SACM N. Cam-Winget, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Informational L. Lorenzin
Expires: September 10, 2015 Pulse Secure
I. McDonald
High North Inc
A. Woland
Cisco Systems
March 9, 2015
Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Architecture
draft-ietf-sacm-architecture-03
Abstract
This document defines a reference 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 September 10, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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 8
4. Component Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. Control Plane Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Data Plane Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1. Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1.1. Internal Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1.2. External Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1.3. Collector Interactions With Target Endpoints . . 11
4.2.2. Evaluator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2.3. Report Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2.4. Data Store . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Example Illustration of Capabilities and Workflow . . . . . . 12
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
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 September 10, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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,
assessed, exchanged, and/or stored. Three main functional components
are defined: a Posture Assessment Information Consumer (Cs), 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 September 10, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
+--------------------------------------+
| +--------------------------------------+
| | +--------------------------------------+
| | | |
+-| | Posture Assessment |
+-| Information Consumer (Cs) |
+--------------------------------------+
/ \ / \ / \
/ \ / \ / \
- - - 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). In the SACM architecture,
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
individual endpoints may be a target endpoint, or a component, or
both simultaneously. An endpoint acting as a component may perform
one or more roles. Components can take on the role(s) 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, Data Store
(see Section 4.2), 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 within the data model itself, or
through the use of the registration function of the Controller (see
Section 3.1.3).
The Provider must be authorized to provide the Posture Assessment
Information and further, be authorized to do so with specific data
models and protocols and/or for specific consumers.
3.1.2. Posture Assessment Information Consumer
The Posture Assessment Information Consumer (C or Consumer) is the
component that requests or accepts Posture Assessment Information
and/or Guidance. A Consumer can be a Posture Evaluator, Report
Generator, Data Store (see Section 4.2), or an application that
consumes Posture Assessment Information in order to perform another
function.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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. The architectural component
performing such requests is a Consumer.
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; 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 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) or may
request metadata reflecting the capabilities of the Providers.
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 or Controller) is a component defined to
facilitate information sharing and to execute on security functions
and overall SACM management and control system functions including:
Authentication: 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.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
* Providers may want to share the information without prior
solicitation.
The architecture must account for an abstraction where a Controller
may be defined to effect the authentication of the Consumers and
Providers independent of the actual information-sharing
communication channel.
Authorization: The restriction of Posture Assessment Information
sharing between the Consumers and Providers. At minimum, a
management function must define the necessary policies.
Identity Management: Since Identity Management for authentication
and authorization policies is best performed via a centralized
component, the Controller also facilitates this function.
The Controller needs to be able to identify the endpoints
participating as SACM components and the roles that they play.
Similar to how access control may be effected via Authentication,
Authorization, and Accounting Systems (e.g. AAA services), the same
principle is defined; as AAA services depend on Identity Management
services, the Controller will need a similar function and interface
to Identity Management services.
Registration/Discovery: The discovery of what Providers are
available, what information a Provider can share, and how it can be
requested / communicated. A discovery mechanism is required to
facilitate interaction with 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 into the Providers present, the type(s) of Posture
Assessment Information available, and how it can be requested.
Similarly, a Provider may need to publish what Posture Assessment
Information it can share and how it can share it (e.g. protocol,
filtering capabilities, etc.). Enabling this function through a
Controller or through metadata publication also allows for the
distinct definition of security considerations (e.g. authorized
registration / publication of capabilities by Providers) beyond how
a Provider may define its own capability.
Beyond the control and management functions for the SACM system, a
Controller may also provide proxy or broker or repository (and
possibly routing) capabilities in the data plane (see Section 4.1).
In the deployment scenario where Providers do not assert the need to
know their Consumers and/or vice versa, the Controller can thus
provide the appropriate functions to ensure the Posture Assessment
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
Information is appropriately communicated from the Providers to the
authorized Consumers.
The Controller, acting as a management control plane, 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 one (Consumer) to many (Provider)
connections. Similarly, a Provider may not need to distinctly know
and establish one (Provider) to many (Consumer) connections; e.g. the
Controller enables the means to allow a SACM system to support many
to many connections. Note that the Controller also allows for the
direct discovery and connection between a Consumer and Provider.
As a SACM component, the Controller may be instantiated within a
system or device acting as a Provider or a Consumer (or both), or as
its own distinct Controller entity. In a rich SACM environment, it
is feasible to instantiate a Controller that provides both the
management (and control) functions for SACM as well as provide the
proxying, brokering, and/or repository capabilities for the actual
data, e.g. Posture Assessment Information flow. Note that
Controllers may be implemented to only provide the management and
control functions or only the data flow capabilities or both.
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
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 illustrates 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
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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 broker or could be
embedded in a Consumer or a Provider).
A variety of protocols, such as SNMP, NETCONF, NEA protocols
[RFC5209], and other similar interfaces, may be used for collection
of data from the target endpoints by the Posture Information
Provider. Those interfaces are outside the scope of SACM.
4. Component Capabilities
SACM components offer a variety of capabilities which may be
instantiated on a single endpoint or on separate standalone endpoints
providing various roles.
4.1. Control Plane Capabilities
Control plane capabilities represent various services offered by the
Controller to the Providers and Consumers to facilitate sharing of
information. A Controller may have Broker, Proxy, or Repository
capabilities, or any combination thereof.
Broker: Intermediary negotiating connection between Provider and
Consumer. A Controller acting as a Broker:
* Receives a request for information from a Consumer and instructs
the Consumer where and how retrieve the requested information.
* Receives a publication request from a Provider and instructs the
Provider where and how to deliver the published information.
The information itself is neither distributed nor stored by the
Controller.
Proxy: Intermediary negotiating on behalf of a Consumer or Provider.
A Controller acting as a Proxy:
* Receives a request for information from a Consumer, retrieves the
information from the appropriate Providers, and provides the
information to the Consumer.
* Receives a publication request from a Provider, accepts the
published information, and distributes it to appropriate
consumers.
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
The information itself is distributed by, but not stored by, the
Controller.
Repository: Intermediary receiving and storing data from a Provider,
and providing stored data to a Consumer. A Controller acting as a
Repository:
* Receives a request for information from a Consumer, retrieves the
information from its data stores, and provides the information to
the Consumer.
* Receives a publication request from a provider, stores the
published information, and distributes it to appropriate
Consumers.
The information itself is both handled by and stored by the
Controller.
4.2. Data Plane Capabilities
Data plane capabilities represent the ability of a Provider or
Consumer to perform a SACM-related task. For example, the Collector
capability indicates that a Provider can perform Collection tasks;
the Evaluator capability indicates that a Consumer can perform
Evaluation tasks.
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
An internal collector is a collector that runs on the endpoint and
collects posture information locally.
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:
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
o A RADIUS server, which collects information about which endpoints
have logged onto the network
o A network profiling system, which collects information by
discovering and classifying network nodes
o A Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) sensor, which collects
information about endpoint behavior by observing network traffic
o A vulnerability scanner, which collects information about endpoint
configuration by scanning endpoints
o A hypervisor, which collects information about endpoints running
as virtual guests in its host environment
o A management system that configures and installs software on the
endpoint, which collects information based on its provisioning
activities
4.2.1.3. Collector Interactions With Target Endpoints
TODO - examples of endpoint interactions with local internal
collector (e.g. NEA client), endpoint with remote internal collector
(SNMP query), and external collector (sensor)
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.
TODO: update the terminology doc to reflect this definition
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:
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
o Endpoint Attribute Assertions, including Evaluation Results
o Other Reports (e.g., 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: once the group reaches consensus on content for the previous
sections, revise all this text based upon the agreed-upon
architecture
+-------------------------------+
| +-------------------------------+
| | |
+-| Controller (Cr) |
+-------------------------------+
// / \ \\
// / \ \\
A // / \ \\ A
// / \ \\
// / B B \ \\
// / \ \\
+------------------------+ +------------------------+
| +----------------------+ A | +------------------------+
| | |===========| | |
| | Consumer (C) |-----------| | Provider (P) |
+-| | C +-| |
+---------------------+ +------------------------+
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
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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
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 September 10, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
+-------------+
|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 September 10, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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
The SACM architecture defines three main components that interface
with each other both for management and control (in the control
plane) and for the sharing of Posture Assessment Information.
Considerations for transitivity of trust between a Provider and
Consumer can be made if there is a well understood trust between the
Provider and the Controller and between the Consumer and Controller.
The trust must include strong mutual authentication, at minimum,
between the Provider and Controller and between the Consumer and
Controller.
To address potential Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks, it is also
strongly recommended that the communications be secured to include
replay protection and message integrity (e.g. transport integrity and
if required, data integrity). Similarly, to avoid potential message
tampering, confidentiality should also be provided.
As the Controller provides the security functions for the SACM
system, the Controller should provide strong authorizations based on
either or both business and regulatory policies to ensure that only
authorized Consumers and obtaining Posture Assessment Information
from authorized Providers. It is presumed that once authenticated
and authorized, the Provider, Controller or Consumer is deemed
trustworthy; though note that it is possible that the modules or
devices hosting the SACM components may be compromised as well (e.g.
due to malware or tampering); however, addressing that level of
trustworthiness is out of scope for SACM.
As the data models defined through the interfaces are transport
agnostic, the Posture Assessment Information data in the interfaces
may leverage the transport security properties as the interfaces are
transported between the Provider, Consumer and Controller. However,
there may be other devices, modules or components in the path between
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
the Provider, Consumer and Controller that may observe the interfaces
flowing through them.
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-03 (work in progress), January 2015.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]
Waltermire, D., Montville, A., Harrington, D., Cam-Winget,
N., Lu, J., Ford, B., and M. Kaeo, "Terminology for
Security Assessment", draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-06 (work
in progress), February 2015.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases]
Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security
Posture Assessment - Enterprise Use Cases", draft-ietf-
sacm-use-cases-08 (work in progress), February 2015.
[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.
[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
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated Title March 2015
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
Aaron Woland
Cisco Systems
1900 South Blvd. Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28203
US
Email: loxx@cisco.com
Cam-Winget, et al. Expires September 10, 2015 [Page 17]
