Michigan Cyber Governance Case Study
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cybersecurity Governance in the State of Michigan A CASE STUDY December 2017 1,2,3 Michigan State Fast Facts ELECTED OFFICIALS: EDUCATION: • Governor Rick Snyder • Public with a high school diploma: 54.4% • Michigan House of Representatives: • Public with an advanced degree: 34.5% 110 Representatives • Michigan State Senate: 38 Senators STATE CYBERSECURITY EXECUTIVES: COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: • Chief Information Officer (CIO) • 33 community colleges4 David DeVries • 15 public universities5 • Chief Security Officer (CSO) Rajiv Das • 54 private colleges6 • Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Rod Davenport STATE DEMOGRAPHICS: KEY INDUSTRIES:7 • Population: 9,886,095 • Manufacturing • Workforce in “computers and math” • Agri-business occupations: 2.1% • Cybersecurity • Defense • Information Technology 1 Executive Summary The Overall Challenge: How to address a range of cybersecurity challenges that cut across multiple government, public, and private sector organizations? Overall Lessons Learned from Michigan’s Governance Approach: • Leadership Matters. Leaders across multiple government, public, and private organizations make cybersecurity, and cybersecurity governance, a priority. • Leadership Is Not Everything. Laws, policies, structures, and processes instantiate and align cybersecurity governance with cybersecurity priorities so that focus does not change as personalities change. • Governance Crosses Organizational Boundaries. The distributed nature of cybersecurity requires a range of governance mechanisms that connect across multiple organizations and sectors. This case study describes how Michigan has similar challenges. As the case covers a broad used laws, policies, structures, and processes to range of areas, each related section provides an help govern cybersecurity as an enterprise-wide, overview of Michigan’s governance approach, strategic issue across state government and rather than a detailed exploration. Individual other public and private sector stakeholders. It states and organizations seeking greater detail explores cross-enterprise governance would likely need to engage directly with mechanisms used by Michigan across a range of Michigan to better understand how to tailor common cybersecurity areas—strategy and solutions to their specific circumstances. planning, budget and acquisition, risk Since the early 2000s, the state of Michigan identification and mitigation, incident response, executive and legislative branches have taken a information sharing, and workforce and series of deliberate steps to enable education. cybersecurity to be governed as an enterprise- This case study is part of a pilot project intended wide strategic issue both across state to demonstrate how states have used government and across a diverse set of public governance mechanisms to help prioritize, plan, and private sector stakeholders. As former and make cross-enterprise decisions about Michigan Department of Technology cybersecurity. It offers concepts and approaches Management and Budget (DTMB) Director and to other states and organizations that face Chief Information Officer (CIO) David Behen For purposes of this case study, governance refers to the laws, policies, structures, and processes that enable people within and across organizations to address challenges in a coordinated manner through activities such as prioritization, planning, and decision making. 2 said, “The focus is state of Michigan consistent, informal communications, in cybersecurity, not [just] the state of Michigan combination with formal communication lines, government’s cybersecurity.”8 to stay prepared for cyber disruptions.10 The state of Michigan government governs Information sharing has also played a critical information technology (IT) through a role in connecting a cybersecurity ecosystem of centralized structure, which enables a unified public and private sector stakeholders. This and coordinated approach to cybersecurity started as a grassroots effort by the Governor’s across the executive branch. Under Michigan and CIO’s offices to reach out across law, the DTMB has authority for IT, including stakeholders and ask for input. The initiative has cybersecurity, management, and budget evolved into an intentional set of formal and operations, for all state departments and informal communication governance agencies. (In this case study, “agency” refers to mechanisms to solve problems at strategic, executive branch agencies.) The DTMB is led by operational, and tactical levels. “Over time, a Director who is also the CIO.9 Under the relationships and trust were built with partners direction of this single Director and CIO, Chief across government, private, academia, etc., to a Technology Officer (CTO), Chief Security Officer point where communication and partnership (CSO), and Agency Service Information are part of the fabric of how [the state of Technology leads, the DTMB is responsible for Michigan approaches cybersecurity],” Ashley coordinating and executing a unified executive Gelisse, the Chief of Staff to the CIO, said.11 branch strategic IT plan, which includes To strengthen the cyber workforce, Michigan cybersecurity and aligns with overall statewide called on a governance approach developed by management and budget priorities. Michigan’s education community. Specifically, it Michigan also utilizes a range of governance utilized Merit Network12 (Merit), a consortium structures and processes to address a variety of of 300+ members, including Michigan’s public cybersecurity challenges that require universities, K-12 schools, libraries, local collaboration and coordination across public government agencies, and not-for-profits. Merit and private stakeholders. For example, Michigan led the effort to build the Michigan Cyber Range has established a cross-ecosystem governance (MCR), an unclassified virtual private training approach to managing cyber incident response. cloud that can be used for hands-on adaptive Working collaboratively with federal, state, training and certification in cybersecurity and IT local, and private sector organizations, leaders as well as product development and testing. The from the Cyber Security Infrastructure MCR also provides a controlled environment to Protection Division of the DTMB and the perform a variety of simulations and testing, Emergency Management and Homeland including running attack scenarios, applying Security Division of the Michigan State Police responses, and analyzing the effect on a developed the Cyber Disruption Response Plan network without putting an organization or (CDRP). The CDRP provides a framework for network at risk. The MCR services can be emergency management and IT agencies to accessed through a virtual connection or at a identify cyber threats and coordinate cyber physical extension of the MCR called a hub. response and recovery operations. The plan Cybersecurity is a challenge that cuts across uses a threat matrix that considers cyber events many issues and many interdependent along a five-level escalation/de-escalation path stakeholders. Therefore, Michigan uses a range and articulates which organization is responsible of governance mechanisms to work across for the cyber response management at each different public, private, academic and nonprofit level. Stakeholders across the ecosystem rely on organizations. The approaches described in this 3 case study were the result of many years of economic development perspective. However, intentional effort by many leaders and leadership was not everything. Protecting data individuals who made cybersecurity and and critical infrastructure across the state, not cybersecurity governance a priority across the just in state-run systems, required engagement state. Governor Rick Snyder made cybersecurity and partnership across the entire cybersecurity a top priority. He and others in the executive ecosystem. In Michigan, tangible laws, policies, branch agencies, state legislature, and private structures, and processes instantiated and organizations addressed cybersecurity as aligned cybersecurity governance with broader important from both a threat mitigation and cybersecurity priorities 4 Table of Contents Michigan State Fast Facts ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Background & Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 6 I. Strategy & Planning ............................................................................................................................................... 7 II. Budget & Acquisition .......................................................................................................................................... 11 III. Risk Identification & Mitigation ......................................................................................................................... 13 IV. Incident Response ............................................................................................................................................. 16 V. Information Sharing ........................................................................................................................................... 19 VI. Workforce & Education ....................................................................................................................................