6 ms·

> C, for the Central Verification System (CVS), ... contains ... Personal Identification Verification (PIV) credentials ... and polygraph data Good lord. Yet,

by arh68 11y ago

> C, for the Central Verification System (CVS), ... contains ... Personal Identification Verification (PIV) credentials ... and polygraph data Good lord. Yet, somehow, someone might still present the solution as needing to spend more money sooner: It was only when OPM was assessing systems to actually implement the sort of continuous monitoring tools ... that OPM security officers discovered traffic outbound from the network. If only they'd demo'd the software a year ago, right? /s Is anyone getting fired? Why should anyone lift a finger during this 30-day sprint? And what happens on Day 31?

rodgerd 11y ago
This is the shit the NSA should be worrying about. Securing the US IT infrastructure against nation-state intrusion. Not dragnets of everyone's naked selfies.
- fname 11y ago
  I don't disagree. Unfortunately, this all falls on DoD-DISA. The NSA works with DISA to write the policy for how to secure systems (called STIGs) and also has 'Red Teams', but they aren't the arm that certifies these systems before coming online, nor are they the ones the ensure the systems stay secured as new vulnerabilities are found and patched -- that's DISA again.
  - walshemj 11y ago
    I could see the CIA NSA taking their vetteing back in house every CIA and NAS employee must be incandesant with rage over this cock up.
  - djKianoosh 11y ago
    You obviously know what you're talking about, but DISA can't enforce STIGs across the entire government can they? Some say that's DHS's job, or some Office within DHS (or within an Agency under DHS).
    - fname 11y ago
      > but DISA can't enforce STIGs across the entire government can they? No, with a small caveat: If that civilian agency (say DHS) is connected to the GIG[1], then DISA has a say-so and can threaten to disconnect them for failing security audits. Something to keep in mind is that the STIGs are merely implementation guides to secure a system. Therefore, different agencies have different interpretations. In some cases specific secure implementations break systems and applications (mostly legacy ones), so they avoid securing those particular settings all together. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Information_Grid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Information_Grid
  - DickingAround 11y ago
    That makes sense from an org-chart level. But if that's actually the thinking inside, it represents a total lack of ownership on their part to get to the overall goal of security.
walshemj 11y ago
If this was the UK the home secretary would have resigned by now - why has the secretary of state (which I understand is the US equivalent) not done so.
- dublinben 11y ago
  The Secretary of State has no responsibility over the agency at question. It is an independent agency with a director appointed by the President. That is who should be resigning over this.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- jrochkind1 11y ago
  The secretary of state isn't the equivalent of the home secretary. The secretary of state is mainly responsible for foreign policy, so probably more like equivalent to the Foreign Secretary? Although definitely not a strict equivalency. There isn't really any U.S. equivalent to the Home Secretary, the responsibilities are divided over several offices reporting to the president.
  - walshemj 11y ago
    Ah I see ty
- djKianoosh 11y ago
  For some background here is the way DHS is organized: http://www.dhs.gov/components-directorates-and-offices http://www.dhs.gov/components-directorates-and-offices
- fweespeech 11y ago
  None of the secretaries have direct control or authority over the OPM. Additionally, the Secretary of State is foreign affairs and not the equivalent of the Home Secretary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Archuleta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Archuleta That is the person who is responsible for the OPM. It operates on a fee-for-service model for 90% of its budget and isn't properly funding IT and IT security. Given she has only been there 18 months, I'm not sure how you can really blame her beyond the fact she didn't follow the "shutdown and repair" recommendation...except for the fact if she did that, she'd have to burn through the OPM's cash reserves as the only way to fund it. Its honestly more of a flaw in the way Congress built the OPM incentive structure and the fact the director is a revolving door position that changes every 2-4 years. The government simply just doesn't fund/prioritize IT & IT security properly outside of the intelligence services. They also build these psuedo-private-sector funding models that create the incentive to "ignore" cost centers like Security into critical infrastructure like the OPM. Its really horrific.
amyjess 11y ago
Gotta love the government obsession with acronyms. Where I come from, CVS and PIV mean completely different things. One of them is an abomination before God, and the other is a natural act of biology.
tripzilch 11y ago
Good lord, not the polygraph data! I wonder if the Chinese have a database with I-Ching divinations?

by arh68 11y ago

rodgerd 11y ago

This is the shit the NSA should be worrying about. Securing the US IT infrastructure against nation-state intrusion. Not dragnets of everyone's naked selfies.

fname 11y ago
I don't disagree. Unfortunately, this all falls on DoD-DISA. The NSA works with DISA to write the policy for how to secure systems (called STIGs) and also has 'Red Teams', but they aren't the arm that certifies these systems before coming online, nor are they the ones the ensure the systems stay secured as new vulnerabilities are found and patched -- that's DISA again.
- walshemj 11y ago
  I could see the CIA NSA taking their vetteing back in house every CIA and NAS employee must be incandesant with rage over this cock up.
- djKianoosh 11y ago
  You obviously know what you're talking about, but DISA can't enforce STIGs across the entire government can they? Some say that's DHS's job, or some Office within DHS (or within an Agency under DHS).
  - fname 11y ago
    > but DISA can't enforce STIGs across the entire government can they? No, with a small caveat: If that civilian agency (say DHS) is connected to the GIG[1], then DISA has a say-so and can threaten to disconnect them for failing security audits. Something to keep in mind is that the STIGs are merely implementation guides to secure a system. Therefore, different agencies have different interpretations. In some cases specific secure implementations break systems and applications (mostly legacy ones), so they avoid securing those particular settings all together. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Information_Grid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Information_Grid
- DickingAround 11y ago
  That makes sense from an org-chart level. But if that's actually the thinking inside, it represents a total lack of ownership on their part to get to the overall goal of security.

walshemj 11y ago

If this was the UK the home secretary would have resigned by now - why has the secretary of state (which I understand is the US equivalent) not done so.

dublinben 11y ago
The Secretary of State has no responsibility over the agency at question. It is an independent agency with a director appointed by the President. That is who should be resigning over this.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jrochkind1 11y ago
The secretary of state isn't the equivalent of the home secretary. The secretary of state is mainly responsible for foreign policy, so probably more like equivalent to the Foreign Secretary? Although definitely not a strict equivalency. There isn't really any U.S. equivalent to the Home Secretary, the responsibilities are divided over several offices reporting to the president.
- walshemj 11y ago
  Ah I see ty
djKianoosh 11y ago
For some background here is the way DHS is organized: http://www.dhs.gov/components-directorates-and-offices http://www.dhs.gov/components-directorates-and-offices
fweespeech 11y ago
None of the secretaries have direct control or authority over the OPM. Additionally, the Secretary of State is foreign affairs and not the equivalent of the Home Secretary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Archuleta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Archuleta That is the person who is responsible for the OPM. It operates on a fee-for-service model for 90% of its budget and isn't properly funding IT and IT security. Given she has only been there 18 months, I'm not sure how you can really blame her beyond the fact she didn't follow the "shutdown and repair" recommendation...except for the fact if she did that, she'd have to burn through the OPM's cash reserves as the only way to fund it. Its honestly more of a flaw in the way Congress built the OPM incentive structure and the fact the director is a revolving door position that changes every 2-4 years. The government simply just doesn't fund/prioritize IT & IT security properly outside of the intelligence services. They also build these psuedo-private-sector funding models that create the incentive to "ignore" cost centers like Security into critical infrastructure like the OPM. Its really horrific.

amyjess 11y ago

Gotta love the government obsession with acronyms. Where I come from, CVS and PIV mean completely different things. One of them is an abomination before God, and the other is a natural act of biology.

tripzilch 11y ago

Good lord, not the polygraph data! I wonder if the Chinese have a database with I-Ching divinations?