WEB-14: Publicly Accessible Content Reviews
Mechanisms exist to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
Control Question: Does the organization routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered?
General (3)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| NIST 800-171 R3 (source) | 03.01.22.b |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure | WEB-14 |
| SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats | WEB-14 |
EMEA (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA UK DEFSTAN 05-138 | 2321 |
Americas (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| Americas Canada ITSP-10-171 | 03.01.22.B |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
There is no evidence of a capability to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
C|P-CMM2 is N/A, since a well-defined process is required to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
Level 3 — Well Defined
Web Security (WEB) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist: o Utilize Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) to provide defense-in-depth protection for application-specific threats. o Restrict inbound traffic to authorized devices on certain services, protocols and ports.
- A Validated Architecture Design Review (VADR) evaluates Internet-facing design criteria for secure practices and conformance with requirements for applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual controls to determine if the system/application/service is designed, built and operated in a secure and resilient manner.
- A change notification capability exists to scan web pages for changes, which are reviewed by appropriate personnel to determine if changes are authorized or unauthorized.
- Ongoing content reviews are performed to ensure web pages do not contain non-public information.
- Security engineering, or a similar function, ensures that Internet-facing devices conform to industry-recognized standards for configuration hardening (e.g., DISA STIGs, CIS Benchmarks or OEM security guides) for test, development, staging and production environments. This includes creating special hardening requirements for High-Value Assets (HVAs).
- An Identity & Access Management (IAM) function, or similar function, enables the implementation of identification and access management controls for Internet-facing technologies.
- Technologies are configured to implement Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) for consumers to prove their identity.
- Administrative processes exist and technologies are configured to provide Internet-facing individuals (e.g., customers, users, clients, etc.) with clear and precise information about cookies, in accordance with regulatory requirements for cookie management.
- An IT Asset Management (ITAM) function, or similar function, categorizes network devices according to the data the asset stores, transmits and/ or processes and applies the appropriate technology controls to protect the asset and data.
- Boundary protections:
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Web Security (WEB) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:
- Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
- Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
- Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
- Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
- Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
- Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive/regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
Assessment Objectives
- WEB-14_A01 the scope of publicly accessible systems is defined.
- WEB-14_A02 publicly accessible systems containing sensitive / regulated data are identified.
- WEB-14_A03 a capability exists to routinely review the content on publicly accessible systems for sensitive / regulated data and remove such information, if discovered.
- WEB-14_A04 a capability exists to expeditiously remove sensitive / regulated data from publicly accessible systems, if discovered.
Evidence Requirements
- E-DCH-12 Reviews for Sensitive / Regulated Data Spillage
-
Documented evidence of reviews for publicly accessible sensitive / regulated data.
Data Protection