DSCSA mnit_slm_workbook_template.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 299 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DSCSA Compliance Storage Solution
- Solicitation number
- S-10700-00009612
- Issued by
- Marion County, Oregon
About this file
This document is a notice for a Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by MMCAP Infuse, a consortium of government agencies, seeking qualified responders to provide compliant Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) storage solutions. The RFP is open to the entire MMCAP Infuse membership, which includes various state and local jurisdictions. Responders must demonstrate knowledge and expertise related to the complexities of DSCSA requirements, as the responses will be used to establish contract(s) that comply with all regulatory aspects. The RFP does not provide specific details on quantities, response dates, award dates, or contract terms.
The document does not contain details on pricing, set-asides, incumbents, current environment, funding requirements, or other salient financial information. The focus of the RFP is on finding qualified vendors that can provide DSCSA compliant storage solutions to the MMCAP Infuse membership, which includes Marion County and the City of Salem in the state of Oregon.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| agreement_template_-_dscsa_rfp.docx | DOCX document | |
| dscsa_rfp_addendum_1_Q&A.pdf | ||
| RFP 5669 Att I - Security & Privacy.docx | DOCX document | |
| cost_proposal_dscsa_rfp.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| dscsa_rfp_final.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
CoverPage Security Lifecycle Management Minnesota IT Services | partners in security C O N F I D E N T I A L This document contains sensitive information about Information Systems and security that is privileged and confidential, and not customarily released publicly, and which is, therefore, exempt from the public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
System Security Plan The following named project or system has completed the Security Lifecycle Management process and been accredited by the CISO. This document certificies that application listed below has a completed System Security Plan (SSP).
[ADD SYSTEM OR APPLICATION NAME HERE]
| Date Approved | Approved By | Security Engineer | Assessment summary and closing comments: |
| Include: project summary, findings, policy exceptions, risk assessment results, outstanding risks, residual risks, What do people need to know, What do we care about? |
Instructions - to be completed by security engineer
1. Use the template below to create the assessment summary with closing comments.
2. Once complete, place the summary in the table above.
3. Share the completed workbook and project files with agency CISO for approval
4. Delete these instructions then export workbook to PDF, excluding the securtity controls tab and any unused tabs from the pdf version
5. Share the PDF with the project manager, business owner, and technical owners as appropriate.
5. Verify the SSP completion date is added to agencies Application Inventory.
Summary Template
A [Full, Custom, Annual] security assessment was done on [XYZ] application. This application is currently in [production, Test]. [WebInspect, Veracode, Burp Suite, Acunetix] scan was done on the [test, stage, Prod] environment and [x, no] vulnerabilities were found. [All the application security/ critical application security] flaws have been fixed or no major security risk at this point]. [If there were fixes]These fixes includes X, Y AND Z]. [If flaws need to be fixed by the vendor] The other flaws were sent to the vendor for fix. Some of the fixes are [scheduled for the next release, were marked as false positive]. Detailed vendor report is attached in the project file.
Operating System scan is being done on a [weekly, bi-weekly, monthly] basis. There were vulnerabilities that need to be fixed on [Prod, Test and Dev] servers. All/critical Application security patches and fixes have been applied to the [Prod, Test and Dev] servers. Detailed Tenable OS scan of these servers is found in the project file.
The Security Lifecycle Management (SLM) workbook has been completed. It was determined that [X, Y and Z] control did not meet the security control requirement. An exception [X, Y AND Z] was submitted in Archer and approved by business. Information Risk assessment was [done/not done and finding XXX was submitted].
The Disaster recovery (DR) plan was completed by the technical owner and the report has been added to Application Inventory System (AIS). Security has updated the AIS entry for [security, technical] tab. [Production server is sending logs to [ArcSight/qradar].
| Key Documents supporting this System Security Plan: |
| List all key documents that support this assessment |
| Operational Documentation Repositories: |
| List URLS for operational documentation |
&"+,Regular"&10 Updated: 06/2020
Checklist Security Lifecycle Management 4.0 Minnesota IT Services | partners in security INSTRUCTIONS: Review requirements below with primary project contact and security analyst or engineer.
For questions contact your security liaison or email SLM@state.mn.us
| SLM Project Check List | Status | Instructions / Status Tracking | Resource Links |
| Step #1 - Project Intake | To be completed by primary project contact | Tab #1 | |
| Risk Assessment | Complete this section with the project team established in step #1 | Risk Assessment | |
| Vendor Risk Assessment | * Vendors & subcontractors must complete S2 Risk Assessment | Security Studio | |
| Data Categorization Worksheet | Complete with project team | Data Categorization | |
| System Environments | Complete with project team | Environments | |
| Scanning Strategy | Complete with project team | Scanning & Testing | |
| Inventory | Add or update Application Inventory | Inventory Tab | |
| Application / System Diagram | Provide system or application diagram if applicable - see template instructions | Diagram Templates | |
| Data Flow Diagram | Data flow diagram - required for systems with "High" data | Diagram Templates | |
| Controls Assessment | Data in this section will not be included in the final PDF version of this SSP | Security Controls | |
| Policy Exceptions | Document and track non-compliant controls | Security Engineer | |
| Error Handling & Logging | Event logging requirements for Developed Code | Logging & Error Handling Guide | |
| Contracts & Data Sharing Agreements | Obtain copies of vendor contracts and/or data sharing agreements | Project Manager | |
| Review & Remediations | Review scan results - document findings and remediations | Security Engineer | |
| * Additional information about the Vendor Risk Assessment processes | |||
| Information Security Community - SLM Supporting Documents | |||
| When is the SLM Workbook used? |
The SLM workbook is used to assess all applications listed in the agencies application inventory. Use of this template satisfies requirements to create a System Security Plan (SSP) for all HIGH data systems.
When is the SLM process used?
The SLM process should be used to assess (1) all projects and activities that incorporate the use of Protected Information, and (2) all system and application development and major enhancement activities, whether conducted or hosted at agency or with a third party, regardless of the classification of data used.
Benefits of Security Lifecycle Management s To protect citizen data by ensuring proper security controls are included in the design of projects and activities.
s To assure security concerns do not delay implementation.
s To reduce the amount of possible rework for the business and development due to security concerns.
s To ensure projects and activities comply with state and federal requirements.
&"-,Bold Italic"C O N F I D E N T I A L&"-,Italic" &10This document contains sensitive security information that is exempt from public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
https://app.securitystudio.com/file:///C:/Users/ndoll/Downloads/SLM%20-%20Secure%20Engineering%20Processfile:///C:/Users/ndoll/Downloads/SLM%20-%20Secure%20Engineering%20Processfile:///C:/Users/ndoll/Downloads/SLM%20-%20Secure%20Engineering%20Processfile:///C:/MNIT-EA/SitePages/Secure%20Systems%20by%20Design.aspxfile:///C:/Users/ndoll/Downloads/Forms/AllItems.aspx%3fsortField=Modified&isAscending=false&viewid=865917f4-45ed-4bb7-8ded-937b8de99a6a&id=/sites/MNIT-ESO/ISC/Shared%20Documents/SLM%20-%20Secure%20Engineering%20Process #1 Security Lifecycle Management 4.0 Risk Assessment & System Security Planning Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| INSTRUCTIONS: List below all project and system contacts. Add additional lines/roles as needed. Role descriptions may be modified. Complete assessment questions ensuring answers are as accuracte as possible. | ||||
| Project and System Contacts | Name | Email address if non-state | ||
| Business Owner | ||||
| Project Manager | ||||
| Technical Owner | ||||
| Technical Contact | ||||
| Subject Matter Expert (SME) | ||||
| QA Team Contact | ||||
| Information Security Lead | ||||
| Vendor Contact | Vendor Email address | |||
| Other | ||||
| Assessment Questions | ||||
| Agency | ||||
| Project Name | ||||
| Application/System Name | ||||
| Business Function of System | ||||
| AC2 Billing Code | N/A | |||
| Sciforma Project ID | N/A | |||
| Project objectives & description | N/A | |||
| Project Scope | N/A | |||
| Project Benefits | N/A | |||
| Project Dependencies | N/A | |||
| Select from drop down | Additional information | |||
| System State | ||||
| Primary Assessment Target | ||||
| Technology Platform | ||||
| Application is potentially Life Critical? | ||||
| Downtime Tolerance | ||||
| Vendor Services | ||||
| Impact Risk Rating | ||||
| Number of Users Potentially Impacted | ----" | Risk Scoring Variables |
DO NOT MODIFY
| Type of Users | ---- | |
| Number of Records That Could be Impacted | ---- | |
| System's Data Protection Categorization | ----- | |
| Business Impact Analysis Recovery Priority | Link to Business Impact Analysis data and definitions | ------ |
| Likelihood Risk Rating | ||
| System Exposure | ----- | |
| Number of Application and System Administrators | ---- | |
| System Support Group | ----- | |
| Physical Access | ------ |
C O N F I D E N T I A L This document contains sensitive security information that is exempt from public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
file:///C:/:w:/r/sites/MNIT-ESO/ISC/Shared%20Documents/SLM%20-%20Secure%20Engineering%20Process/Business%20Impact%20Analysis%20Definitions%202019.docx%3fd=w414963b3b15f44c2b99a1594930c249c&csf=1&web=1&e=BiyqZG Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Questionnaire Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| Group Assessment | ||
| 1 | Provide a written description of the physical system architecture as currently known or understood. *Include: servers, clusters, data sources, data destinations, all significant network and firewall components, all physical and virtual devices, including vendor managed equipment and locations. | Not scored |
2 Describe the Authentication method that will be used to identify and authorize users access to the system and data. Specify if solution is Active Directory, Oracle, MySQL, or other. Provide as much detail as possible about the solution. Include any multi-factor authentication or biometric options. Not scored
| 3 | Describe vendor support notifications and communications plan. How will state staff be notified of software updates, maintenance windows, vulnerabilities, security patches, or other important notices in a timely manner? List one or more state email addresses that are subscribed to vendor alerts and updates. | Not scored | |||||||
| INTERNAL USE ONLY | |||||||||
| 4 | List any system concerns or weaknesses. Describe any threats or vulnerabilities that could result in adverse impact to the system. | Not scored | Risk Assessment Scoring | ||||||
| INSTRUCTIONS: When tab #1 and Risk Assessment are complete, send a copy of the entire workbook to GRC@state.mn.us. The GRC staff will verify calculations, scoring, and the add pertinent data into Archer. | |||||||||
| Control Detail | Score by Answer | ||||||||
| Controls (Completed by Risk Assessor and System Owners) | Standard Name | Control Number | Control Name | Missing Control Priority | Max Points Available | Full | |||
| 100% of max score | Partial | ||||||||
| 50% of max score | None |
0% of max score
| 1 | Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Devices | ||||||||||||
| Are all servers, network devices, databases, and applications that support the system/application known and documented in a formal asset inventory? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 3 | System Inventory | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 2 | Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Software | ||||||||||||
| Is installed software supporting this system/application limited to only software that has been approved and documented by MN IT Services? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 4 | Approved Software and Hardware | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 3 | Secure Configurations for Hardware and Software on Laptops, Workstations, and Servers | ||||||||||||
| Are all laptops, workstations, and servers supporting this system/application configured according to the secure configuration baselines established by the MN IT Services? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 10 | Secure Configurations | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 4 | Continuous Vulnerability Assessment and Remediation | ||||||||||||
| Are all servers and network devices supporting this system/application scanned at least monthly by network vulnerability scanning tools? | 0 | Threat and Vulnerability Management Standard | 2 | Vulnerability Scanning | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 5 | Controlled Use of Administrative Privileges | ||||||||||||
| Does administrative access to the system/application and supporting servers require multi-factor authentication? | 0 | Identity and Access Management Standard | 11 | Privileged Accounts | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 6 | Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs | ||||||||||||
| Does the system/application as well as supporting servers, generate standardized logs and send those logs to a centralized log server? | 0 | Security Logging and Monitoring Standard | 1 | Logging | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 7 | Supported Technologies Available and in Use | ||||||||||||
| Is the system/application using modern and fully supported technologies including hardware, operating systems, databases, and development languages? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 7 | Unsupported Systems | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 8 | Malware Defenses Is anti-malware software installed and running on all servers supporting this system/application? Are the anti-malware software and signatures updated on a daily basis? | 0 | Security Logging and Monitoring Standard | 17 | Anti-Malware Software | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | |||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 9 | Limitation and Control of Network Ports, Protocols, and Services | ||||||||||||
| Are firewall and router rules in place to restrict access to the system/application and are all supporting servers accessible only to those necessary? Is remote access restricted to only legitimate users and services? Are settings configured to block traffic that is not explicitly allowed? | 0 | Network Security Standard | 4 | Firewall and Router Rule Sets | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 10 | Data Recovery Capability | ||||||||||||
| Is data backed up on a regular basis? Are backups automated and do they include all information required to fully restore the data? | 0 | Information Technology Disaster Recovery Planning Standard | 10 | System Backup | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 11 | Secure Configurations for Network Devices such as Firewalls, Routers, and Switches | ||||||||||||
| Are all network devices supporting the system/application configured according to secure configuration baselines established by MN IT Services? Are deviations from the standard configurations documented and approved? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 10 | Secure Configurations | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 12 | Boundary Defense | ||||||||||||
| Is the application and supporting systems located in the appropriate network locations in accordance with the State of Minnesota Zones of Control architecture? Are multilayered boundary defenses enforced and documented for the system/application? | 0 | Network Security Standard | 13 | Network Placement | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 13 | Data Protection | ||||||||||||
| Is all data with a data categorization of High encrypted when at rest? Is data with a categorization of High encrypted at all times during transit? Is data with a Moderate categorization encrypted over external networks? | 0 | Secure Configuration Standard | 46 | Encryption in Transit | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 14 | Controlled Access Based on the Need to Know | ||||||||||||
| Is access to the system/application and supporting servers restricted to the least access necessary for the individuals’ roles? | 0 | Identity and Access Management Standard | 1 | Entitlements | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 15 | Vendor Review and Assessments | ||||||||||||
| Have all vendors that are involved in the development, support, and/or maintenance of the system/application undergone a security review and assessment? Is there a current Vendor Security Questionnaire (VSQ) on file or other 3rd party risk assessment? | 0 | Information Security Risk Management Standard | 2 | Information Security Risk Assessment | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 16 | Account Monitoring and Control | ||||||||||||
| Are user and administrator access removed upon an individual’s role change or termination? Is there a documented process for doing this? Are all accounts reviewed upon changes in user role and at least annually? | 0 | Identity and Access Management Standard | 6 | Access Recertification | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 17 | Security Skills Assessment and Appropriate Training to Fill Gaps | ||||||||||||
| Are all users and administrators appropriately trained with the security knowledge and skills necessary to do their jobs? | 0 | Security Awareness Standard | 4 | Role-Based Security Training | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 18 | Application Software Security | ||||||||||||
| Is all application code tested for security flaws prior to being released to production? Are both internally developed and third-party application software tested for security flaws, including coding errors and malware? | 0 | Enterprise Secure Systems Development and Acquisition Standard | 21 | Code Security Testing | 1 | 15 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 19 | Disaster Response and Management | ||||||||||||
| Are there disaster response plans and procedures in place to recover the system/application within the documented time objectives? Have these plans and procedures been reviewed and tested within the last 12 months? | 0 | Information Technology Disaster Recovery Planning Standard | 5 | IT DR Plan Testing | 2 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 20 | Penetration Tests (required for PCI-DSS and MARS-E data systems only) | ||||||||||||
| Has the system/application undergone a penetration test within the past 24 months? Have both internal and external penetration tests that mimic an attack been conducted to identify vulnerabilities and gauge the potential damage? | 0 | Threat and Vulnerability Management Standard | 5 | Penetration Testing | 3 | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | 0 | ||||
| control detail | |||||||||||||
| 21 | Additional Information |
Add any additional questions / answers that may be relevant to this project.
22 Date completed
| 23 | Overall Likelihood Risk Rating | ERROR:#VALUE! | 19 | Number of Applicable Questions | Number of applicable questions with a missed score |
| 0.0 | Average Points Missed | Sum of all missed scores divided by number of questions; excluding n/a's. Results in an average for the entire list of questions |
C O N F I D E N T I A L This document contains sensitive security information that is exempt from public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
RA (old) Risk Assessment Questionnaire Minnesota IT Services | partners in security A. Group Assessment Security Engineer Instructions Chere linked location below for an existing Risk Assessment that may have been completed already.
1 Describe physical system architecture as currently known or understood.
*Include: servers, network equipment, all hardware/devices/virtual devices including peripherals and non-state owned, vendor managed equipment and locations.
| https://mn365.sharepoint.com/sites/DHS_Teams_OIS/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fsites%2FDHS%5FTeams%5FOIS%2FShared%20Documents%2FGeneral%2FRisk%20Reviews%202021%20%28using%20SLM%20workbook%20%231%20and%20Risk%20Assessment%20sheets%29&FolderCTID=0x012000B64549D35A2C8742A68DC9691B0C5915 | ||
| 2 | Describe the Authentication method that will be used to identify and authorize users access to the system and data. Specify if solution is Active Directory, Oracle, MySQL, or other. Provide as much detail as possible about the solution. Include any MFA, multi-factor authentication or biometric options. |
3 Describe vendor support notifications and communications plan. How will state staff be notified of software updates, maintenance windows, vulnerabilities, security patches, or other important notices in a timely manner? List one or more state email addresses that are subscribed to vendor alerts and updates.
4 List any system concerns or weaknesses. Describe any threats or vulnerabilities that could result in adverse impact to the system.
| Controls (Completed by Risk Assessor and System Owners) | |
| 1 | Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Devices |
Are all servers, network devices, databases, and applications that support the system/application known and documented in a formal asset inventory?
2 Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Software Is installed software supporting this system/application limited to only software that has been approved and documented by MN IT Services?
3 Secure Configurations for Hardware and Software on Laptops, Workstations, and Servers Are all laptops, workstations, and servers supporting this system/application configured according to the secure configuration baselines established by the MN IT Services?
4 Continuous Vulnerability Assessment and Remediation Are all servers and network devices supporting this system/application scanned at least monthly by network vulnerability scanning tools?
5 Controlled Use of Administrative Privileges Does administrative access to the system/application and supporting servers require multi-factor authentication?
6 Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs Does the system/application as well as supporting servers, generate standardized logs and send those logs to a centralized log server?
7 Supported Technologies Available and in Use Is the system/application using modern and fully supported technologies including hardware, operating systems, databases, and development languages?
8 Malware Defenses Is anti-malware software installed and running on all servers supporting this system/application? Are the anti-malware software and signatures updated on a daily basis?
9 Limitation and Control of Network Ports, Protocols, and Services Are firewall and router rules in place to restrict access to the system/application and are all supporting servers accessible only to those necessary? Is remote access restricted to only legitimate users and services? Are settings configured to block traffic that is not explicitly allowed?
10 Data Recovery Capability Is data backed up on a regular basis? Are backups automated and do they include all information required to fully restore the data?
11 Secure Configurations for Network Devices such as Firewalls, Routers, and Switches Are all network devices supporting the system/application configured according to secure configuration baselines established by MN IT Services? Are deviations from the standard configurations documented and approved?
12 Boundary Defense Is the application and supporting systems located in the appropriate network locations in accordance with the State of Minnesota Zones of Control architecture? Are multilayered boundary defenses enforced and documented for the system/application?
13 Data Protection Is all data with a data categorization of High encrypted when at rest? Is data with a categorization of High encrypted at all times during transit? Is data with a Moderate categorization encrypted over external networks? *reference completed vendor security questionnaire if applicable
14 Controlled Access Based on the Need to Know Is access to the system/application and supporting servers restricted to the least access necessary for the individuals’ roles?
15 Vendor Review and Assessments Have all vendors that are involved in the development, support, and/or maintenance of the system/application undergone a security review and assessment? Is there a Vendor Security Questionnaire (VSQ) on file for the system and is it current?
16 Account Monitoring and Control Are user and administrator access removed upon an individual’s role change or termination? Is there a documented process for doing this? Are all accounts reviewed upon changes in user role and at least annually?
17 Security Skills Assessment and Appropriate Training to Fill Gaps Are all users and administrators appropriately trained with the security knowledge and skills necessary to do their jobs?
18 Application Software Security Is all application code tested for security flaws prior to being released to production? Are both internally developed and third-party application software tested for security flaws, including coding errors and malware? *reference completed vendor security questionnaire if applicable
19 Disaster Response and Management Are there disaster response plans and procedures in place to recover the system/application within the documented time objectives? Have these plans and procedures been reviewed and tested within the last 12 months?
20 Penetration Tests Has the system/application undergone a penetration test within the past 24 months? Have both internal and external penetration tests that mimic an attack been conducted to identify vulnerabilities and gauge the potential damage?
21 Add any additional questions / answers that may be relevant to this project.
C O N F I D E N T I A L This document contains sensitive security information that is exempt from public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act file:///C:/DHS_Teams_OIS/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx%3f Scoring Risk Assessment Score Minnesota IT Services | partners in security INSTRUCTIONS: When tab #1 and Risk Assessment are complete, send a copy of the entire workbook to GRC@state.mn.us. GRC staff will verify calculations, scoring, and add risk data to Archer.
| Impact | Likelihood | ||||
| Risk Matrix | Remote | Unlikely | Likely | Almost Certain | |
| Critical | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | |
| Serious | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | |
| Moderate | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | |
| Minor | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | |
| INTERNAL USE ONLY |
Do not modify data or calculations on this page.
| Total Calculated Impact Score | ERROR:#VALUE! | Risk Key | ||
| Impact Rating | ERROR:#VALUE! | 1 | Low | |
| Likelihood Score | ERROR:#VALUE! | 2 | Medium | |
| Likelihood Rating | ERROR:#VALUE! | 3 | High | |
| Risk | ERROR:#VALUE! | 4 | Severe | |
| Risk Calculations | ||||
| ERROR:#VALUE! | ERROR:#VALUE! | ERROR:#VALUE! | ERROR:#VALUE! |
Data Categorization SLM Data Categorization Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| INSTRUCTIONS: List below each data type the system will store, process or transmit.Data must be categorized as High, Moderate or Low based on its protection requirements. Click the link below to reference the Enterprise Data Protection Categorization Standard. | |
| Data Type / Description | Categorization |
| Example - clinic patient records (PHI) | |
| Example - Payment Card data (PCI) | |
| Example - Employee work schedules | |
| add information types | |
| add information types |
| AUDIT & COMPLIANCY INSTRUCTIONS - Select Yes or No for all potential audit scopes. | ||
| Audit and Compliancy Impacts | Yes / No | Description |
| Internal Revenue Service Publication 1075 (IRS 1075) | ||
| Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) | ||
| Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) | ||
| Social Security Administration Data Exchange (SSA) | ||
| Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS) | ||
| Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges (MARS-E) |
| * Link to Enterprise Data Protection Categorization Standard |
| C O N F I D E N T I A L |
This document contains sensitive security information that is exempt from public access provisions of the Freedom of Information Act https://mn.gov/mnit/assets/enterprise-data-protection-categorization-standard_tcm38-323779.pdf Environments Environments Inventory Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| INSTRUCTIONS: List all environments including production. Systems must be categorized based on the highest categorized data the system stores, processes, or transmits. Security and authentication systems must be categorized based on the highest categorized system or data that they are protecting. | |||||
| Environment Type | Production Data | Data Categorization | Common Name | Users | Description |
| Example: Production Users, Operational Support, Application Support | Add additional descriptions to describe environment use. |
C O N F I D E N T I A L
Inventory Application Hardware & Software Inventory Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
INSTRUCTIONS
1. List below ALL system resources: Virtual IP addresses (VIPs), Presentation layer server names and IP addresses, Application server names and IP addresses, database names and IP addresses.
2. Add or update the agency Application Inventory System (AIS) and Enterprise Application Inventory System.
| Hardware Inventory - Physical and Virtual | ||||
| Purpose / Layer | IP Address | Name | Notes / Details | Logs Ingested to SIEM |
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | URL | Primary Web Interface | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | URL | Other Web interface (maint/admin) | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | Server Name | IHS | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | Server Name | IIS | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | Server Name | Application(s) | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | Server Name | Application(s) | ||
| xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | Server or DB connection name | Database type | ||
| 3FFE:FFFF:7654:FEDA:1245:BA98:3210:4562 | Sample data |
| Software Inventory | |||||
| Software | Vendor | Version - implemented | Current available version | Contact | Maint. & Update support plan |
C O N F I D E N T I A L
Diagrams System Architecture and Diagrams Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| Application Diagram |
| Does an updated and complete network diagram exist? |
| Is network diagram attached to an application inventory system? |
| Provide a link to the location where authoritative copy is stored (Copy the link location and paste it in the cell below) |
| [insert the document location link here] |
*If documentation does no exist, provide remediation or justification information here.
| Data Flow Diagram |
| Does an updated and complete data flow diagram exist? |
| Provide a link to the location where authoritative copy is stored (Copy the link location and paste it in the cell below) |
| [insert the document location link here] |
*If documentation does no exist, provide remediation or justification information here.
| Does diagram(s) exist in an application inventory system? |
| Provide link to the location where authoritative copy is stored (Copy the link location and paste it in the cell below) |
| [insert link to entry in Application Inventory] |
C O N F I D E N T I A L
Scanning & Testing Vulnerability Testing Minnesota IT Services | partners in security
| INSTRUCTIONS: Complete this section with a security engineer or analyst. Record work done for this assessment and include documentation for all routine or scheduled testing. | |||||||
| Testing Function | Tool | Description | Instructions | List Targets | Frequency | Technical Contacts email | Describe ongoing and reoccurring test plans, manual or automated. |
| Operating System Scan | MNIT Enterprise Tenable | Operating System security testing tool. | Ensure all physical and virtual devices are being scanned by Enterprise Vulnerability Scanner. | Server names, IP, logon account required. *Contact MNIT TVMU Team | |||
| Dynamic Scan Web Application | Example: Fortify Web Inspect, Acunetix 360, Contrast, Burp Suite | Website scanner. Applications presenting a website interface (internal or external) should scanned. This process provides mapping of attack surfaces to find and exploit security vulnerabilities. | Submit scan request | Web-facing Applications |
List all URLs here
| Database Scan | Example: App Detective Pro | Database vulnerability scanner for configuration and access control errors in MySQL, Oracle, SQL Server, Hadoop. | List databases to be scanned. Include IP address, database connection string, and credentials. | DB Servers subject to IRS Audit | |
| Static Scan | |||||
| Source Code | MNIT Enterprise Veracode | Software vulnerability scanner for compiled application or frameworks. If vendor is unable to provide software security assurances, scan with Veracode. *More information at help.veracode.com | 1. Submit scan request | ||
| 2. Request Veracode Account creation for Developers | Application Source Code | ||||
| Software Composition Analysis (SCA) | Examples: Veracode Source Clear, Contrast, Dependency Check | Utility that identifies dependencies and checks if there are any known, publicly disclosed, vulnerabilities. Currently Java and .NET are supported. | Inventory all third party libraries and check for known vulnerabilities. | Potentially Vulnerable Third Party Libraries | |
| Scanning Summary: | |||||
| C O N F I D E N T I A L |
Controls
| SLM Controls Assessment | ||
| Minnesota IT Services | partners in security | IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS |
Filter controls using columns below Default Filter = High Data Application
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
1. Before entering control responses, complete the "Data Categorization" tab.
2. Filter Scope 1 and Scope 2 according to instructions.
3. Enter data in Columns (E, F, G). Where control is not compliant, include remediation plan and SME in columns H & I.
*For the purpose of this assessment, some control details below have been modified from the original format into a simplified plain language. For detailed Policies and Standards in their published format, access the Enterprise Policies and Standards library. https://mn.gov/mnit/government/policies/security/ Edit filter for Moderate or Low data assessments. Check all that apply AppSLM=Application DataSLM=Data Set Uncheck (Blanks)
| Control | ||||||||||
| Family | # | Control | ||||||||
| Name | Control Detail | Response | Compliant | Review Date | Remediation Plan | SME | Scope (1) | Scope (2) | ||
| Data Categorization | 1 | Data Protection Categorization | Complete the Data Categorization tab in this workbook. Summarize results in the "Response" column, then filter column "J" to the high data category. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | |||||
| Data Categorization | 2 | System Categorization | Systems must be categorized as follows: |
• Systems must be categorized based on the highest categorized data the system stores, processes, or transmits.
| • Security and authentication systems must be categorized based on the highest categorized system or data that they are protecting. | High;#Moderate;#Low | |||
| Data Categorization | 3 | Record | ||
| Retention | State data storage must be kept to a minimum by implementing data retention and disposal policies, procedures and processes that include at least the following: |
• Handling and retaining information within systems and information output from systems in accordance with applicable federal and state laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, standards, and operational requirements.
• Limiting data storage amount and retention time to that which is required for legal, regulatory, and/or business requirements.
• Specific retention requirements for cardholder data and other regulated data.
• Processes for secure deletion of data when no longer needed.
| • A quarterly process for identifying and securely deleting stored data with a Data Protection Categorization of High that exceeds defined retention. | High | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||||
| Data Categorization | 4 | Sensitive Authentication Data | Payment Card Industry sensitive authentication data (full track data, card validation code or value, and PIN data) must not be stored after authorization (even if encrypted). If sensitive authentication data is received, render all data unrecoverable upon completion of the authorization process. | High | PCI | |||
| Data Categorization | 5 | Recordkeeping | A log of all requests for FTI, including receipt and disposal of returns or return information must be maintained. This includes any medium containing FTI, such as computer tapes, cartridges, CDs, or data received electronically. | High | FTI | |||
| Data Categorization | 6 | Publicly Accessible Content | Processes must be in place to ensure nonpublic information is not published on publicly accessible systems. Processes must include: |
• Designating individuals that are authorized to post information onto publicly accessible systems.
• Training authorized individuals to ensure that publicly accessible information does not contain nonpublic information.
• Reviewing the proposed content of information prior to posting onto publicly accessible systems to ensure that nonpublic information is not included.
| • Reviewing the content on publicly accessible systems for nonpublic information bi-weekly and removes such information, if discovered. | High;#Moderate;#Low | ||||||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 1 | Information Technology Disaster Recovery (IT DR) Plan | An IT DR plan must be developed and maintained for critical systems. Critical systems support state agency critical priority services (priority 1 and 2 services) as defined in agency business impact analyses (BIA). Plans must meet all formal criteria as described in State standards. The plan must be reviewed and approved by IT leadership in conjunction with business owners. | If yes, provide a brief summary of plan and date last updated. If no, contact your agency Disaster Recovery specialists. | High;#Moderate | AppSLM | |||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 2 | IT DR Plan Distribution | Distribute copies of the IT DR plan to personnel with a need to know, including MNIT, state agency leaders, and key vendors. | High;#Moderate | |||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 3 | IT DR Plan Review | Review and update the IT DR plan: | ||||||
| • | To address system or organizational changes. | ||||||||
| • | To address problems encountered during plan implementation or execution. | ||||||||
| • | To address test results and identified gaps. | ||||||||
| • | At least annually. | ||||||||
| Communicate IT DR plan changes to personnel with a need to know. | High;#Moderate | ||||||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 4 | IT DR Plan and Procedures Training | Personnel must obtain IT DR plan and procedures training consistent with their assigned roles and responsibility: | ||||||
| • | Within ninety (90) days of assuming an IT DR plan role or responsibility. | ||||||||
| • | Following significant system or recovery strategy changes. | ||||||||
| • | Following IT DR plan updates. | ||||||||
| • | At least annually. | High;#Moderate | |||||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 5 | IT DR Plan Testing | The IT DR plans for systems supporting state critical priority services must be tested at least annually to determine the effectiveness of the plan and MNIT’s readiness to execute the plan. |
IT DR plan testing must be coordinated with state agency partners responsible for related plans.
| Test results must be documented in an after action report and improvement plan (AAR/IP) and identified gaps addressed. | High;#Moderate | |||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 6 | Capacity Planning | Planning must be conducted to ensure the necessary capacity for information processing, telecommunications, and utility and other support services are available to recover critical systems following an interruption, emergency or disaster. | High;#Moderate | ||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 7 | Alternate Storage Site | An alternate storage site must be established for systems supporting state critical priority services, including necessary agreements to permit the storage and recovery of system backup information. |
The alternate storage site must:
| • | Be separated from the primary storage site to reduce susceptibility to the same threats as identified in a risk assessment. | ||||
| • | Provide information security safeguards equivalent to that of the primary site. | ||||
| • | Comply with all applicable state and federal requirements. | ||||
| Identify and document multiple travel routes to the site in the event of an area-wide emergency or disaster. | High;#Moderate | ||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 8 | Alternate Processing Site | Establish an alternate processing site including necessary agreements to permit the resumption of system operations for critical priority services within applicable recovery time objectives when the primary processing capabilities are unavailable. |
Ensure that equipment and supplies required to resume operations are available at the alternate site, or contracts are in place to support delivery to the site in time to support the resumption.
Ensure the alternate processing site is separated from the primary processing site to reduce susceptibility to the same threats as identified in a risk assessment.
Provides information security safeguards equivalent to that of the primary site.
| Identify multiple travel routes to the alternate processing site in the event of an area-wide emergency or disaster. | High;#Moderate | |||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 9 | Telecommunications Services | Establish alternate telecommunications services when redundant telecommunication services are not available from Minnesota IT Services. Where necessary, agreements must be established to permit the resumption of system operations for critical priority services within the recovery time objective specified when the primary telecommunications capabilities are unavailable. If agreements with alternate telecommunications providers are needed, they must: | |||
| • | Ensure alternate telecommunications agreements are in place to permit resumption of the system within agreed upon Recovery Time Objectives (RTO). | |||||
| • | Contain priority-of-service provisions in accordance with state agency availability requirements, including recovery time objectives. | |||||
| • | Request Telecommunications Service Priority for all telecommunications services used for national security emergency preparedness in the event that the primary and/or alternate telecommunications services are provided by a common carrier. | High;#Moderate | ||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 10 | System Backup | Conduct backups of user-level information, system-level information and security-related documentation consistent with the defined frequency in the IT DR plan. |
Critical systems must have three generations of backups (full as well as all related incremental or differential backups) stored off site.
| Protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of backup information at storage sites. Off-site and on-site backups must be logged with name, date, time and action. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | |||||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 11 | Testing for Reliability/Integrity | Test backup information at least annually to verify media reliability and information integrity. | High;#Moderate | |||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 12 | Transaction Recovery | Transaction recovery must be implemented for transaction-based systems. | High;#Moderate | |||||
| Disaster Recovery Planning | 13 | System Recovery and Reconstitution | Provide for the recovery and reconstitution of the system to a known state after a disruption, compromise or failure in a trusted, secure, and verifiable manner. Secure information system recovery and reconstitution includes, but is not limited to: | ||||||
| • | Reset of all system parameters (either default or MNIT established). | ||||||||
| • | Reinstallation of patches. | ||||||||
| • | Reestablishment of configuration settings. | ||||||||
| • | Reinstallation of application and system software. | ||||||||
| • | Full testing of the system. | High;#Moderate | |||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 1 | Entitlements | All access to systems or data, other than one time submission of data and read only access to data with a data protection categorization of Low, must be controlled through the use of identification and authentication mechanisms. This access control must: | ||||||
| • | Assign privileges to individuals based on the individual’s job classification and function. | ||||||||
| • | Restrict privileges to the least needed for the individual or service to perform their role. | ||||||||
| • | Deny all access that is not explicitly granted. | ||||||||
| • | Remove all system access not explicitly required. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 2 | Unique IDs | All users must be assigned a unique ID to access systems or data. IDs must not be reused until all previous access authorizations are removed from the system, including all file accesses for that identifier but not before a period of at least three (3) years has expired. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | ||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 3 | Device, Service and Application Accounts | Device, service, and application accounts must be assigned to an account owner and must not be used by individuals to access the system. These accounts and their associated passwords must be managed by the enterprise privileged account management tool This control applies to accounts with passwords. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | ||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 4 | Access Approval | Requests to create or modify accounts and access privileges must be documented and approved by authorized personnel before access can be granted. Each request for access must define access needs including: |
• Systems and data that each user needs to access for their job function.
• Level of privilege required (for example, user, administrator, etc.) for accessing resources.
| Requests for privileged access must be approved by the Enterprise Access and Identity Management team. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM;#DataSLM | |||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 5 | Account Management | The addition, deletion, and modification of user IDs, credentials, and other identifier objects must be restricted to authorized account administrators. | ||||||
| • The Access and Identity Management (AIM) team, in conjunction with system /data owners will establish and maintain a list of roles and their associated rights. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM;#DataSLM | |||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 6 | Access Recertification | All accounts must be reviewed upon changes in user role and at least annually for user accounts and every 6 months for privileged accounts and service accounts. The review must validate and recertify that all access privileges are still needed and authorized. The results of the review must be documented and unnecessary access privileges must be communicated to account administrators for removal. Review documentation must be maintained by the account administrator for at least 2 years and made available to the Enterprise Access and Identity Management team upon request. | High;#Moderate | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 7 | Privileged Account Review | Administrator groups, root accounts, and other system-related accounts must be inspected on demand, and at least once every fourteen (14) days to ensure that unauthorized accounts have not been created. Privileged user roles associated with applications should be inspected every thirty (30) days. | High;#Moderate;#Low | |||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 8 | Inactive Accounts | Inactive user accounts must be disabled after no more than 60 days of inactivity. Disabled user accounts must be deleted within 1 year. Inactive non-user accounts must be disabled after 1 year of inactivity. | High;#Moderate | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 9 | Revoke Entitlements | Accounts and privileges that are no longer required must be removed or disabled within: | ||||||
| • | 8 hours of notification or identification of voluntary changes in access needs. | ||||||||
| • | 1 hour of notification or identification for users that have been involuntarily terminated or for accounts with credentials that may have been lost or compromised. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | ||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 10 | Emergency Accounts | Emergency and temporary accounts must be disabled within 24 hours. | High;#Moderate;#Low | |||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 11 | Privileged Accounts | Privileged IDs must be: | ||||||
| • | Approved by the system owner and AIM. | ||||||||
| • | Assigned only to users that specifically require such privileged access. | ||||||||
| • | Restricted to least privileges necessary to perform administrative responsibilities. | ||||||||
| • | Denied access to the following security functions unless explicitly approved by AIM: | ||||||||
| o | Setting/modifying audit logs and auditing behavior | ||||||||
| o | Setting/modifying boundary protection system rules | ||||||||
| o | Configuring/modifying access authorizations (i.e., permissions, privileges) | ||||||||
| o | Setting/modifying authentication parameters | ||||||||
| o | Setting/modifying system configurations and parameters | ||||||||
| • | Granted access to only the system utilities that are needed. | ||||||||
| • | Authenticated using replay resistant multifactor authentication (such as security tokens with an output that randomly changes over time)when accessing systems with data protection categorization of High. | ||||||||
| • | Prohibited from changing privileges to another user ID either for themselves or another user without authorization. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 12 | Privileged Account Use | Privileged accounts must only be used when performing authorized administrative tasks. Non-privileged accounts must be used when performing all other tasks. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM;#DataSLM | ||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 13 | Remote Administrative Access | All non-console access for personnel with administrative access must: | ||||||
| • | Authenticate with multi-factor authentication. | ||||||||
| • | Be permitted only for compelling operational needs, strictly controlled, and explicitly authorized in writing. | ||||||||
| • | Be monitored. | ||||||||
| • | Be documented in system maintenance records. | ||||||||
| • | Be done using agency issued information systems. | High;#Moderate;#Low | |||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 14 | Segregation of Duties | Access privileges must allow for the appropriate segregation of duties by: | ||||||
| • | Segregating duties of individuals as necessary, to prevent malicious activity by a single individual. | ||||||||
| • | Ensuring that audit functions are not performed by personnel responsible for administering access control. | ||||||||
| • | Maintaining a limited group of administrators (i.e. system administrators, application administrators, security administrators) with access based upon the users' roles and responsibilities. | ||||||||
| • | Ensuring that critical functions and system support functions are divided among separate individuals. | ||||||||
| • | Ensuring that system testing functions and production functions are divided among separate individuals or groups. | ||||||||
| • | Ensuring access authorizations does not violate any required separation of duties | ||||||||
| • | Ensuring that an independent entity, not the Business Owner, System Developer(s)/Maintainer(s), or System Administrator(s) responsible for the information system, conducts information security testing of the system. | ||||||||
| • | Documenting separation of duties of individuals for each information system / application. | High;#Moderate | AppSLM | ||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 15 | Vendor Access | Accounts used by vendors to access, support or maintain system components via remote access must be: | ||||||
| • | Enabled only during the time period needed. | ||||||||
| • | Disabled when not in use. | ||||||||
| • | Monitored when in use. | ||||||||
| • | Accessed only via multi-factor. | High;#Moderate;#Low | AppSLM | ||||||
| Identity and Access Management Standard | 16 | Group Accounts | Group, shared or generic IDs, passwords or other authentication methods must be restricted as follows: | ||||||
| • | Generic user IDs must be disabled or removed. | ||||||||
| • | Shared user IDs must not exist for system administration and other critical functions. | ||||||||
| • | Shared and generic user IDs must not be used to administer any system components. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .