Cybersecurity Strategy – Risk Management, Cyber-Warfare And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cybersecurity strategy Risk management, cyber-warfare and incentives Gergely Biczók (some slides from Levente Buttyán and Márk Félegyházi) BME CrySyS Lab [email protected] ISSES SC meeting, Nis, Serbia October 29th, 2018 Cyber security strategy § Corporate cyber security strategy: a plan of actions designed to improve the security and resilience of corporate (cyber) infrastructures and services (def. inspired by ENISA) § This sounds very much like... ISSES 2018 | 2 Risk management § Information security = risk management § Risk = Likelihood x Impact (of attacks) § factors affecting likelihood: – threats – entities who can do you harm (a.k.a. attackers) » skill level, motive, opportunity, resources, ... – vulnerabilities – weaknesses that can be exploited » ease of discovery, ease of exploitation, awareness, ... – countermeasures – precautions you take » technical and non-technical § impact: – potential loss you may experience » direct loss (decreased revenue, cost of recovery) » indirect loss (losing reputation, fines for non-complience) § likelihood and impact are difficult to quantify and subject to change! ISSES 2018 | 3 Outline § Risk management § US Cyber Strategy § Cyber-warfare § Research on cyber-warfare modeling ISSES 2018 | 4 Risk management: goal § vulnerabilities threats incidents losses Goal: Minimize the costs associated with risks (threats) ISSES 2018 | 6 Risk management: lifecycle source: Systems Engineering Fundamentals. Defense Acquisition University Press, 2001 ISSES 2018 | 7 Risk management: standards § ISO/IEC 27000 series - Information security management systems – 27005:2011 - Information security risk management – generally accepted guidelines of implementing information management systems and also serves to perform audits – open source support: Enterprise Security Information System (ESIS) § NIST SP 800-30 § ISACA Risk IT § Open Source Security Testing Methodology Manual (OSSTMM) § ISO/IEC 15408 - Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation (abbreviated as Common Criteria or CC) ISSES 2018 | 8 Risk Management: phases § risk governance (RG) § risk assessment (RA) – risk mgmt context – risk analysis – define criteria • identification » profile definition • estimation » requirements – risk evaluation – resources § risk monitoring and review § risk treatment (RT) (RM) – prevent – monitoring – mitigate – communication – awareness – transfer – accept ISSES 2018 | 9 RG Risk management planning and governance § develop an enterprise risk management strategy § establish and maintain a risk management plan – risk appetite – risk tolerance § ensure that IT risk management is embedded in the system – integrate with business processes § provide resources for risk management § establish responsibilities and accountability generic control of risk management ISSES 2018 | 5. ESSENTIALS OF RISK GOVERNANCE 5. ESSENTIALS OF RISK GOVERNANCE This chapter discusses a few essential components of the Risk Governance domain. They are discussed briefly, and more information and practical guidance can be found in The Risk IT Practitioner Guide. The topics discussed here include: Risk Appetite and Tolerance COSO Definition Risk appetite and tolerance are concepts that are frequently used, but the potential for misunderstanding is high. Some people use the 10 RG Establish and maintain a common risk view. Behavior towards risks Risk Appetite § risk appetite: the property of engaging with risks – risk-averse – risk-neutral – risk -taking accept to pursue a return? § risk tolerance: tolerance towards the difference from the risk Risk appetite can be defined in practice in terms of combinations of frequency and magnitude of a risk. Risk appetite can and will be level as defined in risk appetite Risk appetite can be defined using risk maps. Different bands of risk Figure 7—Risk Map Indicating Risk Appetite Bands significance can be defined, indicated by coloured bands on the risk map shown in figure 7. Really Unacceptable e d tu this band might trigger an immediate risk response. i n Unacceptable ag The enterprise might, as a matter of policy, require mitigation or another M adequate response to be defined within certain time boundaries. Acceptable responses Opportunity found by decreasing the degree of control or where opportunities for Frequency assuming more risk might arise ISACA, “Risk-IT framework,” 2009 ISSES 2018 | opportunity seeking. There is no universal right or wrong, but it needs to be defined, well understood and communicated. Risk appetite and Risk Tolerance © 2009 ISACA. ALL RI GHTS RE S E R VED. 17 11 Key factors for success RG § continuous support from top management § central management – common strategy § successful integration with business processes § optimize tasks and controls (avoid over-control) § compliant with company’s business philosophy § continuous training § never-ending process! European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA), “Risk Management: Implementation principles and Inventories for Risk Management/Risk Assessment methods and tools,” June 2006 ISSES 2018 | 12 Risk assessment RA # § Risk assessment !"#$% &'()*+((,((-,"%*+.%'/'%',( 0$%#$% =E(46F(4* =!B./*:#M0356(4B# =!01/F(4* <2&='*+'' =!B./*:#N35C/-05. =!B./*:#-5/*41(C*. <8-2&0'?4;%;:2&%"F;2"51 =!B./*:#(56#G(/(# =G(/(#(56#-5104:(/-05 24-/-C(7-/B ="*0?7* =!B./*:#(56#G(/(# – identification =!B./*:#:-..-05 !*5.-/-H-/B =E-./04B#01#.B./*:#(//(C@ <2&='@+'' =G(/(#140:#-5/*77-)*5C*# A4%&;2'B6&12"C":;2"51 894*(/#!/(/*:*5/ ()*5C-*.O#IJ"2O#PJQO » persons, assets and system info N*62J>2O#:(..#:*6-(O# =>*?04/.#140:#?4-04#4-.@# (..*..:*5/. <2&='(+'' ,-./#01#"0/*5/-(7# » technical / mgmt / operational controls =A5B#(36-/#C0::*5/. D$71&%;E"7"28'B6&12"C":;2"51 ;375*4(<-7-/-*. =!*C34-/B#4*D3-4*:*5/. =!*C34-/B#/*./#4*.37/. » information gathering – info sources =2344*5/#C05/407. <2&='>+''?512%57'/1;78-"- ,-./#01#2344*5/#(56# ="7(55*6#C05/407. "7(55*6#205/407. » threat sources – attacker model = 894*(/&.034C*#:0/-H(/-05# =894*(/#C(?(C-/B <2&='G+'' ,-@*7-9006#>(/-5) » vulnerability identification =I(/34*#01#H375*4(<-7-/B H".&7"4556'I&2&%0"1;2"51 =2344*5/#C05/407. – <2&='K+''B0=;:2'/1;78-"- analysis / estimation = K-..-05#-:?(C/#(5(7B.-.# =A..*/#C4-/-C(7-/B#(..*..:*5/ = ,0..#01#J5/*)4-/B# J:?(C/#>(/-5) =G(/(#C4-/-C(7-/B# =,0..#01#AH(-7(<-7-/B =G(/(#.*5.-/-H-/B » control analysis – security options (ROSI) =,0..#01#2051-6*5/-(7-/B =,-@*7-9006#01#/94*(/# *L?70-/(/-05 >-.@.#(56# » =K()5-/36*#01#-:?(C/ <2&='L+'',"-.'I&2&%0"1;2"51 A..0C-(/*6#>-.@# categorize threats by likelihood =A6*D3(CB#01#?7(55*6#04# ,*H*7. C344*5/#C05/407.# <2&='M+'' >*C0::*56*6# » impact analysis – system critical incidents ?512%57',&:500&16;2"51- 205/407. <2&='J+'' >-.@#A..*..:*5/# – evaluation ,&-$72-'I5:$0&12;2"51 >*?04/ # » risk determination !"#$%&'()*+'',"-.'/--&--0&12'3&2456575#8'!759:4;%2'' !"#$%%&'%## ########### "()*#+ NIST SP800-30, “Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems,” July 2002 ISSES 2018 | !"#$ %&'($)&*&+,*&-.$'*%,*/+0$ !*,-./#0(,()*0*,12#13*#0-44-.,#.5,*/42#6,.5-,)#13*#7.1*,1-(8#/-464#(,9#/*:.00*,9*9#:.,1/.842# 0(;#(462#<=3*,#(,9#>,9*/#53(1#:-/:>041(,:*4#43.>89#?#1(6*#(:1-.,@##=3*,#43(88#?#-078*0*,1# 13*4*#:.,1/.84#1.#0-1-)(1*#13*#/-46#(,9#7/.1*:1#.>/#./)(,-A(1-.,@B# # 13 C3*#/-46#0-1-)(1-.,#:3(/1#-,#D-)>/*#E&F#(99/*44*4#13*4*#G>*41-.,4H##I77/.7/-(1*#7.-,14#J./#Risk analysis RA -078*0*,1(1-.,#.J#:.,1/.8#(:1-.,4#(/*#-,9-:(1*9#-,#13-4#J-)>/*#K;#13*#5./9#LM!H# # *D?4@3 ':=?B4 0/' <=>94?@A7>731 '12345 $<=>94?@A>4M 0/' 642789 /CE>:73@A>4M 3:$,33@B; /C7232 ! .- .- .:$%72; .:$%72; J:22 %72; ,33@B;4?G2 0/' ,937B7E@34K 0/' F9@BB4E3@A>4 /C7232 H:23$I$+@79 L$*D?42D:>K %72; .- .- %72;$,BB4E3 %72;$,BB4E3 # NIST SP800-30, “Risk N78=?4$!OP"$$%72;$)7378@Management Guide for Information37:9$,B37:9$Q:7932$ Technology Systems,” July 2002 # ISSES 2018 |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isk treatment: options RT § avoidance § mitigation – eliminate incidents – testing determine the – reduce impact appropriate controls § sharing / transfer – disclaimer: no party is responsible – agreement: responsibility transferred – compensation » risk pooling: share losses » risk hedging: bet for losses § acceptance / retention – self-insure partially from: – accept losses Blakley, B.