communications between the Posture Manager - and EPCP components to its left could be performed directly or - indirectly using a given message transfer mechanism. For example, - the pub/sub interface between the Orchestrator and the Posture - Manager could be using a proprietary method or using [RFC8600] or - some other pub/sub mechanism. Similarly, the store connection from - the Posture Manager to the Repository could be performed internally - to a given implementation, via a RESTful API invocation over HTTPS, - or even over a pub/sub mechanism. + * File system attributes - Our assertion is that the Evaluator, Repository, Orchestrator, and - Posture Manager all have the potential to represent SACM Components - with specific capability interfaces that can be logically specified, - then bound to one or more specific transfer mechanisms (i.e. RESTful - API, [RFC8322], [RFC8600], and so on). + * Specific state attributes -B.3. Datastream Collection + In some cases, the endpoint information needed to determine an + endpoint's vulnerability status will have been previously collected + by the endpoint management capabilities and available in a + Repository. However, in other cases, the necessary endpoint + information will not be readily available in a Repository and a + Collection Task will be triggered to perform collection from the + target endpoint. Of course, some implementations of endpoint + management capabilities may prefer to enable operators to perform + this collection even when sufficient information can be provided by + the endpoint management capabilities (e.g. there may be freshness + requirements for information). - [NIST800126], also known as SCAP 1.3, provides the technical - specifications for a "datastream collection". The specification - describes the "datastream collection" as being "composed of SCAP data - streams and SCAP source components". A "datastream" provides an - encapsulation of the SCAP source components required to, for example, - perform configuration assessment on a given endpoint. These source - components include XCCDF checklists, OVAL Definitions, and CPE - Dictionary information. A single "datastream collection" may - encapsulate multiple "datastreams", and reference any number of SCAP - components. Datastream collections were intended to provide an - envelope enabling transfer of SCAP data more easily. +A.2.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) - The [NIST800126] specification also defines the "SCAP result data - stream" as being conformant to the Asset Reporting Format - specification, defined in [NISTIR7694]. The Asset Reporting Format - provides an encapsulation of the SCAP source components, Asset - Information, and SCAP result components, such as system - characteristics and state evaluation results. + TBD - What [NIST800126]did not do is specify the interface for finding or - acquiring source datastream information, nor an interface for - publishing result information. Discovering the actual resources for - this information could be done via ROLIE, as described in the Policy - Services section above, but other repositories of SCAP data exist as - well. +A.2.1.1. Components -B.4. Network Configuration Collection + TBD - [draft-birkholz-sacm-yang-content] illustrates a SACM Component - incorporating a YANG Push client function and an XMPP-grid publisher - function. [draft-birkholz-sacm-yang-content] further states "the - output of the YANG Push client function is encapsulated in a SACM - Content Element envelope, which is again encapsulated in a SACM - statement envelope" which are published, essentially, via an XMPP- - Grid Connector for SACM Components also part of the XMPP-Grid. +A.2.1.2. Capabilities - This is a specific example of an existing collection mechanism being - adapted to the XMPP-Grid message transfer system. + TBD -Appendix C. Exploring An XMPP-based Solution +A.2.1.3. Workflow(s) - TODO: Consider removing or placing in a separate draft. + TBD - Ongoing work has been taking place around and during IETF hackathons. - The list of hackathon efforts follows: +A.3. Configuration Management - o [HACK99]: A partial implementation of a vulnerability assessment - scenario involving an [I-D.ietf-sacm-ecp] implementation, a - [RFC8322] implementation, and a proprietary evaluator to pull the - pieces together. + Configuration management involves configuration assessment, which + requires state assessment. The [CISCONTROLS] specify two high-level + controls concerning configuration management (Control 5 for non- + network devices and Control 11 for network devices). As an aside, + these controls are listed separately because many enterprises have + different organizations for managing network infrastructure and + workload endpoints. Merging the two controls results in the + following paraphrasing: Establish, implement, and actively manage + (track, report on, correct) the security configuration of systems + using a rigorous configuration management and change control process + in order to prevent attackers from exploiting vulnerable services and + settings. - o [HACK100]: Work to combine the vulnerability assessment scenario - from [HACK99] with an XMPP-based YANG push model. + Typically, an enterprise will use configuration guidance from a + reputable source, and from time to time they may tailor the guidance + from that source prior to adopting it as part of their enterprise + standard. The enterprise standard is then provided to the + appropriate configuration assessment tools and they assess endpoints + and/or appropriate endpoint information. - o [HACK101]: A fully automated configuration assessment - implementation using XMPP (specifically Publish/Subscribe - capabilities) as a communication mechanism. + A preferred flow follows: - o [HACK102]: An exploration of how we might model assessment, - collection, and evaluation abstractly, and then rely on YANG - expressions for the attributes of traditional endpoints. + * Reputable source publishes new or updated configuration guidance + * Enterprise configuration assessment capability retrieves + configuration guidance from reputable source - o [HACK103]: No SACM participation at the Bangkok hackathon. + * Optional: Configuration guidance is tailored for enterprise- + specific needs - o [HACK104]: Basic XMPP-to-Concise MAP - Created an XMPP adapter - that can accept basic posture attributes and translate them to - Concise MAP. This hackathon only proved the concept that system - characteristics information can be transported via XMPP and - translated to a (very basic) concise MAP implementation. + * Configuration assessment tool queries asset inventory repository + to retrieve a list of affected endpoints - o [HACK105]: Advanced XMPP-to-Concise MAP: Full orchestration of - collection capabilities using XMPP. Collector implementations - extend the core XMPP structure to allow OVAL collection - instructions (OVAL objects) to inform posture attribute - collection. Collected system characteristics can be provided to - the Concise MAP XMPP adapter using all 3 available XMPP - capabilities: Publish/Subscribe, Information Query (iq - request/ - response) stanzas, or direct Message stanzas. CDDL was created to - map collected posture attributes to Concise MAP structure. The - XMPP adapter translates the incoming system characteristics and - stores the information in the MAP. + * Configuration assessment tool queries configuration state + repository to evaluate compliance - Figure 7 depicts a slightly more detailed view of the architecture - (within the enterprise boundary) - one that fosters the development - of a pluggable ecosystem of cooperative tools. Existing collection - mechanisms can be brought into this architecture by specifying the - interface of the collector and creating the XMPP-Grid Connector - binding for that interface. + * If information is stale or unavailable, configuration assessment + tool triggers an ad hoc assessment - Additionally, while not directly depicted in Figure 7, this - architecture does allow point-to-point interfaces. In fact, - [RFC8600] provides brokering capabilities to facilitate such point- - to-point data transfers). Additionally, each of the SACM Components - depicted in Figure 7 may be a provider, a consumer, or both, - depending on the workflow in context. + The SACM architecture needs to support varying deployment models to + accommodate the current state of the industry, but should strongly + encourage event-driven approaches to monitoring configuration. - +--------------+ +--------------+ - | Orchestrator | | Repositories | - +------^-------+ +------^-------+ - | | - | | - +-------v--------------------------v--------+ +-----------------+ - | XMPP-Grid+ <-----> Downstream Uses | - +------------------------^------------------+ +-----------------+ - | - | - +-------v------+ - | XMPP-Grid | - | Connector(s) | - +------^-------+ - | - +------v-------+ - | Collector(s) | - +--------------+ +A.3.1. Components, Capabilities and Workflow(s) - Figure 7: XMPP-based Architecture + This section provides more detail about the components and + capabilities required when considering the aforementioned + configuration management workflow. - [RFC8600] details a number of XMPP extensions (XEPs) that MUST be - utilized to meet the needs of [RFC7632] and [RFC8248]: +A.3.1.1. Components - o Service Discovery (XEP-0030): Service Discovery allows XMPP - entities to discover information about other XMPP entities. Two - kinds of information can be discovered: the identity and - capabilities of an entity, such as supported features, and items - associated with an entity. + The following is a minimal list of SACM Components required to + implement the aforementioned configuration assessment workflow. - o Publish-Subscribe (XEP-0060): The PubSub extension enables - entities to create nodes (topics) at a PubSub service and publish - information at those nodes. Once published, an event notification - is broadcast to all entities that have subscribed to that node. + * Configuration Policy Feed: An external source of authoritative + configuration recommendations. - At this point, [RFC8600] specifies fewer features than SACM requires, - and there are other XMPP extensions (XEPs) we need to consider to - meet the needs of [RFC7632] and [RFC8248]. In Figure 7 we therefore - use "XMPP-Grid+" to indicate something more than [RFC8600] alone, - even though we are not yet fully confident in the exact set of XMPP- - related extensions we will require. The authors propose work to - extend (or modify) [RFC8600] to include additional XEPs - possibly - the following: + * Configuration Policy Repository: An internal repository of + enterprise standard configurations. - o Entity Capabilities (XEP-0115): This extension defines the methods - for broadcasting and dynamically discovering an entities' - capabilities. This information is transported via standard XMPP - presence. Example capabilities that could be discovered could - include support for posture attribute collection, support for - specific types of posture attribute collection such as EPCP, - SWIMA, OVAL, or YANG. Other capabilities are still to be - determined. + * Configuration Assessment Orchestrator: A component responsible for + orchestrating assessments. - o Ad Hoc Commands (XEP-0050): This extension allows an XMPP entity - to advertise and execute application-specific commands. Typically - the commands contain data forms (XEP-0004) in order to structure - the information exchange. This extension may be usable for simple - orchestration (i.e. "do assessment"). + * Posture Attribute Collection Subsystem: A component responsible + for collection of posture attributes from systems. - o HTTP File Upload (XEP-0363): The HTTP File Upload extension allows - for large data sets to be published to a specific path on an HTTP - server, and receive a URL from which that file can later be - downloaded again. XMPP messages and IQs are meant to be compact, - and large data sets, such as collected posture attributes, may - exceed a message size threshold. Usage of this XEP allows those - larger data sets to be persisted, thus necessitating only the - download URL to be passed via XMPP messages. + * Posture Attribute Repository: A component used for storing system + posture attribute values. - o Personal Eventing Protocol (XEP-0163): The Personal Eventing - Protocol can be thought of as a virtual PubSub service, allowing - an XMPP account to publish events only to their roster instead of - a generic PubSub topic. This XEP may be useful in the cases when - collection requests or queries are only intended for a subset of - endpoints and not an entire subscriber set. + * Configuration Assessment Evaluator: A component responsible for + evaluating system posture attribute values against expected + posture attribute values. - o File Repository and Sharing (XEP-0214): This extension defines a - method for XMPP entities to designate a set of file available for - retrieval by other users of their choosing, and is based on PubSub - Collections. + * Configuration Assessment Results Repository: A component used for + storing evaluation results. - o Easy User Onboarding (XEP-401): The goal of this extension is - simplified client registration, and may be useful when adding new - endpoints or SACM components to the ecosystem. +A.3.1.2. Capabilities - o Bidirectional-streams Over Synchronous HTTP (BOSH) (XEP-0124): - BOSH emulates the semantics of a long-lived, bidirectional TCP - connection between two entities (aka "long polling"). Consider a - SACM component that is updated dynamically, i.e. an internal - vulnerability definition repository ingesting data from a Feed/ - Repository of External Data, and a second SACM component such as - an Orchestrator. Using BOSH, the Orchestrator can effectively - continuously poll the vulnerability definition repository for - changes/updates. + Per [RFC8248], solutions MUST support capability negotiation. + Components implementing specific interfaces and operations (i.e. + interactions) will need a method of describing their capabilities to + other components participating in the ecosystem; for example, "As a + component in the ecosystem, I can assess the configuration of + Windows, MacOS, and AWS using OVAL". - o PubSub Collection Nodes (XEP-0248): Effectively an extension to - XEP-0060 (Publish-Subscribe), PubSub Collections aim to simplify - an entities' subscription to multiple related topics, and - establishes a "node graph" relating parent nodes to its - descendents. An example "node graph" could be rooted in a - "vulnerability definitions" topic, and contain descendent topics - for OS family-level vulnerability definitions (i.e. Windows), and - further for OS family version-level definitions (i.e. Windows 10 - or Windows Server 2016). +A.3.1.3. Configuration Assessment Workflow - o PubSub Since (XEP-0312): This extension enables a subscriber to - automatically receive PubSub and Personal Eventing Protocol (PEP) - notifications since its last logout time. This extension may be - useful in intermittent connection scenarios, or when entities - disconnect and reconnect to the ecosystem. + This section describes the components and interactions in a basic + configuration assessment workflow. For simplicity, error conditions + are recognized as being necessary and are not depicted. When one + component messages another component, the message is expected to be + handled appropriately unless there is an error condition, or other + notification, messaged in return. - o PubSub Chaining (XEP-0253): This extension describes the - federation of publishing nodes, enabling a publish node of one - server to be a subscriber to a publishing node of another server. + +-------------+ +----------------+ +------------------+ +------------+ + | Policy Feed | | Orchestrator | | Evaluation | | Evaluation | + +------+------+ +-------+--------+ | Sub-Architecture | | Results | + | | +---^----------+---+ | Repository | + | | | | +------^-----+ + | | | | | + 1.| 3.| 8.| 9.| 10.| + | | | | | + | | | | | + +------v-----------------v---------------+----------v-------------+-----+ + | Integration Service | + +-----+----------------------------------+----------^---------+------^--+ + | | | | | + | | | | | + 2.| 4.| 5.| 6.| 7.| + | | | | | + | | | | | + +-----v------+ +---v----------+---+ +--v------+--+ + | Policy | | Collection | | Posture | + | Repository | | Sub-Architecture | | Attribute | + +------------+ +------------------+ | Repository | + +------------+ -C.1. Example Architecture using XMPP-Grid and Endpoint Posture - Collection Protocol + Figure 5: Configuration Assessment Component Interactions - Figure 8 depicts a further detailed view of the architecture - including the Endpoint Posture Collection Protocol as the collection - subsystem, illustrating the idea of a pluggable ecosystem of - cooperative tools. + Figure 5 depicts configuration assessment components and their + interactions, which are further described below. - +--------------------+ - | Feeds/Repositories | - | of External Data | - +--------------------+ - | -********************v*********************** Boundary of Responsibility ******* -* | * -* +--------------+ | +-------------------+ +-------------+ * -* | Orchestrator | | | Posture Attr Repo | | Policy Repo | * -* +------^-------+ | +---------^---------+ +---^---------+ * -* | | | | +----------------+ * -* | | | | | Downstream Uses| * -* | | | | | +-----------+ | * -* +------v---------v-----------v---------------v--+ | |Evaluations| | * -* | XMPP-Grid <-------> +-----------+ | * -* +----------------^-------------------^----------+ | +-----------+ | * -* | | | | Analytics | | * -* | | | +-----------+ | * -* | +-----v--------+ | +-----------+ | * -* | | Results Repo | | | Reporting | | * -* | +--------------+ | +-----------+ | * -* | +----------------+ * -* +---------v-----------+ * -* | XMPP-Grid Connector | * -* +---------^-----------+ * -* | * -* +-----------------v-------------------------------------------------------+ * -* | | * -* | +--Posture Collection Manager------------------------------------------+| * -* | |+-----------------------+ +----------------+ +----------------------+ || * -* | || Communications Server | | Posture Server | | Posture Validator(s) | || * -* | |+----------^------------+ +----------------+ +----------------------+ || * -* | +-----------|----------------------------------------------------------+| * -* | | | * -* | +-----------|-------------------------Endpoint or Endpoint Proxy-------+| * -* | |+----------v------------+ +----------------+ +----------------------+ || * -* | || Communications Client | | Posture Client | | Posture Collector(s) | || * -* | |+-----------------------+ +----------------+ +----------------------+ || * -* | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+| * -* +-----------------Endpoint Posture Collection Profile---------------------+ * -* * -******************************************************************************* + 1. A policy feed provides a configuration assessment policy payload + to the Integration Service. - Figure 8: XMPP-based Architecture including EPCP + 2. The Policy Repository, a consumer of Policy Feed information, + receives and persists the Policy Feed's payload. -Authors' Addresses + 3. Orchestration component(s), either manually invoked, scheduled, + or event-based, publish a payload to begin the configuration + assessment process. + + 4. If necessary, Collection Sub-Architecture components may be + invoked to collect neeeded posture attribute information. + + 5. If necessary, the Collection Sub-Architecture will provide + collected posture attributes to the Integration Service for + persistence to the Posture Attribute Repository. + + 6. The Posture Attribute Repository will consume a payload querying + for relevant posture attribute information. + + 7. The Posture Attribute Repository will provide the requested + information to the Integration Service, allowing further + orchestration payloads requesting the Evaluation Sub- + Architecture perform evaluation tasks. + + 8. The Evaluation Sub-Architecture consumes the evaluation payload + and performs component-specific state comparison operations to + produce evaluation results. + + 9. A payload containing evaluation results are provided by the + Evaluation Sub-Architecture to the Integration Service + + 10. Evaluation results are consumed by/persisted to the Evaluation + Results Repository + + In the above flow, the payload information is expected to convey the + context required by the receiving component for the action being + taken under different circumstances. For example, a directed message + sent from an Orchestrator to a Collection sub-architecture might be + telling that Collector to watch a specific posture attribute and + report only specific detected changes to the Posture Attribute + Repository, or it might be telling the Collector to gather that + posture attribute immediately. Such details are expected to be + handled as part of that payload, not as part of the architecture + described herein. +Authors' Addresses Adam W. Montville Center for Internet Security 31 Tech Valley Drive East Greenbush, NY 12061 - USA + United States of America Email: adam.montville.sdo@gmail.com Bill Munyan Center for Internet Security 31 Tech Valley Drive East Greenbush, NY 12061 - USA + United States of America Email: bill.munyan.ietf@gmail.com