| 1.0 |
Identification
Data |
| 1.1 |
BSP
Number |
|
00008 |
| 1.2
|
BSP
Title/Name |
|
Incident
Handling at BMDO |
| 1.3 |
Version Number |
|
1 |
| 1.4 |
Adoption Date |
|
5/19/2000 |
| 1.5 |
Approving
Authority |
|
Security
Practices Subgroup |
| 1.6 |
Responsible
Organization |
|
Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization, US Department of Defense |
| 1.7 |
Level of BSP |
|
Candidate |
| 1.8 |
Security Processes
or other Framework(s) Supported |
|
Monitor
System Activity (SPF 2.6.3.4.3) and Monitor the Performance and
Functional Effectiveness of Security Safeguards (SSE CMM BP.08.04) |
| 1.9 |
Reserved |
| 1.10 |
Points
of Contact |
|
Government
BSP Owner:
Yes, post this contact information with the publicly accessible
BSP.
Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization
1725 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1200
Arlington, VA 22209
Telephone No - 703-604-0098
Fax No. - 703-604-4229
E-mail - dennis.poindexter@bmdo.osd.mil
Vendor Partner:
Yes, post this contact information with the publicly accessible
BSP.
- Norm St. Laurent
Program Manager
Computer
Sciences Corporation
1725 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1200
Arlington, VA 22202-4102
Telephone: 703-604-0135
Fax: 703-604-0689
E-mail: norman.stlaurent-contractor@bmdo.osd.mil
|
|
|
| 2.0 |
What
This BSP Does |
| 2.1 |
BSP's
Purpose |
|
The
purpose of this BSP is to address how to detect, handle, and recover
from security incidents involving computer hosts or networks.
The need for Incident
Handling
It has been shown that
a skilled intruder can extract specific data from an archive,
manipulate it to solve a problem, and commit the changes back
in to the archive, all from the local or remote terminal undetected.
It is this ability to manipulate data that makes proving a computer
attack so difficult.
To combat computer attacks
clear and effective incident handling techniques and methods must
be employed. The must critical part of this methodology is documentation
of all the circumstances surrounding the incident. With the details
documented if the intrusion to see the light of day in a courtroom,
its reasonable that the defense will
do everything in its power to cast the shadow of uncertainty and
unreliability over the prosecution. This shows why a clear and
effective Incident Handling methodology must be in-place when
law-enforcement is going the brought in. |
| 2.2 |
Requirements
for this BSP |
|
Department
of Defense (DoD) Chief Information Officer (CIO) Guidance and Policy
Memorandum No. 6-8510 - Department of Defense Information
Assurance
E3.6.7. Incident Reporting
and Response: In addition to protective measures designed into
information systems and architectures, sites should have a structured
ability to audit, detect, isolate, react and recover to intrusions,
service disruptions, and incidents that threaten the security
of DoD operations.
E3.6.7.1. Incident Reporting:
All DoD organizations shall promptly report incidents via their
appropriate chain of command. Types of incidents that will be
reported include:
E3.6.7.1.1. Intrusion:
Unauthorized access to an information system.
E3.6.7.1.2. Denial of Service
Attacks: Actions which prevent any part of an automated information
system from functioning in accordance with its intended purpose,
to include any action which causes the unauthorized destruction,
modification, or delay of service.
E3.6.7.1.3 Malicious Logic:
Hardware, software, or firmware that is intentionally included
in an information system for an unauthorized purpose, such as
a virus or Trojan horse.
E3.6.7.1.4 Probe: In information
operations, any attempt to gather information about an automated
information system or its users online. |
| 2.3 |
Success
Stories |
|
Having
the proper incident handling procedures was instrumental in the
stopping of an intruder into one of the governments major
testing facilities. Additionally, this methodology was used to successfully
prosecute the intruder. This was due to proper documenting of the
incident, the proper handling of the computer media, and the documentation. |
|
|
| 3.0 |
What
This BSP Is |
| 3.1 |
Description
of BSP |
|
There
are at least six identifiable stages of response to an INFOSEC incident.
They include preparation, identification, containment, eradication,
recovery and follow-up. Knowing about each stage facilitates responding
more methodically (and thus efficiently), and also helps users understand
the process of responding better so that they can deal with unexpected
aspects of incidents they face. The six identifiable stages are
detailed below. Refer to Figure 1, which outlines the procedures
for responding to computer incidents. |
| 3.1.1 |
Inputs
The resources needed to successful perform our incident handling
function are as follows:
- A incident handling
team (2-4 persons)
- System Administrator
workstation to secure logs
- Access to the network
and host log files
One of the major issues
that must be determined by an organization before an incident
handling function can be activated is the definition of incident.
For the purposes of this BSP the following definition of an incident
and event is as follows:
The term "incident" refers to an adverse event in an
information system and/or network or the threat of the occurrence
of such an event. Examples of incidents include unauthorized use
of another user's account, unauthorized use of system privileges,
and execution of malicious code that destroys data. Other adverse
events include floods, fires, electrical outages, and excessive
heat that cause system crashes. Adverse events such as natural
disasters and power-related disruptions are not, however, within
the scope of this guidebook. For the purpose of this guidebook,
therefore, the term "incident" refers to an adverse
event that is related to INFOSEC.
It must be clearly understood that this definition relies on the
existence of a security policy that varies from organization to
organization. Below are characterizations of the types of activities
that are generally recognized as violating of a typical security
policy. These activities include but are not limited to:
- A system alarm or
similar indication from an intrusion detection tool
- Suspicious entries
in system or network accounting (e.g., a UNIX user obtains
root access without going through the normal sequence necessary
to obtain this access)
- Accounting discrepancies
(e.g., someone notices an 18-minute gap in the accounting
log in which no entries whatsoever appear)
- Unsuccessful logon
attempts
- Unexplained, new user
accounts
- Unexplained, new files
or unfamiliar file names
- Unexplained modifications
to file lengths or/or dates, especially in system executable
files
- Unexplained attempts
to write to system files or changes in system files
- Unexplained modification
or deletion of data
- Denial of service
or inability of one or more users to login to an account
- System crashes
- Poor system performance
- Unauthorized operation
of a program or sniffer device to capture network traffic
- "Door knob rattling"
(e.g., use of attack scanners, remote requests for information
about systems and/or users, or social engineering attempts)
- Unusual time of usage
(remember, more security incidents occur during non-working
hours than any other time)
- An indicated last
time of usage of a user account that does not correspond to
the actual last time of usage for that user
- Unusual usage patterns
(e.g., programs are being compiled in the account of a user
who does not know how to program)
Although no single one
of these typical symptoms of security incidents is generally by
itself conclusive, observing one or more of these symptoms should
prompt you to investigate events more closely. You should in this
vein work with other personnel at your organization that possess
the appropriate technical and computer security knowledge to determine
exactly what has occurred. Collective judgment is typically better
than a single person's judgment when it comes to identifying incidents.
Reporting Procedures
If a computer security
incident is detected (excluding incidents involving classified
information), it should immediately be reported to the appropriate
NSO/ISSO. Each user should know how to contact the ISSO responsible
for their information systems.
If the ISSO cannot be contacted,
the incident should be reported to Network Security Officer (NSO)
at 604-4113. Again, all users need to know the identity of their
ISSO and NSO are and how to contact them.
If users cannot contact
either their ISSO or NSO, they should call C directly to report
the incident. The timing of reporting incidents depends upon whether
or not the user knows how to resolve the security incident, as
shown in Figure 3.
The ISSO has the responsibility
to report incident information upwards to the CISSM and CIO in
a timely fashion. Figure 4 shows a standard reporting chain. In
addition, the ISSO should be prepared to advise the ISSM on immediate
response decisions in the event of a serious breach of security,
as in the case of an attacker gaining access via the Internet.
If there is evidence of criminal activity, it is the CISSMs
responsibility, in concert with the General Councel, to notify
the Office Special Investigations. It may be advisable for the
CISSM or Director DSC to contact OSI directly after advising DISA.
CAUTION: Do not disseminate
information about incidents to any person, agency, or organization
that is not in the above reporting chain. |
| 3.1.2 |
Process
The process of incident
handling involves six stages:
- Preparation:
One of the most critical facets of responding to incidents
is being prepared to respond before an incident occurs.
Without adequate preparation, it is extremely likely that
response efforts to an incident will be disorganized and that
there will be considerable confusion among personnel. Preparation
accordingly limits the potential for damage by ensuring response
actions are known and coordinated. (See BMDO Incident Handling
Procedures)
- Identification:
Identification involves determining whether or not an incident
has occurred, and if one has, what the nature of the incident
is. Identification normally begins after someone has noticed
an anomaly in a system or network. Determining whether or
not that anomaly is symptomatic of an incident is often difficult
because apparent evidences of security incidents often turn
out to indicate something less---errors in system configuration
or an application program, hardware failures, and, most commonly,
user errors. Typical indications of security incidents include
any or all of the following: (See BMDO Incident Handling Procedures)
- Containment:
Containment, the third stage of responding to incidents,
involves limiting the scope and magnitude of an incident.
Because so many incidents observed currently involve using
malicious code, incidents can spread rapidly, causing massive
destruction and compromise of information. It is for example
not uncommon to find that every workstation connected to
a LAN is infected when there is a virus outbreak. The Internet
Worm of 1988 successfully attacked over 6,000 computers
in the U.S. in only one day. As soon as it is recognized
that an incident has occurred or is occurring, immediately
begin working on containing the incident.
- Eradication:
Eradicating an incident entails removing the cause of the
incident. In the case of a virus incident, eradication simply
requires removing the virus from all systems and media (e.g.,
floppy disks), usually by using virus eradication software.
In the case of a network intrusion, eradication is more
ambiguous. Network intrusions are best eradicated by bringing
the perpetrators into legal custody and convicting them
in a court of law. From a statistical viewpoint, however,
the likelihood of obtaining a conviction is very small.
The network intruder(s) may instead simply terminate efforts
to gain unauthorized access or may temporarily terminate
an attack, then attack the same system again several months
later.
- Recovery:
Recovery means restoring a system to its normal mission
status. In the case of relatively simple incidents (such
as attempted but unsuccessful intrusions into systems),
recovery requires only assurance that the incident did not
in any way affect system software or data stored on the
system. In the case of complex incidents, such as malicious
code planted by insiders, recovery may require a complete
restore operation from backups. In this case it is essential
to first determine the integrity of the backup itself. Once
the restore has been performed, it is also essential to
verify that the restore operation was successful and that
the system is back to its normal condition.
- Follow-up:
Some incidents require considerable time and effort. It is
little wonder, then, that once the incident appears to be
terminated there is little interest in devoting any more effort
to the incident. Performing follow-up activity is, however,
one of the most critical activities in responding to incidents.
Following up afterwards helps organizations improve their
incident handling procedures as well as continue to support
any efforts to prosecute those who have broken the law.
Incident priorities
Due to limited resources
and the growing number of incident reports, we may not be
able to respond to every incident reported to us. We must
prioritize our responses to have the greatest impact on the
Internet community. The following type of reports receives
the highest priority and are considered emergencies:
- Possible life-threatening
activity
- Attacks on the Internet
infrastructure, such as:
- Root name servers
- Domain name servers
- Major archive sites
- Network access points
(NAPs)
- Widespread automated
attacks against Internet sites
- Network sniffers
- Router attacks
- Root compromises
|
| 3.1.3 |
Outputs
The outputs from the incident
handling function are as follows:
- Reports
- Training scenarios
- Document that can be
passed to law-enforcement, as needed
|
| 3.2 |
Relationship
to Other BSPs |
|
This
BSP is related to the Defense Information Systems Agencys
(DISA) Information Assurance Vulnerability Alert (IAVA) and as additional
BSPs are developed, additional relationships will be added. |
|
|
| 4.0
|
How To
Use This BSP |
| 4.1 |
Implementation
Guidance |
|
The
implement an incident handling program the following is needed:
- The SHADOW implementation
material (hardware, software, and instructions)
- Trained personnel to
include a systems administrator
- Managements support
|
| 4.2 |
Implementation
Resource Estimates |
|
Personnel:
Operating System Administrator or knowledge equivalent. Four people
working full-time monitoring the intrusion detection system. |
| 4.3 |
Performance
Goals and Indicators (Metrics) |
|
General
Goal: The goal of information assurance program is to prevent
or reduce the likelihood of computer system intrusions. But because
no prevention measures are perfect, there also needs to be a strategy
for handling incidents that includes preparation, detection, and
response. |
| 4.4 |
Tools
|
|
SHADOW intrusion detection
system. Hardware and software needed for SHADOW installation
is as follows:
- Pentium II 350 MHZ RedHat
Linux 5.1
- 128MB RAM RedHat Linux
Patches
- 9GB SCSI Hard Drive
CID Code
- STB Velocity 128bit
8MB Video Card Libpcap
- Generic Multi-Sync Monitor
Tcpdump
- Tcpslice
- Secure Shell
|
| 4.5 |
Training
Materials |
|
Training
materials include the following: |
|
|
| Appendices |
| A |
Executive
Overview and Briefing |
|
[Provide
materials, briefings, etc. used to gain management buy-in.] |
| B |
Reference
List |
|
[List
books, articles, or URLs to enhance understanding this BSP.] |
| C |
Procurement
Information |
|
[Identify
contract vehicles and SOWs if services or materials were procured.] |
| D |
Evaluation
Information |
| E |
Recommended
Changes |
| F |
Glossary
|
|
[Define
terms helpful to understanding this BSP.] |
|