SACM D. Waltermire, Ed.
Internet-Draft NIST
Intended status: Standards Track K. Watson
Expires: January 9, 2017 DHS
C. Kahn
L. Lorenzin
Pulse Secure, LLC
M. Cokus
D. Haynes
The MITRE Corporation
July 8, 2016
SACM Information Model
draft-ietf-sacm-information-model-06
Abstract
This document defines the Information Elements that are transported
between SACM components and their interconnected relationships. The
primary purpose of the Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring
(SACM) Information Model is to ensure the interoperability of
corresponding SACM data models and addresses the use cases defined by
SACM. The Information Elements and corresponding types are
maintained as the IANA "SACM Information Elements" registry.
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 January 9, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
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
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2. Information Element Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Information Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Context of Information Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Extensibility of Information Elements . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Structure of Information Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. SACM Content Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2. SACM Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3. Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4. Event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.5. Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.6. Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.7. Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5. Abstract Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1. Simple Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.1. IPFIX Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.2. ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1.3. rpmSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1.4. simpleSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2. Structured Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.1. List Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. Information Model Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.1. Asset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.2. Endpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.3. Hardware Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.4. Software Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.4.1. Software Instance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.5. Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.6. Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.6.1. Internal Collection Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.6.2. External Collection Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.6.3. Evaluation Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.6.4. Retention Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.7. Evaluation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7. Information Model Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
7.1. hardwareSerialNumber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.2. interfaceName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.3. interfaceIndex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.4. interfaceMacAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.5. interfaceType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.6. interfaceFlags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.7. networkInterface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.8. softwareIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.9. softwareTitle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.10. softwareCreator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.11. simpleSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.12. rpmSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.13. ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.14. softwareVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.15. lastUpdated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.16. softwareInstance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.17. globallyUniqueIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.18. dataOrigin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.19. dataSource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.20. creationTimestamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.21. collectionTimestamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.22. publicationTimestamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.23. relayTimestamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.24. storageTimestamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.25. type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.26. protocolIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.27. sourceTransportPort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.28. sourceIPv4PrefixLength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.29. ingressInterface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.30. destinationTransportPort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.31. sourceIPv6PrefixLength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.32. sourceIPv4Prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.33. destinationIPv4Prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.34. sourceMacAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.35. ipVersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.36. interfaceDescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.37. applicationDescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.38. applicationId . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.39. applicationName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.40. exporterIPv4Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.41. exporterIPv6Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.42. portId . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.43. templateId . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.44. collectorIPv4Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.45. collectorIPv6Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.46. informationElementIndex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.47. informationElementId . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.48. informationElementDataType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.49. informationElementDescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.50. informationElementName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.51. informationElementRangeBegin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.52. informationElementRangeEnd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.53. informationElementSemantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.54. informationElementUnits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.55. userName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.56. applicationCategoryName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.57. mibObjectValueInteger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.58. mibObjectValueOctetString . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.59. mibObjectValueOID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.60. mibObjectValueBits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.61. mibObjectValueIPAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.62. mibObjectValueCounter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.63. mibObjectValueGauge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
7.64. mibObjectValueTimeTicks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
7.65. mibObjectValueUnsigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.66. mibObjectValueTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.67. mibObjectValueRow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.68. mibObjectIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.69. mibSubIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.70. mibIndexIndicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.71. mibCaptureTimeSemantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.72. mibContextEngineID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.73. mibContextName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.74. mibObjectName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.75. mibObjectDescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.76. mibObjectSyntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.77. mibModuleName . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
8. SACM Usage Scenario Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8.1. Graph Model for Detection of Posture Deviation . . . . . 49
8.1.1. Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8.1.2. Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
8.1.3. Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
8.1.4. Relationships between Identifiers and Metadata . . . 51
8.2. Workflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9.1. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
11. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
12. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
13. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
A.1. Changes in Revision 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
A.2. Changes in Revision 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
A.3. Changes in Revision 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
A.4. Changes in Revision 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.5. Changes in Revision 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.6. Changes in Revision 06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
1. Introduction
The SACM Information Model (IM) serves multiple purposes:
o to ensure interoperability between SACM data models that are used
as transport encodings,
o to provide a standardized set of Information Elements - the SACM
Vocabulary - to enable the exchange of content vital to automated
security posture assessment, and
o to enable secure information sharing in a scalable and extensible
fashion in order to support the tasks conducted by SACM
components.
A complete set of requirements imposed on the IM can be found in
[I-D.ietf-sacm-requirements]. The SACM IM is intended to be used for
standardized data exchange between SACM components (data in motion).
Nevertheless, the Information Elements (IE) and their relationships
defined in this document can be leveraged to create and align
corresponding data models for data at rest.
The information model expresses, for example, target endpoint (TE)
attributes, guidance, and evaluation results. The corresponding
Information Elements are consumed and produced by SACM components as
they carry out tasks.
The primary tasks that this information model supports (on data,
control, and management plane) are:
o TE Discovery
o TE Characterization
o TE Classification
o Collection
o Evaluation
o Information Sharing
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
o SACM Component Discovery
o SACM Component Authentication
o SACM Component Authorization
o SACM Component Registration
These tasks are defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology].
2. Conventions used in this document
2.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2.2. Information Element Examples
The notation used to define the SACM Information Elements (IEs) is
based on a customized version of the IPFIX information model syntax
[RFC7012] which is described in Figure 2. However, there are several
examples presented throughout the document that use a simplified
pseudo-code to illustrate the basic structure. It should be noted
that while they include actual names of subjects and attributes as
well as values, they are not intended to influence how corresponding
SACM IEs should be defined in Section 7. The examples are provided
for demonstration purposes only.
3. Information Elements
The IEs defined in this document comprise the building blocks by
which all SACM content is composed. They are consumed and provided
by SACM components on the data plane. Every Information Element has
a unique label: its name. Every type of IE defined by the SACM IM is
registered as a type at the IANA registry. The Integer Index of the
IANA SMI number tables can be used by SACM data models.
3.1. Context of Information Elements
The IEs in this information model represent information related to
assets in the following areas (based on the use cases described in
[RFC7632]):
o Endpoint Management
o Software Inventory Management
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
o Hardware Inventory Management
o Configuration Management
o Vulnerability Management
3.2. Extensibility of Information Elements
A SACM data model based on this information model MAY include
additional information elements that are not defined here. The
labels of additional Information Elements included in different SACM
data models MUST NOT conflict with the labels of the Information
Elements defined by this information model, and the names of
additional Information Elements MUST NOT conflict with each other or
across multiple data models. In order to avoid naming conflicts, the
labels of additional IEs SHOULD be prefixed to avoid collisions
across extensions. The prefix MUST include an organizational
identifier and therefore, for example, MAY be an IANA enterprise
number, a (partial) name space URI, or an organization name
abbreviation.
4. Structure of Information Elements
There are two basic types of IEs:
o Attributes: an instance of an attribute type is the simplest IE
structure comprised of a unique attribute name and an attribute
value.
o Subjects: a subject is a richer structure that has a unique
subject name and one or more attributes or subjects. In essence,
instances of a subject type are defined (and differentiated) by
the attribute values and subjects associated with it.
hostname = "arbutus"
coordinates = (
latitude = N27.99619,
longitude = E86.92761
)
Figure 1: Example instance of an attribute and subject.
In general, every piece of information that enables security posture
assessment or further enriches the quality of the assessment process
can be associated with metadata. In the SACM IM, metadata is
represented by specific subjects and is bundled with other attributes
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
or subjects to provide additional information about them. The IM
explicitly defines two kinds of metadata:
o Metadata focusing on the data origin (the SACM component that
provides the information to the SACM domain)
o Metadata focusing on the data source (the target endpoint that is
assessed)
Metadata can also include relationships that refer to other
associated IEs (or SACM content in general) by using referencing
labels that have to be included in the metadata of the associated IE.
Subjects can be nested and the SACM IM allows for circular or
recursive nesting. The association of IEs via nesting results in a
tree-like structure wherein subjects compose the root and
intermediary nodes and attributes the leaves of the tree. This
semantic structure does not impose a specific structure on SACM data
models regarding data in motion or data repository schemata for data
at rest.
The SACM IM provides two conceptual top-level subjects that are used
to ensure a homogeneous structure for SACM content and its associated
metadata: SACM statements and SACM content-elements. Every set of
IEs that is provided by a SACM component must provide the information
contained in these two subjects although it is up to the implementer
whether or not the subjects are explicitly defined in a data model.
The notation the SACM IM is defined in is based on a modified version
of the IP Information Flow Export (IPFIX) Information Model syntax
described in Section 2.1 of [RFC7012]. The customized syntax used by
the SACM IM is defined below in Figure 2.
elementId (required): The numeric identifier of the
Information Element. It is used
for the compact identification
of an Information Element. If
this identifier is used without
an enterpriseID, then the
elementId must be unique, and
the description of allowed values
is administrated by IANA. The
value "TBD" may be used during
development of the information
model until an elementId is
assigned by IANA and filled
in at publication time.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
enterpriseId (optional): Enterprises may wish to define
Information Elements without
registering them with IANA, for
example, for enterprise-internal
purposes. For such Information
Elements, the elementId is
not sufficient when used
outside the enterprise. If
specifications of enterprise-
specific Information Elements
are made public and/or if
enterprise-specific identifiers
are used by SACM components
outside the enterprise, then the
enterprise-specific identifier
MUST be made globally unique by
combining it with an enterprise
identifier. Valid values for the
enterpriseId are defined by IANA
as Structure of Management
Information (SMI) network management
private enterprise numbers.
name (required): A unique and meaningful name for
the Information Element.
dataType (required): There are two kinds of datatypes:
simple and structured. Attributes are
defined using simple datatypes
and subjects are defined using
structured datatypes. The contents of
the datatype field will be either
a reference to one of the simple
datatypes listed in Section
5.1, or the specification of
structured datatype as defined in
Section 5.2.
status (required): The status of the specification
of the Information Element.
Allowed values are "current" and
"deprecated". All newly defined
Information Elements have "current"
status. The process for moving
Information Elements to the
"deprecated" status is TBD.
description (required): Describes the meaning of the
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
Information Element, how it is
derived, conditions for its use,
etc.
For Information Elements that
represent flags, please include
a table that lists each flag value
(hexadecimal) and description. The
following is a template for that
table.
+-------+-----------------------+
| Value | Description |
+-------+-----------------------+
| | |
+-------+-----------------------+
references (optional): Identifies other RFCs or documents
outside the IETF which provide
additional information or context
about the Information Element.
Figure 2: Information Element Specification Template
4.1. SACM Content Elements
Every piece of information that is provided by a SACM component is
always associated with a set of metadata, for example, the timestamp
at which this set of information was produced (e.g. by a collection
task) or what target endpoint this set of information is about (e.g.
the data-source or a target endpoint identifier, respectively). The
subject that associates content IE with content-metadata IE is called
a content-element. Content metadata can also include relationships
that express associations with other content-elements.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146193322,
data-source = fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981
),
hostname = "arbutus",
coordinates = (
latitude = N27.99619,
longitude = E86.92761
)
)
Figure 3: Example set of IEs associated with a timestamp and a target
endpoint label.
4.2. SACM Statements
One or more SACM content elements are bundled in a SACM statement.
In contrast to content-metadata, statement-metatdata focuses on the
providing SACM component instead of the target endpoint that the
content is about. The only content-specific metadata included in the
SACM statement is the content-type IE. Therefore, multiple content-
elements that share the same statement metadata and are of the same
content-type can be included in a single SACM statement. A SACM
statement functions similar to an envelope or a header. Its purpose
is to enable the tracking of the origin of data inside a SACM domain
and more importantly to enable the mitigation of conflicting
information that my originate from different SACM components. How a
consuming SACM component actually deals with conflicting information
is out-of-scope of the SACM IM. Semantically, the term statement
implies that the SACM content provided by a SACM component might not
be correct in every context, but rather is the result of an best-
effort to produce correct information.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
sacm-statement = (
statement-metadata = (
publish-timestamp = 1461934031,
data-origin = 24e67957-3d31-4878-8892-da2b35e121c2,
content-type = observation
),
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146193322,
data-source = fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981
),
hostname = "arbutus"
)
)
Figure 4: Example of a simple SACM statement including a single
content-element.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
sacm-statement = (
statement-metadata = (
publish-timestamp = 1461934031,
data-origin = 24e67957-3d31-4878-8892-da2b35e121c2
content-type = observation
),
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146193322,
data-source = fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981
),
coordinates = (
latitude = N27.99619,
longitude = E86.92761
)
)
)
sacm-statement = (
statement-metadata = (
publish-timestamp = 1461934744,
data-origin = e42885a1-0270-44e9-bb5c-865cf6bd4800,
content-type = observation
),
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146193821,
te-label = fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981
),
coordinates = (
latitude = N16.67622,
longitude = E141.55321
)
)
)
Figure 5: Example of conflicting information originating from
different SACM components.
4.3. Relationships
An IE can be associated with another IE, e.g. a user-name attribute
can be associated with a content-authorization subject. These
references are expressed via the relationships subject, which can be
included in a corresponding content-metadata subject. The
relationships subject includes a list of one or more references. The
SACM IM does not enforce a SACM domain to use unique identifiers as
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
references. Therefore, there are at least two ways to reference
another content-element:
o The value of a reference represents a specific content-label that
is unique in a SACM domain (and has to be included in the
corresponding content-element metadata in order to be referenced),
or
o The reference is a subject that includes an appropriate number of
IEs in order to identify the referenced content-element by its
actual content.
It is recommended to provide unique identifiers in a SACM domain and
the SACM IM provides a corresponding naming-convention as a reference
in section FIXME. The alternative highlighted above summarizes a
valid approach that does not require unique identifiers and is
similar to the approach of referencing target endpoints via
identifying attributes included in a characterization record (FIXME
REF arch).
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 1461934031,
te-label =
fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981
relationships = (
associated-with-user-account =
f3d70ef4-7e18-42af-a894-8955ba87c95d
)
),
hostname = "arbutus"
)
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
content-label = f3d70ef4-7e18-42af-a894-8955ba87c95d
),
user-account = (
username = romeo
authentication = local
)
)
Figure 6: Example instance of a content-element subject associated
with another subject via its content metadata.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
4.4. Event
Event subjects provide a structure to represent the change of IE
values that was detected by a collection task at a specific point of
time. It is mandatory to include the new values and the collection
timestamp in an event subject and it is recommended to include the
past values and a collection timestamp that were replaced by the new
IE values. Every event can also be associated with a subject-
specific event-timestamp and a lastseen-timestamp that might differ
from the corresponding collection-timestamps. If these are omitted
the collection-timestamp that is included in the content-metadata
subject is used instead.
sacm-statement = (
statement-metadata = (
publish-timestamp = 1461934031,
data-origin = 24e67957-3d31-4878-8892-da2b35e121c2,
content-type = event
),
event = (
event-attributes = (
event-name = "host-name change",
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146193322,
data-source =
fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981,
event-component = past-state
),
hostname = "arbutus"
),
content-element = (
content-metadata = (
collection-timestamp = 146195723,
data-source =
fb02e551-7101-4e68-8dec-1fde6bd10981,
event-component = current-state
),
hostname = "lilac"
)
)
)
Figure 7: Example of a SACM statement containing an event.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
4.5. Categories
Categories are special IEs that enable to refer to multiple types of
IE via just one name. Therefore, they are similar to a type-choice.
A prominent example of a category is network-address. Network-
address is a category that every kind of network address is
associated with, e.g. mac-address, ipv4-address, ipv6-address, or
typed-network-address. If a subject includes network-address as one
of its components, any of the category members are valid to be used
in its place.
Another prominent example is EndpointIdentifier. Some IEs can be
used to identify (and over time re-recognize) target endpoints -
those are associated with the category endpoint-identifier.
4.6. Designation
TODO: In the IETF, there are privacy concerns with respect to
endpoint identity and monitoring. As a result, the Endpoint ID
Design Team proposes that "endpoint identity" be changed to "endpoint
designation". Designation attributes can be used to correlate
endpoints, information about endpoints, events, etc. NOTE:
Designation attributes are just those that are mandatory-to-
implement. In practice, organizations may need to select additional
attributes beyond the mandatory-to-implement attributes to
successfully identify an endpoint on their network. Operational and
privacy concerns will be covered in Operational Considerations and
Privacy Considerations sections respectively. A proposal outlining
various options for representing designation attributes/objects in
the IPFIX syntax is being discussed on the mailing list. See IM
issue #39 at https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-
model/issues/39 for more information. Also, consider inserting table
that discusses the various properties of designation attributes and
include it in this section to help others determine whether or not a
new Information Element should be considered a designation attribute.
Lastly, explain how designation attributes can be used. For example,
letting a consumer identify an endpoint, for two purposes:
o To tell whether two endpoint attribute assertions concern the same
endpoint
o To respond to compliance measurements, for example by reporting,
remediating, and quarantining (SACM does not specify these
responses, but SACM exists to enable them.)
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
4.7. Privacy
TODO: In the IETF, there are privacy concerns with respect to
endpoint identity and monitoring. As a result, it was proposed that
a privacy property be included to denote when a Information Element
represents a privacy concern. A proposal outlining various options
for representing privacy attributes/objects in the IPFIX syntax is
being discussed on the mailing list. See IM issue #39 at
https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/39
for more information.
5. Abstract Data Types
This section describes the set of valid abstract data types that can
be used for the specification of the SACM Information Elements in
Section 7. SACM currently supports two classes of datatypes that can
be used to define Information Elements.
o Simple: Datatypes that are atomic and are used to define the type
of data represented by an attribute Information Element.
o Structured: Datatypes that can be used to define the type of data
represented by a subject Information Element.
Note that further abstract data types may be specified by future
extensions of the SACM information model.
5.1. Simple Datatypes
5.1.1. IPFIX Datatypes
To facilitate the use of existing work, SACM supports the following
abstract data types defined in Section 3 of [RFC7012].
o unsigned8, unsigned16, unsigned32, unsigned64
o signed8, signed16, signed32, signed64
o float32, float64
o boolean
o macAddress
o octetArray
o string
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
o dateTimeSeconds, dateTimeMilliseconds, dateTimeMicroseconds,
dateTimeNanoSeconds
o ipv4Address, ipv6Address
5.1.2. ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion
The type "ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion" represents a software version
that conforms to the Cisco IOS Train string format.
5.1.3. rpmSoftwareVersion
The type "rpmSoftwareVersion" represents a software version that
conforms to the EPOCH:VERSION-RELEASE format.
5.1.4. simpleSoftwareVersion
The type "simpleSoftwareVersion" represents a software version that
is a hierarchical list of non-negative integers separated by a single
character delimiter.
5.2. Structured Datatypes
5.2.1. List Datatypes
SACM defines the following abstract list data types that are used to
represent the structured data associated with subjects.
o list: indicates that the Information Element order is not
significant but MAY be preserved.
o orderedList: indicates that Information Element order is
significant and MUST be preserved.
The notation for defining a SACM structured datatype is based on
regular expressions, which are composed of the keywords "list" or
"orderedList" and an Information Element expression. IE expressions
use some of the regular expression syntax and operators, but the
terms in the expression are the names of defined Information Elements
instead of character classes. The syntax for defining list and
orderedList datatypes is described below, using BNF:
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
<list-def> -> ("list"|"orderedList") "(" <ie-expression> ")"
<ie-expression> -> <ie-name> <cardinality>?
( ("," | "|") <ie-name> <cardinality>?)*
<cardinality> -> "*" | "+" | "?" |
( "(" <non-neg-int> ("," <non-neg-int>)? ")" )
Figure 8: Syntax for Defining List Datatypes
As seen above, multiple occurences of an Information Element may be
present in a structured datatype. The cardinality of an Information
Element within a structured Information Element definition is defined
by the following operators:
* - zero or more occurrences
+ - one or more occurrences
? - zero or one occurrence
(m,n) - between m and n occurrences
Figure 9: Specifying Cardinality for Structured Datatypes
The absence of a cardinality operator implies one mandatory
occurrence of the Information Element.
Below is an example of a structured Information Element definition.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
personInfo = list(firstName, middleNames?, lastName)
firstName = string
middleNames = orderedList(middleName+)
middleName = string
lastName = string
As an example, consider the name "John Ronald Reuel Tolkien".
Below are instances of this name, structured according to the
personInfo definition.
personInfo = (firstName="John", middleNames(middleName="Ronald",
middleName="Reuel"), lastName="Tolkien")
personInfo = (middleNames(middleName="Ronald", middleName=" Reuel"),
lastName="Tolkien", firstName="John")
The instance below is not legal with respect to the definition
of personInfo because the order in middleNames is not preserved.
personInfo = (firstName="John", middleNames(middleName=" Reuel",
middleName="Ronald"), lastName="Tolkien")
Figure 10: Example of Defining a Structured Datatype
6. Information Model Assets
In order to represent the Information Elements related to the areas
listed in Section 3.1, the information model defines the information
needs (or metadata about those information needs) related to
following types of assets which arse defined in
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology] (and included below for convenience)
which are of interest to SACM. Specifically:
o Endpoint
o Software Component
o Hardware Component
o Identity
o Guidance
o Evaluation Results
The following figure shows the make up of an Endpoint asset which
contains zero or more hardware components and zero or more software
components each of which may have zero or more instances running an
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
endpoint at any given time as well as zero or more identities that
act on behalf of the endpoint when interfacing with other endpoints,
tools, or services. An endpoint may also contain other endpoints in
the case of a virtualized environment.
+---------+*______in>_______*+-----+
|Hardware | |! !|
|Component| +---------+ |! !|
+---------+ |Software |in> |! !|
|Component|____|! !|
+---------+* *|! !|
1| |! !|
*| | | +----------+
+---------+ |End- |*_____*| Identity |
|Software |in> |point| acts +----------+
|Instance |____| | for>
+---------+* 1|! !|
|! !|
|! !|
|! !|
|! !|____
|! !|0..1|
+-----+ |
|* |
|_______|
in>
Figure 11: Model of an Endpoint
6.1. Asset
As defined in [RFC4949], an asset is a system resource that is (a)
required to be protected by an information system's security policy,
(b) intended to be protected by a countermeasure, or (c) required for
a system's mission.
In the scope of SACM, an asset can be composed of other assets.
Examples of Assets include: Endpoints, Software, Guidance, or
Identity. Furthermore, an asset is not necessarily owned by an
organization.
6.2. Endpoint
From [RFC5209], an endpoint is any computing device that can be
connected to a network. Such devices normally are associated with a
particular link layer address before joining the network and
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
potentially an IP address once on the network. This includes:
laptops, desktops, servers, cell phones, or any device that may have
an IP address.
To further clarify, an endpoint is any physical or virtual device
that may have a network address. Note that, network infrastructure
devices (e.g. switches, routers, firewalls), which fit the
definition, are also considered to be endpoints within this document.
Physical endpoints are always composites that are composed of
hardware components and software components. Virtual endpoints are
composed entirely of software components and rely on software
components that provide functions equivalent to hardware components.
The SACM architecture differentiates two essential categories of
endpoints: Endpoints whose security posture is intended to be
assessed (target endpoints) and endpoints that are specifically
excluded from endpoint posture assessment (excluded endpoints).
6.3. Hardware Component
Hardware components are the distinguishable physical components that
compose an endpoint. The composition of an endpoint can be changed
over time by adding or removing hardware components. In essence,
every physical endpoint is potentially a composite of multiple
hardware components, typically resulting in a hierarchical
composition of hardware components. The composition of hardware
components is based on interconnects provided by specific hardware
types (e.g. mainboard is a hardware type that provides local busses
as an interconnect). In general, a hardware component can be
distinguished by its serial number.
Examples of a hardware components include: motherboards, network
interfaces, graphics cards, hard drives, etc.
6.4. Software Component
A software package installed on an endpoint (including the operating
system) as well as a unique serial number if present (e.g. a text
editor associated with a unique license key).
It should be noted that this includes both benign and harmful
software packages. Examples of benign software components include:
applications, patches, operating system kernel, boot loader,
firmware, code embedded on a webpage, etc. Examples of malicious
software components include: malware, trojans, viruses, etc.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
6.4.1. Software Instance
A running instance of the software component (e.g. on a multi-user
system, one logged-in user has one instance of a text editor running
and another logged-in user has another instance of the same text
editor running, or on a single-user system, a user could have
multiple independent instances of the same text editor running).
6.5. Identity
TODO: Define an Asset Identity asset. NOTE: Make sure it is clear
that this is not identity in the sense of what we have been saying
endpoint identity (now designation).
Examples of an identity include: username, user and device
certificates, etc.
6.6. Guidance
TODO: Need to resolve the forms of Guidance in the terminology and
those listed as sub-sections below.
Guidance is input instructions to processes and tasks, such as
collection or evaluation. Guidance influences the behavior of a SACM
component and is considered content of the management plane.
Guidance can be manually or automatically generated or provided.
Typically, the tasks that provide guidance to SACM components have a
low-frequency and tend to be be sporadic. A prominent example of
guidance are target endpoint profiles, but guidance can have many
forms, including:
Configuration, e.g. a SACM component's name, or a CMDB's IPv6
address.
Profiles, e.g. a set of expected states for network behavior
associated with target endpoints employed by specific users.
Policies, e.g. an interval to refresh the registration of a SACM
component, or a list of required capabilities for SACM components
in a specific location.
6.6.1. Internal Collection Guidance
An internal collector may need guidance to govern what it collects
and when.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
6.6.2. External Collection Guidance
An external collector may need guidance to govern what it collects
and when.
6.6.3. Evaluation Guidance
An evaluator typically needs Evaluation Guidance to govern what it
considers to be a good or bad security posture.
6.6.4. Retention Guidance
A SACM deployment may retain posture attributes, events, or
evaluation results for some time. Retention supports ad hoc
reporting and other use cases.
If information is retained, retention guidance controls what is
retained and for how long.
If two or more pieces of retention guidance apply to a piece of
information, the guidance calling for the longest retention should
take precedence.
6.7. Evaluation Results
Evaluation results are the resulting values from having evaluated a
set of posture attributes.
An example is: a NEA access recommendation [RFC5793].
An evaluator may be able to evaluate better if history is available.
This is a use case for retaining Endpoint Attribute Assertions for a
time.
An Evaluation Result may be retained longer than the Endpoint
Attribute Assertions from which it derives (Figure 11 does not show
this). In the limiting case, Endpoint Attribute Assertions are not
retained. When an Endpoint Attribute Assertion arrives, an evaluator
produces an Evaluation Result. These mechanics are out of the scope
of the Information Model.
7. Information Model Elements
TODO: Define specific subjects, attributes, and metadata. We may
want to consider adding small diagrams showing the relationships
between each (see Lisa's notes:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sacm/
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
kWxlnboHAXD87cned9WavwPZy5w). This may be too much work, but, not
sure yet.
7.1. hardwareSerialNumber
elementId: TBD
name: hardwareSerialNumber
dataType: string
status: current
description: A globally unique identifier for a particular
piece of hardware assigned by the vendor.
7.2. interfaceName
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceName
dataType: string
status: current
description: A short name uniquely describing an interface,
eg "Eth1/0". See [RFC2863] for the definition
of the ifName object.
7.3. interfaceIndex
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceIndex
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: The index of an interface installed on an endpoint.
The value matches the value of managed object
'ifIndex' as defined in [RFC2863]. Note that ifIndex
values are not assigned statically to an interface
and that the interfaces may be renumbered every time
the device's management system is re-initialized,
as specified in [RFC2863].
7.4. interfaceMacAddress
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceMacAddress
dataType: macAddress
status: current
description: The IEEE 802 MAC address associated with a network
interface on an endpoint.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.5. interfaceType
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceType
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: The type of a network interface. The value matches
the value of managed object 'ifType' as defined in
[IANA registry ianaiftype-mib].
7.6. interfaceFlags
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceFlags
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: This information element specifies the flags
associated with a network interface. Possible
values include:
+-------+----------------------------------+
| Value | Description |
+-------+----------------------------------+
| 0x1 | interface is up |
| 0x2 | broadcast address valid |
| 0x4 | turn on debugging |
| 0x8 | is a loopback net |
| 0x10 | interface is point-to-point link |
| 0x20 | avoid use of trailers |
| 0x40 | resources allocated |
| 0x80 | no address resolution protocol |
| 0x100 | receive all packets |
+-------+----------------------------------+
7.7. networkInterface
elementId: TBD
name: networkInterface
dataType: orderedList(interfaceName, interfaceIndex, macAddress,
ifType, flags)
status: current
description: Information about a network interface
installed on an endpoint. The
following high-level digram
describes the structure of
networkInterface information
element.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.8. softwareIdentifier
elementId: TBD
name: softwareIdentifier
dataType: string
status: current
description: A globally unique identifier for a particular
software application.
7.9. softwareTitle
elementId: TBD
name: softwareTitle
dataType: string
status: current
description: The title of the software application.
7.10. softwareCreator
elementId: TBD
name: softwareCreator
dataType: string
status: current
description: The software developer (e.g., vendor or author).
7.11. simpleSoftwareVersion
elementId: TBD
name: simpleSoftwareVersion
dataType: simpleVersion
status: current
description: The version string for a software application that
follows the simple versioning scheme.
7.12. rpmSoftwareVersion
elementId: TBD
name: rpmSoftwareVersion
dataType: rpmVersion
status: current
description: The version string for a software application that
follows the RPM versioning scheme.
7.13. ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion
dataType: ciscoTrainVersion
status: current
description: The version string for a software application that
follows the Cisco Train Release versioning scheme.
7.14. softwareVersion
elementId: TBD
name: softwareVerison
dataType: list(simpleSoftwareVersion | rpmSoftwareVersion |
ciscoTrainSoftwareVersion)
status: current
description: The version of the software application. Software
applications may be versioned using a number of
schemas. The following high-level digram describes
the structure of the softwareVersion information
element.
7.15. lastUpdated
elementId: TBD
name: lastUpdated
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
description: The date and time when the software instance
was last updated on the system (e.g., new
version instlalled or patch applied)
7.16. softwareInstance
elementId: TBD
name: softwareInstance
dataType: orderedList(softwareIdentifier, title, creator,
softwareVersion, lastUpdated)
status: current
description: Information about an instance of software
installed on an endpoint. The following
high-level digram describes the structure of
softwareInstance information element.
7.17. globallyUniqueIdentifier
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: globallyUniqueIdentifier
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
metadata: true
description: TODO.
7.18. dataOrigin
elementId: TBD
name: dataOrigin
dataType: string
status: current
metadata: true
description: The origin of the data. TODO make a better
description.
7.19. dataSource
elementId: TBD
name: dataSource
dataType: string
status: current
metadata: true
description: The source of the data. TODO make a better
description.
7.20. creationTimestamp
elementId: TBD
name: creationTimestamp
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
metadata: true
description: The date and time when the posture
information was created by a SACM Component.
7.21. collectionTimestamp
elementId: TBD
name: collectionTimestamp
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
metadata: true
description: The date and time when the posture
information was collected or observed by a SACM
Component.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.22. publicationTimestamp
elementId: TBD
name: publicationTimestamp
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
metadata: true
description: The date and time when the posture
information was published.
7.23. relayTimestamp
elementId: TBD
name: relayTimestamp
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
metadata: true
description: The date and time when the posture
information was relayed to another SACM Component.
7.24. storageTimestamp
elementId: TBD
name: storageTimestamp
dataType: dateTimeSeconds
status: current
metadata: true
description: The date and time when the posture
information was stored in a Repository.
7.25. type
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: type
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
metadata: true
description: The type of data model use to represent
some set of endpoint information. The following
table lists the set of data models supported by SACM.
+-------+----------------------------------+
| Value | Description |
+-------+----------------------------------+
| 0x00 | Data Model 1 |
+-------+----------------------------------+
| 0x01 | Data Model 2 |
+-------+----------------------------------+
| 0x02 | Data Model 3 |
+-------+----------------------------------+
|... | ... |
+-------+----------------------------------+
7.26. protocolIdentifier
elementId: TBD
name: protocolIdentifier
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: The value of the protocol number in the IP packet
header. The protocol number identifies the IP packet
payload type. Protocol numbers are defined in the
IANA Protocol Numbers registry.
In Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4), this is
carried in the Protocol field. In Internet Protocol
version 6 (IPv6), this is carried in the Next Header
field in the last extension header of the packet.
7.27. sourceTransportPort
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: sourceTransportPort
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: The source port identifier in the transport header.
For the transport protocols UDP, TCP, and SCTP, this
is the source port number given in the respective
header. This field MAY also be used for future
transport protocols that have 16-bit source port
identifiers.
7.28. sourceIPv4PrefixLength
elementId: TBD
name: sourceIPv4PrefixLength
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: The number of contiguous bits that are relevant in
the sourceIPv4Prefix Information Element.
7.29. ingressInterface
elementId: TBD
name: ingressInterface
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: The index of the IP interface where packets of this
Flow are being received. The value matches the
value of managed object 'ifIndex' as defined in
[RFC2863]. Note that ifIndex values are not assigned
statically to an interface and that the interfaces
may be renumbered every time the device's management
system is re-initialized, as specified in [RFC2863].
7.30. destinationTransportPort
elementId: TBD
name: destinationTransportPort
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: The destination port identifier in the transport
header. For the transport protocols UDP, TCP, and
SCTP, this is the destination port number given in
the respective header. This field MAY also be used
for future transport protocols that have 16-bit
destination port identifiers.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.31. sourceIPv6PrefixLength
elementId: TBD
name: sourceIPv6PrefixLength
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: The number of contiguous bits that are relevant in
the sourceIPv6Prefix Information Element.
7.32. sourceIPv4Prefix
elementId: TBD
name: sourceIPv4Prefix
dataType: ipv4Address
status: current
description: IPv4 source address prefix.
7.33. destinationIPv4Prefix
elementId: TBD
name: destinationIPv4Prefix
dataType: ipv4Address
status: current
description: IPv4 destination address prefix.
7.34. sourceMacAddress
elementId: TBD
name: sourceMacAddress
dataType: macAddress
status: current
description: The IEEE 802 source MAC address field.
7.35. ipVersion
elementId: TBD
name: ipVersion
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: The IP version field in the IP packet header.
7.36. interfaceDescription
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: interfaceDescription
dataType: string
status: current
description: The description of an interface, eg "FastEthernet
1/0" or "ISP
connection".
7.37. applicationDescription
elementId: TBD
name: applicationDescription
dataType: string
status: current
description: Specifies the description of an application.
7.38. applicationId
elementId: TBD
name: applicationId
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: Specifies an Application ID per [RFC6759].
7.39. applicationName
elementId: TBD
name: applicationName
dataType: string
status: current
description: Specifies the name of an application.
7.40. exporterIPv4Address
elementId: TBD
name: exporterIPv4Address
dataType: ipv4Address
status: current
description: The IPv4 address used by the Exporting Process.
This is used by the Collector to identify the
Exporter in cases where the identity of the Exporter
may have been obscured by the use of a proxy.
7.41. exporterIPv6Address
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: exporterIPv6Address
dataType: ipv6Address
status: current
description: The IPv6 address used by the Exporting Process.
This is used by the Collector to identify the
Exporter in cases where the identity of the
Exporter may have been obscured by the use of a
proxy.
7.42. portId
elementId: TBD
name: portId
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: An identifier of a line port that is unique per
IPFIX Device hosting an Observation Point.
Typically, this Information Element is used for
limiting the scope of other Information Elements.
7.43. templateId
elementId: TBD
name: templateId
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: An identifier of a Template that is locally unique
within a combination of a Transport session and an
Observation Domain.
Template IDs 0-255 are reserved for Template Sets,
Options Template Sets, and other reserved Sets yet
to be created. Template IDs of Data Sets are
numbered from 256 to 65535.
Typically, this Information Element is used for
limiting the scope of other Information Elements.
Note that after a re-start of the Exporting Process
Template identifiers may be re-assigned.
7.44. collectorIPv4Address
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: collectorIPv4Address
dataType: ipv4Address
status: current
description: An IPv4 address to which the Exporting Process sends
Flow information.
7.45. collectorIPv6Address
elementId: TBD
name: collectorIPv6Address
dataType: ipv6Address
status: current
description: An IPv6 address to which the Exporting Process sends
Flow information.
7.46. informationElementIndex
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementIndex
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: A zero-based index of an Information Element
referenced by informationElementId within a Template
referenced by templateId; used to disambiguate
scope for templates containing multiple identical
Information Elements.
7.47. informationElementId
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementId
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: This Information Element contains the ID of another
Information Element.
7.48. informationElementDataType
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementDataType
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: A description of the abstract data type of an IPFIX
information element.These are taken from the
abstract data types defined in section 3.1 of the
IPFIX Information Model [RFC5102]; see that section
for more information on the types described in the
informationElementDataType sub-registry.
These types are registered in the IANA IPFIX
Information Element Data Type subregistry. This
subregistry is intended to assign numbers for type
names, not to provide a mechanism for adding data
types to the IPFIX Protocol, and as such requires a
Standards Action [RFC5226] to modify.
7.49. informationElementDescription
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementDescription
dataType: string
status: current
description: A UTF-8 [RFC3629] encoded Unicode string containing
a human-readable description of an Information
Element. The content of the
informationElementDescription MAY be annotated with
one or more language tags [RFC4646], encoded
in-line [RFC2482] within the UTF-8 string, in order
to specify the language in which the description is
written. Description text in multiple languages MAY
tag each section with its own language tag; in this
case, the description information in each language
SHOULD have equivalent meaning. In the absence of
any language tag, the "i-default" [RFC2277] language
SHOULD be assumed. See the Security Considerations
section for notes on string handling for Information
Element type records.
7.50. informationElementName
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementName
dataType: string
status: current
description: A UTF-8 [RFC3629] encoded Unicode string containing
the name of an Information Element, intended as a
simple identifier. See the Security Considerations
section for notes on string handling for Information
Element type records.
7.51. informationElementRangeBegin
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementRangeBegin
dataType: unsigned64
status: current
description: Contains the inclusive low end of the range of
acceptable values for an Information Element.
7.52. informationElementRangeEnd
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementRangeEnd
dataType: unsigned64
status: current
description: Contains the inclusive high end of the range of
acceptable values for an Information Element.
7.53. informationElementSemantics
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementSemantics
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: A description of the semantics of an IPFIX
Information Element. These are taken from the data
type semantics defined in section 3.2 of the IPFIX
Information Model [RFC5102]; see that section for
more information on the types defined in the
informationElementSemantics sub-registry. This
field may take the values in Table ; the special
value 0x00 (default) is used to note that no
semantics apply to the field; it cannot be
manipulated by a Collecting Process or File Reader
that does not understand it a priori.
These semantics are registered in the IANA IPFIX
Information Element Semantics subregistry. This
subregistry is intended to assign numbers for
semantics names, not to provide a mechanism for
adding semantics to the IPFIX Protocol, and as such
requires a Standards Action [RFC5226] to modify.
7.54. informationElementUnits
elementId: TBD
name: informationElementUnits
dataType: unsigned16
status: current
description: A description of the units of an IPFIX Information
Element. These correspond to the units implicitly
defined in the Information Element definitions in
section 5 of the IPFIX Information Model [RFC5102];
see that section for more information on the types
described in the informationElementsUnits
sub-registry. This field may take the values in
Table 3 below; the special value 0x00 (none) is
used to note that the field is unitless.
These types are registered in the IANA IPFIX
Information Element Units subregistry; new types
may be added on a First Come First Served [RFC5226]
basis.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.55. userName
elementId: TBD
name: userName
dataType: string
status: current
description: User name associated with the flow.
7.56. applicationCategoryName
elementId: TBD
name: applicationCategoryName
dataType: string
status: current
description: An attribute that provides a first level
categorization for each Application ID.
7.57. mibObjectValueInteger
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueInteger
dataType: signed64
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that the
integer value of a MIB object will be exported.
The MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier")
for this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field
Option or via another means. This Information
Element is used for MIB objects with the Base
Syntax of Integer32 and INTEGER with IPFIX Reduced
Size Encoding used as required. The value is
encoded as per the standard IPFIX Abstract Data Type
of signed64.
7.58. mibObjectValueOctetString
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueOctetString
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that an
Octet String or Opaque value of a MIB object will
be exported. The MIB Object Identifier
("mibObjectIdentifier") for this field MUST be
exported in a MIB Field Option or via another means.
This Information Element is used for MIB objects
with the Base Syntax of OCTET STRING and Opaque. The
value is encoded as per the standard IPFIX Abstract
Data Type of octetArray.
7.59. mibObjectValueOID
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueOID
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that an
Object Identifier or OID value of a MIB object will
be exported. The MIB Object Identifier
("mibObjectIdentifier") for this field MUST be
exported in a MIB Field Option or via another means.
This Information Element is used for MIB objects
with the Base Syntax of OBJECT IDENTIFIER. Note -
In this case the "mibObjectIdentifier" will define
which MIB object is being exported while the value
contained in this Information Element will be an
OID as a value. The mibObjectValueOID Information
Element is encoded as ASN.1/BER [BER] in an
octetArray.
7.60. mibObjectValueBits
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueBits
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that a
set of Enumerated flags or bits from a MIB object
will be exported. The MIB Object Identifier
("mibObjectIdentifier") for this field MUST be
exported in a MIB Field Option or via another means.
This Information Element is used for MIB objects
with the Base Syntax of BITS. The flags or bits are
encoded as per the standard IPFIX Abstract Data Type
of octetArray, with sufficient length to accommodate
the required number of bits. If the number of bits
is not an integer multiple of octets then the most
significant bits at end of the octetArray MUST be
set to zero.
7.61. mibObjectValueIPAddress
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueIPAddress
dataType: ipv4Address
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that the
IPv4 Address of a MIB object will be exported. The
MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier") for
this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field Option
or via another means. This Information Element is
used for MIB objects with the Base Syntax of
IPaddress. The value is encoded as per the standard
IPFIX Abstract Data Type of ipv4Address.
7.62. mibObjectValueCounter
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueCounter
dataType: unsigned64
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that the
counter value of a MIB object will be exported.
The MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier")
for this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field
Option or via another means. This Information
Element is used for MIB objects with the Base
Syntax of Counter32 or Counter64 with IPFIX Reduced
Size Encoding used as required. The value is encoded
as per the standard IPFIX Abstract Data Type
of unsigned64.
7.63. mibObjectValueGauge
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueGauge
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that the
Gauge value of a MIB object will be exported. The
MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier") for
this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field Option
or via another means. This Information Element is
used for MIB objects with the Base Syntax of Gauge32.
The value is encoded as per the standard IPFIX
Abstract Data Type of unsigned64. This value will
represent a non-negative integer, which may increase
or decrease, but shall never exceed a maximum
value, nor fall below a minimum value.
7.64. mibObjectValueTimeTicks
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueTimeTicks
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that the
TimeTicks value of a MIB object will be exported.
The MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier")
for this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field
Option or via another means. This Information
Element is used for MIB objects with the Base
Syntax of TimeTicks. The value is encoded as per
the standard IPFIX Abstract Data Type of unsigned32.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.65. mibObjectValueUnsigned
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueUnsigned
dataType: unsigned64
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that an
unsigned integer value of a MIB object will be
exported. The MIB Object Identifier
("mibObjectIdentifier") for this field MUST be
exported in a MIB Field Option or via another means.
This Information Element is used for MIB objects
with the Base Syntax of unsigned64 with IPFIX
Reduced Size Encoding used as required. The value is
encoded as per the standard IPFIX Abstract Data Type
of unsigned64.
7.66. mibObjectValueTable
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueTable
dataType: orderedList
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that a
complete or partial conceptual table will be
exported. The MIB Object Identifier
("mibObjectIdentifier") for this field MUST be
exported in a MIB Field Option or via another means.
This Information Element is used for MIB objects
with a SYNTAX of SEQUENCE. This is encoded as a
subTemplateList of mibObjectValue Information
Elements. The template specified in the
subTemplateList MUST be an Options Template and
MUST include all the Objects listed in the INDEX
clause as Scope Fields.
7.67. mibObjectValueRow
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectValueRow
dataType: orderedList
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that a
single row of a conceptual table will be exported.
The MIB Object Identifier ("mibObjectIdentifier")
for this field MUST be exported in a MIB Field
Option or via another means. This Information
Element is used for MIB objects with a SYNTAX of
SEQUENCE. This is encoded as a subTemplateList of
mibObjectValue Information Elements. The
subTemplateList exported MUST contain exactly one
row (i.e., one instance of the subtemplate). The
template specified in the subTemplateList MUST be
an Options Template and MUST include all the
Objects listed in the INDEX clause as Scope Fields.
7.68. mibObjectIdentifier
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectIdentifier
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: An IPFIX Information Element which denotes that a
MIB Object Identifier (MIB OID) is exported in the
(Options) Template Record. The mibObjectIdentifier
Information Element contains the OID assigned to
the MIB Object Type Definition encoded as
ASN.1/BER [BER].
7.69. mibSubIdentifier
elementId: TBD
name: mibSubIdentifier
dataType: unsigned32
status: current
description: A non-negative sub-identifier of an Object
Identifier (OID).
7.70. mibIndexIndicator
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibIndexIndicator
dataType: unsigned64
status: current
description: This set of bit fields is used for marking the
Information Elements of a Data Record that serve as
INDEX MIB objects for an indexed Columnar MIB
object. Each bit represents an Information Element
in the Data Record with the n-th bit representing
the n-th Information Element. A bit set to value 1
indicates that the corresponding Information Element
is an index of the Columnar Object represented by
the mibFieldValue. A bit set to value 0 indicates
that this is not the case.
If the Data Record contains more than 64
Information Elements, the corresponding Template
SHOULD be designed such that all INDEX
Fields are among the first 64 Information Elements,
because the mibIndexIndicator only contains 64 bits.
If the Data Record contains less than 64
Information Elements, then the extra bits in the
mibIndexIndicator for which no corresponding
Information Element exists MUST have the value 0,
and must be disregarded by the Collector. This
Information Element may be exported with
IPFIX Reduced Size Encoding.
7.71. mibCaptureTimeSemantics
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
elementId: TBD
name: mibCaptureTimeSemantics
dataType: unsigned8
status: current
description: Indicates when in the lifetime of the flow the MIB
value was retrieved from the MIB for a
mibObjectIdentifier. This is used to indicate if
the value exported was collected from the MIB
closer to flow creation or flow export time and
will refer to the Timestamp fields included in the
same record. This field SHOULD be used when
exporting a mibObjectValue that specifies counters
or statistics.
If the MIB value was sampled by SNMP prior to the
IPFIX Metering Process or Exporting Process
retrieving the value (i.e., the data is already
stale) and it's important to know the exact sampling
time, then an additional observationTime* element
should be paired with the OID using structured data.
Similarly, if different mibCaptureTimeSemantics
apply to different mibObject elements within the
Data Record, then individual mibCaptureTimeSemantics
should be paired with each OID using structured data.
Values:
0. undefined
1. begin - The value for the MIB object is captured
from the MIB when the Flow is first observed
2. end - The value for the MIB object is captured
from the MIB when the Flow ends
3. export - The value for the MIB object is
captured from the MIB at export time
4. average - The value for the MIB object is an
average of multiple captures from the MIB over the
observed life of the Flow
7.72. mibContextEngineID
elementId: TBD
name: mibContextEngineID
dataType: octetArray
status: current
description: A mibContextEngineID that specifies the SNMP engine
ID for a MIB field being exported over IPFIX.
Definition as per [RFC3411] section 3.3.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
7.73. mibContextName
elementId: TBD
name: mibContextName
dataType: string
status: current
description: This Information Element denotes that a MIB Context
Name is specified for a MIB field being exported
over IPFIX. Reference [RFC3411] section 3.3.
7.74. mibObjectName
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectName
dataType: string
status: current
description: The name (called a descriptor in [RFC2578]
of an object type definition.
7.75. mibObjectDescription
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectDescription
dataType: string
status: current
description: The value of the DESCRIPTION clause of an MIB object
type definition.
7.76. mibObjectSyntax
elementId: TBD
name: mibObjectSyntax
dataType: string
status: current
description: The value of the SYNTAX clause of an MIB object type
definition, which may include a Textual Convention
or Subtyping. See [RFC2578].
7.77. mibModuleName
elementId: TBD
name: mibModuleName
dataType: string
status: current
description: The textual name of the MIB module that defines a MIB
Object.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
8. SACM Usage Scenario Example
TODO: this section needs to refer out to wherever the operations /
generalized workflow content ends up
TODO: revise to eliminate graph references
This section illustrates the proposed SACM Information Model as
applied to SACM Usage Scenario 2.2.3, Detection of Posture Deviations
[RFC7632]. The following subsections describe the elements
(components and elements), graph model, and operations (sample
workflow) required to support the Detection of Posture Deviations
scenario.
The Detection of Posture Deviations scenario involves multiple
elements interacting to accomplish the goals of the scenario.
Figure 11 illustrates those elements along with their major
communication paths.
8.1. Graph Model for Detection of Posture Deviation
The following subsections contain examples of identifiers and
metadata which would enable detection of posture deviation. These
lists are by no means exhaustive - many other types of metadata would
be enumerated in a data model that fully addressed this usage
scenario.
8.1.1. Components
The proposed SACM Information Model contains three components, as
defined in the SACM Architecture [I-D.ietf-sacm-architecture]:
Posture Attribute Information Provider, Posture Attribute Information
Consumer, and Control Plane.
In this example, the components are instantiated as follows:
o The Posture Attribute Information Provider is an endpoint security
service which monitors the compliance state of the endpoint and
reports any deviations for the expected posture.
o The Posture Attribute Information Consumer is an analytics engine
which absorbs information from around the network and generates a
"heat map" of which areas in the network are seeing unusually high
rates of posture deviations.
o The Control Plane is a security automation broker which receives
subscription requests from the analytics engine and authorizes
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
access to appropriate information from the endpoint security
service.
8.1.2. Identifiers
To represent the elements listed above, the set of identifiers might
include (but is not limited to):
o Identity - a device itself, or a user operating a device,
categorized by type of identity (e.g. username or X.509
certificate [RFC5280])
o Software asset
o Network Session
o Address - categorized by type of address (e.g. MAC address, IP
address, Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Host Identity Tag (HIT)
[RFC5201], etc.)
o Task - categorized by type of task (e.g. internal collector,
external collector, evaluator, or reporting task)
o Result - categorized by type of result (e.g. evaluation result or
report)
o Guidance
8.1.3. Metadata
To characterize the elements listed above, the set of metadata types
might include (but is not limited to):
o Authorization metadata attached to an identity identifier, or to a
link between a network session identifier and an identity
identifier, or to a link between a network session identifier and
an address identifier.
o Location metadata attached to a link between a network session
identifier and an address identifier.
o Event metadata attached to an address identifier or an identity
identifier of an endpoint, which would be made available to
interested parties at the time of publication, but not stored
long-term. For example, when a user disables required security
software, an internal collector associated with an endpoint
security service might publish guidance violation event metadata
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
attached to the identity identifier of the endpoint, to notify
consumers of the change in endpoint state.
o Posture attribute metadata attached to an identity identifier of
an endpoint. For example, when required security software is not
running, an internal collector associated with an endpoint
security service might publish posture attribute metadata attached
to the identity identifier of the endpoint, to notify consumers of
the current state of the endpoint.
8.1.4. Relationships between Identifiers and Metadata
Interaction between multiple sets of identifiers and metadata lead to
some fairly common patterns, or "constellations", of metadata. For
example, an authenticated-session metadata constellation might
include a central network session with authorizations and location
attached, and links to a user identity, an endpoint identity, a MAC
address, an IP address, and the identity of the policy server that
authorized the session, for the duration of the network session.
These constellations may be independent of each other, or one
constellation may be connected to another. For example, an
authenticated-session metadata constellation may be created when a
user connects an endpoint to the network; separately, an endpoint-
posture metadata constellation may be created when an endpoint
security system and other collectors gather and publish posture
information related to an endpoint. These two constellations are not
necessarily connected to each other, but may be joined if the
component publishing the authenticated-session metadata constellation
is able to link the network session identifier to the identity
identifier of the endpoint.
8.2. Workflow
The workflow for exchange of information supporting detection of
posture deviation, using a standard publish/subscribe/query transport
model such as available with IF-MAP [TNC-IF-MAP-SOAP-Binding] or
XMPP-Grid [I-D.salowey-sacm-xmpp-grid], is as follows:
1. The analytics engine (Posture Assessment Information Consumer)
establishes connectivity and authorization with the transport
fabric, and subscribes to updates on posture deviations.
2. The endpoint security service (Posture Assessment Information
Provider) requests connection to the transport fabric.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
3. Transport fabric authenticates and establishes authorized
privileges (e.g. privilege to publish and/or subscribe to
security data) for the requesting components.
4. The endpoint security service evaluates the endpoint, detects
posture deviation, and publishes information on the posture
deviation.
5. The transport fabric notifies the analytics engine, based on its
subscription of the new posture deviation information.
Other components, such as access control policy servers or
remediation systems, may also consume the posture deviation
information provided by the endpoint security service.
9. Acknowledgements
Many of the specifications in this document have been developed in a
public-private partnership with vendors and end-users. The hard work
of the SCAP community is appreciated in advancing these efforts to
their current level of adoption.
Over the course of developing the initial draft, Brant Cheikes, Matt
Hansbury, Daniel Haynes, Scott Pope, Charles Schmidt, and Steve
Venema have contributed text to many sections of this document.
9.1. Contributors
The RFC guidelines no longer allow RFCs to be published with a large
number of authors. Some additional authors contributed to specific
sections of this document; their names are listed in the individual
section headings as well as alphabetically listed with their
affiliations below.
+---------------+----------------+---------------------------------+
| Name | Affiliation | Contact |
+---------------+----------------+---------------------------------+
| Henk Birkholz | Fraunhofer SIT | henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de |
+---------------+----------------+---------------------------------+
10. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
11. Operational Considerations
TODO: Need to include various operational considerations here.
Proposed sections include timestamp accuracy and which attributes
attributes designate an endpoint.
12. Privacy Considerations
TODO: Need to include various privacy considerations here.
13. Security Considerations
Posture Assessments need to be performed in a safe and secure manner.
In that regard, there are multiple aspects of security that apply to
the communications between components as well as the capabilities
themselves. Due to time constraints, this information model only
contains an initial listing of items that need to be considered with
respect to security. This list is not exhaustive, and will need to
be augmented as the model continues to be developed/refined.
Initial list of security considerations include:
Authentication: Every component and asset needs to be able to
identify itself and verify the identity of other components
and assets.
Confidentiality: Communications between components need to be
protected from eavesdropping or unauthorized collection.
Some communications between components and assets may need to
be protected as well.
Integrity: The information exchanged between components needs to be
protected from modification. some exchanges between assets
and components will also have this requirement.
Restricted Access: Access to the information collected, evaluated,
reported, and stored should only be viewable/consumable to
authenticated and authorized entities.
The TNC IF-MAP Binding for SOAP [TNC-IF-MAP-SOAP-Binding] and TNC IF-
MAP Metadata for Network Security [TNC-IF-MAP-NETSEC-METADATA]
document security considerations for sharing information via security
automation. Most, and possibly all, of these considerations also
apply to information shared via this proposed information model.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
14. References
14.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.
14.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sacm-architecture]
Cam-Winget, N., Ford, B., Lorenzin, L., McDonald, I., and
l. loxx@cisco.com, "Secure Automation and Continuous
Monitoring (SACM) Architecture", draft-ietf-sacm-
architecture-00 (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-requirements]
Cam-Winget, N. and L. Lorenzin, "Secure Automation and
Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements", draft-ietf-
sacm-requirements-01 (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.salowey-sacm-xmpp-grid]
Salowey, J., Lorenzin, L., Kahn, C., Pope, S., Appala, S.,
Woland, A., and N. Cam-Winget, "XMPP Protocol Extensions
for Use in SACM Information Transport", draft-salowey-
sacm-xmpp-grid-00 (work in progress), July 2014.
[RFC3580] Congdon, P., Aboba, B., Smith, A., Zorn, G., and J. Roese,
"IEEE 802.1X Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
(RADIUS) Usage Guidelines", RFC 3580,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3580, September 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3580>.
[RFC4949] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2",
FYI 36, RFC 4949, DOI 10.17487/RFC4949, August 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4949>.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
[RFC5201] Moskowitz, R., Nikander, P., Jokela, P., Ed., and T.
Henderson, "Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5201,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5201, April 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5201>.
[RFC5209] Sangster, P., Khosravi, H., Mani, M., Narayan, K., and J.
Tardo, "Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA): Overview and
Requirements", RFC 5209, DOI 10.17487/RFC5209, June 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5209>.
[RFC5793] Sahita, R., Hanna, S., Hurst, R., and K. Narayan, "PB-TNC:
A Posture Broker (PB) Protocol Compatible with Trusted
Network Connect (TNC)", RFC 5793, DOI 10.17487/RFC5793,
March 2010, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5793>.
[RFC7012] Claise, B., Ed. and B. Trammell, Ed., "Information Model
for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)", RFC 7012,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7012, September 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7012>.
[RFC7632] Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security
Posture Assessment: Enterprise Use Cases", RFC 7632,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7632, September 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7632>.
[TNC-IF-MAP-NETSEC-METADATA]
Trusted Computing Group, ""TNC IF-MAP Metadata for Network
Security", Specification Version 1.1", May 2012.
[TNC-IF-MAP-SOAP-Binding]
Trusted Computing Group, ""TNC IF-MAP Binding for SOAP",
Specification Version 2.2", March 2014.
Appendix A. Change Log
A.1. Changes in Revision 01
Renamed "credential" to "identity", following industry usage. A
credential includes proof, such as a key or password. A username or
a distinguished name is called an "identity".
Removed Session, because an endpoint's network activity is not SACM's
initial focus
Removed Authorization, for the same reason
Added many-to-many relationship between Hardware Component and
Endpoint, for clarity
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
Added many-to-many relationship between Software Component and
Endpoint, for clarity
Added "contains" relationship between Network Interface and Network
Interface
Removed relationship between Network Interface and Account. The
endpoint knows the identity it used to gain network access. The PDP
also knows that. But they probably do not know the account.
Added relationship between Network Interface and Identity. The
endpoint and the PDP will typically know the identity.
Made identity-to-account a many-to-one relationship.
A.2. Changes in Revision 02
Added Section Identifying Attributes.
Split the figure into Figure Model of Endpoint and Figure Information
Elements.
Added Figure Information Elements Take 2, proposing a triple-store
model.
Some editorial cleanup
A.3. Changes in Revision 03
Moved Appendix A.1, Appendix A.2, and Mapping to SACM Use Cases into
the Appendix. Added a reference to it in Section 1
Added the Section 4 section. Provided notes for the type of
information we need to add in this section.
Added the Section 6 section. Moved sections on Endpoint, Hardware
Component, Software Component, Hardware Instance, and Software
Instance there. Provided notes for the type of information we need
to add in this section.
Removed the Provenance of Information Section. SACM is not going to
solve provenance rather give organizations enough information to
figure it out.
Updated references to the Endpoint Security Posture Assessment:
Enterprise Use Cases document to reflect that it was published as an
RFC.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
Fixed the formatting of a few figures.
Included references to [RFC3580] where RADIUS is mentioned.
A.4. Changes in Revision 04
Integrated the IPFIX [RFC7012] syntax into Section 4.
Converted many of the existing SACM Information Elements to the IPFIX
syntax.
Included existing IPFIX Information Elements and datatypes that could
likely be reused for SACM in Section 7 and Section 4 respectively.
Removed the sections related to reports as described in
https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/
issues/30.
Cleaned up other text throughout the document.
A.5. Changes in Revision 05
Merged proposed changes from the I-D IM into the WG IM
(https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/
issues/41).
Fixed some formatting warnings.
Removed a duplicate IE and added a few IE datatypes that were
missing.
A.6. Changes in Revision 06
Clarified that the SACM statement and content-element subjects are
conceptual and that they do not need to be explicitly defined in a
data model as long as the necessary information is provided.
Updated the IPFIX syntax used to define Information Elements. There
are still a couple of open issues that need to be resolved.
Updated some of the Information Elements contained in Section 7 to
use the revised IPFIX syntax. The rest of the Information Elements
will be converted in a later revision.
Performed various clean-up and refactoring in Sections 6 and 7.
Still need to go through Section 8.
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
Removed appendices that were not referenced in the body of the draft.
The text from them is still available in previous revisions of this
document if needed.
Authors' Addresses
David Waltermire (editor)
National Institute of Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Drive
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877
USA
Email: david.waltermire@nist.gov
Kim Watson
United States Department of Homeland Security
DHS/CS&C/FNR
245 Murray Ln. SW, Bldg 410
MS0613
Washington, DC 20528
USA
Email: kimberly.watson@hq.dhs.gov
Clifford Kahn
Pulse Secure, LLC
2700 Zanker Road, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: cliffordk@pulsesecure.net
Lisa Lorenzin
Pulse Secure, LLC
2700 Zanker Road, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: llorenzin@pulsesecure.net
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft SACM Information Model July 2016
Michael Cokus
The MITRE Corporation
903 Enterprise Parkway, Suite 200
Hampton, VA 23666
USA
Email: msc@mitre.org
Daniel Haynes
The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road
Bedford, MA 01730
USA
Email: dhaynes@mitre.org
Waltermire, et al. Expires January 9, 2017 [Page 59]
