Az Policy Advertizer

Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0

NS-1

Azure_Security_Benchmark_v2.0_NS-1

Azure Security Benchmark NS-1

Network Security

Implement security for internal traffic

Customer

Ensure that all Azure virtual networks follow an enterprise segmentation principle that aligns to the business risks. Any system that could incur higher risk for the organization should be isolated within its own virtual network and sufficiently secured with either a network security group (NSG) and/or Azure Firewall. Based on your applications and enterprise segmentation strategy, restrict or allow traffic between internal resources based on network security group rules. For specific well-defined applications (such as a 3-tier app), this can be a highly secure "deny by default, permit by exception" approach. This might not scale well if you have many applications and endpoints interacting with each other. You can also use Azure Firewall in circumstances where central management is required over a large number of enterprise segments or spokes (in a hub/spoke topology). Use Azure Security Center Adaptive Network Hardening to recommend network security group configurations that limit ports and source IPs based with the reference to external network traffic rules. Use Azure Sentinel to discover the use of legacy insecure protocols such as SSL/TLSv1, SMBv1, LM/NTLMv1, wDigest, Unsigned LDAP Binds, and weak ciphers in Kerberos. How to create a network security group with security rules: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/tutorial-filter-network-traffic How to deploy and configure Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal Adaptive Network Hardening in Azure Security Center: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/security-center/security-center-adaptive-network-hardening Azure Sentinel insecure protocols workbook:https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/sentinel/quickstart-get-visibility#use-built-in-workbooks

n/a

Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0

NS-3

Azure_Security_Benchmark_v3.0_NS-3

Microsoft cloud security benchmark NS-3

Network Security

Deploy firewall at the edge of enterprise network

Shared

**Security Principle:** Deploy a firewall to perform advanced filtering on network traffic to and from external networks. You can also use firewalls between internal segments to support a segmentation strategy. If required, use custom routes for your subnet to override the system route when you need to force the network traffic to go through a network appliance for security control purpose. At a minimum, block known bad IP addresses and high-risk protocols, such as remote management (for example, RDP and SSH) and intranet protocols (for example, SMB and Kerberos). **Azure Guidance:** Use Azure Firewall to provide fully stateful application layer traffic restriction (such as URL filtering) and/or central management over a large number of enterprise segments or spokes (in a hub/spoke topology). If you have a complex network topology, such as a hub/spoke setup, you may need to create user-defined routes (UDR) to ensure the traffic goes through the desired route. For example, you have option to use an UDR to redirect egress internet traffic through a specific Azure Firewall or a network virtual appliance. **Implementation and additional context:** How to deploy Azure Firewall: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/firewall/tutorial-firewall-deploy-portal Virtual network traffic routing: https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/virtual-network/virtual-networks-udr-overview

n/a

CIS_Azure_2.0.0

6.1

CIS_Azure_2.0.0_6.1

CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 6.1

Ensure that RDP access from the Internet is evaluated and restricted

Shared

n/a

Network security groups should be periodically evaluated for port misconfigurations. Where certain ports and protocols may be exposed to the Internet, they should be evaluated for necessity and restricted wherever they are not explicitly required. The potential security problem with using RDP over the Internet is that attackers can use various brute force techniques to gain access to Azure Virtual Machines. Once the attackers gain access, they can use a virtual machine as a launch point for compromising other machines on an Azure Virtual Network or even attack networked devices outside of Azure.

CIS_Azure_2.0.0

6.2

CIS_Azure_2.0.0_6.2

CIS Microsoft Azure Foundations Benchmark recommendation 6.2

Ensure that SSH access from the Internet is evaluated and restricted

Shared

n/a

Network security groups should be periodically evaluated for port misconfigurations. Where certain ports and protocols may be exposed to the Internet, they should be evaluated for necessity and restricted wherever they are not explicitly required. The potential security problem with using SSH over the Internet is that attackers can use various brute force techniques to gain access to Azure Virtual Machines. Once the attackers gain access, they can use a virtual machine as a launch point for compromising other machines on the Azure Virtual Network or even attack networked devices outside of Azure.

AC.L2-3.1.3

CMMC_2.0_L2_AC.L2-3.1.3

404 not found

n/a

SC.L1-3.13.1

CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.1

404 not found

n/a

SC.L1-3.13.5

CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L1-3.13.5

404 not found

n/a

SC.L2-3.13.2

CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.2

404 not found

n/a

SC.L2-3.13.6

CMMC_2.0_L2_SC.L2-3.13.6

404 not found

n/a

FedRAMP_High_R4

AC-4

FedRAMP_High_R4_AC-4

FedRAMP High AC-4

Access Control

Information Flow Enforcement

Shared

n/a

The information system enforces approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between interconnected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies]. Supplemental Guidance: Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within an information system and between information systems (as opposed to who is allowed to access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include, for example, keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet, blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization, restricting web requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server, and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Transferring information between information systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners/stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes, for example: (i) prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); (ii) employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and (iii) implementing trustworthy regarding mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels. Organizations commonly employ information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within information systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on the characteristics of the information and/or the information path. Enforcement occurs, for example, in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message- filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering/inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Control enhancements 3 through 22 primarily address cross-domain solution needs which focus on more advanced filtering techniques, in-depth analysis, and stronger flow enforcement mechanisms implemented in cross-domain products, for example, high-assurance guards. Such capabilities are generally not available in commercial off-the-shelf information technology products. Related controls: AC-3, AC-17, AC-19, AC-21, CM-6, CM-7, SA-8, SC-2, SC-5, SC-7, SC-18. References: None.

FedRAMP_High_R4

SC-7

FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7

FedRAMP High SC-7

System And Communications Protection

Boundary Protection

Shared

n/a

The information system: a. Monitors and controls communications at the external boundary of the system and at key internal boundaries within the system; b. Implements subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically; logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connects to external networks or information systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security architecture. Supplemental Guidance: Managed interfaces include, for example, gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational information systems includes, for example, restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security controls associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers, and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Related controls: AC-4, AC-17, CA-3, CM-7, CP-8, IR-4, RA-3, SC-5, SC-13. References: FIPS Publication 199; NIST Special Publications 800-41, 800-77.

FedRAMP_High_R4

SC-7(3)

FedRAMP_High_R4_SC-7(3)

FedRAMP High SC-7 (3)

System And Communications Protection

Access Points

Shared

n/a

The organization limits the number of external network connections to the information system. Supplemental Guidance: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates more comprehensive monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. The Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of limiting the number of external network connections.

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4

AC-4

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_AC-4

FedRAMP Moderate AC-4

Access Control

Information Flow Enforcement

Shared

n/a

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4

SC-7

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7

FedRAMP Moderate SC-7

System And Communications Protection

Boundary Protection

Shared

n/a

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4_SC-7(3)

FedRAMP_Moderate_R4

SC-7(3)

FedRAMP Moderate SC-7 (3)

System And Communications Protection

Access Points

Shared

n/a

hipaa-1143.01c1System.123-01.c

hipaa

1143.01c1System.123-01.c

1143.01c1System.123-01.c

11 Access Control

1143.01c1System.123-01.c 01.02 Authorized Access to Information Systems

Shared

n/a

Privileges are formally authorized and controlled, allocated to users on a need-to-use and event-by-event basis for their functional role (e.g., user or administrator), and documented for each system product/element.

hipaa

1150.01c2System.10-01.c

hipaa-1150.01c2System.10-01.c

1150.01c2System.10-01.c

11 Access Control

1150.01c2System.10-01.c 01.02 Authorized Access to Information Systems

Shared

n/a

The access control system for the system components storing, processing or transmitting covered information is set with a default "deny-all" setting.

hipaa

1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l

hipaa-1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l

1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l

11 Access Control

1193.01l2Organizational.13-01.l 01.04 Network Access Control

Shared

n/a

Controls for the access to diagnostic and configuration ports include the use of a key lock and the implementation of supporting procedures to control physical access to the port.

mp.com.1 Secure perimeter

404 not found

n/a

New_Zealand_ISM

14.1.8.C.01

New_Zealand_ISM_14.1.8.C.01

14. Software security

14.1.8.C.01 Developing hardened SOEs

n/a

Agencies SHOULD develop a hardened SOE for workstations and servers, covering several requirements detailed here https://www.nzism.gcsb.govt.nz/ism-document#SubSection-15020

.1.3

NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.1.3

NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.1.3

Access Control

Control the flow of CUI in accordance with approved authorizations.

Shared

Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement.

Information flow control regulates where information can travel within a system and between systems (versus who can access the information) and without explicit regard to subsequent accesses to that information. Flow control restrictions include the following: keeping export-controlled information from being transmitted in the clear to the Internet; blocking outside traffic that claims to be from within the organization; restricting requests to the Internet that are not from the internal web proxy server; and limiting information transfers between organizations based on data structures and content. Organizations commonly use information flow control policies and enforcement mechanisms to control the flow of information between designated sources and destinations (e.g., networks, individuals, and devices) within systems and between interconnected systems. Flow control is based on characteristics of the information or the information path. Enforcement occurs in boundary protection devices (e.g., gateways, routers, guards, encrypted tunnels, firewalls) that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict system services, provide a packet-filtering capability based on header information, or message-filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Organizations also consider the trustworthiness of filtering and inspection mechanisms (i.e., hardware, firmware, and software components) that are critical to information flow enforcement. Transferring information between systems representing different security domains with different security policies introduces risk that such transfers violate one or more domain security policies. In such situations, information owners or stewards provide guidance at designated policy enforcement points between interconnected systems. Organizations consider mandating specific architectural solutions when required to enforce specific security policies. Enforcement includes: prohibiting information transfers between interconnected systems (i.e., allowing access only); employing hardware mechanisms to enforce one-way information flows; and implementing trustworthy regrading mechanisms to reassign security attributes and security labels.

NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.1

.13.1

NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.1

System and Communications Protection

Monitor, control, and protect communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of organizational systems.

Shared

Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement.

Communications can be monitored, controlled, and protected at boundary components and by restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems. Boundary components include gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis and virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a system security architecture (e.g., routers protecting firewalls or application gateways residing on protected subnetworks). Restricting or prohibiting interfaces in organizational systems includes restricting external web communications traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces and prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses. Organizations consider the shared nature of commercial telecommunications services in the implementation of security requirements associated with the use of such services. Commercial telecommunications services are commonly based on network components and consolidated management systems shared by all attached commercial customers and may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such transmission services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies. [28] There is no prescribed format or specified level of detail for system security plans. However, organizations ensure that the required information in 3.12.4 is conveyed in those plans.

NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.2

.13.2

NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.2

System and Communications Protection

Employ architectural designs, software development techniques, and systems engineering principles that promote effective information security within organizational systems.

Shared

Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement.

Organizations apply systems security engineering principles to new development systems or systems undergoing major upgrades. For legacy systems, organizations apply systems security engineering principles to system upgrades and modifications to the extent feasible, given the current state of hardware, software, and firmware components within those systems. The application of systems security engineering concepts and principles helps to develop trustworthy, secure, and resilient systems and system components and reduce the susceptibility of organizations to disruptions, hazards, and threats. Examples of these concepts and principles include developing layered protections; establishing security policies, architecture, and controls as the foundation for design; incorporating security requirements into the system development life cycle; delineating physical and logical security boundaries; ensuring that developers are trained on how to build secure software; and performing threat modeling to identify use cases, threat agents, attack vectors and patterns, design patterns, and compensating controls needed to mitigate risk. Organizations that apply security engineering concepts and principles can facilitate the development of trustworthy, secure systems, system components, and system services; reduce risk to acceptable levels; and make informed risk-management decisions. [SP 800-160-1] provides guidance on systems security engineering.

NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.5

.13.5

NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.5

System and Communications Protection

Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal networks.

Shared

Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement.

Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones (DMZs). DMZs are typically implemented with boundary control devices and techniques that include routers, gateways, firewalls, virtualization, or cloud-based technologies. [SP 800-41] provides guidance on firewalls and firewall policy. [SP 800-125B] provides guidance on security for virtualization technologies

NIST_SP_800-171_R2_3.13.6

.13.6

NIST SP 800-171 R2 3.13.6

System and Communications Protection

Deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception (i.e., deny all, permit by exception).

Shared

Microsoft and the customer share responsibilities for implementing this requirement.

This requirement applies to inbound and outbound network communications traffic at the system boundary and at identified points within the system. A deny-all, permit-by-exception network communications traffic policy ensures that only those connections which are essential and approved are allowed.

NIST_SP_800-53_R4

AC-4

NIST_SP_800-53_R4_AC-4

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 AC-4

Access Control

Information Flow Enforcement

Shared

n/a

NIST_SP_800-53_R4

SC-7

NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7

System And Communications Protection

Boundary Protection

Shared

n/a

NIST_SP_800-53_R4_SC-7(3)

NIST_SP_800-53_R4

SC-7(3)

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 4 SC-7 (3)

System And Communications Protection

Access Points

Shared

n/a

NIST_SP_800-53_R5

AC-4

NIST_SP_800-53_R5_AC-4

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 AC-4

Access Control

Information Flow Enforcement

Shared

n/a

Enforce approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system and between connected systems based on [Assignment: organization-defined information flow control policies].

NIST_SP_800-53_R5

SC-7

NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7

System and Communications Protection

Boundary Protection

Shared

n/a

a. Monitor and control communications at the external managed interfaces to the system and at key internal managed interfaces within the system; b. Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are [Selection: physically;logically] separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connect to external networks or systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security and privacy architecture.

NIST_SP_800-53_R5_SC-7(3)

NIST_SP_800-53_R5

SC-7(3)

NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7 (3)

System and Communications Protection

Access Points

Shared

n/a

Limit the number of external network connections to the system.

NL_BIO_Cloud_Theme_U.07.1(2)

NL_BIO_Cloud_Theme

U.07.1(2)

U.07 Data separation

Isolated

n/a

Permanent isolation of data is realized within a multi-tenant architecture. Patches and adjustments of applications and infrastructure are realized in a controlled manner for all cloud services that the CSC purchases.

NZ_ISM_v3.5

SS-2

NZ_ISM_v3.5_SS-2

NZISM Security Benchmark SS-2

Software security

14.1.8 Developing hardened SOEs

Customer

n/a

Antivirus and anti-malware software, while an important defensive measure, can be defeated by malicious code that has yet to be identified by antivirus vendors. This can include targeted attacks, where a new virus is engineered or an existing one modified to defeat the signature-based detection schemes. The use of antivirus and anti-malware software, while adding value to the defence of workstations, cannot be relied solely upon to protect the workstation. As such agencies still need to deploy appropriately hardened SOEs to assist with the protection of workstations against a broader range of security risks.

NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1

SS-2

NZISM_Security_Benchmark_v1.1_SS-2

NZISM Security Benchmark SS-2

Software security

14.1.8 Developing hardened SOEs

Customer

Agencies SHOULD develop a hardened SOE for workstations and servers, covering: removal of unneeded software and operating system components; removal or disabling of unneeded services, ports and BIOS settings; disabling of unused or undesired functionality in software and operating systems; implementation of access controls on relevant objects to limit system users and programs to the minimum access required; installation of antivirus and anti-malware software; installation of software-based firewalls limiting inbound and outbound network connections; configuration of either remote logging or the transfer of local event logs to a central server; and protection of audit and other logs through the use of a one way pipe to reduce likelihood of compromise key transaction records.

13.3

RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_13.3

Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management

Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management-13.3

n/a

Consider implementing whitelisting of internet websites/systems.

13.4

RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_13.4

Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management

Advanced Real-Timethreat Defenceand Management-13.4

n/a

Consider implementingsecure web gateways with capability to deep scan network packets including secure (HTTPS, etc.) traffic passing through the web/internet gateway

4.10

RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.10

Network Management And Security

Perimeter Protection And Detection-4.10

n/a

Boundary defences should be multi-layered with properly configured firewalls, proxies, DMZ perimeter networks, and network--???based IPS and IDS. Mechanism to filter both inbound and outbound traffic to be put in place.

4.3

RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.3

Network Management And Security

Network Device Configuration Management-4.3

n/a

Ensure that all the network devices are configured appropriately and periodically assess whether the configurations are appropriate to the desired level of network security.

4.7

RBI_CSF_Banks_v2016_4.7

Network Management And Security

Anomaly Detection-4.7

n/a

Put in place mechanism to detect and remedy any unusual activities in systems, servers, network devices and endpoints.

RBI_ITF_NBFC_v2017

1.1

RBI_ITF_NBFC_v2017_1.1

RBI IT Framework 1.1

IT Governance

IT Governance-1.1

n/a

NBFCs are required to form an IT Strategy Committee. The chairman of the committee shall be an independent director and CIO & CTO should be a part of the committee. The IT Strategy Committee should meet at an appropriate frequency but not more than six months should elapse between two meetings. The Committee shall work in partnership with other Board committees and Senior Management to provide input to them. It will also carry out review and amend the IT strategies in line with the corporate strategies, Board Policy reviews, cyber security arrangements and any other matter related to IT Governance. Its deliberations may be placed before the Board.

RMiT_v1.0

10.49

RMiT_v1.0_10.49

RMiT 10.49

Cloud Services

Cloud Services - 10.49

Shared

n/a

A financial institution must fully understand the inherent risk of adopting cloud services. In this regard, a financial institution is required to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment prior to cloud adoption which considers the inherent architecture of cloud services that leverages on the sharing of resources and services across multiple tenants over the Internet. The assessment must specifically address risks associated with the following: (a) sophistication of the deployment model; (b) migration of existing systems to cloud infrastructure; (c) location of cloud infrastructure; (d) multi-tenancy or data co-mingling; (e) vendor lock-in and application portability or interoperability; (f) ability to customise security configurations of the cloud infrastructure to ensure a high level of data and technology system protection; (g) exposure to cyber-attacks via cloud service providers; (h) termination of a cloud service provider including the ability to secure the financial institution's data following the termination; (i) demarcation of responsibilities, limitations and liability of the service provider; and (j) ability to meet regulatory requirements and international standards on cloud computing on a continuing basis.