Agreed. I'll use that value unless someone screams.
-Shawn
On 4/25/12 3:43 PM, Joe Wulf wrote:
Shawn,
90 days seems like a reasonable number.
R,
-Joe
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Shawn Wells <shawn(a)redhat.com>
*To:* scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 25, 2012 3:18 PM
*Subject:* Seeking Input: CCI-001459 Remediation - Temp Account
Termination
Hey Guys,
CCI-001459 requires that temp accounts be terminated after a
organizationally defined period of time. Right now we don't have a
check/control that implements that.
I'd like to add prose that recommends that -ALL- accounts be
locked after 60 (or 90... or 120..) days of inactivity. This
would allow us to automatically meet CCI-001459 and enforces that
inactive accounts should (eventually and automatically) be frozen.
Thoughts? My thinking is that 90 days of inactivity is a good
number.
-Shawn
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list
scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
<mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org>
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide