Today the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (82 FR
61499-61505) proposing to require the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) to improve mandatory reporting of Cyber Security Incidents,
including incidents that might facilitate subsequent efforts to harm the
reliable operation of the bulk electric system.
New Reporting Requirements
Because of the way that FERC utilizes NERC as the actual
regulatory agency for the bulk electric system, this NPRM does not include any
actual regulatory language. Instead it proposes to require NERC to develop
changes to the Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Reliability Standards,
specifically CIP-008-5.
This NPRM proposed that FERC would direct NERC to modify the CIP Reliability
Standards to:
• Include the
mandatory reporting of Cyber Security Incidents that compromise, or attempt to
compromise, a responsible entity's Electronic Security Perimeter (ESP) or
associated Electronic Access Control or Monitoring System (EACMS);
• Specify the required
content in a Cyber Security Incident report;
• Establish
requirements outlining deadlines for filing a report once a compromise or
disruption to reliable bulk electric system operation, or an attempted
compromise or disruption, is identified by a responsible entity; and
• Require that the
reports submitted under the enhanced mandatory reporting requirements would be
provided to E-ISAC, similar to the current reporting scheme, as well as
ICS-CERT.
Public Comments
FERC is soliciting public comments on this NPRM. Comments
may be submitted via the FERC eFiling page
(registration required). Comments should be filed by February 26th,
2018.
Commentary
The FERC/NERC relationship is more than a little odd as
compared to the rest of the federal government. Readers who work in and/or
around the bulk electrical system are probably used to this, but for a relative
outsider like myself, the quirks of the rulemaking process are just a tad byzantine.
For example, the notice states that: “the
Commission certifies that this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities”. They
can get away with saying that because, technically, the NPRM only will affect
NERC; nobody else will have to take any actions because of this rulemaking. Of
course, once NERC modifies CIP-008-05, bunches of other folks (including some
number of ‘small entities’) will have to make changes to the way they operate,
but that is years down the road.
One of the interesting aspects of this NPRM is that it uses
the FY
2016 ICS-CERT Year in Review as part of the justification for the increased
reporting requirements. Apparently in 2016 CERC reported that there were no
cybersecurity incidents reported to it while ICS-CERT reported investigating 59
incidents in the 'Energy Sector’ (which may or may not have – but probably
did - included anyone in the bulk electric systems).
As I pointed out in a blog
post about that report (and in numerous other posts over the years) there
is a problem with the ICS-CERT incident reporting numbers, it is based upon a
non-existent (but apparently very broad) definition of the term incident. This problem
is not unique to ICS-CERT and is actually addressed in this NPRM.
After discussing the issue
FERC would actually add a new term; ‘a reportable cybersecurity incident’.
Unfortunately, the NPRM does not contain a specific definition of the term.
Rather it generally describes the issue by stating: “we
believe it is reasonable to establish the compromise of, or attempt to
compromise, an ESP or its associated EACMS as the minimum reporting threshold”.
Because the NERC CIPs are in effect the regulations that this NPRM is
attempting to modify, we will have to see what definition that NERC will
establish for the ‘reportable cybersecurity incident’ terminology.
One requirement that is not explicitly explained in the NPRM
is why FERC wants ICS-CERT to be included as a recipient of any cybersecurity
incident report. While I completely agree (and have advocated such reporting
requirements for other sectors as well), it would have been helpful to have FERC
explicate their reasoning. For me, the inclusion of ICS-CERT would help to
ensure that compromises of control system components (including software and
firmware) that are also used in other sectors are shared with those sectors. I
suspect that the FERC reasoning is similar, but it would have been helpful to
have this spelled out.
No comments:
Post a Comment