draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-05.txt   draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-06.txt 
Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring WG D. Waltermire Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring WG D. Waltermire
Internet-Draft NIST Internet-Draft NIST
Intended status: Informational A. Montville Intended status: Informational A. Montville
Expires: February 16, 2015 Tripwire Expires: August 15, 2015 CIS
D. Harrington D. Harrington
Effective Software Effective Software
N. Cam-Winget N. Cam-Winget
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
August 15, 2014 J. Lu
Oracle Corporation
B. Ford
Lancope
M. Kaeo
Double Shot Security
February 11, 2015
Terminology for Security Assessment Terminology for Security Assessment
draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-05 draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-06
Abstract Abstract
This memo documents terminology used in the documents produced by This memo documents terminology used in the documents produced by
SACM (Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring). SACM (Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring).
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 16, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 15, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Pre-defined Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2. New Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. ietf-sacm-terminology-01- to -02- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.1. ietf-sacm-terminology-01- to -02- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. ietf-sacm-terminology-01- to -02- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.2. ietf-sacm-terminology-01- to -02- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.3. ietf-sacm-terminology-02- to -03- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.3. ietf-sacm-terminology-02- to -03- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.4. ietf-sacm-terminology-03 to -04- . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.5. ietf-sacm-terminology-04 to -05- . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.6. ietf-sacm-terminology-05 to -06- . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Our goal with this document is to improve our agreement on the Our goal with this document is to improve our agreement on the
terminology used in documents produced by the IETF Working Group for terminology used in documents produced by the IETF Working Group for
Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring. Agreeing on Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring. Agreeing on
terminology should help reach consensus on which problems we're terminology should help reach consensus on which problems we're
trying to solve, and propose solutions and decide which ones to use. trying to solve, and propose solutions and decide which ones to use.
This document is expected to be a temporary work product, and will
probably be incorporated into the architecture or other document.
2. Terms and Definitions 2. Terms and Definitions
This section describes terms that have been defined by other RFC's This section describes terms that have been defined by other RFC's
and defines new ones. The predefined terms will reference the RFC and defines new ones. The predefined terms will reference the RFC
and where appropriate will be annotated with the specific context by and where appropriate will be annotated with the specific context by
which the term is used in SACM. which the term is used in SACM.
2.1. Pre-defined Terms
Assessment Assessment
Defined in [RFC5209] as "the process of collecting posture for a Defined in [RFC5209] as "the process of collecting posture for a
set of capabilities on the endpoint (e.g., host-based firewall) set of capabilities on the endpoint (e.g., host-based firewall)
such that the appropriate validators may evaluate the posture such that the appropriate validators may evaluate the posture
against compliance policy." against compliance policy."
Within this document the use of the term is expanded to support Within this document the use of the term is expanded to support
other uses of collected posture (e.g. reporting, network other uses of collected posture (e.g. reporting, network
enforcement, vulnerability detection, license management). The enforcement, vulnerability detection, license management). The
phrase "set of capabilities on the endpoint" includes: hardware phrase "set of capabilities on the endpoint" includes: hardware
and software installed on the endpoint." and software installed on the endpoint."
Asset Asset
Defined in [RFC4949] as "a system resource that is (a) required to Defined in [RFC4949] as "a system resource that is (a) required to
be protected by an information system's security policy, (b) be protected by an information system's security policy, (b)
intended to be protected by a countermeasure, or (c) required for intended to be protected by a countermeasure, or (c) required for
a system's mission. a system's mission.
Attribute
Defined in [RFC5209] as "data element including any requisite
meta-data describing an observed, expected, or the operational
status of an endpoint feature (e.g., anti-virus software is
currently in use)."
Endpoint
Defined in [RFC5209] as "any computing device that can be
connected to a network. Such devices normally are associated with
a particular link layer address before joining the network and
potentially an IP address once on the network. This includes:
laptops, desktops, servers, cell phones, or any device that may
have an IP address."
To further clarify the [RFC5209] definition, an endpoint is any
physical or virtual device that may have a network address. Note
that, network infrastructure devices (e.g. switches, routers,
firewalls), which fit the definition, are also considered to be
endpoints within this document.
Based on the previous definition of an asset, an endpoint is a
type of asset.
Information Model
An information model is an abstract representation of data, their
properties, relationships between data and the operations that can
be performed on the data. While there is some overlap with a data
model, [RFC3444] distinguished an information model as being
protocol and implementation neutral whereas a data model would
provide such details.
Posture
Defined in [RFC5209] as "configuration and/or status of hardware
or software on an endpoint as it pertains to an organization's
security policy."
This term is used within the scope of this document to represent
the state information that is collected from an endpoint (e.g.
software/hardware inventory, configuration settings). The state
information may constitute one to many Posture Attributes.
Posture Attributes
Defined in [RFC5209] as "attributes describing the configuration
or status (posture) of a feature of the endpoint. A Posture
Attribute represents a single property of an observed state. For
example, a Posture Attribute might describe the version of the
operating system installed on the system."
Within this document this term represents a specific assertion
about endpoint state (e.g. configuration setting, installed
software, hardware). The phrase "features of the endpoint" refers
to installed software or software components.
System Resource
Defined in [RFC4949] as "data contained in an information system;
or a service provided by a system; or a system capacity, such as
processing power or communication bandwidth; or an item of system
equipment (i.e., hardware, firmware, software, or documentation);
or a facility that houses system operations and equipment.
2.2. New Terms and Definitions
This section defines terms that are not explictly defined in the
IETF.
Asset characterization Asset characterization
Asset characterization is the process of defining attributes that Asset characterization is the process of defining attributes that
describe properties of an identified asset. describe properties of an identified asset.
Asset Management Asset Management
The process by which assets are provisioned, updated, maintained The process by which assets are provisioned, updated, maintained
and deprecated. and deprecated.
skipping to change at page 5, line 4 skipping to change at page 3, line 28
Asset characterization is the process of defining attributes that Asset characterization is the process of defining attributes that
describe properties of an identified asset. describe properties of an identified asset.
Asset Management Asset Management
The process by which assets are provisioned, updated, maintained The process by which assets are provisioned, updated, maintained
and deprecated. and deprecated.
Asset Targeting Asset Targeting
Asset targeting is the use of asset identification and Asset targeting is the use of asset identification and
categorization information to drive human-directed, automated categorization information to drive human-directed, automated
decision making for data collection and analysis in support of decision making for data collection and analysis in support of
endpoint posture assessment. endpoint posture assessment.
Attribute
Defined in [RFC5209] as "data element including any requisite
meta-data describing an observed, expected, or the operational
status of an endpoint feature (e.g., anti-virus software is
currently in use)."
Broker Broker
An entity providing and/or connecting services on the behalf of An entity providing and/or connecting services on the behalf of
other architectural components. Within the SACM Architecture, for other architectural components. Within the SACM Architecture, for
example, a broker may provide authorization services and find, example, a broker may provide authorization services and find,
upon request, entities providing requested services. upon request, entities providing requested services.
Building Block Building Block
For SACM, a building block is a unit of functionality that may For SACM, a building block is a unit of functionality that may
apply to more than one use case and can be supported by different apply to more than one use case and can be supported by different
components of an architectural model. components of an architectural model.
Capability Capability
The extent of an architectural component's ability. For example, The extent of an architectural component's ability. For example,
a Posture Information Provider may only provide endpoint a Posture Information Provider may only provide endpoint
management data, and then only a subset of that data. management data, and then only a subset of that data.
skipping to change at page 5, line 42 skipping to change at page 4, line 28
Collection Task Collection Task
The process by which posture attributes or values are collected. The process by which posture attributes or values are collected.
Consumer Consumer
An architectural component receiving information from another An architectural component receiving information from another
architectrual component. architectrual component.
Endpoint
Defined in [RFC5209] as "any computing device that can be
connected to a network. Such devices normally are associated with
a particular link layer address before joining the network and
potentially an IP address once on the network. This includes:
laptops, desktops, servers, cell phones, or any device that may
have an IP address."
To further clarify the [RFC5209] definition, an endpoint is any
physical or virtual device that may have a network address. Note
that, network infrastructure devices (e.g. switches, routers,
firewalls), which fit the definition, are also considered to be
endpoints within this document.
Based on the previous definition of an asset, an endpoint is a
type of asset.
Evaluation Task Evaluation Task
The process by which posture attributes are evaluated. The process by which posture attributes are evaluated.
Endpoint Target Endpoint Target
The endpoint of interest. The endpoint of interest.
Endpoint Discovery Endpoint Discovery
The process by which an endpoint can be identified. The process by which an endpoint can be identified.
Evaluation Result Evaluation Result
The resulting value from having evaluated a set of posture The resulting value from having evaluated a set of posture
attributes. attributes.
Expected Endpoint State Expected Endpoint State
The required state of an endpoint that is to be compared against. The required state of an endpoint that is to be compared against.
skipping to change at page 6, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 26
The required state of an endpoint that is to be compared against. The required state of an endpoint that is to be compared against.
Function Function
A behavioral aspect of a particular architectural component, which A behavioral aspect of a particular architectural component, which
belies that component's purpose. For example, the Management belies that component's purpose. For example, the Management
Plane can provide a brokering function to other SACM architectrual Plane can provide a brokering function to other SACM architectrual
components. components.
Information Model
An information model is an abstract representation of data, their
properties, relationships between data and the operations that can
be performed on the data. While there is some overlap with a data
model, [RFC3444] distinguished an information model as being
protocol and implementation neutral whereas a data model would
provide such details.
Management Plane (TBD per list; was "Control Plane") Management Plane (TBD per list; was "Control Plane")
Architectural component providing common functions to all SACM Architectural component providing common functions to all SACM
participants, including authentication, authorization, participants, including authentication, authorization,
capabilities mappings, and the like. capabilities mappings, and the like.
Posture
Defined in [RFC5209] as "configuration and/or status of hardware
or software on an endpoint as it pertains to an organization's
security policy."
This term is used within the scope of this document to represent
the state information that is collected from an endpoint (e.g.
software/hardware inventory, configuration settings). The state
information may constitute one to many Posture Attributes.
Posture Attributes
Defined in [RFC5209] as "attributes describing the configuration
or status (posture) of a feature of the endpoint. A Posture
Attribute represents a single property of an observed state. For
example, a Posture Attribute might describe the version of the
operating system installed on the system."
Within this document this term represents a specific assertion
about endpoint state (e.g. configuration setting, installed
software, hardware). The phrase "features of the endpoint" refers
to installed software or software components.
Provider Provider
An architectural component providing information to another An architectural component providing information to another
architectrual component. architectrual component.
Proxy Proxy
An architectural component providing functions, information, or An architectural component providing functions, information, or
services on behalf of another component, which is not directly services on behalf of another component, which is not directly
participating in the architecture. participating in the architecture.
skipping to change at page 7, line 14 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
The process of which security alerts can be automated through the The process of which security alerts can be automated through the
use of different tools to monitor, evaluate and analyze endpoint use of different tools to monitor, evaluate and analyze endpoint
and network traffic for the purposes of detecting and network traffic for the purposes of detecting
misconfigurations, misbehaviors or threats. misconfigurations, misbehaviors or threats.
Supplicant Supplicant
The entity seeking to be authenticated by the Management Plane for The entity seeking to be authenticated by the Management Plane for
the purpose of participating in the SACM architecture. the purpose of participating in the SACM architecture.
2.3. Requirements Language System Resource
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", Defined in [RFC4949] as "data contained in an information system;
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this or a service provided by a system; or a system capacity, such as
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. processing power or communication bandwidth; or an item of system
equipment (i.e., hardware, firmware, software, or documentation);
or a facility that houses system operations and equipment.
3. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA. This memo includes no request to IANA.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This memo documents terminology for security automation. While it is This memo documents terminology for security automation. While it is
about security, it does not affect security. about security, it does not affect security.
skipping to change at page 8, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 45
Added Vulnerability, Vulnerability Management, xposure, Added Vulnerability, Vulnerability Management, xposure,
Misconfiguration, and Software flaw. Misconfiguration, and Software flaw.
6.3. ietf-sacm-terminology-02- to -03- 6.3. ietf-sacm-terminology-02- to -03-
Removed Section 2.1. Cleaned up some editing nits; broke terms into Removed Section 2.1. Cleaned up some editing nits; broke terms into
2 sections (predefined and newly defined terms). Added some of the 2 sections (predefined and newly defined terms). Added some of the
relevant terms per the proposed list discussed in the IETF 89 relevant terms per the proposed list discussed in the IETF 89
meeting. meeting.
7. References 6.4. ietf-sacm-terminology-03 to -04-
7.1. Normative References TODO
[I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases] 6.5. ietf-sacm-terminology-04 to -05-
Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security
Posture Assessment - Enterprise Use Cases", draft-ietf-
sacm-use-cases-06 (work in progress), March 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate TODO
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
7.2. Informative References 6.6. ietf-sacm-terminology-05 to -06-
Updated author information.
Combined "Pre-defined Terms" with "New Terms and Definitions".
Removed "Requirements language".
Removed unused reference to use case draft; resulted in removal of
normative references.
Removed introductory text from Section 1 indicating that this
document is intended to be temporary.
Added placeholders for missing change log entries.
7. Informative References
[RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between [RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between
Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444, January Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444, January
2003. 2003.
[RFC4949] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2", RFC [RFC4949] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2", RFC
4949, August 2007. 4949, August 2007.
[RFC5209] Sangster, P., Khosravi, H., Mani, M., Narayan, K., and J. [RFC5209] Sangster, P., Khosravi, H., Mani, M., Narayan, K., and J.
Tardo, "Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA): Overview and Tardo, "Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA): Overview and
skipping to change at page 8, line 39 skipping to change at page 9, line 4
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
David Waltermire David Waltermire
National Institute of Standards and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Drive 100 Bureau Drive
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877 Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877
USA USA
Email: david.waltermire@nist.gov Email: david.waltermire@nist.gov
Adam W. Montville Adam W. Montville
Tripwire Center for Internet Security
101 SW Main Street, 15th floor 31 Tech Valley Drive
Portland, Oregon 97204 East Greenbush, New York 12061
USA USA
Email: adam.w.montville@gmail.com Email: adam.w.montville@gmail.com
David Harrington David Harrington
Effective Software Effective Software
50 Harding Rd 50 Harding Rd
Portsmouth, NH 03801 Portsmouth, NH 03801
USA USA
Email: ietfdbh@comcast.net Email: ietfdbh@comcast.net
Nancy Cam-Winget Nancy Cam-Winget
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
skipping to change at line 391 skipping to change at page 9, line 27
Email: ietfdbh@comcast.net Email: ietfdbh@comcast.net
Nancy Cam-Winget Nancy Cam-Winget
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
3550 Cisco Way 3550 Cisco Way
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
US US
Email: ncamwing@cisco.com Email: ncamwing@cisco.com
Jarrett Lu
Oracle Corporation
4180 Network Circle
Santa Clara, California 95054
Email: jarrett.lu@oracle.com
Brian Ford
Lancope
3650 Brookside Parkway, Suite 500
Alpharetta, Georgia 30022
Email: bford@lancope.com
Merike Kaeo
Double Shot Security
3518 Fremont Avenue North, Suite 363
Seattle, Washington 98103
Email: merike@doubleshotsecurity.com
 End of changes. 29 change blocks. 
105 lines changed or deleted 106 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/