Yesterday I wrote a
post describing a new process control system security program developed for
the Water Sector. The program is broadly based upon the recently published NIST
Cybersecurity Framework (CSF). Since large portions of the Water Sector are
federally regulated (usually under State supervision) it was to be expected
that an attempt would be made to incorporate the CSF into the loose regulatory
scheme for drinking water security.
CFATS and CSF
Chemical facilities covered under the CFATS program might
also be expected to face the inclusion of a CSF based cybersecurity program
under the terms of §10
of the President’s Executive Order on Improving Critical Infrastructure
Cybersecurity (EO
13636). Risk Based Performance Standard (RBPS # 8) of the CFATS regulations
already {6
CFR §27.230(a)(8)} governs cybersecurity at covered facilities and requires
that those facilities:
Deter cyber sabotage, including by
preventing unauthorized onsite or remote access to critical process controls,
such as Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Distributed
Control Systems (DCS), Process Control Systems (PCS), Industrial Control
Systems (ICS), critical business system, and other sensitive computerized
systems;
Thus it would appear that DHS through the Infrastructure Security
Compliance Division (ISCD) of the National Protection and Programs Directorate
(NPPD) has the requisite “clear authority to establish requirements based upon
the Cybersecurity Framework to sufficiently address current and projected cyber
risks to critical infrastructure.
Furthermore, the non-directive nature and the lack of
specificity found in the CSF would mesh well with the CFATS program’s
congressional mandate to allow covered facilities the widest latitude in
developing security procedures and processes that would achieve the broad
requirements of the RBPS.
The CFATS program already has an RBPS
Guidance document that was adapted through a formal publication and public comment
process. It provides very-broad, non-specific guidance on all 18 of the
separate RBPS that govern the CFATS security processes. It contains 9 pages (pgs
71 – 81) of broadly written guidance on what the facilities site security plan
must cover with respect to cyber security. Those pages includes nearly four
pages of vaguely worded metrics that may be keyed to the (Risk) Tier ranking of
the facility. An example is given below.
Metric 8.2.5 – Password Management
- The facility has documented and enforces authentication methods (including
password structures) for all administrative and user accounts. Additionally,
the facility changes all default passwords and ensures that default passwords
for new software, hardware, etc., are changed upon installation. In instances
where changing default passwords is not technically feasible (e.g., a control
system with a hard-coded password), the facility has implemented appropriate
compensating security controls (e.g., physical controls).
Appendix C (pgs 162 – 173) includes another discussion of
cybersecurity and how it impacts some of the other RBPS. That discussion also
includes a listing of cybersecurity references similar to those found in the
CSF. The RBPS reference list is not keyed to allow the facility to determine
what areas of what standard apply to which parts of their cybersecurity
program.
CSF Style
Cybersecurity Guidance
A cybersecurity guidance tool like that developed for the
Water Sector would fit in very nicely with the CFATS general security program.
It would provide a general discussion of the various details that should make
up a cybersecurity program and provide specific references that could be
expected to provide more detailed information about that specific portion of
the program.
The CFATS cybersecurity program is targeted not so much at
protecting information as it is designed to protect access to and control of
chemicals. Thus most of the systems covered are control systems, though some of
the order placement and tracking systems could be a CFATS concern if the
facility were regularly shipping covered DHS chemicals of interest (COI).
Additionally any automated security systems, including video detection,
security alarms and chemical release mitigation systems would also require
protection under the CFATS site security plan.
The CFATS program already has a series of on-line tools that
it uses in administering the evaluation of the implementation of the site security
plans as well as the administrative aspects of the program. This Chemical
Security Assessment Tool, CSAT, could easily be expanded to include a
cybersecurity tool.
CFATS Cybersecurity
Framework Tool
The Cybersecurity Framework Tool (CSFT) would encompass
three closely related cybersecurity tasks:
• Define and catalogue those
components of the facility computer based systems that would have direct
impacts on the security of the chemicals of interest made, used or stored at
the facility;
• Provide a reference based
description of the security measures that would be necessary to protect those
cyber assets; and
• Provide a method for recording
the security activities that the facility has taken and plans to take to
protect the security of their chemical security related cyber assets.
CSFT and the Security
Vulnerability Assessment
ISCD makes a preliminary determination that a facility is at
high risk of terrorist attack based upon the initial information provided in
the Top Screen, a data submission tool that provides DHS information about the types
and quantities of DHS chemicals of interest (COI) stored, used or produced on
site and general geophysical information about the facility. Once that
preliminary determination is made, ISCD directs the facility to complete a
security vulnerability assessment (SVA).
The first portion of the CSFT would become a portion of that
SVA. The facility would provide a brief description of the major components of
its chemical and security related cyber systems. The tool would be constructed
in a similar manner to the way the current SVA tool is designed with a series
of questions with multiple choice types of answers and a limited number of fill
in the blank responses.
For facilities that had release hazard COI (chemicals that
if released on site in a terrorist attack could be expected to have serious
off-site consequences) would be required to list the types of computer or
electronic systems used to monitor or control the movement or physical status
of those release COI on site. These would be primarily industrial control
systems, but could also include automated safety systems and release detection
systems.
For facilities that had theft/diversion hazard COI
(chemicals that could be used to make improvised explosive devices (IED) or chemical
weapons (CW) would be required to list the types of computer or electronic
systems used to control the inventory and shipping of those chemicals. This
would include any security systems used to control access to those chemicals.
All facilities would also be required to provide information
about the electronic security systems that were used to monitor the facility or
key area perimeters or control facility or key area access.
Once the major cyber components were identified there would
be a series of questions about each of those components. Those questions would
be designed to solicit the information necessary to determine the Use Cases
similar to those shown in Table 3-1 of the AWWAC
Process Control System Security Guidance for the Water Sector. Those use
cases would be used to determine the level of cybersecurity risk at that the
facility related to the electronic systems used to control or protect the COI
at the facility.
More to Come
This post has gotten a little bit longer than I like, so
this seems to be a reasonable stopping point. In future posts in this series I’ll
look at how the CSFT can be used as part of the site security plan development,
authorization and approval processes for CFATS facilities. I’ll also discuss
how DHS can use the provided information to provide specific cybersecurity
support to the facility.
No comments:
Post a Comment