last sync: 2024-Dec-05 18:53:22 UTC

Management ports should be closed on your virtual machines

Azure BuiltIn Policy definition

Source Azure Portal
Display name Management ports should be closed on your virtual machines
Id 22730e10-96f6-4aac-ad84-9383d35b5917
Version 3.0.0
Details on versioning
Versioning Versions supported for Versioning: 1
3.0.0
Built-in Versioning [Preview]
Category Security Center
Microsoft Learn
Description Open remote management ports are exposing your VM to a high level of risk from Internet-based attacks. These attacks attempt to brute force credentials to gain admin access to the machine.
Mode All
Type BuiltIn
Preview False
Deprecated False
Effect Default
AuditIfNotExists
Allowed
AuditIfNotExists, Disabled
RBAC role(s) none
Rule aliases THEN-ExistenceCondition (1)
Alias Namespace ResourceType Path PathIsDefault DefaultPath Modifiable
Microsoft.Security/assessments/status.code Microsoft.Security assessments properties.status.code True False
Rule resource types IF (2)
Microsoft.ClassicCompute/virtualMachines
Microsoft.Compute/virtualMachines
Compliance
The following 46 compliance controls are associated with this Policy definition 'Management ports should be closed on your virtual machines' (22730e10-96f6-4aac-ad84-9383d35b5917)
Control Domain Control Name MetadataId Category Title Owner Requirements Description Info Policy#
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v1.0 1.1 Azure_Security_Benchmark_v1.0_1.1 Azure Security Benchmark 1.1 Network Security Protect resources using Network Security Groups or Azure Firewall on your Virtual Network Customer Ensure that all Virtual Network subnet deployments have a Network Security Group applied with network access controls specific to your application's trusted ports and sources. Use Azure Services with Private Link enabled, deploy the service inside your Vnet, or connect privately using Private Endpoints. For service specific requirements, please refer to the security recommendation for that specific service. Alternatively, if you have a specific use case, requirements can be met by implementing Azure Firewall. General Information on Private Link: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/private-link/private-link-overview How to create a Virtual Network: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/quick-create-portal How to create an NSG with a security configuration: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/tutorial-filter-network-traffic How to deploy and configure Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal n/a link 20
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0 NS-1 Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0_NS-1 Azure Security Benchmark NS-1 Network Security Implement security for internal traffic Customer Ensure that all Azure virtual networks follow an enterprise segmentation principle that aligns to the business risks. Any system that could incur higher risk for the organization should be isolated within its own virtual network and sufficiently secured with either a network security group (NSG) and/or Azure Firewall. Based on your applications and enterprise segmentation strategy, restrict or allow traffic between internal resources based on network security group rules. For specific well-defined applications (such as a 3-tier app), this can be a highly secure "deny by default, permit by exception" approach. This might not scale well if you have many applications and endpoints interacting with each other. You can also use Azure Firewall in circumstances where central management is required over a large number of enterprise segments or spokes (in a hub/spoke topology). Use Azure Security Center Adaptive Network Hardening to recommend network security group configurations that limit ports and source IPs based with the reference to external network traffic rules. Use Azure Sentinel to discover the use of legacy insecure protocols such as SSL/TLSv1, SMBv1, LM/NTLMv1, wDigest, Unsigned LDAP Binds, and weak ciphers in Kerberos. How to create a network security group with security rules: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/tutorial-filter-network-traffic How to deploy and configure Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal Adaptive Network Hardening in Azure Security Center: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/security-center/security-center-adaptive-network-hardening Azure Sentinel insecure protocols workbook:https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/sentinel/quickstart-get-visibility#use-built-in-workbooks n/a link 18
Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0 NS-3 Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0_NS-3 Microsoft cloud security benchmark NS-3 Network Security Deploy firewall at the edge of enterprise network Shared **Security Principle:** Deploy a firewall to perform advanced filtering on network traffic to and from external networks. You can also use firewalls between internal segments to support a segmentation strategy. If required, use custom routes for your subnet to override the system route when you need to force the network traffic to go through a network appliance for security control purpose. At a minimum, block known bad IP addresses and high-risk protocols, such as remote management (for example, RDP and SSH) and intranet protocols (for example, SMB and Kerberos). **Azure Guidance:** Use Azure Firewall to provide fully stateful application layer traffic restriction (such as URL filtering) and/or central management over a large number of enterprise segments or spokes (in a hub/spoke topology). If you have a complex network topology, such as a hub/spoke setup, you may need to create user-defined routes (UDR) to ensure the traffic goes through the desired route. For example, you have option to use an UDR to redirect egress internet traffic through a specific Azure Firewall or a network virtual appliance. **Implementation and additional context:** How to deploy Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal Virtual network traffic routing: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/virtual-networks-udr-overview n/a link 4
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 6.1 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_6.1 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 6.1 6 Ensure that RDP access from the Internet is evaluated and restricted Shared n/a Network security groups should be periodically evaluated for port misconfigurations. Where certain ports and protocols may be exposed to the Internet, they should be evaluated for necessity and restricted wherever they are not explicitly required. The potential security problem with using RDP over the Internet is that attackers can use various brute force techniques to gain access to Azure Virtual Machines. Once the attackers gain access, they can use a virtual machine as a launch point for compromising other machines on an Azure Virtual Network or even attack networked devices outside of Azure. link 1
CIS_Azure_2.0.0 6.2 CIS_Azure_2.0.0_6.2 CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 6.2 6 Ensure that SSH access from the Internet is evaluated and restricted Shared n/a Network security groups should be periodically evaluated for port misconfigurations. Where certain ports and protocols may be exposed to the Internet, they should be evaluated for necessity and restricted wherever they are not explicitly required. The potential security problem with using SSH over the Internet is that attackers can use various brute force techniques to gain access to Azure Virtual Machines. Once the attackers gain access, they can use a virtual machine as a launch point for compromising other machines on the Azure Virtual Network or even attack networked devices outside of Azure. link 1
CMMC_2.0_L2 AC.L2-3.1.3 CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.3 404 not found n/a n/a 52
CMMC_2.0_L2 SC.L1-3.13.1 CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.1 404 not found n/a n/a 56
CMMC_2.0_L2 SC.L1-3.13.5 CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.5 404 not found n/a n/a 51
CMMC_2.0_L2 SC.L2-3.13.2 CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.2 404 not found n/a n/a 51
CMMC_2.0_L2 SC.L2-3.13.6 CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.6 404 not found n/a n/a 26
FedRAMP_High_R4 AC-4 FedRAMP_High_R4_AC-4 FedRAMP High AC-4 Access Control Information Flow Enforcement Shared n/a The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18. References: None. link 52
FedRAMP_High_R4 SC-7 FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7 FedRAMP High SC-7 System And Communications Protection Boundary Protection Shared n/a The information system: a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system; b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture. Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13. References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. link 52
FedRAMP_High_R4 SC-7(3) FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7(3) FedRAMP High SC-7 (3) System And Communications Protection Access Points Shared n/a The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. link 51
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 AC-4 FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_AC-4 FedRAMP Moderate AC-4 Access Control Information Flow Enforcement Shared n/a The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18. References: None. link 52
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SC-7 FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7 FedRAMP Moderate SC-7 System And Communications Protection Boundary Protection Shared n/a The information system: a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system; b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture. Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13. References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. link 52
FedRAMP_Moderate_R4 SC-7(3) FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7(3) FedRAMP Moderate SC-7 (3) System And Communications Protection Access Points Shared n/a The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. link 51
hipaa 1143.01c1System.123-01.c hipaa-1143.01c1System.123-01.c 1143.01c1System.123-01.c 11 Access Control 1143.01c1System.123-01.c 01.02 Authorized Access to Information Systems Shared n/a Privileges are formally authorized and controlled, allocated to users on a need-to-use and event-by-event basis for their functional role (e.g., user or administrator), and documented for each system product/element. 10
hipaa 1150.01c2System.10-01.c hipaa-1150.01c2System.10-01.c 1150.01c2System.10-01.c 11 Access Control 1150.01c2System.10-01.c 01.02 Authorized Access to Information Systems Shared n/a The access control system for the system components storing, processing or transmitting covered information is set with a default "deny-all" setting. 7
hipaa 1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l hipaa-1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l 1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l 11 Access Control 1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l 01.04 Network Access Control Shared n/a Controls for the access to diagnostic and configuration ports include the use of a key lock and the implementation of supporting procedures to control physical access to the port. 5
mp.com.1 Secure perimeter mp.com.1 Secure perimeter 404 not found n/a n/a 49
New_Zealand_ISM 14.1.8.C.01 New_Zealand_ISM_14.1.8.C.01 New_Zealand_ISM_14.1.8.C.01 14. Software security 14.1.8.C.01 Developing hardened SOEs n/a Agencies SHOULD develop a hardened SOE for workstations and servers, covering several requirements detailed here https://www.nzism.gcsb.govt.nz/ism-document#SubSection-15020 3
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .1.3 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.3 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.3 Access Control Control the flow of CUI in accordance with approved authorizations. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Information flow control regulates where information can travel within a system and between systems (versus who can access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include the following: keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet; blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization; restricting requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server; and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Organizations commonly use information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on characteristics of the information or the information path. Enforcement occurs in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message-filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering and inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Transferring information between systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners or stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes: prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and implementing trustworthy regrading mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. link 56
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .13.1 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.1 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.1 System and Communications Protection Monitor, control, and protect communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of organizational systems. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Communications can be monitored, controlled, and protected at boundary components and by restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems. Boundary components include gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a system security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems includes restricting external web communications traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security requirements associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies. [28] There is no prescribed format or specified level of detail for system security plans. However, organizations ensure that the required information in 3.12.4 is conveyed in those plans. link 51
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .13.2 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.2 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.2 System and Communications Protection Employ architectural designs, software development techniques, and systems engineering principles that promote effective information security within organizational systems. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Organizations apply systems security engineering principles to new development systems or systems undergoing major upgrades. For legacy systems, organizations apply systems security engineering principles to system upgrades and modifications to the extent feasible, given the current state of hardware, software, and firmware components within those systems. The application of systems security engineering concepts and principles helps to develop trustworthy, secure, and resilient systems and system components and reduce the susceptibility of organizations to disruptions, hazards, and threats. Examples of these concepts and principles include developing layered protections; establishing security policies, architecture, and controls as the foundation for design; incorporating security requirements into the system development life cycle; delineating physical and logical security boundaries; ensuring that developers are trained on how to build secure software; and performing threat modeling to identify use cases, threat agents, attack vectors and patterns, design patterns, and compensating controls needed to mitigate risk. Organizations that apply security engineering concepts and principles can facilitate the development of trustworthy, secure systems, system components, and system services; reduce risk to acceptable levels; and make informed risk-management decisions. [SP 800-160-1] provides guidance on systems security engineering. link 51
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .13.5 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.5 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.5 System and Communications Protection Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal networks. Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones (DMZs). DMZs are typically implemented with boundary control devices and techniques that include routers, gateways, firewalls, virtualization, or cloud-based technologies. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies link 51
NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3 .13.6 NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.6 NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.6 System and Communications Protection Deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception (i.e., deny all, permit by exception). Shared Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement. This requirement applies to inbound and outbound network communications traffic at the system boundary and at identified points within the system. A deny-all, permit-by-exception network communications traffic policy ensures that only those connections which are essential and approved are allowed. link 22
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 AC-4 NIST_SP_800-53_R4_AC-4 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 AC-4 Access Control Information Flow Enforcement Shared n/a The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18. References: None. link 52
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SC-7 NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7 System And Communications Protection Boundary Protection Shared n/a The information system: a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system; b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture. Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13. References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77. link 52
NIST_SP_800-53_R4 SC-7(3) NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7(3) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7 (3) System And Communications Protection Access Points Shared n/a The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections. link 51
NIST_SP_800-53_R5 AC-4 NIST_SP_800-53_R5_AC-4 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AC-4 Access Control Information Flow Enforcement Shared n/a Enforce approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between connected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. link 52
NIST_SP_800-53_R5 SC-7 NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7 NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7 System and Communications Protection Boundary Protection Shared n/a a. Monitor and control communications at the external managed interfaces to the system and at key internal managed interfaces within the system; b. Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically;logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connect to external networks or systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security and privacy architecture. link 52
NIST_SP_800-53_R5 SC-7(3) NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7(3) NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7 (3) System and Communications Protection Access Points Shared n/a Limit the number of external network connections to the system. link 51
NL_BIO_Cloud_Theme U.07.1(2) NL_BIO_Cloud_Theme_U.07.1(2) NL_BIO_Cloud_Theme_U.07.1(2) U.07 Data separation Isolated n/a Permanent isolation of data is realized within a multi-tenant architecture. Patches and adjustments of applications and infrastructure are realized in a controlled manner for all cloud services that the CSC purchases. 57
NZ_ISM_v3.5 SS-2 NZ_ISM_v3.5_SS-2 NZISM Security Benchmark SS-2 Software security 14.1.8 Developing hardened SOEs Customer n/a Antivirus and anti-malware software, while an important defensive measure, can be defeated by malicious code that has yet to be identified by antivirus vendors. This can include targeted attacks, where a new virus is engineered or an existing one modified to defeat the signature-based detection schemes. The use of antivirus and anti-malware software, while adding value to the defence of workstations, cannot be relied solely upon to protect the workstation. As such agencies still need to deploy appropriately hardened SOEs to assist with the protection of workstations against a broader range of security risks. link 3
NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1 SS-2 NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1_SS-2 NZISM Security Benchmark SS-2 Software security 14.1.8 Developing hardened SOEs Customer Agencies SHOULD develop a hardened SOE for workstations and servers, covering: removal of unneeded software and operating system components; removal or disabling of unneeded services, ports and BIOS settings; disabling of unused or undesired functionality in software and operating systems; implementation of access controls on relevant objects to limit system users and programs to the minimum access required; installation of antivirus and anti-malware software; installation of software-based firewalls limiting inbound and outbound network connections; configuration of either remote logging or the transfer of local event logs to a central server; and protection of audit and other logs through the use of a one way pipe to reduce likelihood of compromise key transaction records. Antivirus and anti-malware software, while an important defensive measure, can be defeated by malicious code that has yet to be identified by antivirus vendors. This can include targeted attacks, where a new virus is engineered or an existing one modified to defeat the signature-based detection schemes. The use of antivirus and anti-malware software, while adding value to the defence of workstations, cannot be relied solely upon to protect the workstation. As such agencies still need to deploy appropriately hardened SOEs to assist with the protection of workstations against a broader range of security risks. 7 3
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 13.3 RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_13.3 Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management-13.3 n/a Consider implementing whitelisting of internet websites/systems. 12
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 13.4 RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_13.4 Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management-13.4 n/a Consider implementingsecure web gateways with capability to deep scan network packets including secure (HTTPS, etc.) traffic passing through the web/internet gateway 41
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 4.10 RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.10 Network Management And Security Perimeter Protection And Detection-4.10 n/a Boundary defences should be multi-layered with properly configured firewalls, proxies, DMZ perimeter networks, and network--???based IPS and IDS. Mechanism to filter both inbound and outbound traffic to be put in place. 11
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 4.3 RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.3 Network Management And Security Network Device Configuration Management-4.3 n/a Ensure that all the network devices are configured appropriately and periodically assess whether the configurations are appropriate to the desired level of network security. 14
RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016 4.7 RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.7 Network Management And Security Anomaly Detection-4.7 n/a Put in place mechanism to detect and remedy any unusual activities in systems, servers, network devices and endpoints. 13
RBI_ITF_NBFC_v2017 1.1 RBI_ITF_NBFC_v2017_1.1 RBI IT Framework 1.1 IT Governance IT Governance-1.1 n/a NBFCs are required to form an IT Strategy Committee. The chairman of the committee shall be an independent director and CIO & CTO should be a part of the committee. The IT Strategy Committee should meet at an appropriate frequency but not more than six months should elapse between two meetings. The Committee shall work in partnership with other Board committees and Senior Management to provide input to them. It will also carry out review and amend the IT strategies in line with the corporate strategies, Board Policy reviews, cyber security arrangements and any other matter related to IT Governance. Its deliberations may be placed before the Board. link 4
RMiT_v1.0 10.49 RMiT_v1.0_10.49 RMiT 10.49 Cloud Services Cloud Services - 10.49 Shared n/a A financial institution must fully understand the inherent risk of adopting cloud services. In this regard, a financial institution is required to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment prior to cloud adoption which considers the inherent architecture of cloud services that leverages on the sharing of resources and services across multiple tenants over the Internet. The assessment must specifically address risks associated with the following: (a) sophistication of the deployment model; (b) migration of existing systems to cloud infrastructure; (c) location of cloud infrastructure; (d) multi-tenancy or data co-mingling; (e) vendor lock-in and application portability or interoperability; (f) ability to customise security configurations of the cloud infrastructure to ensure a high level of data and technology system protection; (g) exposure to cyber-attacks via cloud service providers; (h) termination of a cloud service provider including the ability to secure the financial institution's data following the termination; (i) demarcation of responsibilities, limitations and liability of the service provider; and (j) ability to meet regulatory requirements and international standards on cloud computing on a continuing basis. link 5
SOC_2 CC6.1 SOC_2_CC6.1 SOC 2 Type 2 CC6.1 Logical and Physical Access Controls Logical access security software, infrastructure, and architectures Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. The following points of focus, specifically related to all engagements using the trust services criteria, highlight important characteristics relating to this criterion: • Identifies and Manages the Inventory of Information Assets — The entity identifies, Page 29 TSP Ref. # TRUST SERVICES CRITERIA AND POINTS OF FOCUS inventories, classifies, and manages information assets. • Restricts Logical Access — Logical access to information assets, including hardware, data (at-rest, during processing, or in transmission), software, administrative authorities, mobile devices, output, and offline system components is restricted through the use of access control software and rule sets. • Identifies and Authenticates Users — Persons, infrastructure, and software are identified and authenticated prior to accessing information assets, whether locally or remotely. • Considers Network Segmentation — Network segmentation permits unrelated portions of the entity's information system to be isolated from each other. • Manages Points of Access — Points of access by outside entities and the types of data that flow through the points of access are identified, inventoried, and managed. The types of individuals and systems using each point of access are identified, documented, and managed. • Restricts Access to Information Assets — Combinations of data classification, separate data structures, port restrictions, access protocol restrictions, user identification, and digital certificates are used to establish access-control rules for information assets. • Manages Identification and Authentication — Identification and authentication requirements are established, documented, and managed for individuals and systems accessing entity information, infrastructure, and software. • Manages Credentials for Infrastructure and Software — New internal and external infrastructure and software are registered, authorized, and documented prior to being granted access credentials and implemented on the network or access point. Credentials are removed and access is disabled when access is no longer required or the infrastructure and software are no longer in use. • Uses Encryption to Protect Data — The entity uses encryption to supplement other measures used to protect data at rest, when such protections are deemed appropriate based on assessed risk. • Protects Encryption Keys — Processes are in place to protect encryption keys during generation, storage, use, and destruction 78
SOC_2 CC6.6 SOC_2_CC6.6 SOC 2 Type 2 CC6.6 Logical and Physical Access Controls Security measures against threats outside system boundaries Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. • Restricts Access — The types of activities that can occur through a communication channel (for example, FTP site, router port) are restricted. • Protects Identification and Authentication Credentials — Identification and authentication credentials are protected during transmission outside its system boundaries. • Requires Additional Authentication or Credentials — Additional authentication information or credentials are required when accessing the system from outside its boundaries. • Implements Boundary Protection Systems — Boundary protection systems (for example, firewalls, demilitarized zones, and intrusion detection systems) are implemented to protect external access points from attempts and unauthorized access and are monitored to detect such attempts 40
SOC_2 CC6.7 SOC_2_CC6.7 SOC 2 Type 2 CC6.7 Logical and Physical Access Controls Restrict the movement of information to authorized users Shared The customer is responsible for implementing this recommendation. • Restricts the Ability to Perform Transmission — Data loss prevention processes and technologies are used to restrict ability to authorize and execute transmission, movement, and removal of information. • Uses Encryption Technologies or Secure Communication Channels to Protect Data — Encryption technologies or secured communication channels are used to protect transmission of data and other communications beyond connectivity access points. • Protects Removal Media — Encryption technologies and physical asset protections are used for removable media (such as USB drives and backup tapes), as appropriate. • Protects Mobile Devices — Processes are in place to protect mobile devices (such as laptops, smart phones, and tablets) that serve as information assets 29
U.07.1 - Isolated U.07.1 - Isolated 404 not found n/a n/a 56
Initiatives usage
Initiative DisplayName Initiative Id Initiative Category State Type
[Deprecated]: Azure Security Benchmark v1 42a694ed-f65e-42b2-aa9e-8052e9740a92 Regulatory Compliance Deprecated BuiltIn
[Deprecated]: Azure Security Benchmark v2 bb522ac1-bc39-4957-b194-429bcd3bcb0b Regulatory Compliance Deprecated BuiltIn
[Deprecated]: New Zealand ISM Restricted d1a462af-7e6d-4901-98ac-61570b4ed22a Regulatory Compliance Deprecated BuiltIn
[Deprecated]: New Zealand ISM Restricted v3.5 93d2179e-3068-c82f-2428-d614ae836a04 Regulatory Compliance Deprecated BuiltIn
[Preview]: CMMC 2.0 Level 2 4e50fd13-098b-3206-61d6-d1d78205cb45 Regulatory Compliance Preview BuiltIn
[Preview]: Reserve Bank of India - IT Framework for Banks d0d5578d-cc08-2b22-31e3-f525374f235a Regulatory Compliance Preview BuiltIn
[Preview]: Reserve Bank of India - IT Framework for NBFC 7f89f09c-48c1-f28d-1bd5-84f3fb22f86c Regulatory Compliance Preview BuiltIn
CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark v2.0.0 06f19060-9e68-4070-92ca-f15cc126059e Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
FedRAMP High d5264498-16f4-418a-b659-fa7ef418175f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
FedRAMP Moderate e95f5a9f-57ad-4d03-bb0b-b1d16db93693 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
HITRUST/HIPAA a169a624-5599-4385-a696-c8d643089fab Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
Microsoft cloud security benchmark 1f3afdf9-d0c9-4c3d-847f-89da613e70a8 Security Center GA BuiltIn
New Zealand ISM 4f5b1359-4f8e-4d7c-9733-ea47fcde891e Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 03055927-78bd-4236-86c0-f36125a10dc9 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 cf25b9c1-bd23-4eb6-bd2c-f4f3ac644a5f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 179d1daa-458f-4e47-8086-2a68d0d6c38f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NL BIO Cloud Theme 6ce73208-883e-490f-a2ac-44aac3b3687f Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
NL BIO Cloud Theme V2 d8b2ffbe-c6a8-4622-965d-4ade11d1d2ee Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
RMIT Malaysia 97a6d4f1-3bed-4cf4-ac5b-0e444c0408d6 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
SOC 2 Type 2 4054785f-702b-4a98-9215-009cbd58b141 Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
Spain ENS 175daf90-21e1-4fec-b745-7b4c909aa94c Regulatory Compliance GA BuiltIn
History
Date/Time (UTC ymd) (i) Change type Change detail
2021-01-05 16:06:49 change Major (2.0.0 > 3.0.0)
JSON compare
compare mode: version left: version right:
JSON
api-version=2021-06-01
EPAC