Paper Menu >>
Journal Menu >>
![]() Journal of Information Security, 2011, 2, 85-90 doi:10.4236/jis.2011.22008 Published Online April 2011 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/jis) Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS Proposed Framework for Security Risk Assessment Zakaria I. Saleh, Heba Refai, Ahmad Mashhour Faculty of Computer Science and Information Systems, Yarmouk University, Jordan Email: drzaatreh@aim.com, Refai86@ya ho o.com, mash ho ur_ a hm a d@yahoo.co m Received November 28, 2010; revised January 11, 2011; accepted April 12, 2011 Abstract Security risk assessment framework provides comprehensive structure for security risk analysis that would help uncover systems’ threats and vulnerabilities. While security risk assessment is an important step in the security risk management process, this paper will focus only on the security risk assessment framework. Viewing issues that exist in a current framework, we have developed a new framework for security risk and vulnerabilities assessment by adding new components to the processes of the existing framework. The pro- posed framework will further enhance the outcome of the risk assessment, and improve the effectiveness of the current framework. To demonstrate the efficiency the proposed framework, a network security simulation as well as filed tests of an existing network where conducted. Keywords: Security Risk, Vulnerabilities, Framework, Simulation 1. Introduction The substantial usage of information and communication devices, and the increasing interconnectivity among sys- tems and organizations, is exposing organizations for security risk and vulnerabilities, including intentional threat that would be associated to sabotage and vandal- ism. Therefore, there is a growing interest in applying risk analysis and risk management to eliminate security problems and protect networks. Security Risk management is an ongoing process of identifying these risks and implementing planes to ad- dress them and risk assessment is the part of the ongo ing risk management process that assigns relative priorities for mitigation plans and imple mentation [1]. Thus, a risk assessment framework is needed with an approach for categorizing and sharing information about the security risks of the information technology infrastructure. Fur- thermore, to establish useful framework for risk analysis we have to clearly identify the risks, it is not sufficient to refer to probabilities and expected values [2]. This paper will evaluate different frameworks that are being in use and then will develop an enhanced framework that will improve the outcome of the existing security risk as- sessment frameworks. 1.1. Overview of Vulnerabilities and Security Framework System Vulnerabilities are defined as fault or weakness that reduces and limits system ability [3]. Assessing se- curity risk is the initial step to evalu ate and identify risks and consequences associated with vulnerabilities and provide basis for management to establish cost effective security program. The vulnerability analysis is a part of risk assessment process that focuses on methods for identifying vulnerabilities and implementing measures to mitigate the vulnerabilities, by implementing suitable protection and safeguard to maintain acceptable network security level and protect information. Many types of network attacks require a high degree of technical exper- tise and some may require significant financial resources to be carried successfully; however some attacks may be accomplished with few resources and little expertise. Johnston (2004) defined a framework as structure upon or into which co ntents can b e pit and further relates it to thoughts that are directed for a purpose. A security framework provides holistic structure for risk analysis covering both terminology on risk and vulnerabilities concepts and methodology for risk and vulnerabilities analysis for safety and security [2]. The natural of risks however, could include the possibility of threat event (e.g. flood, earthquake, and fire) that have impact on the organization’s information asset as well as its physical structures [4]. In addition, the nature of information net- works allows for an attack to be launched from anywhere in the world, making identifying the origins of an attack a major difficulty, if the attack is detected to start with [5]. ![]() Z. I. SALEH ET AL. Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS 86 1.2. Research Objectives Secured networks and information systems assist or- ganization in sharing its business in trustworthy way, helping organization to build strong relationship with customer, supplier and other business partner. Creating trust relationships through the security of information and by means of effective security controls will improve the cash flow and profitability of organization [6,7]. In addition, security risk assessment provides complete view on existing security risk and necessary security safeguard, and provides approach to security manage- ment with alternative solution for decision-making and basis for future change made in security measure [8]. Therefore, a proper and efficient security risk assessment will result in improved outcome. To prove the effective- ness of this framework I will use network security emu- lation to answer the following research questions, which include: 1) How effective is the proposed framework for secu- rity risk assessment? 2) Does criteria process have an impact on the security risk assessment? 3) Does the proposed security risk assessment have an impact on the security strategy development process? 1.3. Security Risk Assessment Overview Security risk assessment is being defined as the process of evaluating security risks that is conducted identifies the required security measures [9]. The assessment is conducted at the very early stages of the system devel- opment as well as when there is change to information asset or its environment. The process includes the evalu- ations and analysis of all asset and processes related to the system to identifying the threat and vulnerabilities that could affect confidentiality, integrity or availability of the system, and setting required co ntrol to manage the risk [1]. Risk assessment is an essential element of risk management and to be effective, risk assessment must be an ongoing process. Depending on the purpose and the scope of security risk assessment it can be categorized into three types: (1) high level assessment that can be applied for system at design phase to identify security risks before implementation; (2) comprehensive assess- ment that can be used to evaluate the security risk of par- ticular system in department to provide recommendation for improvement; (3) pre-production assessment con- ducted on new information system before it’s rolled out or after there is major functional ch ange [10]. 1.4. Security Risk Assessment Frameworks 1) The iterative process of IT security management, which starts with assessing security risk and based on the assessment results, an appropriate security protection and safeguards would be implemented to maintain a secure protection framework as illu strated in Figure 1 [1]. 2) The national infrastructure protection plan risk management framework (NNIP-RM) is structured to promote continuous improvement to enhance critical infrastructure protection and key resource protection as shown in Figure 2 [4]. 3) Framework for information security culture, pro- vides organizations with understanding of how to estab- lish an information security culture to minimize risks posed by employee behavior regarding the use of infor- mation assets (Figure 3), where the interaction between information security co mponents su ch as a po licy and th e behavior of employees would have an impact on the re- sulting information security culture [11]. Figure 1. Security risk management process. Figure 2. NIPP- RM framework. Figure 3. Information security culture framework. ![]() Z. I. SALEH ET AL. Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS 87 2. Research Model Security risk and vulnerabilities assessment has many benefits and challenges associated with it. The security risk assessment should provide complete view of the existing security risk and help provide alternative solu- tion and changes to the security measures and controls. In light of that, this research believes that none of the discussed frameworks is fully providing the desired out- come. Therefore, we propose that an enhancement is needed, which will improve the security risk assessment process, and that enhancement can be made to Ogesio [1] security risk management approach (see Figure 1). The approach should include two more components which will be added and placed as process 2 (Identify infra- structure vulnerabilities) and process 3 (Analyze Risks & Vulnerabilities) to the existing security risk assessment process as being illustrated in Figure 4. Network infrastructure vulnerabilities are the core of all technical security issues in any information systems. The extreme importance of infrastructures to modern network systems shall be recognized. These infrastruc- tures are complex and interdependent; therefore protect- ing the infrastructures is an enormous challenge. Recog- nizing that an organization cannot afford the costs asso- ciated with absolute protection, it is necessary to identify and prioritize the vulnerabilities in these infrastructures. These vulnerabilities can affect everything running on the network. The information infrastructure now a day is still regarded as an easy and vulnerable entry point. But discovering the threat and the likely nature of an attack — remains difficult [5]. Therefore, infrastructure vul- nerabilities and infra structure evolution requires effec- tive crisis management and preventive, strategic planning, to try and eliminate them whenever possible. This re- quires an evaluation of the information infrastructure, where the main operational components of the informa- tion technology infrastructure are examined for weak- nesses and technology vulnerabilities. Any basic risk assessment would identify and quantify this vu lnerability. Figure 4. Proposed framework for security risk and vulnerabilities assessment. However, establishing risk assessment criteria and then implementing & maintaining secure framework before Identify infrastructure vuln erabilities and analyze risk s & vulnerabilities will not be as efficient as it would be de- sired. Infrastructures vulnerabilities might arise from the common links where failures might propagate through the different systems. Thus, intrusion and disruption in one subsystem might provoke unexpected threats to other subsystem. There are four types Infrastructure threat (see Table 1), where attacks on the systems in all four types involve the malicious use of the information infrastruc- ture either as a target or as a tool [12]. 3. Research Method The proposed framework effectiveness will be tested using SpiceWorks network management software ver- sion 4.7 (see Figure 5). SpiceWorks is a complete net- work management software, helpdesk, and PC inventory tools designed to manage networks in small & medium businesses. SpiceWorks gets a full and accurate scan of all network devices including Windows, Mac, and Linux machines and keep track of the network assets, run a helpdesk, monitor activity, receive reports and trouble- Table 1. Infrastructure threat matrix [12]. Target Means/Tool Physical Cyber 1) 2) - Severing a telecom cable with a backhoe - Smashing a server with a hammer - Bombing the electric grid - Use of electromagnetic pulse and radio-frequency weapons to destabilize electronic components 3) 4) Physical Cyber - Hacking into a SCADA system that con- trols municipal sewage - “Spoofing” an air traffic control system to bring down a plane - Hacking into a critical governme nt networ k - Trojan horse in public switched network ![]() Z. I. SALEH ET AL. Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS 88 Figure 5. Spiceworks 4.7 screenshot. shoot network problems [13]. The software will be used to test the network of a university (for security and pri- vacy reasons, the name of the university will remain anonymous). Using SpiceWorks, we will implement Ogesio framework process [1] and the proposed frame- work, test a network, and then compare the findings. 4. Data Collection and Analysis SpiceWorks network management software was installed and to test the network and to identify infrastructure vulnerabilities and analyze risks if any found (process 2 & 3). Evaluating the major events that were taking place in the network systems by applications and other devices, the evaluation revealed a number of audit failure, warn- ings and errors as displayed in Figure 6. The ID of the system where the audit failures occur is displayed in Table 2 along with the source of failure, event count, and the location and the time/date in which the failures occur. The warnings are listed in Table 3, along with the ID of the applications that may failure or error occur on it, source of these expected errors, the event count, the sys- tems involved and the time/date of warning. The security issues are listed in Table 4, along with the ID of the systems where the errors occur, source of errors, event count, the systems involved, and the time/ date that the errors occur. In addition, Table 4 displays the type of security issues and the device (name or ad- dress) where the issue is identified. Analyzing Tables 2, 3 and 4, we can specify the like- lihood of the events to occur by looking at the count Figure 6. The major events in the network. Table 2. Audit failure report. ID Sources Count Computers 4/12/2010 4001 SWService 2 Srvs 18:07:32 ![]() Z. I. SALEH ET AL. Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS 89 Table 3. Warnings report. ID Sources CountComputers 4/12/2010 8032 BROWSER 3 Srvs 20:59:43 8021 BROWSER 3 Srvs 20:57:19 7000 Service Control Manager 2 Srvs 20:55:22 20 Print 1 Srvs 20:12:55 7034 Service Control Manager 4 Srvs 20:08:48 7031 Service Control Manager 3 Srvs 20:03:35 7001 Service Control Manager 12 Srvs 19:51:21 7022 Service Control Manager 11 Srvs 19:51:21 7032 Service Control Manager 1 Srvs 19:15:09 Table 4. Security issues report. ID Sources CountComputers 4/12/2010 1 WinVNC4 5 Srvs 21:15:47 107 Report Server Windows Service 2 Srvs 20:54:55 18456 MSSQLSERVER 2 Srvs 20:54:53 3 SQL Browser 4 Srvs 20:54:00 1001 MS Installer 3 Srvs 20:26:15 0 System Service Model Install 3.0.0.0 10 Srvs 20:17:05 0 Net Runtime 14 Srvs 20:08:47 column that specifies how many time this event was re- peated and reported. For example, we can conclude that most of the errors events have high likelihood of occur- rence, and some of the warning event has high likelihood and some warnings have medium likelihood of occur- rence, but the audit failure has low likelihood of occur- rence because the event count is only 2. Errors were also reported during the system test (see Table 5). In light of that, we need to assess the impact of the errors and warnings on the critical data assets to de- velop the appropriate method to manage the risks and to protect data assets. For example, an effective firewall provides the software or hardware necessary to validate and authenticate traffic and user against a security policy or set of rules to allow them to pass the private or trusted side of network. Firewall problems and issues could mean that external unauthorized people can access the private network and disclose sensitive and critical data asset. Table 5. Reported errors type. Device Name Error 172.19.150.127 Permission or Firewall Problem okhreis-pc Permission or Firewall Probl em 172.19.150.74 Permission or Firewall Problem yu-9c2f5e2e9e4b Permission or Firewall Probl em 172.19.150.58 Permission or Firewall Problem dr-y-aaage Permission or Firewall Problem drsalah Permission or Firewall Probl em 5. Conclusions Based on the results and the findings, we conclude that the framework process is providing the desired results, where each process depends on the result of the previous one. For example, during the tests, we have identified warnings and security issues. Unless the two proposed components are added to the existing security risk as- sessment process as illustrated in Figure 4 (process 2: Identify infrastructure vulnerabilities) and (process 3: Analyze Risks & Vulnerabilities) those warnings may become real issues and introduce new vulnerabilities soon or later. The only way to confirm that they will (or will not), is by identifying the vulnerabilities that each warning may have, and then analyzing the risk associated with it. Therefore, the risk analysis process depends on the result of the infrastructure vulnerabilities identifica- tion, where in this process the vulnerabilities are identi- fied, and then the risk is analyzed based on its impact and probability of occurrence. Th e monitoring process is based on the result of the established risk assessment criteria, where reports are produced to indicate all alerts or warning of all possible threats. The monitoring is con- tinuously repeated to insure the development of effective security system, and an appropriate action is taken to handle the risks associated with those threats, which should result in improving the security system. In addi- tion, the risk assessment criteria should be based on the result of the reporting process. In other words, manager will use the report that summarize the status and per- formance of the security in the organization, and based on that, management will update the security system (and policy) to eliminate security weakness, and thus enhance the security system. In light of the findings, we can conclude that the framework is effective for security risk assessment be- cause the processes are proven to be highly interacted with each other. We also conclude that the risk assess- ment criteria process has appositive impact on security risk assessment, as the test results have shown in the different stages of the process. In addition, the security ![]() Z. I. SALEH ET AL. Copyright © 2011 SciRes. JIS 90 risk assessment process has a positive impact on the se- curity strategic development, through continuous devel- opment of the security system to improve the security system. The security plan and strategies may specify the priorities and area of concerns as well as the degree of risk that management can accept, however, without ap- plying the added process the system may not be as effec- tive, as the results indicate. 6. References [1] The Office of the Government Chief Information Officer, “Security Risk Assessment and Audit Guidelines”, 2009. http://www.ogcio.gov.hk/eng/prodev/download/g51_pub [2] T. Even, “A Unified Framework For Risk and Vulner- ability Analysis Covering Both Safety a nd Security”, Re- liability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 92, No. 6, 2007, pp. 745-754. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2006.03.008 [3] G. Stoneburner, A. Goguen, A. Feringa, “Risk Manage- ment Guide for Information Technology Systems”, 2002. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-30/sp800-3 0f [4] Homeland Security, “National Infrastructure Protection Plane Risk Management Framework”, (2009). http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_RiskMgmt [5] M. D. Cavelty, “Critical Information Infrastructure: Vul- nerabilities, Threats an d Responses” Disarmame nt Forum ICTs and International Security, No. 3, 2007, pp. 15-22. [6] R. Olsson, “In Search of Opportunity Management: Is the Risk Management Process Enough?” International Jour- nal of Project Management, Vol. 25, No. 8, November 2007, pp. 745-752. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.03.005 [7] S. Posthumus, R. Solms, “A Framework for the Govern- ance of Information Security”, Computer and Security, Vol. 23, No. 8, December 2004, pp. 638-646. doi:10.1016/j.cose.2004.10.006 [8] Akelainc, “What Risk and Vulnerability Assessment”, 2009. http://www.akelainc.com/pdf_files/What%20is%20risk% 20and%20vulnerability%20assessment.pdf [9] Insight Networking, “Risk and Vulnerabilities Assess- ment”, 2009. https://images01.insight.com/media/pdf/IN_RVA_Datash eet [10] S. Bajpai, A. Sachdeva, J. Gupta, “Security Risk Assess- ment: Applying the Concept of Fuzzy Logic”, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 173, No. 1-3, January 2010, pp.258-264. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.08.078 [11] A. Veiga, J. Eloff, “A Framework and Assessment for Information Security Culture”, Computer and Security, Vol. 29, No. 2, March 2010, pp. 196-207. doi:10.1016/j.cose.2009.09.002 [12] Dunn Myriam, “A Comparative Analysis of Cyber secu- rity Initiatives Worldwide”, WSIS Thematic Meeting on Cybersecurity, Geneva, 28 June-1 July 2005. [13] SpiceWorks Inc., “SpiceWorks, IT Is Everything”, April 14, 2010. http://www.spiceworks.com/ |