лаба_10 / лаб_10_14_4

I.Executive Summary

Scope

This risk analysis was limited to SpecOrg Data Center.

•[[[Minicomputers and microcomputers were included in the analysis only to the extent they posed a risk to SpecOrg.]]]

Risk Analysis Steps

•Questionnaire diskettes or network sub-directories were developed containing

[[[532]]] questions covering all areas of SpecOrg AIS security;

•[[[One hundred eleven]]] SpecOrg employees and users of the SpecOrg answered and returned the responses to the questions;

• The RiskWatch software determined SpecOrg vulnerabilities based on information on diskettes;

•Identified vulnerabilities were validated by SpecOrg management;

•A risk analysis report was prepared.

Key Risk Analysis Report Findings

•Hardware, personnel (government and contractor), and intangibles (reputation) are the major asset categories at SpecOrg.

•Important assets, such as system software, applications, and databases can be replaced relatively inexpensively because they are backed-up.

]]]

Vulnerabilities

[[[

•The risk analysis identified 170 vulnerabilities covering twenty -two vulnerability areas.

•SpecOrg is most vulnerable in five areas: (see Figure 1)

1.The labeling and control of output listings.

2.The security of remote terminals.

3.The level and extent of security training.

4.The level of staffing and separation of duties at the DATA CENTER.

5.The level of training for the identification of Privacy Act records and insufficient labeling of Privacy Act-related materials.

A physical survey of DATA CENTER revealed four fire detection and control vulnerabilities not identified by the questionnaire diskettes (see Chapter VII).

]]]

Threats

[[[

The four most significant threats to SpecOrg on an annual basis are: (see Figure 2)

1.Data Destruction

2.Misuse of the Computer

3.Theft of Assets

4.Data integrity loss.

]]]

Safeguards

[[[

The safeguards with the greatest return on investment, which are also among the least costly safeguards, are: (see Figure 3)

1.Property Management

2.Organizational Structure

3.Visitor Control

4.Security Plan

5.Application Control

]]]

1

Vulnerability Report

VULNERABILITY AREA REPORT

OVERALL COMPLIANCE:

Compliance (1.4%)

Non-Compliance (98.6%)

VULNERABILITY AREA: Access Control

Compliance (5.3%)

Non-Compliance (94.7%)

VULNERABILITY AREA: Accountability

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

VULNERABILITY AREA: Administration

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

VULNERABILITY AREA: Data Integrity

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

VULNERABILITY AREA: Disclosure

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

VULNERABILITY AREA: Documentation

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

VULNERABILITY AREA: Evaluation

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

There is 100% non-compliance in this area of vulnerability.

Assets are identified, by category, by commonly used name; associated with each individual asset there is other related information. Depending on the asset category, other data is also provided for each asset. This will include the level of sensitivity for data, the quantity of a duplicated hardware item, etc.. When the information is available, an indication is included about the basic attribute(s) of each assets that states whether the asset is

critical (in the sense that the mission of the enterprise depends on the correct and timely functioning of this asset), or

financial (with respect to the need to control modification), or sensitive (with respect to disclosure), or supportive (non of the above).

The definition of each asset category is also provided

The monetary values assigned represent the estimated replacement or purchase cost of the asset, not its current value. For example, the recruitment cost, the training cost, and the staff salaries and benefits were used to determine personnel costs. For leased equipment, replacement cost of obtaining a new lease is used since the organization is responsible for obtaining a replacement reso urce.

The value of sensitive resources could be greater than the replacement value to account for the loss of future opportunity and the extent of exposure that agencies have resulting from the disclosure of data subject to the Privacy Act; awards of $1,000 to $5,000 per individual record have been assessed by the courts based on the sanctions included in the Privacy Act of 1974.

The sections below deal, in turn, with each of the asset categories included in the analysis.

2.2.1Accounts Payable

Figure 7.1

This information about replacement costs is presented below as a barchart.

1,337 RTG

Dollars

Figure 8.1

2.2.2Accounts Receivable

Figure 7.2

This information about replacement costs is presented below as a barchart.