Case Study: Risk Assessment of an Enterprise Call Accounting Solution
Part 2:
Conducting the Security Risk Assessment
Why conduct a threat analysis?
"By retiring an aging 80’s in-house system
and outsourcing to TACS we will move into the 21st Century in less than
nine months; and get an easy to use service that’s available to all students
and generates a revenue stream," said Steve Walz, Campton campus operations
manager, “but we had security concerns about using an outsourced service.”
“We knew that TACS is an experienced call accounting solution provider but
we were unsure that their software and operations team had adopted a best-practices
approach to information security and we asked TACS to submit to an external
assessment of their systems…” said Walz.
The six basic steps in a Practical Threat Analysis
A typical PTA - Practical Threat Analysis
study focuses on protecting valuable
assets, is sponsored by a senior manager, has 2-5 participants with relevant
knowledge, is guided by an experienced security consultant, lasts 5 days and
is facilitated by the PTA Professional Edition risk assessment software tool.
In a pre-kickoff planning meeting, the consultant works with the sponsor
to set clearly defined goals and outcomes for the session. Since much of
the work is done in small breakout groups, all stakeholders take an active
part. The consultant guides the group through a fast-paced process to:
1-Identify assets
2-Identify vulnerabilities
3-Define countermeasures
4-Compose threat scenarios
5-Understand calculated risk
6-Optimize countermeasures
The PTA process is particularly effective because it is facilitated and accelerated
with the accompanying PTA Professional Edition risk assessment tool that ensures that all the information
is captured in a structured database and automates the economic risk what-if
calculation process. Analysts and stakeholders don’t need to maintain unstructured
Word or Excel documents and can quickly create new threat scenarios and
countermeasures. All issues are captured and nothing is lost. Management
can ask for and quickly receive any reports they want.
PTA kickoff
At the first day kickoff session, the functional
and architectural descriptions of TACS’s system were presented to the
Software Associates lead analyst, by Dympna O’Connell, TACS product manager. “We’re
already documenting and revising our customer provisioning and configuration
procedures”, said O’Connell. “We realize that these process steps are crucial
to our customer's information security and we want to make sure there are
no security holes and opportunities for data manipulation”.
Step 1 of the study – Identify Assets
In the first step of the study the group
mapped the system’s major assets, their financial values and the losses
that may be caused when assets are damaged. The following major system assets
were identified:
| Asset Name |
Asset Value (annual) |
| The accuracy and integrity
of the data in system database |
$2,000,000 or 90.5% of total assets |
| Private call details
information |
$150,000 or 6.8% of total assets |
| The availability of
the system's web application and service |
$50,000 or 2.2% of total assets |
| The integrity of system
passwords |
$10,000 0.5 % of total assets |
The total value of all system assets
was $2,210,000 - a detailed list of identified assets
is part of the full threat-model database available for free download:
The Threat Model of the
Enterprise Call Accounting Solution. To view the detailed entities lists you should have
the free
PTA Risk Assessment Tool installed
on your computer.
Step 2 – Identify Vulnerabilities
In order to identify vulnerabilities and
flaws, Software Associates analysts studied the functional and architecture documents
supplied by Ms. O’Connell. “Since TACS bases its architecture on Microsoft
infrastructure, we used the
PTA MS-Telecom entity library
as a base line checklist for picking up system common vulnerabilities” said
Yuval, Software Associates lead risk analyst. “More then 70% of the stuff was
already there. We have just had to complement the picture by diving into
the CDR collection equipment and by studying Campton specific business procedures
with the help of Mr. Walz.
“Identifying the relevant vulnerabilities is an iterative process bundled
with the understanding of the actual threats. All in all, we came up with
15 focused vulnerabilities relevant to the specific architecture, the specific
telephony infrastructure and the ASP mode of operation” said Yuval.
Step 3 – Define Countermeasures
During this step the team defined the countermeasures
relevant for mitigating the identified vulnerabilities. Some of the countermeasures
were well known safeguards picked up from the predefined PTA entity library
such as enforcing OS patches deployment and strong passwords policy. Others
were more unique e.g. the development of mechanism for managing data collection
buffer passwords in an encrypted repository.
“We worked directly with Ms. O’Connell and her developers on estimating
countermeasures’ implementation costs needed by PTA for calculating countermeasures
cost-effectiveness” said Yuval.
The lists of the 22 countermeasures that were defined and the identified
vulnerabilities are included in the case study database available for
free download:
The Risk Assessment and
Threat Analysis of the Enterprise Call Accounting Solution.
Step 4 – Build Threat Scenarios
“Building the threats is the peak of the
process” said Software Associates founder and CTO Mr. Danny Lieberman, “this
is the point where we use our experience to compose the threat scenarios,
evaluate their feasibility and estimate the probability they’ll actually
happen”.
“The flexibility of the PTA database driven model enables us ‘what-if’ experiments
and the calculative capabilities gives us immediate feedback on the severity
of threats” , said Yuval.
Step 5 - Understand the calculated Risk
After refining threat probabilities, the
PTA software calculated the following bottom-line:
- The total yearly value of assets that might be damaged if threats materialize
is $2.21M
- The risk level (the value of the financial losses that may be
caused to the system due to the identified threats) is 249% of the total
assets (~$5.5M). Although it is clear that the actual damage to the
system’s assets cannot exceed their total value, the risk level does not
express the actual damage. It reflects the amount of effort that has to
be invested in order to mitigate the threats to the system, and since in
this specific system several threats threaten the same assets, the risk
level exceeds 100%.
The following bar chart presents the 5 most dangerous threats calculated
and displayed by PTA (the value of risk is presented in real $):
Top Threats by
Risk

| ID |
Name |
Risk ($) |
| T001 |
Intruder accesses system application
and database servers directly from the Internet |
1,458,600 |
| T011 |
Intruder sniffs CDR buffers passwords
and then steals or corrupts calls data |
1,040,247 |
| T004 |
Intruder corrupts database by
injecting malicious SQLs in input fields of Web pages |
979,914 |
| T013 |
Intruder gets control of call
processing engine after hacking the Web server machine |
663,000 |
| T010 |
A malicious user with managerial
rights manipulates calls data |
528,632 |
Not surprising, it was found that the most
dangerous threats are the ones that threaten the calls data either in the
system’s database on the various collecting stages.
“The ranking of the threats reflects a typical heterogeneous software system.
The ability to take into account non-standard threats specific to the analyzed
system is one of the great strengths of PTA “ said Lieberman, “We weren’t
limited to generic info security standards, such as ISO17799 and indeed
you can see some interesting threats that indigenous to this particular
system e.g. the CDR buffers vulnerabilities. Complex systems like this often
have huge risks that are hidden in the cracks of generic standards…”
Step 6 – Optimize Countermeasures
It was clear that a level of 249% of risk
is dangerous and that countermeasures should be applied to reduce the system’s
risk before going into heavy-duty production operation.
“We asked Software Associates to show us how to reduce the risk to an acceptable
level of 60% at lowest cost” said Steve Walz. “Since our budget was constrained,
we considered canceling the whole info-sec project and taking our risks
by doing nothing”.
“At that step we ran PTA ‘Optimized Risk Reduction Plan’ with the target
risk level of ~ 50 %” said Yuval “and we received an optimized plan with
the following countermeasures that should be applied:
1. Install content leakage prevention system
2. Install firewall
3. Enforce deployment of latest security patches for OS, database and Web
server
4. Develop mechanism for secure managing of CDR buffers passwords
5. Use CDR buffers with secure transfer and login authentication
protocols
6. Enforce security code review
7. Enforce data access via stored procedures with formal parameters
content validation
8. Implement validation of input fields in web pages
9. Develop secured passwords and role-based mechanism for web users
10. Develop monitoring mechanism for back-end processing (system health)
11. Limit access of ASP employees and technicians to system resources
12. Enforce quality passwords policy for protecting each of the machines
on the network
13. Use Windows integrated authentication policy
14. Database login accounts should be given the minimal rights that are
necessary for their functionality
Implementing the recommended set of countermeasures reduces the system’s
risk to 54.3% at a cost of 127,000 $. Only 14 countermeasures out of the
22 were selected - the proposed order of countermeasures also ensures a
quickest reduction of risk per $ spent throughout the system modification
process. The implementation of the following countermeasures was suspended to later stages in system
life cycle:
- Create acceptable use policy for email and Internet access
- Install anti-DoS appliance
- Enforce deployment of latest security patches for OS, database and Web
server
- Develop fraud detection mechanism
- Security officer should assure the personal integrity of employees
- Develop module for logging changes in data initiated by users
- Enforce employees' liability for disclosing private calls information
- Restrict display of phone numbers and sensitive information in
detailed reports
“All-in-all, we were pleased with the speed and quality of results of the
PTA methodology that Software Associates uses and with the fact that it created
consensus among the stakeholders with effective use of senior manager time
and above all got us the best risk reduction at the lowest cost…” summarized
both Steve Walz of Campton College and Ms. O’Connell of TACS.
Appendix: Call Accounting Abbreviations
and terminology
PBX – Private Exchange telephony device; interchangeable with the
term Switch
MSMQ - Microsoft Middleware Queue system
CDR – Telephony Call Detail Record
CDR buffer – Intermediate buffer device for storing CDRs collected
from PBX
Data Source – origin of telephony calls data e.g. PBXs, IP Switches
etc.
Users – Individuals that have access to the university telephony
resources and to TACS system e.g. students, academic staff, administration
and personnel
Download the Risk
Assessment of the Enterprise Call Accounting Solution
The PTA threat analysis
and risk assessment project of the Enterprise Call Accounting and
Billing Solution
is packed in a WinZip archive
CallAccountingCaseStudy.zip.
The archive contains the sample threat model database (a file with thm extension)
and a few document files relevant to the project (doc and pdf). After downloading
the archive, please extract the files to a dedicated folder according to
your convenience and than invoke PTA* and open the thm database using the
File / Open PTA Project dialog.
*Note: to view the sample threat model you should have the
PTA
Risk Assessment Tool installed on your computer.
***
Case Study: Threat Modeling
of Microsoft Passport Sign on Protocol
Previous -
Home Page
|
|