Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

INFORMATIONAL
Network Working Group                                          R. PethiaRequest for Comments: 1281                Software Engineering Institute                                                              S. Crocker                                       Trusted Information Systems, Inc.                                                               B. Fraser                                          Software Engineering Institute                                                           November 1991Guidelines for the Secure Operation of the InternetStatus of this Memo   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does   not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is   unlimited.Preamble   The purpose of this document is to provide a set of guidelines to aid   in the secure operation of the Internet.  During its history, the   Internet has grown significantly and is now quite diverse.  Its   participants include government institutions and agencies, academic   and research institutions, commercial network and electronic mail   carriers, non-profit research centers and an increasing array of   industrial organizations who are primarily users of the technology.   Despite this dramatic growth, the system is still operated on a   purely collaborative basis.  Each participating network takes   responsibility for its own operation.  Service providers, private   network operators, users and vendors all cooperate to keep the system   functioning.   It is important to recognize that the voluntary nature of the   Internet system is both its strength and, perhaps, its most fragile   aspect.  Rules of operation, like the rules of etiquette, are   voluntary and, largely, unenforceable, except where they happen to   coincide with national laws, violation of which can lead to   prosecution.  A common set of rules for the successful and   increasingly secure operation of the Internet can, at best, be   voluntary, since the laws of various countries are not uniform   regarding data networking.  Indeed, the guidelines outlined below   also can be only voluntary.  However, since joining the Internet is   optional, it is also fair to argue that any Internet rules of   behavior are part of the bargain for joining and that failure to   observe them, apart from any legal infrastructure available, are   grounds for sanctions.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 1]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991Introduction   These guidelines address the entire Internet community, consisting of   users, hosts, local, regional, domestic and international backbone   networks, and vendors who supply operating systems, routers, network   management tools, workstations and other network components.   Security is understood to include protection of the privacy of   information, protection of information against unauthorized   modification, protection of systems against denial of service, and   protection of systems against unauthorized access.   These guidelines encompass six main points.  These points are   repeated and elaborated in the next section.  In addition, a   bibliography of computer and network related references has been   provided at the end of this document for use by the reader. Security Guidelines   (1)  Users are individually responsible for understanding and        respecting the security policies of the systems (computers and        networks) they are using.  Users are individually accountable        for their own behavior.   (2)  Users have a responsibility to employ available security        mechanisms and procedures for protecting their own data.  They        also have a responsibility for assisting in the protection of        the systems they use.   (3)  Computer and network service providers are responsible for        maintaining the security of the systems they operate.  They are        further responsible for notifying users of their security        policies and any changes to these policies.   (4)  Vendors and system developers are responsible for providing        systems which are sound and which embody adequate security        controls.   (5)  Users, service providers, and hardware and software vendors are        responsible for cooperating to provide security.   (6)  Technical improvements in Internet security protocols should be        sought on a continuing basis.  At the same time, personnel        developing new protocols, hardware or software for the Internet        are expected to include security considerations as part of the        design and development process.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 2]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991Elaboration   (1)  Users are individually responsible for understanding and        respecting the security policies of the systems (computers and        networks) they are using.  Users are individually accountable        for their own behavior.        Users are responsible for their own behavior.  Weaknesses in        the security of a system are not a license to penetrate or        abuse a system.  Users are expected to be aware of the security        policies of computers and networks which they access and to        adhere to these policies.  One clear consequence of this        guideline is that unauthorized access to a computer or use of a        network is explicitly a violation of Internet rules of conduct,        no matter how weak the protection of those computers or networks.        There is growing international attention to legal prohibition        against unauthorized access to computer systems, and several        countries have recently passed legislation that addresses the        area (e.g., United Kingdom, Australia).  In the United States,        the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986, Title 18 U.S.C.section 1030 makes it a crime, in certain situations, to access        a Federal interest computer (federal government computers,        financial institution computers, and a computer which is one of        two or more computers used in committing the offense, not all of        which are located in the same state) without authorization.        Most of the 50 states in the U.S have similar laws.        Another aspect of this part of the policy is that users are        individually responsible for all use of resources assigned to        them, and hence sharing of accounts and access to resources is        strongly discouraged.  However, since access to resources is        assigned by individual sites and network operators, the        specific rules governing sharing of accounts and protection of        access is necessarily a local matter.   (2)  Users have a responsibility to employ available security        mechanisms and procedures for protecting their own data.  They        also have a responsibility for assisting in the protection of        the systems they use.        Users are expected to handle account privileges in a        responsible manner and to follow site procedures for the        security of their data as well as that of the system.  For        systems which rely upon password protection, users should        select good passwords and periodically change them.  Proper        use of file protection mechanisms (e.g., access control lists)        so as to define and maintain appropriate file access controlPethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 3]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991        is also part of this responsibility.   (3)  Computer and network service providers are responsible for        maintaining the security of the systems they operate.  They are        further responsible for notifying users of their security        policies and any changes to these policies.        A computer or network service provider may manage resources on        behalf of users within an organization (e.g., provision of        network and computer services with a university) or it may        provide services to a larger, external community (e.g., a        regional network provider).  These resources may include host        computers employed by users, routers, terminal servers, personal        computers or other devices that have access to the Internet.        Because the Internet itself is neither centrally managed nor        operated, responsibility for security rests with the owners and        operators of the subscriber components of the Internet.        Moreover, even if there were a central authority for this        infrastructure, security necessarily is the responsibility of        the owners and operators of the systems which are the primary        data and processing resources of the Internet.        There are tradeoffs between stringent security measures at a        site and ease of use of systems (e.g., stringent security        measures may complicate user access to the Internet).  If a site        elects to operate an unprotected, open system, it may be        providing a platform for attacks on other Internet hosts while        concealing the attacker's identity.  Sites which do operate        open systems are nonetheless responsible for the behavior of        the systems' users and should be prepared to render assistance        to other sites when needed.  Whenever possible, sites should        try to ensure authenticated Internet access.  The readers are        directed toappendix A for a brief descriptive list of elements        of good security.        Sites (including network service providers) are encouraged to        develop security policies.  These policies should be clearly        communicated to users and subscribers.  The Site Security        Handbook (FYI 8,RFC 1244) provides useful information and        guidance on developing good security policies and procedures        at both the site and network level.   (4)  Vendors and system developers are responsible for providing        systems which are sound and which embody adequate security        controls.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 4]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991        A vendor or system developer should evaluate each system in        terms of security controls prior to the introduction of the        system into the Internet community.  Each product (whether        offered for sale or freely distributed) should describe the        security features it incorporates.        Vendors and system developers have an obligation to repair        flaws in the security relevant portions of the systems they        sell (or freely provide) for use in the Internet.  They are        expected to cooperate with the Internet community in        establishing mechanisms for the reporting of security flaws and        in making security-related fixes available to the community in        a timely fashion.   (5)  Users, service providers, and hardware and software vendors are        responsible for cooperating to provide security.        The Internet is a cooperative venture.  The culture and        practice in the Internet is to render assistance in security        matters to other sites and networks.  Each site is expected to        notify other sites if it detects a penetration in progress at        the other sites, and all sites are expected to help one another        respond to security violations.  This assistance may include        tracing connections, tracking violators and assisting law        enforcement efforts.        There is a growing appreciation within the Internet community        that security violators should be identified and held        accountable.  This means that once a violation has been detected,        sites are encouraged to cooperate in finding the violator and        assisting in enforcement efforts.  It is recognized that many        sites will face a trade-off between securing their sites as        rapidly as possible versus leaving their site open in the hopes        of identifying the violator.  Sites will also be faced with the        dilemma of limiting the knowledge of a penetration versus        exposing the fact that a penetration has occurred.  This policy        does not dictate that a site must expose either its system or        its reputation if it decides not to, but sites are encouraged        to render as much assistance as they can.   (6)  Technical improvements in Internet security protocols should be        sought on a continuing basis.  At the same time, personnel        developing new protocols, hardware or software for the Internet        are expected to include security considerations as part of the        design and development process.        The points discussed above are all administrative in nature,        but technical advances are also important.  Existing protocolsPethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 5]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991        and operating systems do not provide the level of security that        is desired and feasible today.  Three types of advances are        encouraged:        (a)  Improvements should be made in the basic security             mechanisms already in place.  Password security is             generally poor throughout the Internet and can be             improved markedly through the use of tools to administer             password assignment and through the use of better             authentication technology.  At the same time, the             Internet user population is expanding to include a             larger percentage of technically unsophisticated users.             Security defaults on delivered systems and the controls             for administering security must be geared to this growing             population.         (b)  Security extensions to the protocol suite are needed.              Candidate protocols which should be augmented to improve              security include network management, routing, file              transfer, telnet, and mail.         (c)  The design and implementation of operating systems should              be improved to place more emphasis on security and pay              more attention to the quality of the implementation of              security within systems on the Internet.APPENDIX A   Five areas should be addressed in improving local security:   (1)  There must be a clear statement of the local security policy,        and this policy must be communicated to the users and other        relevant parties.  The policy should be on file and available        to users at all times, and should be communicated to users as        part of providing access to the system.   (2)  Adequate security controls must be implemented.  At a minimum,        this means controlling access to systems via passwords,        instituting sound password management, and configuring the        system to protect itself and the information within it.   (3)  There must be a capability to monitor security compliance and        respond to incidents involving violation of security.  Logs of        logins, attempted logins, and other security-relevant events        are strongly advised, as well as regular audit of these logs.        Also recommended is a capability to trace connections and other        events in response to penetrations.  However, it is important        for service providers to have a well thought out and publishedPethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 6]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991        policy about what information they gather, who has access to it        and for what purposes.  Maintaining the privacy of network        users should be kept in mind when developing such a policy.   (4)  There must be an established chain of communication and control        to handle security matters.  A responsible person should be        identified as the security contact.  The means for reaching the        security contact should be made known to all users and should        be registered in public directories, and it should be easy for        computer emergency response centers to find contact information        at any time.        The security contact should be familiar with the technology and        configuration of all systems at the site or should be able to        get in touch with those who have this knowledge at any time.        Likewise, the security contact should be pre-authorized to make        a best effort to deal with a security incident, or should be        able to contact those with the authority at any time.   (5)  Sites and networks which are notified of security incidents        should respond in a timely and effective manner.  In the case        of penetrations or other violations, sites and networks should        allocate resources and capabilities to identify the nature of        the incident and limit the damage.  A site or network cannot be        considered to have good security if it does not respond to        incidents in a timely and effective fashion.        If a violator can be identified, appropriate action should be        taken to ensure that no further violations are caused.  Exactly        what sanctions should be brought against a violator depend on        the nature of the incident and the site environment.  For        example, a university may choose to bring internal disciplinary        action against a student violator.        Similarly, sites and networks should respond when notified of        security flaws in their systems.  Sites and networks have the        responsibility to install fixes in their systems as they become        available.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 7]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991A Bibliography of Computer and Network Security Related DocumentsUnited States Public Laws (PL) and Federal Policies   [1] P.L. 100-235, "The Computer Security Act of 1987", (Contained inAppendix C of Citation No. 12, Vol II.), Jan. 8, 1988.   [2] P.L. 99-474 (H.R. 4718), "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986",       Oct. 16, 1986.   [3] P.L. 99-508 (H.R. 4952), "Electronic Communications Privacy Act       of 1986", Oct. 21, 1986.   [4] P.L. 99-591, "Paperwork Reduction Reauthorization Act of 1986",       Oct. 30, 1986.   [5] P.L. 93-579, "Privacy Act of 1984", Dec. 31, 1984.   [6] "National Security Decision Directive 145", (Contained inAppendix C of Citation No. 12, Vol II.).   [7] "Security of Federal Automated Information Systems", (Contained       inAppendix C of Citation No. 12, Vol II.),Appendix III of,       Management of Federal Information Resources, Office of Management       and Budget (OMB), Circular A-130.   [8] "Protection of Government Contractor Telecommunications",       (Contained inAppendix C of Citation No. 12, Vol II.), National       Communications Security Instruction (NACSI) 6002.Other Documents   [9] Secure Systems Study Committee, "Computers at Risk: Safe       Computing in the Information Age", Computer Science and       Technology Board, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution       Avenue, Washington, DC 20418, December 1990.  [10] Curry, D., "Improving the Security of Your UNIX System", Report       No. ITSTD-721-FR-90-21, SRI International, 333 Ravenswood Ave.,       Menlo Park, CA, 94025-3493, April 1990.  [11] Holbrook P., and J. Reynolds, Editors, "Site Security Handbook",       FYI 8,RFC 1244, CICNet, ISI, July 1991.  [12] "Industry Information Protection, Vols. I,II,III", Industry       Information Security Task Force, President's National       Telecommunications Advisory Committee, June 1988.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 8]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991  [13] Jelen, G., "Information Security: An Elusive Goal", Report No.       P-85-8, Harvard University, Center for Information Policy       Research, 200 Akin, Cambridge, MA.  02138, June 1985.  [14] "Electronic Record Systems and Individual Privacy", OTA-CIT-296,       Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment,       Washington, D.C. 20510, June 1986.  [15] "Defending Secrets, Sharing Data", OTA-CIT-310, Congress of the       United States, Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, D.C.       20510, October 1987.  [16] "Summary of General Legislation Relating to Privacy and Computer       Security", Appendix 1 of, COMPUTERS and PRIVACY: How the       Government Obtains, Verifies, Uses and Protects Personal Data,       GAO/IMTEC-90-70BR, United States General Accounting Office,       Washington, DC 20548, pp.  36-40, August 1990.  [17] Stout, E., "U.S. Geological Survey System Security Plan - FY       1990", U.S. Geological Survey ISD, MS809, Reston, VA, 22092, May       1990.Security Considerations   If security considerations had not been so widely ignored in the   Internet, this memo would not have been possible.Pethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                       [Page 9]

RFC 1281          Guidelines for the Secure Operation      November 1991Authors' Addresses   Richard D. Pethia   Software Engineering Institute   Carnegie Mellon University   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890   Phone:  (412) 268-7739   FAX:    (412) 268-6989   EMail:  rdp@cert.sei.cmu.edu   Stephen D. Crocker   Trusted Information Systems, Inc.   3060 Washington Road   Glenwood, Maryland 21738   Phone:  (301) 854-6889   FAX:    (301) 854-5363   EMail:  crocker@tis.com   Barbara Y. Fraser   Software Engineering Institute   Carnegie Mellon University   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890   Phone:  (412) 268-5010   FAX:    (412) 268-6989   EMail:  byf@cert.sei.cmu.eduPethia, Crocker, & Fraser                                      [Page 10]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp