This morning, the Department of Homeland Security released the new Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) to provide baseline cybersecurity goals that are consistent across all critical infrastructure sectors. The CPGs identify and prioritize the most important cybersecurity practices for critical infrastructure operators and provide an approachable common set of IT and OT cybersecurity protections to improve cybersecurity across our nation’s critical infrastructure.
The security directives were developed by CISA, in coordination with NIST, following the mandates set out in the Biden administration’s July 2021 national security memorandum to improve cybersecurity for critical infrastructure control systems.
Robert M. Lee, CEO and Co-Founder of Dragos had this commentary on these security directives:
“CISA has shown their commitment to working alongside the industrial cybersecurity community with the release of the common baseline Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs). CISA took extensive input and feedback from industry stakeholders and this updated guidance reflects that they were listening closely, providing actionable but not overly prescriptive guidance – exactly the type of support the community has been requesting. It allows asset owners and operators to work towards shared goals while giving them the flexibility and expertise to implement them in ways best suited to their organizations and risks. Most of the CPGs map closely to the critical controls needed for strong OT cybersecurity—namely, having an incident response plan, a defensible architecture, visibility and monitoring, secure remote access, and key vulnerability management. This guidance can help lift industrial cybersecurity standards across the board to better protect our nation’s critical infrastructure. CISA’s continued focus on OT cybersecurity as foundational to national security, and distinct from IT cybersecurity, is an important contribution to the community’s advancement.”
This is the sort of thing that will help to make us all safer and I hope that this is adopted widely so that things like ransomware and other sorts of attacks become less prevalent.
UPDATE: I have a second comment from Yotam Perkal, director of vulnerability research for software security firm, Rezilion:
General impression from the document:
I think the direction CISA chose to take with the CPG is very good. I hope that having the document written in an approachable language, easy to digest, and focused on the fundamentals, will help with adoption. The main underbelly in terms of cybersecurity risk are not the mature, modern enterprises with huge security budgets and an abundance of security controls. Rather, it is the long tail of organizations, without mature cyber programs or procedures in place. For these organizations, a resource such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework might be overwhelming. If these organizations adopt and implement the bare-minimum recommendations in the GPG, it could go a long way in terms of improving the overall security posture across the US. I also like the fact that CISA is promoting discussion around the guidelines and soliciting for feedback using the discussion page on GitHub
Specifically regarding the Vulnerability Management section:
I think the recommendations are valid and are reasonably straightforward to implement. That said, in order to implement some of them (such as “mitigating known vulnerabilities” and “no exploitable services on the internet”) there is a preliminary stage that isn’t mentioned in the guidelines which is having visibility into your organization’s exploitable attack surface. Assuming that the long tail of less mature organizations have that visibility is a stretch.We have seen evidence to that when we did our Vintage Vulnerabilities research which found over 4.5 million internet-facing devices that are vulnerable to vulnerabilities discovered between 2010 to 2020 that are known to be actively exploited in-the-wild (on the CISA known exploited vulnerabilities catalog). Specifically in the critical infrastructure domain, Security professionals have to be also aware of the capabilities and limitations of their vulnerability scanning tools. As we have shown in our latest research both open-source and commercial scanners and SCA tools are prone to a significant amount of false-positive and false-negative results. For example, when scanning OT assets, a vulnerability scanner without the ability to identify vulnerable components within compiled code will have significant blindspots when it comes to the known vulnerabilities it will be able to identify.
UPDATE #2: Tyler Reguly, senior manager, security R&D at HelpSystems, says:
“The most important take away there is that these goals were selected to address risks to the nation as well as individual entities. This is a big shift from other well-known baseline documents, such as the CIS Benchmarks or the NIST Security Guidance. At the same time, this is not a complete guide, it is a starting point to ensure organizations are all starting on the same footing.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
This entry was posted on October 27, 2022 at 3:26 pm and is filed under Commentary with tags Dragos, Homeland Security. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
New CISA Cybersecurity Performance Goals For critical Infrastructure Announced By DHS
This morning, the Department of Homeland Security released the new Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) to provide baseline cybersecurity goals that are consistent across all critical infrastructure sectors. The CPGs identify and prioritize the most important cybersecurity practices for critical infrastructure operators and provide an approachable common set of IT and OT cybersecurity protections to improve cybersecurity across our nation’s critical infrastructure.
The security directives were developed by CISA, in coordination with NIST, following the mandates set out in the Biden administration’s July 2021 national security memorandum to improve cybersecurity for critical infrastructure control systems.
Robert M. Lee, CEO and Co-Founder of Dragos had this commentary on these security directives:
“CISA has shown their commitment to working alongside the industrial cybersecurity community with the release of the common baseline Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs). CISA took extensive input and feedback from industry stakeholders and this updated guidance reflects that they were listening closely, providing actionable but not overly prescriptive guidance – exactly the type of support the community has been requesting. It allows asset owners and operators to work towards shared goals while giving them the flexibility and expertise to implement them in ways best suited to their organizations and risks. Most of the CPGs map closely to the critical controls needed for strong OT cybersecurity—namely, having an incident response plan, a defensible architecture, visibility and monitoring, secure remote access, and key vulnerability management. This guidance can help lift industrial cybersecurity standards across the board to better protect our nation’s critical infrastructure. CISA’s continued focus on OT cybersecurity as foundational to national security, and distinct from IT cybersecurity, is an important contribution to the community’s advancement.”
This is the sort of thing that will help to make us all safer and I hope that this is adopted widely so that things like ransomware and other sorts of attacks become less prevalent.
UPDATE: I have a second comment from Yotam Perkal, director of vulnerability research for software security firm, Rezilion:
General impression from the document:
I think the direction CISA chose to take with the CPG is very good. I hope that having the document written in an approachable language, easy to digest, and focused on the fundamentals, will help with adoption. The main underbelly in terms of cybersecurity risk are not the mature, modern enterprises with huge security budgets and an abundance of security controls. Rather, it is the long tail of organizations, without mature cyber programs or procedures in place. For these organizations, a resource such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework might be overwhelming. If these organizations adopt and implement the bare-minimum recommendations in the GPG, it could go a long way in terms of improving the overall security posture across the US. I also like the fact that CISA is promoting discussion around the guidelines and soliciting for feedback using the discussion page on GitHub
Specifically regarding the Vulnerability Management section:
I think the recommendations are valid and are reasonably straightforward to implement. That said, in order to implement some of them (such as “mitigating known vulnerabilities” and “no exploitable services on the internet”) there is a preliminary stage that isn’t mentioned in the guidelines which is having visibility into your organization’s exploitable attack surface. Assuming that the long tail of less mature organizations have that visibility is a stretch.We have seen evidence to that when we did our Vintage Vulnerabilities research which found over 4.5 million internet-facing devices that are vulnerable to vulnerabilities discovered between 2010 to 2020 that are known to be actively exploited in-the-wild (on the CISA known exploited vulnerabilities catalog). Specifically in the critical infrastructure domain, Security professionals have to be also aware of the capabilities and limitations of their vulnerability scanning tools. As we have shown in our latest research both open-source and commercial scanners and SCA tools are prone to a significant amount of false-positive and false-negative results. For example, when scanning OT assets, a vulnerability scanner without the ability to identify vulnerable components within compiled code will have significant blindspots when it comes to the known vulnerabilities it will be able to identify.
UPDATE #2: Tyler Reguly, senior manager, security R&D at HelpSystems, says:
“The most important take away there is that these goals were selected to address risks to the nation as well as individual entities. This is a big shift from other well-known baseline documents, such as the CIS Benchmarks or the NIST Security Guidance. At the same time, this is not a complete guide, it is a starting point to ensure organizations are all starting on the same footing.”
Share this:
Like this:
Related
This entry was posted on October 27, 2022 at 3:26 pm and is filed under Commentary with tags Dragos, Homeland Security. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.