RFC1281

From RFC-Wiki

Network Working Group R. Pethia Request for Comments: 1281 Software Engineering Institute

                                                          S. Crocker
                                   Trusted Information Systems, Inc.
                                                           B. Fraser
                                      Software Engineering Institute
                                                       November 1991
      Guidelines for the Secure Operation of the Internet

Status 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.

Introduction

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.

Elaboration

(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 control
    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 to appendix 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.
    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 protocols
    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 published
    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.

A Bibliography of Computer and Network Security Related Documents

United States Public Laws (PL) and Federal Policies

[1] P.L. 100-235, "The Computer Security Act of 1987", (Contained in

   Appendix 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 in

   Appendix C of Citation No. 12, Vol II.).

[7] "Security of Federal Automated Information Systems", (Contained

   in Appendix 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 in Appendix 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.
 [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.

Authors' Addresses

Richard D. Pethia Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890

Phone: (412) 268-7739 FAX: (412) 268-6989

EMail: [email protected]

Stephen D. Crocker Trusted Information Systems, Inc. 3060 Washington Road Glenwood, Maryland 21738

Phone: (301) 854-6889 FAX: (301) 854-5363

EMail: [email protected]

Barbara Y. Fraser Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890

Phone: (412) 268-5010 FAX: (412) 268-6989

EMail: [email protected]