I appreciate your optimism and view point, but I tend to fall on Brian’s side on this matter – at least for the moment.
Can you confirm that the OSCAP provides the XCCDF formatted xml in the results provided? If so, the reviewers required completed Checklist as populated via STIG Viewer should be producible, and ultimately, this is the artifact in my experience that EII/SCA/NAO reviewers are in search of, and this will place me to your view point on this matter.
(410) 627-5633 (M)
The Information contained in or attached to this communication may be confidential and privileged proprietary intended only for the individual/s or entity to whom/which it is addressed. Any unauthorized use, distribution, copying or disclosure of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender immediately and delete from your system.
From: Trevor Vaughan [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 10:44 AM
To: SCAP Security Guide <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Loss of EL7 STIG profiles
I come at this from a very similar point of view but have a different take on the situation.
OpenSCAP is a NIST approved SCAP scanner and, though people may have their preferences, the tool is perfectly capable of performing its duties appropriately and, in fact, is usually seen as the de facto reference implementation. If the commercial/internal tools cannot process SCAP spec compliant information, then a bug report needs to be filed against those tools as insufficient.
The entire body of SSG content is on GitHub and easily verifiable. Any auditor that does not approve of the veracity of the information can easily validate for themselves that the rules are to their standards.
If I remember correctly, DISA is only chartered to create content if there is no sufficient vendor or public content is available. Obviously, someone should review the material but that is quite easy to do and, the more people that do it *and provide feedback*, the better the content gets for all of us.
Like most people, I have had issues with getting accreditors to look outside of the walled garden, but they really need to be encouraged to do so in order to reduce rework across the Government.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Reese, Brian J CTR (US) <email@example.com> wrote:
I can think of a few reasons why DISA would release its own automation content even though it can be obtained direct from Red Hat, and I'm discouraged by your statement that DISA does not plan on releasing automation content for RHEL 7.
First, my understanding is that the SSG content is primarily written and tested against OpenSCAP. However internally within DoD, the primary "approved" SCAP tools are the SPAWAR SCC and McAfee Policy Auditor (Nessus/Security Center also support it as part of the ACAS program). I know as long as it's compliant with the spec it "should" work, but there could always be issues. DISA published content however is tested with these tools.
Second, does the SSG content have the appropriate metadata to be ingested by DISA tools and reporting requirements? I'm thinking about things like the Rule ID, Vulnerability ID, DoD Severity, etc. Can the output from the SSG content be imported into a STIG checklist using the DISA STIG Viewer (http://iase.disa.mil/stigs/Pages/stig-viewing-guidance.aspx)?
Finally, DoD auditors might not accept the results using vendor-provided SCAP content/tools over content and tools have been officially released and tested by DISA, which means for RHEL 7, assessors will have to resort to doing manual reviews of the STIG.
I apologize if some of this has already been discussed, but I've mostly been working with RHEL 6, which DISA currently releases content for, so I've only casually been following SSG and have not personally used it.
From: Shawn Wells [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:11 PM
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Loss of EL7 STIG profiles
All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a Web browser.
On 7/20/17 4:13 PM, Moessbauer, David wrote:
Our program is currently working through the architecting of the next release, and the decision point is upon us WRT OS version - RHEL6 or RHEL7. One significant factor (at least from a cybersecurity perspective, is the ability to efficiently / effectively conduct STIG reviews via the SCAP tools.
This said, is there any place I could ascertain the projected release of the RHEL 7 Benchmarks?
I apologize if this is not the appropriate venue for such a question, or if it is so obviously in front of me I should already know, but honestly I have not closely monitored this feed of late, since I have been stuck in the RHEL 5 world and trying to keep the system secure in that context.
RHEL 6.4+ and RHEL7.x ship automation content.
It sounds like your systems are very long-lived, given that you're dealing with RHEL5. Note that RHEL6 is has entered "Production Phase 3" which means no new features or hardware enablement .
If you're asking for when *DISA* will release automation content: They've stated they have no intention to release automation content for Red Hat STIGs moving forward. This isn't terrible... e.g. why should DISA release automation content when it's delivered natively in the platform (via the SCAP Security Guide)?
Caution-https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata#Production_3_Phase < Caution-https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata#Production_3_Phase >
scap-security-guide mailing list -- email@example.com
To unsubscribe send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699 x788
-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --