Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Architecture
draft-ietf-sacm-architecture-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Nancy Cam-Winget , Brian Ford , Lisa Lorenzin, Ira McDonald , loxx at cisco | ||
| Last updated | 2014-11-19 | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-sacm-architecture-01
SACM N. Cam-Winget, Ed.
Internet-Draft B. Ford
Intended status: Informational Cisco Systems
Expires: May 23, 2015 L. Lorenzin
Pulse Secure
I. McDonald
High North Inc
A. Woland
Cisco Systems
November 19, 2014
Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Architecture
draft-ietf-sacm-architecture-01
Abstract
This document describes an architecture for standardization of
interfaces, protocols and information models related to security
automation and continuous monitoring. It describes the basic
architecture, components and their interfaces defined to enable the
collection, acquisition and verification of Posture and Posture
Assessments.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 23, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Architectural Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Component Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.1. Posture Assessment Information Provider . . . . . . . 5
3.1.2. Posture Assessment Information Consumer . . . . . . . 5
3.1.3. Controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Interfaces between Consumers, Providers, and Controllers 7
4. Component Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Control Plane Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Data Plane Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1. Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1.1. Internal Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1.2. External Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1.3. Collector Interactions With Target Endpoints . . 9
4.2.2. Evaluator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.3. Report Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.4. Data Store . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Example Illustration of Capabilities and Workflow . . . . . . 10
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction
Several data models and protocols are in use today that allow
different applications to perform the collection, acquisition, and
assessment of posture. These applications can vary from being
focused on general system and security management to specialized
configuration, compliance, and control systems. With an existing
varied set of applications, there is a strong desire to standardize
data models, protocols, and interfaces to better allow for the
automation of such data processes.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
This document addresses general and architectural requirements
defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-requirements]. This document describes an
architecture to enable standardized collection, acquisition, and
verification of Posture and Posture Assessments. This architecture
includes the components and interfaces that can be used to better
identify the Information Model and type(s) of transport protocols
needed for communication.
This document uses terminology defined in
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology].
2. Problem Statement
Securing information and the systems that store, process, and
transmit that information is a challenging task for organizations of
all sizes, and many security practitioners spend much of their time
on manual processes. Administrators can't get technology from
disparate sources to work together; they need information to make
decisions, but the information is not available. Everyone is
collecting the same data, but storing it as different information.
Administrators therefore need to collect data and craft their own
information, which may not be accurate or interoperable because it's
customized by each administrator, not shared.
Security automation and continuous monitoring require a large and
broad set of mission and business processes; to make the most
effective of use of technology, the same data must support multiple
processes. The need for complex characterization and assessment
necessitates components and functions that interoperate and can build
off each other to enable far-ranging and/or deep-diving analysis.
3. Architectural Overview
At a high level, the architecture describes 'How' and 'Where'
information and assessment of posture may be collected, processed or
assessed. Three main functional components are defined: a Posture
Assessment Information Consumer (C), a Posture Assessment Information
Provider (P), and a Controller (Cr) used to facilitate some of the
security functions such as authentication and authorization and other
metadata functions.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
+--------------------------------------+
| +--------------------------------------+
| | +--------------------------------------+
| | | |
+-| | Posture Assessment |
+-| Information Consumer (C) |
+--------------------------------------+
/ \ / \ / \
/ \ / \ / \
- - - d - - -
|| ||A | a |B | |C
|| || | t | | |
- - - a - | |
\ / \ / | |
\ / \ / | |
/|---------------------|\ | |
/|----/ \--------| d |--|\
/ / Controller (Cr) \ ctrl | a | \
\ \ [Broker/Proxy/Repository] / plane | t | /
\|----\ /--------| a |--|/
\|---------------------|/ | |
/ \ / \ | |
/ \ / \ | |
- - - d - | |
|| ||A | a |B | |C
|| || | t | | |
- - - a - - -
\ / \ / \ /
\ / \ / \ /
+------------------------------------+
| |-+
| Posture Assessment | |
| Information Provider (P) | |-+
+------------------------------------+ | |
+------------------------------------+ |
+------------------------------------+
Figure 1: Simple Architectural Model
3.1. Component Roles
An endpoint, as defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology], can function
in two primary ways: as the target of an assessment, and/or as a
functional component of the SACM architecture that can instantiate
one or more capabilities (see Section 4). Individual endpoints may
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
be a target endpoint, or a component, or both simultaneously.
Components can take on the role of Posture Assessment Information
Provider, Posture Assessment Information Consumer, and/or Controller.
3.1.1. Posture Assessment Information Provider
The Posture Assessment Information Provider (P or Provider) is the
component that contributes Posture Assessment Information and/or
Guidance either spontaneously or in response to a request. A
Provider can be a Posture Evaluator, Posture Collector, or an
application that has aggregated Posture Assessment Information that
can be shared.
The Provider implements the capabilities and functions that must be
handled to share or provide Posture Assessment information.
A Provider may provide information spontaneously, or in response to a
direct request from a Consumer. The information may be filtered or
truncated to provide a subset of the requested information to honor
the request. This truncation may be performed based on the
Consumer's request and/or the Provider's ability to filter. The
latter case may be due to security considerations (e.g. authorization
restrictions due to domain segregation, privacy, etc.).
The Provider may only be able to share the Posture Assessment
Information using a specific data model and protocol. It may use a
standard data model and/or protocol, a non-standard data model and/or
protocol, or any combination of standard and non-standard data models
and protocols. It may also choose to advertise its capabilities
through a metadata abstraction or through the use of the registration
function of the Controller (see Section 3.1.3) [QUESTION: Are these
different?].
The Provider must be authorized to provide the Posture Assessment
Information and further, be authorized to do so with the specific
data models and protocols.
3.1.2. Posture Assessment Information Consumer
As described in Section 2.2 of the SACM Use Cases
[I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases], several usage scenarios are posed with
different application types requesting posture assessment
information. Whether it is a configuration verification system; a
checklist verification system; or a system for detecting posture
deviations, compliance or vulnerabilities, they all need to acquire
information about Posture Assessment. Thus, the architectural
component to enable such requests is defined as a Posture Assessment
Information Consumer (C or Consumer).
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
The Consumer implements the capabilities and functions that must be
handled in order to facilitate a Posture Assessment Information
Request. Requests can be either for a single posture attribute or a
set of posture attributes where those attributes can be the raw
information or an evaluated or assessed state based upon that
information. The Consumer may further choose to query for the
information directly (one-time query), or to request for updates to
be provided as the Posture Assessment Information changes
(subscription). A request could be made directly to an explicitly
identified Posture Assessment Information Provider (P or Provider),
but a Consumer may also desire to obtain the information without
having to know the available providers.
There may be instances where a Consumer may be requesting information
from various Providers and due to its policy or application
requirements may need to be better informed of the Providers and
their capabilities. In those use cases, a Consumer may also request
to discover the respective capabilities of those Providers using the
discovery function of the Controller (see Section 3.1.3).
The Controller (described below) must authorize a Consumer to acquire
the information it is requesting. The Consumer may also be subject
to limits or constraints on the numbers, types, sizes, and rate of
requests.
3.1.3. Controller
The Controller (Cr) may be an independent endpoint, or an abstracted
component running on an endpoint has multiple capabilities. The
purpose of the Controller is to execute on security functions and
overall system functions including:
Authentication: The architecture must account for an abstraction
where a Controller may be defined to affect the authentication of
Consumers and Providers independent of the actual information
sharing communication channel. This supports use cases where:
* Consumers may request information independent of knowing the
identities of the Providers.
* Providers may want to share the information without prior
solicitation.
Authorization: To restrict how Posture Assessment Information is
shared between the Consumers and Providers. At minimum a management
function must define the necessary policies.
The introduction of the Controller supports use cases where:
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
* Consumer's may request information independent of knowing the
identities of the Provider's
* Providers may want to share information unsolicited
The architecture must account for an abstraction where a Controller
may be defined to affect the authentication of the Consumers and
Providers independent of the actual information sharing
communication channel.
Identity Management: As typically, Identity Management for
authentication and authorization policies are best defined through a
centralized component, the Controller also provides these services.
Registration/Discovery: A discovery mechanism is required to
facilitate the interaction of Providers that may have different
Posture Assessment Information and potentially limited (or a rich
set) of ways in which they can share the information. Through the
use of a discovery mechanism, Consumers can have visibility of the
Providers present and the type(s) of Posture Assessment Information
that is available and how it can be requested. Similarly, a
Provider may need to register what Posture Assessment Information it
can share and how it can share it (e.g. protocol or with filtering
capabilities). Enabling this function through a Controller also
allows for the distinct definition of security considerations (e.g.
authorized registration of capabilities and of Providers) beyond how
a Provider may define its own capability.
These functions may be provided by a single component, or by multiple
components. For example, an endpoint acting as a data store may also
act as its own broker.
The Controller also helps define how to manage an overall SACM system
that allows for Consumers to obtain the desired Posture Assessment
Information without the need to distinctly know and establish a one
(Consumer) to many (Provider) connections. Note that the Controller
also allows for the direct discovery and connection between a
Consumer and Provider.
3.2. Interfaces between Consumers, Providers, and Controllers
As shown in Figure 1, communication can proceed with the following
interfaces and expected functions and behaviors:
A: interface "A" shown in Figure 1 handles the management and
control functions that are needed to establish, at minimum, a secure
communication between Consumers and Providers. The interface must
also handle the functions to allow for the discovery and
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
registration of the Providers as well as the ways in which Posture
Assessment Information can be provided (or requested).
B: interface "B" shown in Figure 1 enables Providers to share their
Posture Assessment Information spontaneously; similarly, it enables
Consumers to request information without having to know the
identities (or reachability) of all the Providers that can fulfill
Consumers' requests.
C: interface "C" shown in Figure 1 demonstrates the ability and
desire for Consumers and Providers to be able to communicate
directly when a Provider is sharing Posture Assessment Information
directly to a Consumer. The interface allows for the different data
models and protocols to be used between a Consumer and a Provider
with the expectation that the appropriate authentication and
authorization mechanisms have been employed to establish a secure
communication link between the Consumer and the Provider.
Typically, it is expected that the secure link establishment occurs
as a management or control function through the abstracted
Controller role (e.g. the Controller could be a proxy or could be
embedded in a Consumer or a Provider).
TODO - add text around the usage of various protocols for endpoint
data collection (SNMP, NETCONF, etc.?)
4. Component Capabilities
TODO: Intro text about capabilities
4.1. Control Plane Capabilities
TODO: Intro text about control plane capabilities
TODO: Determine whether broker, proxy, and repository need to be full
subsections or paragraphs in this section.
Broker: Intermediary negotiating connection between provider and
consumer.
Proxy: Intermediary negotiating on behalf of a consumer.
Repository: Intermediary receiving and storing data from a provider,
and providing stored data to a consumer.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
4.2. Data Plane Capabilities
TODO: Intro text about data plane capabilities
4.2.1. Collector
A collector consumes Guidance and/or other Posture Assessment
Information; it provides Posture Assessment Information. Collectors
may be internal or external.
4.2.1.1. Internal Collector
TODO
4.2.1.2. External Collector
An external collector is a collector that observes endpoints from
outside. These collectors may be configured and operated to manage
assets for reasons including, but not limited to, posture assessment.
Collectors that are not primarily intended to support posture
assessment (e.g. intrusion detection systems) may still provide
information that speaks to endpoint posture (e.g. behavioral
information).
Examples:
o A RADIUS server whereby an endpoint has logged onto the network
o A network profiling system, which discovers and classifies network
nodes
o A Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) sensor
o A vulnerability scanner
o A hypervisor that peeks into the endpoint, the endpoint being a
virtual machine
o A management system that configures and installs software on the
endpoint
4.2.1.3. Collector Interactions With Target Endpoints
TODO
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
4.2.2. Evaluator
An evaluator consumes Posture Assessment Information, Evaluation
Results, and/or Guidance; it provides Evaluation Results. An
evaluator may consume endpoint attribute assertions, previous
evaluations of posture attributes, or previous reports of Evaluation
Results.
[kkw-i don't think this conflicts with the definition in the
terminology doc re: that evaluation tasks evaluate posture
attributes.]
[cek-I like the change. I think it *does* require a change in the
terminology doc, though.]
Example: a NEA posture validator [RFC5209]
[jmf- a NEA posture validator is not an example of this definition.
A NEA posture assessment is, maybe?]
[cek-Why isn't a NEA posture validator an example?]
4.2.3. Report Generator
A report generator consumes Posture Assessment Information,
Evaluation Results, and/or Guidance; it provides reports. These
reports are based on:
o Endpoint Attribute Assertions, including Evaluation Results
o Other Reports (a weekly report may be created from daily reports)
It may summarize data continually, as the data arrives. It also may
summarize data in response to an ad hoc query.
4.2.4. Data Store
A data store consumes any data; it provides any data.
5. Example Illustration of Capabilities and Workflow
TODO: revise all this text
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
+-------------------------------+
| +-------------------------------+
| | |
+-| Controller (Cr) |
+-------------------------------+
// / \ \\
// / \ \\
A // / \ \\ A
// / \ \\
// / B B \ \\
// / \ \\
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| +-------------------------------+ A | +-------------------------------+
| | |===========| | |
| | Posture Assessment |-----------| | Posture Assessment |
+-| Information Consumer (C) | C +-| Information Provider (P) |
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
Figure 2: Communications Model
SACM's focus is on the automation of collection, verification and
update of system security configurations pertaining to endpoint
assessment. In order to carry out these tasks, the architectural
components shown in Figure 1 can be further refined as:
Posture Assessment Information Providers: a Provider may be
dedicated to perform either the collection, aggregation or
evaluation of one or more posture attributes whose results can be
conveyed to a Posture Assessment Information Consumer. In this
example form of the SACM architecture model, these are shown as
Collection, Evaluation, and Results Providers. Note that there may
be posture attributes or posture assessment information that
articulates Guidance information which may or may not be present in
the architecture.
Posture Assessment Information Consumers: a Consumer may request or
receive one or more posture attributes or posture assessment
information from a Posture Assessment Information Provider for their
own use. In this example form of the SACM architecture model, these
are shown as Collection, Evaluation, and Results Consumers. Note
that there may be posture attributes or posture assessment
information articulating Guidance information which may or may not
be present in the architecture to be provided or consumed.
Data Stores: a Data Store is both a Provider and a Consumer, storing
one or more posture attributes or assessments for endpoints. It
should be understood that these repositories interface directly to a
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
Provider or Consumer (and Guidance) but the interfaces used to
interact between them is outside the scope of SACM (e.g. no
interface arrows are shown in the architecture).
Figure 3 illustrates an example flow for how Posture Assessment
Information may flow.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
+-------------+
|Evaluation |
+-------------+ |Guidance +--+
|Endpoint | |Capability | |
+-------+ | +-------------+ |
| | | |
| +-------+-----+ +-----v-------+
| Collection | |Evaluation |
+-> Capability +--+--------+ |Capability |
| | |Collection | +-----------+ +----------+
| +------------+Provider | | |---| |
| | | |Collection | |Evaluation|
| | | |Consumer | |Provider |
| +----+------+ +----^------+ +---+------+
++---------+ | | |
|Collection| +-----v------+ +---+--------+ |
|Guidance | | | |Collection | |
|Capability| |Collection | |Provider | |
| | |Consumer |-----| | |
+----------+ +------------+ +------------+ |
| Collection | |
| Data Store | |
+------------+ |
|
+--------------+ +---------------+ |
|Evaluation | |Evaluation | |
|Results | |Consumer <-----+
|Provider |-----------| |
+-----+--------+ +---------------+
| |Results Reporting|
| |Capability |
| +------------^----+
| |
+-----v--------+ +----+------+
|Evaluation | |Reporting |
|Results | |Guidance |
|Consumer | |Data Store |
+---+----------+ +-----------+ +-------------+
| | Results |
+-----------------------------> Data Store |
| |
+-------------+
Figure 3: Example Posture Information Flow
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
TODO - add example of / more content around interactions with
endpoint, possible communications patterns
6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Jim Bieda, Henk Birkholz, Jessica
Fitzgerald-McKay, Trevor Freeman, Adam Montville, and David
Waltermire for participating in architecture design discussions,
reviewing, and contributing to this draft.
7. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
8. Security Considerations
TBD. This section will need to cover the AAA and confidentiality/
integrity of the data and data transports to be considered. Also,
the considerations for the interfaces (which may be covered in
transports) between the Consumers, Providers, and the Controller.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-sacm-requirements]
Cam-Winget, N. and L. Lorenzin, "Secure Automation and
Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements", draft-ietf-
sacm-requirements-02 (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]
Waltermire, D., Montville, A., Harrington, D., and N. Cam-
Winget, "Terminology for Security Assessment", draft-ietf-
sacm-terminology-05 (work in progress), August 2014.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases]
Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security
Posture Assessment - Enterprise Use Cases", draft-ietf-
sacm-use-cases-07 (work in progress), April 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
9.2. Informative References
[RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between
Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444, January
2003.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
[RFC5209] Sangster, P., Khosravi, H., Mani, M., Narayan, K., and J.
Tardo, "Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA): Overview and
Requirements", RFC 5209, June 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Nancy Cam-Winget (editor)
Cisco Systems
3550 Cisco Way
San Jose, CA 95134
US
Email: ncamwing@cisco.com
Brian Ford
Cisco Systems
5507-10 Nesconset Hwy #242
Mt Sinai, NY 11766
US
Email: brford@cisco.com
Lisa Lorenzin
Pulse Secure
2700 Zanker Rd, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95134
US
Email: llorenzin@pulsesecure.net
Ira E McDonald
High North Inc
PO Box 221
Grand Marais, MI 49839
US
Email: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title November 2014
Aaron Woland
Cisco Systems
1900 South Blvd. Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28203
US
Email: loxx@cisco.com
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires May 23, 2015 [Page 16]