[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 draft-ietf-sacm-requirements

SACM                                                       N. Cam-Winget
Internet-Draft                                             Cisco Systems
Intended status: Informational                              June 8, 2014
Expires: December 10, 2014


    Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements
                  draft-camwinget-sacm-requirements-04

Abstract

   This document defines the scope and set of requirements for the
   Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring working group.  The
   requirements and scope are based on the agreed upon use cases.

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 December 10, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (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.





Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft              Abbreviated Title                  June 2014


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.1.  General SACM requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.2.  Requirements based on Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   Today's challenges of evolving threats and improved analytics to
   address such threats highlight a need to automate the securing of
   both information and the systems that store, process and transmit the
   information.  SACM's charter focuses on addressing some of these
   challenges in a narrower scope by bounding the task to address use
   cases that pertain to the posture assessment of endpoints.

   This document focuses on describing the requirements for facilitating
   the exchange of posture assessment information, in particular, for
   the use cases as exemplified in [I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases].Also, this
   document uses terminology defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology].

2.  Requirements

   This document defines requirements based on the SACM use cases
   defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases].  This section describes the
   requirements used by SACM to assess and compare candidate information
   models and protocols to suit the architecture.  These requirements
   express characteristics or features that a candidate protocol or data
   model must be capable of offering so as to ensure security and
   interoperability.

2.1.  General SACM requirements

   The use cases defined in [I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases] apply to many
   deployment scenarios.  To ensure interoperability, scalability and
   flexibility in any of these deployments, the following requirements
   are defined for all use cases:

   G-001  Extensibility: the data models, protocols and transports
    defined by SACM must be extensible to allow support for non-standard
    and future extensions.  The transport protocol must support easily



Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft              Abbreviated Title                  June 2014


    adding new operations while maintaining backwards compatibility.
    The query language must allow general inquiries as well as
    expression of specific paths to follow; retrieval of specific
    information based on an event, as well as on a continuous basis; and
    the ability to retrieve specific pieces of information, specific
    classes of information, and/or the entirety of available
    information.  The information model must accommodate the addition of
    new data types and/or schemas in a backwards compatible fashion.

   G-002  Interoperability: The data models, protocols and transports
    must be specified with enough details and state machine to ensure
    interoperability.

   G-003  Scalability: The data models, protocols and transports must be
    scalable.  SACM must support a broad set of deployment scenarios.
    As such, it is possible that the size or posture assessment
    information can vary from a single assessment that is small in
    (record or datagram) size to a very large datagram or a very large
    set of assessments and must be addressed by the SACM specifications
    defined.

   G-004  Agility: The agility requirement is to ensure that the data
    model, protocols, transports and its implementations are suitable to
    fit in different deployment models and scenarios.  Considerations
    for the lightweight implementations of data models and transports is
    required.  Use cases, especially in the vulnerability assessment and
    threat defense applications require time criticality in both
    obtaining the information as well as consuming (e.g. parsing) the
    data.

   G-005  Transport variability: Different transports must be supported
    to address different deployment and time constraints.  Supporting
    transports at the Layer 2, Layer 3 and higher application layers.

   G-006  Extensibility: a method for expressing both standard and non-
    standard (implementer-specific) data attributes while avoiding
    collisions should be defined.  For interoperability and scope
    boundary, an explicit set of data attributes as mandatory to
    implement should be defined and focused on Posture Assessment should
    be described to allow for interoprability too.

   G-007  Access Control: To address security and privacy
    considerations, the data model, protocols and transport must
    consider authorization based on roles to only allow authorized
    requestors and publishers to access the information being requested
    or published.





Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft              Abbreviated Title                  June 2014


2.2.  Requirements based on Use Cases

   This section describes the requirements that may apply to information
   models, data models, protocols or transports as identified by the use
   cases in [I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases] and referenced by the section
   numbers from that draft.

   REQ-001  Attribute Dictionary: Use Cases in the whole of Section 2
    describe the need for an Attribute Dictionary.  With SACM's scope
    focused on Posture Assessment, the attribute collection and
    aggregation must have a well understood set of attributes inclusive
    of their meaning or usage intent.

   REQ-002  Information Model: Use Case 2.1.1 describes the need for an
    Information Model to drive content definition.  As SACM endeavors to
    reuse already existing standards which may have their own data
    models defined by instantiating an information model, the data
    models can be mapped to SACM's information model.  See [RFC3444] for
    a description and distinctions between an information and data
    model.

   REQ-003  Data Model to Protocol mapping: Use Case 2.1.1 describes the
    need to instantiate a data model that can map to the SACM protocols
    for posture content operations such as publication, query, change
    detection and asynchronous notifications.

   REQ-004  Endpoint Discovery: Use Case 2.1.2 describes the need to
    discover endpoints and their composition.

   REQ-005  Attribute based query: Use Case 2.1.2 describes the need for
    the data model to support a query operation based on a set of
    attributes to facilitate collection of information such as posture
    assessment, inventory (of endpoints or endpoint components) and
    configuration checklist. .

   REQ-006  Information based query with filtering: Use Case 2.1.3
    describes the need for the data model to support the means for the
    information to be collected through a query mechanism.  Furthermore,
    the query operation requires filtering capabilities to allow for
    only a subset of information to be retrieved.  The query operation
    may be a synchronous request or asynchronous request.

   REQ-007  Asynchronous publication, updates or change modifications
    with filtering: Use Cases 2.1.3, 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 describe the need
    for the data model to support the means for the information to be
    published asynchronously.  Similarly, the data model must support
    the means for a requestor to obtain updates or change modifications
    asynchronously.  Like the query operation, these update



Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft              Abbreviated Title                  June 2014


    notifications can be set up with a filter to allow for only a subset
    of posture assessment information to be obtained.

   REQ-008  Data model scalability: Use Cases 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 describes
    the need for the data model to support scalability.  For example,
    the query operation may result in a very large set of attributes as
    well as a large set of targets.

   REQ-009  Separation of Collection Request and Collection Action: the
    data model must distinguish the means to request for a data item to
    include enough information to properly identify the item to collect
    but the request could be separate and distinct from the actual
    method or process used to fulfill the request.

3.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Barbara Fraser, Jim Bieda and Adam
   Montville for reviewing and contributing to this draft.

4.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.

5.  Security Considerations

   This document defines the requirements for SACM.  As such, it is
   expected that several data models, protocols and transports may be
   defined or reused from already existing standards.  This section will
   highlight security considerations that may apply to SACM based on the
   architecture and standards applied in SACM.

6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]
              Waltermire, D., Montville, A., Harrington, D., and N. Cam-
              Winget, "Terminology for Security Assessment", draft-ietf-
              sacm-terminology-04 (work in progress), May 2014.

   [I-D.ietf-sacm-use-cases]
              Waltermire, D. and D. Harrington, "Endpoint Security
              Posture Assessment - Enterprise Use Cases", draft-ietf-
              sacm-use-cases-07 (work in progress), April 2014.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.




Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft              Abbreviated Title                  June 2014


6.2.  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.

Author's Address

   Nancy Cam-Winget
   Cisco Systems
   3550 Cisco Way
   San Jose, CA  95134
   US

   Email: ncamwing@cisco.com
































Cam-Winget              Expires December 10, 2014               [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/