C2M2 and the NIST Cyber Framework: Applying DOE's NIST Cyber Security Framework Guidance



Similar documents
Voluntary Cybersecurity Initiatives in Critical Infrastructure. Nadya Bartol, CISSP, SGEIT, 2014 Utilities Telecom Council

NIST CYBERSECURITY FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION: ENERGY SECTOR APPROACH

Electricity Subsector Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (ES-C2M2) (Case Study) James Stevens Senior Member, Technical Staff - CERT Division

ENERGY SECTOR CYBERSECURITY FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology Smart Grid Cybersecurity

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Sean Sweeney, Information Security Officer 5/20/2015

NIST Cybersecurity Framework. ARC World Industry Forum 2014

Cybersecurity Framework. Executive Order Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Risk Management in Practice A Guide for the Electric Sector

Cybersecurity in the Utilities Sector Best Practices and Implementation 2014 Canadian Utilities IT & Telecom Conference September 24, 2014

How To Write A Cybersecurity Framework

Cybersecurity Framework: Current Status and Next Steps

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

The President issued an Executive Order Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, on February 2013.

State Agency Cyber Security Survey v October State Agency Cybersecurity Survey v 3.4

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

RE: Experience with the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

IEEE-Northwest Energy Systems Symposium (NWESS)

Cybersecurity Audit Why are we still Vulnerable? November 30, 2015

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Executive Order 13636: The Healthcare Sector and the Cybersecurity Framework. September 23, 2014

Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Framework. Overview and Status. Executive Order Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Understanding the NIST Cybersecurity Framework September 30, 2014

CYBERSECURITY CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL (C2M2) FACILITATOR GUIDE

Applying Framework to Mobile & BYOD

Applying IBM Security solutions to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework

IG ISCM MATURITY MODEL FOR FY 2015 FISMA FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

DOE Cyber Security Policy Perspectives

Building Security In:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework What It Means for Energy Companies

Facilitated Self-Evaluation v1.0

Happy First Anniversary NIST Cybersecurity Framework:

Implementing the U.S. Cybersecurity Framework at Intel A Case Study

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Water Sector Approach to Cybersecurity Risk Management

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) Unlocking CSF - An Educational Session

National Cybersecurity Challenges and NIST. Donna F. Dodson Chief Cybersecurity Advisor ITL Associate Director for Cybersecurity

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Modeling and Simulation (M&S) for Homeland Security

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

Information and Communications Technology Supply Chain Risk Management (ICT SCRM) AND NIST Cybersecurity Framework

CForum: A Community Driven Solution to Cybersecurity Challenges

Intel Security Professional Services Leveraging NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF): Complexity is the enemy of security

Continuous Monitoring in a Risk Management Framework. US Census Bureau Oct 2012

NIST Cybersecurity Initiatives. ARC World Industry Forum 2014

ADVANCED DISTRIBUTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OFFICE OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERY & ENERGY RELIABILITY SMART GRID R&D

Cybersecurity: What CFO s Need to Know

SECURE POWER SYSTEMS PROFESSIONALS (SPSP) PROJECT PHASE 3, FINAL REPORT: RECRUITING, SELECTING, AND DEVELOPING SECURE POWER SYSTEMS PROFESSIONALS

Why you should adopt the NIST Cybersecurity Framework

Critical Manufacturing Cybersecurity Framework Implementation Guidance

NIST Cybersecurity Framework & A Tale of Two Criticalities

PROTIVITI FLASH REPORT

Business Continuity for Cyber Threat

CRR-NIST CSF Crosswalk 1

Which cybersecurity standard is most relevant for a water utility?

DHS Cyber Security & Resilience Resources: Cyber Preparedness, Risk Mitigation, & Incident Response

NIST CYBERSECURITY FRAMEWORK COMPLIANCE WITH OBSERVEIT

CONCEPTS IN CYBER SECURITY

Program Overview and 2015 Outlook

70% of US Business Will Be Impacted by the Cybersecurity Framework: Are You Ready?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Manufacturing Implementation

IT ASSET MANAGEMENT Securing Assets for the Financial Services Sector

Enhancing NASA Cyber Security Awareness From the C-Suite to the End-User

Copyright 2014 Carnegie Mellon University The Cyber Resilience Review is based on the Cyber Resilience Evaluation Method and the CERT Resilience

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework

A Guide to Successfully Implementing the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. Jerry Beasley CISM and TraceSecurity Information Security Analyst

RSA CYBERSECURITY POVERTY INDEX 2015

NHTSA S AUTOMOTIVE CYBERSECURITY RESEARCH. Arthur Carter, Frank Barickman, NHTSA

PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF SCOTT KING ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

Secure360. Measuring the Maturity of your Information Security Program Impossible? Presented by: Mark Carney, VP of Strategic Services

How To Protect Your Data From Being Hacked

Automation Suite for NIST Cyber Security Framework

Health Industry Implementation of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework

Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Executive Order Preliminary Cybersecurity Framework

RECOMMENDED CHARTER FOR THE IDENTITY ECOSYSTEM STEERING GROUP

Cybersecurity The role of Internal Audit

Re: Experience with the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity ( Framework )

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Impacting Your Company? April 24, 2014 Presented By Sheila FitzPatrick, NetApp Jeff Greene, Symantec Andy Serwin, MoFo

FFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool Overview for Chief Executive Officers and Boards of Directors

Why you should adopt the NIST Cybersecurity Framework

Looking at the SANS 20 Critical Security Controls

Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery Context

The NIST Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity - An Executive Guide

SPSP Phase III Recruiting, Selecting, and Developing Secure Power Systems Professionals: Job Profiles

A RIPE Implementation of the NIST Cyber Security Framework

Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity

An Overview of Large US Military Cybersecurity Organizations

Cybersecurity Framework Security Policy Mapping Table

An Enterprise Continuous Monitoring Technical Reference Architecture

Docket No. DHS , Notice of Request for Public Comment Regarding Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations

Transcription:

C2M2 and the NIST Cyber Framework: Applying DOE's NIST Cyber Security Framework Guidance June 18, 2015

Victoria Yan Pillitteri, National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) Smart Grid Cybersecurity Committee Chair

Cybersecurity Committee The SGIP Cybersecurity Committee is collaborative forum that develops resources that smart grid stakeholders can leverage to help understand and manage cybersecurity risk. Cybersecurity is a critical, crosscutting issue for the Smart Grid

Update: Cybersecurity Task Force The Cybersecurity Task Force is developing a case study highlighting how different utilities have implemented various voluntary cybersecurity frameworks including results, benefits, and key lessons learned. Next Task Force virtual meeting: Tuesday, June 23 at 10 AM Eastern To learn more contact: victoria.pillitteri@nist.gov and ellisonm@dteenergy.com

Christopher S. Taylor, is currently a senior Engineering Analyst for Southern Company s IT Security Team.

Agenda NIST Cybersecurity Framework and Implementation Guidance C2M2 Overview Southern s C2M2 to NIST Framework Tool Comparative Analysis

NIST Cybersecurity Framework

NIST Cyber Security Framework Developed in response to Executive Order 13636 Calls for development of a voluntary Cybersecurity Framework Framework provides a prioritized, flexible, repeatable, performancebased, and cost effective approach to manage cybersecurity risk The Framework is composed of 3 parts Framework Core Framework Implementation Tiers Framework Profile In January 2015, DOE released the Energy Sector s Cybersecurity Framework Implementation Guidance C2M2 is DOE s recommended implementation tool

Cybersecurity Framework Implementation Guidance Provides standard approach aligned with Framework s 7-step process Create a Target Profile Prioritize and Scope Orient Determine, Analyze, Prioritize Gaps Create a Current Profile Implement Action Plan Conduct a Risk Assessment Advocates use of C2M2 to implement Framework because: Widespread use Supports Benchmarking Sector-specific guidance Descriptive guidance C2M2 mapped to Framework Self-evaluation toolkit

C2M2 Overview

C2M2 Overview ES-C2M2 is a DOE developed tool that helps organizations evaluate, prioritize, and improve cybersecurity capabilities Maturity Model Definition: An organized way to identify competencies and areas of improvement C2M2 is used to evaluate business unit s practices, processes, and procedures

Risk Management Asset, Change and Configuration Management Identity and Access Management Threat and Vulnerability Management Situational Awareness Information Sharing and Communications Event and Incident Response, Continuity of Operations Supply Chain and External Dependencies Management Workforce Management Cyberseacurity Program Management Maturity Indicator Levels C2M2 Components 3 Managed 2 Performed 1 Initiated 0 Not Performed 4 Maturity Indicator Levels: Defined progressions of practices Each cell contains the defining practices for the domain at that maturity indicator level 10 Model Domains: Logical groupings of cyber security practices

Sample C2M2 Evaluation Results The C2M2 Toolkit generates a graphical summary of the results divided by C2M2 domain and MIL level Detailed results and analysis are also provided for each domain

Southern s C2M2 to NIST Framework Tool

Categories Subcategories Informative References C2M2 to NIST Framework Mapping DOE s Implementation Guidance mapped C2M2 practices to NIST s Framework Core and Implementation Tier CSF Core C2M2 CSF Tiers C2M2 CSF Functions CSF Tiers IDENTIFY PROTECT DETECT RESPOND RECOVER Tier 1: Partial Tier 2: Risk Informed Tier 3: Repeatable Tier 4: Adaptive

Automating the C2M2 to NIST Process Current Implementation of Framework using C2M2 C2M2 toolkit and assessment process provide data required to implement the Framework Implementation guidance maps C2M2 controls to Framework User must then manually extract data from C2M2 toolkit into the Framework The C2M2 to NIST Framework tool automates the rest of the process Automates extraction of data from C2M2 Toolkit and populates the NIST Framework Uses notes section of C2M2 toolkit to develop target profiles Generates tables and charts of Framework Core Generates tables and charts of Framework Implementation Tier

IDENTIFY Sample C2M2 to NIST Framework Tool Output Functio C2M2 Profiles Function Category Subcategory n MIL Practice Current Target Asset Management (AM): The data, personnel, devices, systems, and facilities that enable the organization to achieve business purposes are identified and managed consistent with their relative importance to business objectives and the organization s risk strategy. ID.AM-1: Physical devices and systems within the organization are inventoried ID.AM-2: Software platforms and applications within the organization are inventoried NIST Framework s 7 Steps Prioritize and Scope Orient Create a Current Profile Conduct a Risk Assessment 1 2 3 3 1 2 3 3 ACM-1a ACM-1c ACM-1e ACM-1f ACM-1a ACM-1c ACM-1e ACM-1f FI FI LI PI FI FI LI PI Create a Target Profile C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity C2M2 Activity Determine, Analyze, Prioritize Gaps Implement Action Plan Gaps C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes C2M2 Notes

Sample NIST Framework Function Results MIL 1 MIL 2 MIL 3 TOTALS Identify Protect Detect Respond Recover Fully Implemented 24 23 24 71 Largely Implemented 1 14 23 38 Partially Implemented 2 8 14 24 Not Implemented 2 0 3 5 Subtotals: 29 45 64 138 Fully Implemented 50 28 10 88 Largely Implemented 3 26 32 61 Partially Implemented 3 16 30 49 Not Implemented 0 0 1 1 Subtotals: 56 70 73 199 Fully Implemented 20 2 8 30 Largely Implemented 1 22 10 33 Partially Implemented 1 2 14 17 Not Implemented 0 0 3 3 Subtotals: 22 26 35 83 Fully Implemented 10 4 3 17 Largely Implemented 0 9 9 18 Partially Implemented 0 6 6 12 Not Implemented 0 0 0 0 Subtotals: 10 19 18 47 Fully Implemented 1 0 1 2 Largely Implemented 0 0 3 3 Partially Implemented 0 3 4 7 Not Implemented 0 0 0 0 Subtotals: 1 3 8 12 TOTALS 118 163 198 479 The Framework Core Provides a set of activities to achieve specific cybersecurity outcomes and references examples of guidance to achieve those outcomes NIST Framework Results by Function

Sample NIST Framework Implementation Tier Results Tier 1 (Partial) Tier 2 ( Risk Informed) Tier 3 (Repeatable) Tier 4 (Adaptive) Fully Implemented Largely Implemented Partially Implemented Not Implemented 12 11 8 2 0 4 5 13 0 0 8 7 0 0 5 2 Totals 12 15 26 24 The Implementation Tiers Provides context on how an organization views cybersecurity risk and the processes in place to manage risk.

Displaying the CSF Results by Function Option 1: Map C2M2 by NIST CSF Function and MILs Leverages C2M2 Scoring Criteria (Partial Credit) Preserves MIL Levels to understand complexity of mitigation efforts Many-to-Many relationships so must determine whether to remove duplicates NIST Framework by Function and MIL NIST Framework by Function and MIL (No Duplicates)

Displaying the CSF Results by Function Option 2: Map C2M2 by NIST CSF Function but remove MILs Leverages C2M2 Scoring Criteria (Partial Credit) Removes MILs to conform to NIST CSF s flat architecture Many-to-Many relationships so must determine whether to remove duplicates NIST Framework by Function NIST Framework by Function (No Duplicates)

Displaying the CSF Results by Function Option 3: Map C2M2 by NIST CSF Function but remove MILs and Partial Credit Removes C2M2 Scoring Criteria (Partial Credit) to achieve complete or not complete Removes MILs to conform to NIST CSF s flat architecture Many-to-Many relationships so must determine whether to remove duplicates NIST Framework by Function NIST Framework by Function (No Duplicates)

Displaying the CSF Results by Function Option 4: Map C2M2 by NIST CSF Function and Category Determines average score for each subcategory and rounds down Must determine whether to preserve partial credit NIST Framework by Function and Category NIST Framework by Function and Category (No Duplicates)

Displaying the CSF Results by Tier Map C2M2 by NIST CSF Tier Many-to-Many relationships so must determine whether to remove duplicates Must determine whether to preserve partial credit NIST Framework by Tier NIST Framework by Tier (No Duplicates) Partial Credit No Partial Credit Partial Credit No Partial Credit

C2M2 to NIST Toolkit: Comparative Analysis

Comparative Analysis: Sortable Results Survey Reponses Per Question Ordered By Domain/Objective/Practice Sort: Domain/Obj/ Practice Sort: Domain/MIL/ Practice Sort: Domain/ Average Score Low to High Sort: Average Score Low to High Sort: Domain/ Average Score High to Low Sort: Average Score High to Low Sort: Standard Deviation Domain Objective MIL Practice C2M2 - Organization 1 C2M2 - Organization 2 C2M2 - Organization 3 C2M2 - Organization 4 Standard Average Deviation Score Score Score Score 01. Risk Management 01. Establish Cyber Security Risk Management 2 RM-1a Strategy FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 01. Establish Cyber Security Risk Management 2 RM-1b Strategy FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 01. Establish Cyber Security Risk Management 3 RM-1c Strategy FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 01. Establish Cyber Security Risk Management 3 RM-1d Strategy FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 01. Establish Cyber Security Risk Management 3 RM-1e Strategy FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 1 RM-2a FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 1 RM-2b FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 2 RM-2c LI LI FI FI 2.5 0.577350269 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 2 RM-2d FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 2 RM-2e FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 2 RM-2f FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 2 RM-2g FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 3 RM-2h FI PI LI FI 2.25 0.957427108 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 3 RM-2i FI FI LI FI 2.75 0.5 01. Risk Management 02. Manage Cyber Security Risk 3 RM-2j FI LI LI FI 2.5 0.577350269 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 2 RM-3a PI LI FI FI 2.25 0.957427108 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 2 RM-3b FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 2 RM-3c FI LI FI LI 2.5 0.577350269 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 2 RM-3d FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 3 RM-3e FI LI FI LI 2.5 0.577350269 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 3 RM-3f PI FI FI FI 2.5 1 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 3 RM-3g FI FI FI FI 3 0 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 3 RM-3h FI LI FI FI 2.75 0.5 01. Risk Management 03. Management Activities 3 RM-3i FI FI FI FI 3 0 Takes C2M2 input from multiple assessments and puts them in a sortable results table Only focused on C2M2, not the NIST CSF

Comparative Analysis: Summary (Avg Scores) Domain Average Score Domain C2M2 - Organization 1 C2M2 - Organization 2 C2M2 - Organization 3 C2M2 - Organization 4 Score Score Score Score Avg Score 01. Risk Management 2.79 2.67 2.88 2.92 2.81 02. Asset, Change, and Configuration Management 2.58 2.00 2.77 2.81 2.54 03. Identity and Access Management 3.00 2.32 3.00 2.96 2.82 04. Threat and Vunerability Management 2.36 1.61 2.24 2.33 2.14 05. Situational Awareness 2.19 1.48 2.29 2.26 2.06 06. Information Sharing and Communications 2.23 2.23 2.82 2.77 2.51 07. Event and Incident Response, Continuity of Operations 2.27 2.23 2.33 2.46 2.32 08. Supply Chain and External Dependencies Management 1.90 1.80 2.00 2.23 1.98 09. Workforce Management 2.53 1.97 2.47 2.18 2.29 10. Cybersecurity Program Management 2.81 2.71 2.52 2.77 2.70 Domain Average Score Creates a summary worksheet of the C2M2 assessment results 1 st section is an average score for each domain by organization assessed

Comparative Analysis: Summary (Low Scores) Average (Partial or Less) Practice C2M2 - Organization 1 C2M2 - Organization 2 C2M2 - Organization 3 C2M2 - Organization 4 Score Score Score Score Avg Score TVM-1h 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TVM-1j 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TVM-2m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 EDM-2c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPM-4b 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 IR-3m 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 TVM-1e 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 SA-3b 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 EDM-3a 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 0.75 TVM-1d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SA-2d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SA-2e 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SA-2f 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SA-2h 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SA-3d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IR-1g 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IR-2g 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IR-2h 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 IR-3f 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IR-3g 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-2d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-2e 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-2f 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-2h 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-2i 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 EDM-3g 0.00 1.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 WM-1g 2.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 WM-3g 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 WM-4c 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 WM-4d 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 CPM-1g 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Domain Average Score 2 nd section is all activities that average Partial or less Only focused on C2M2, not the NIST CSF

Comparative Analysis: Summary (Low Scores) Standard Deviation - Top 10 Domain C2M2 - Organization 1 C2M2 - Organization 2 C2M2 - Organization 3 C2M2 - Organization 4 Score Score Score Score Std Deviation ACM-2d PI NI FI FI 1.50 IAM-3a FI NI FI FI 1.50 TVM-3a FI NI FI FI 1.50 TVM-3g FI NI FI FI 1.50 SA-4g FI NI FI FI 1.50 EDM-3d FI NI FI FI 1.50 EDM-3g NI PI NI FI 1.41 IAM-2i FI NI FI LI 1.41 IR-2e PI NI LI FI 1.29 SA-3f PI PI NI FI 1.26 Domain Average Score 3 rd section is the 10 activities with the greatest deviation in responses Only focused on C2M2, not the NIST CSF Ideal for benchmarking and determining why there are differences Possible reasons include: maturity, size, mission, or interpretation of survey questions

Proof of Concept Demonstration Demonstrated to DOE that process can be automated Next release of C2M2 toolkit should incorporate new capabilities (ECD 2016) Identify Industry Requirements for Implementing Framework Currently adoption of NIST Framework is a labor-intensive manual process Need to identify requirements to make adopting the Framework practical Automated Tools Standardized Charts Standardized Tables Standardized Reports Comparative Analysis Next Steps Role of Cybersecurity Framework Taskforce? Other Stakeholder Participation DOE, SGIP, NIST, C 3? Mechanism for providing feedback?