US Government IT Security 'Outstandingly Mediocre' 86
mrneutron2004 writes wrote with a link to an article on The Register, discussing an annual IT security report card handed out to the federal government. The results this year were mixed. The good news is that they graded higher than last year. The bad news? They still just rate a C-". Individual departments did better than others, but overall the results were quite poor. "Although overall security procedures improved the Department of Defense (DoD) recorded a failing F grade. Meanwhile the Department of Veterans Affairs - whose loss of laptops containing veterans' confidential data triggered a huge security breach - failed to submit a report. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, another agency that has trouble keeping track of its PCs, flunked."
Same day dupe (Score:1)
Re:Government (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Government (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I wonder what will happen when the government can't make the payments, and the banks foreclose and take the country away on the back of a really big truck...it'd make a good reality show, anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Twas a joke...
Re: (Score:2)
In today's society the easiest discrimination target for the people to vent their hate is homeless people.
It's the standard stupid (Score:2)
These standards are completely silly and represent the worst of government--it's all command and control, central clearing houses, et cetera. When the federal government does the best is when it says
I assume... (Score:1, Informative)
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/12/23
You owe me (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
YES and NO (Score:2)
They are letting us know that nothing has gotten better in the last 22 hours..........
C'mon guys at least read the front page (and the little box in the corner where it clearly shows the c- story, it even has c- in headline)
I wonder if any of the
Re: (Score:2)
'
Correlation with usage of Microsoft products (Score:2)
Any exceptions?
Re: (Score:1)
Any exceptions?
It has nothing to do with Heavy Windows usage. Plenty of Corporations uses Windows heavily for their end users and are still much more secure than the government does. It's the "company" culture and the management style that should be credited for lack of security while slow to improve its current standing.
It may help also if they learn how to keep the real talent happily working for the government agencies and not pissing them off to the privat
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My degree is in IT, and I can tell you a lot of what
I reall
Re: (Score:2)
And who can forget that Linux never suffers this kind of poor auditing (Do you know how to generate a unique hardware hash and centrally audit it over a secure network?), and nobody wants to steal one of those nice, shiny, expensive MacBook Pros.
Dupe (Score:1, Redundant)
Re: (Score:1)
What might help (Score:1, Insightful)
Am i the only one that sees this as a good thing? (Score:1)
This provides the best oversight by the civilians, not purely agents of a government.
This would limit the size and capability of our government and put it as similar to individual power.
The other hand is what happens if a script kiddie takes control where a civil oversight member cannot. Who would you rather your information be held by, the government or some 15 year old?
The elephant in the room (Score:2)
Question the status quo, people. (In Soviet Russia, the status quo questions YOU.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll agree that a secure Windows centric network is certainly possible, but I believe that Windows makes it much easier to make an insecure network. Take for example the autorun capability, first on CDs, now also on fl
But Windows is sold as software for the unskilled (Score:2)
But Microsoft sells itself as the software for dumb people who have no technical expertise. You have seen the adverts on TV with the ordinary schlebs in an office environment all happier than a pig in mud puddle. They are happy because they can use computers with Microsoft software even though they do not know jack.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah....
Re: (Score:1)
Okay. Where's your your next stop [statusquo.co.uk]?
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, the status quo questions YOU in corporate america too.
Help Wanted (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
FISMA is not security (Score:3, Interesting)
It is about having documented down to the letter networks, configurations, policies and procedures for everything.
Another weakness is how "controls" are rated. Basically, missing one little policy or procedure is rated as bad as missing something as critical as secure configurations...
Every agency IG has a vested interest in scoring down agency efforts.
If you look too, the ratings are biased because small agencies & independents have inordinately high ratings, while the bigger agencies/departments have far worse ratings.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
First off, there's the whole Sun Tzu thing. I find quoting Sun Tzu and the applications of "The Art of War" to network security tiresome but in this case he's right.
Second, there are so many newfangled correlation engines on the horizon that can make Security's job a lot easier, but which require tons of metadata. You have to tell it which IP is your webserver so it will adjust its weightings. Of course before that you need to know where and what the webserv
No Department Left Behind? (Score:3, Funny)
Clearly the White House should launch a "No Department Left Behind" initiative to improve the government's IT security grades.
It could begin with routine penetration testing to assess how well-defended systems are against known and common attacks -- one could call this "standardized testing" to establish a minimum level of security, with budget cuts for departments that fail to keep their networks secure. The results should be reported to the taxpayers, so that we know which systems are secure and which are not, and can put public pressure on departments that aren't keeping their grades up. And of course, all IT managers should have MCSE, CCNA, RHCE, and A+ certifications, to prove that they're qualified for their jobs.
Crawl Before Run (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The dupe is still on the front page (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's be realistic here - if you were them, would you want to? Staring failure in the face every day is not for the faint of heart...
Re: (Score:1)
Federal Goverment better at defending Itself... (Score:2)
At least I pray to God it is. Otherwise, we're all in deep, deep trouble.
Now you'll have to excuse me. I need to go update my will.
Crow T. Trollbot
'Outstandingly Mediocre' (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Indeed. I would be more shocked if they got an "A". Now that would warrant an investigation. If the gov't get's an A, it means one of:
1. They have way too big a budget
2. Somebody bribed the graders
3. Somebody is trying to hide something else or compensate for a separate weakness or screw-up by making another section do really well.
Hunn?? I dont get it Bob. (Score:1)
Windows (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Windows (Score:4, Interesting)
I've worked with USMC, USAF, and NATO workstations and servers. Both CLASS and UNCLASS.
The first thing the DoD does right is to remove desktop admin rights. I love the fact that we lock workstations pretty hard. If your shop follows the NSA guidelines for Win2k, it's pretty solid. Ideally, the user cannot WRITE to any part of the drive other than his home folders. Of course, a rights-elevating script can destroy that.
The USMC started enforcing standard text emails. They also push cryptographic signing and public-key encryption. Fery few civilian companies do that.
The second thing the DoD does right is in user training. We (used to) regularly call people and ask for their password. If they gave it out, their commander got bitched at. He usually ensured that everyone came in on Saturday to practice not giving out passwords...
The DoD also tends to filter out web sites. There are some places that only allow
The DoD also filters email attachments. Sometimes this is strange. I can send a Word document with 9000 macros, but a basic Visio diagram gets blocked. Zipping, Raring, or Taring a file isn't usually enough to get through the filters.
The DoD also segregates their critical communications. Everyone loves email and Google, but we can still deploy bombs and bullets without Wikipedia. All our *good stuff* is completely inaccessible from the internets.
The biggest flaw is, as you said, using outdated software. However, there is no easy way around this. Once MS releases a patch, the DoD has to decide if it's needed. Then they have to decide if it will break anything. Form there, they filter it to the USMC. They decide if they need it and if it will break anything. This continues to happen all the way down to the Base communication support people. By that time, the exploit has been in the wild for a few months.
The only real alternative is to *cowboy* your way through the patches and hope that nothing breaks.
Re: (Score:1)
Relative to what? (Score:2, Insightful)
Outstandingly Mediocre!!! (Score:1)
US Government backbone is (Score:1)
Accurately Hilarious (Score:1)
But Paul Ohm Says No Super Hackers (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Securities abound. (Score:2)
Department of Defence (Score:1)