5 FAH-11 H-500
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR INFORMATION ASSURANCE
5 FAH-11 H-510
GENERAL
(CT:IAH-16; 11-08-2018)
(Office of Origin: IRM/IA)
5 FAH-11 H-511 INTRODUCTION
5 FAH-11 H-511.1 Purpose
(CT:IAH-16; 11-08-2018)
a. This subchapter implements the policy in 5 FAM 1060
(Information Assurance Management). It addresses the requirement that Federal
agencies collect and report performance metrics and measures for Department programs,
including information assurance, to demonstrate compliance with laws and
regulations, improve accountability for their programs, and advance
efficiencies in delivering programs and services. As required by the
Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) and the Clinger-Cohen Act, the
Department must ensure that performance measurements are prescribed for
Information Technology (IT) used by, or to be acquired for, the Department. In
addition, these measurements must indicate how well the IT supports the
Departments programs (see 40 U.S.C. 11313(3); see also 31 U.S.C. 1115(a)).
b. These procedures also explain how system owners and
managers must work together to ensure that performance metrics are applied for
Department information technology (IT) personnel who are assisting in
developing, implementing, and managing an IT security program.
c. Current Federal requirements relating to IT
security performance measures require a formalized process on how an agency,
through the use of metrics, identifies the adequacy of in-place security
controls, policies, and procedures.
d. National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) Special Publications (SP) SP 800-53A,
Revision 4, Guide for Assessing the Security Controls in Federal Information
Systems and Organizations: Building Effective Security Assessment Plans, FIPS
200 Minimum Security Requirements for Federal
Information and Information Systems, NIST SP 800-53 Revision 4, and NIST SP 800-55,
Revision 1 identify management, operational, and technical control topic
areas that affect the security posture of an IT system. This subchapter
provides a recommended methodology for quantifying the critical elements in NIST
SPs 800-53A Revision 4, 800-53, Revision 4, 800-55, Revision 1, and FIPS 200 for monitoring and reporting on implementation
and effectiveness of the system security controls.
5 FAH-11 H-511.2 Definitions
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Performance Measures: Evaluation benchmarks that
facilitate decision making and accountability through collection, analysis, and
reporting of relevant performance data. They provide relevant trends over time
and are useful in tracking performance and directing resources to initiate
performance improvement actions.
Performance Metrics: A set of standard measures used to
identify and evaluate how well specified characteristics or properties of
resources, processes, customers, or desired results change over time when
compared against a baseline value.
5 FAH-11 H-511.3 Objective
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. The objective of this subchapter is to provide a
comprehensive, uniform approach to developing, implementing, and managing
performance measures as they pertain to information assurance at the system
level.
b. Understanding the following concepts is vital to
improving the effectiveness of measuring performance at the system level:
(1) IT security measures provide a practical approach
to assessing information security at the system level through collecting,
analyzing, and reporting relevant performance data.
(2) Based on IT security performance goals and
objectives, IT security metrics must be quantifiable, measurable, readily
collectible, and repeatable. They provide relevant trends over time and are
useful in tracking performance, facilitating decision making, and directing
resources to initiate performance improvement actions.
(3) System or user-level performance measures are
linked to agency measures, which are linked to the Federal mandate for
performance measures for information assurance, thereby creating a pyramid of measures
that range from tactical to operational to strategic. (See the Departments
Information Security Program Plan (ISPP) on the Office of Information Assurance
(IRM/IA) Web site; the specific link is shown as Management Plan).
(4) The use of performance measures and the data they
reveal support overall management of the IT system over its lifecycle.
(5) Metrics improve accountability to stakeholders,
ensure an appropriate level of mission support, determine IT security program
effectiveness, and demonstrate program impact to Department management.
5 FAH-11 H-511.4 Scope
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. This subchapter focuses on how to establish, apply,
and maintain information security performance measures at the system level. It
also discusses how to develop effective performance measures for capturing the
elements in the Information Security Program Plan (ISPP) and to ensure
compliance with Department IT performance measures, policies, and security
controls (see 5
FAM 130).
b. This subchapter does not include specifics related
to agency-level performance measures. However, system-level metrics do support
agency-level reporting on progress towards achieving strategic goals (see 5 FAM 671).
c. IRM/IA is responsible for the content of this
subchapter. If there are any questions, please e-mail IRM/IA.
5 FAH-11 H-511.5 Authorities
(CT:IAH-16; 11-08-2018)
a. Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)
(Public Law 107-347, Title III), December 2002.
b. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (Public Law
104-13), May 1995.
c. The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401),
also known as the Information Technology Management Reform Act.
d. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993
(GPRA) (Public Law 103-62).
e. Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) (44
U.S.C. 3504).
f. NIST Standards and Special Publications (SPs):
(1) Federal Information
Processing Standard 200 (FIPS 200) Minimum
Security Requirements for Federal and Information and Information Systems,
March 2006
(2) SP 800-53, Revision
4, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and
Organizations, April 2013;
(3) SP 800-53A, Revision
4, Assessing Security and Privacy Controls in Federal Information Systems and
Organizations: Building Effective Assessment Plans, December 2014;
(4) SP 800-55, Revision 1, Performance Measurement Guide for
Information Security, July 2008;
(5) Federal
Information Processing Standard 199 (FIPS 199), Standards for Security
Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, February 2004;
and
(6) Federal
Information Processing Standard 200 (FIPS 200), Minimum Security Requirements
for Federal Information and Information Systems, March 2006.
5 FAH-11 H-511.6 Roles and
Responsibilities
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. The Chief Information Officer (CIO) has the
following responsibilities related to IT security performance measures:
(1) Demonstrates through formal leadership
managements commitment to the development, implementation, and maintenance of
IT security measures;
(2) Communicates, formally, the importance of using IT
security measures to monitor the overall management of the IT security program
and to comply with applicable regulations;
(3) Ensures the program development, implementation,
and maintenance of IT security performance measures;
(4) Allocates adequate financial and human resources
to the performance measures program;
(5) Communicates with system owners to facilitate
metrics acceptance and build support for the program;
(6) Directs the collection of performance measures data;
(7) Reviews IT security measures regularly and uses
data derived from the measures to support policy and budget decisions, better
resource allocations, and improved understanding of the IT security posture;
and
(8) Issues IT security performance measures policies,
procedures and guidance.
b. The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) has
the following responsibilities related to IT security performance measures:
(1) Leads the Departments program for the
development, implementation, and maintenance of IT security metrics under the
direction of the CIO;
(2) Ensures a standard Department process is used for
the development, creation, and analysis of IT metrics;
(3) Develops policies and procedures related to IT
security metrics;
(4) Obtains adequate staff and financial resources to
support program development and implementation of IT metrics;
(5) Actively solicits input from and provides feedback
to system owners, system managers, and security personnel at every step in the
development of IT performance metrics;
(6) Ensures that IT performance metrics data is
collected, analyzed, and reported to the CIO and system owners;
(7) Reviews IT security performance metrics to
determine if there is support for policy, resource allocation, and budget
decisions, and its impact on the IT security program;
(8) Educates system owners on utilizing IT security
metrics data for policy, resource allocation, and budget decisions;
(9) Ensures metrics that have reached their
performance target are phased out and replaced by new metrics;
(10) Ensures manageability of the program by limiting
the number of collected metrics at a single point in time;
(11) Analyzes and establishes prioritization of metrics
and directs programs to address high priority items and problem areas;
(12) Ensures that the corrective actions, identified
through measuring IT security performance, are implemented; and
(13) Develops and implements performance metrics in the
Departments automated reporting tool as part of the agency-wide FISMA
reporting process.
c. The system owner has the following responsibilities
related to IT security performance measures:
(1) Identifies performance metrics as part of the IT
business case required in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) budget guidance
(OMB Circular A-11) and by the Departments Electronic Capital Planning and
Investment Control (e-CPIC) process;
(2) Implements and maintains performance measures to
support the management of the IT investment;
(3) Collects and submits to IRM/IA performance
measures data, including the use of the Departments automated reporting tool,
for tracking compliance actions in support of the agency-wide FISMA reporting
process; and
(4) Collects and reports on systems metrics as a part
of the agency-wide FISMA reporting process and tracks and allocates resources
for corrective actions.
d. The information system security officer (ISSO) has
the following responsibilities related to IT security performance measures:
(1) Participates in information security metric
program development and implementation by providing feedback on the feasibility
of data collection and identification of data sources and repositories;
(2) Collects and provides metrics data to designated
staff for data analysis and reporting; and
(3) Assists with the implementation of corrective
actions derived from the measurement and analysis of IT security performance.
5 FAH-11 H-512 Establishing Information
security performance measures
5 FAH-11 H-512.1 Performance
Measures Essentials
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. Types of Performance Measures: The type of
performance measures used depends on the maturity of the security control
implementation in the organization as follows:
(1) Implementation measures: are used when security
controls have been defined in procedures and are in the process of being
implemented. The metrics are used to demonstrate progress in implementing
policies and procedures for individual security controls.
(2) Efficiency measures: in a more advanced security
program efficiency measures are used to assess the timeliness and efficiency of
security control implementation.
(3) Impact measures: as controls become fully
implemented and refined impact measures assess the impact of these controls on
the Departments strategic missions and goals, often through quantifying the
cost savings produced by the security program or through costs incurred from
addressing security events.
b. Characteristics of Performance Measures: IT
security performance measures should have the following characteristics:
(1) Quantitative information format (Percentages,
averages, and numbers);
(2) Supporting data that is readily available and
collectible;
(3) A repeatable process that can be measured
repeatedly over time; and
(4) Usefulness to management for tracking performance
and directing resources
5 FAH-11 H-512.2 Incorporating
Security Controls Into A Security Program Using Performance Measures
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Developing information security performance measures
should be a part of a broader process of defining a complete set of performance
measures for managing an information security program as noted below:
(1) As a part of its charter for providing guidance on
organizing and managing an information security program, NIST has published SP
800-53 that identifies minimum security controls for Federal information
systems. These minimum security controls are organized into 17 security
control families (see 5 FAH-11
Exhibit H-512.2.)
(2) Information security performance measures provide
a means for monitoring and reporting an agencys implementation of the SP
800-53 security controls. The performance measures are also used to assess the
effectiveness of the security controls in protecting agency information
resources in support of the agencys mission.
5 FAH-11 H-513 HOW TO DEVELOP
INFORMATION SECURITY performance measures
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
The specific aspect of IT security that performance
measures will focus on at a given point in time depends on the maturity of the
information security program and its success. The sections listed below
explain how to develop performance metrics.
5 FAH-11 H-513.1 Create Metrics
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. The performance metrics development approach
provides two ways of developing metrics, depending on the depth of analysis
desired by management:
(1) The control-specific approach selects individual
controls as the basis for a metric that best represents the entire control
family (see 5 FAH-11
Exhibit H-513.1(1)) as determined by the organizational environment; and
(2) The cross-cutting approach focuses on metrics that
gauge security performance based on more than one individual control or control
families (see 5 FAH-11
Exhibit H-513.1(2)). This type of metric provides a broader view of
information security performance than the control specific approach.
b. Deriving the metric for each method of development
involves the following methods:
(1) In the control-specific method, the selected
control and derived metric:
(a) Maps directly to an individual control within the
respective control family;
(b) Uses the data describing the individual controls
implementation to generate required metrics such as plan of action and
milestones (POA&M), testing, and project tracking; and
(c) Characterizes the metric as applicable to low,
moderate or high system categorization.
(2) In the cross-cutting approach, the metric:
(a) Maps to information security goals and objectives
that may encompass performance of several information security controls
belonging to several control families; and
(b) Uses the data from two or more control sources
describing the security programs performance to generate the required
measurement.
5 FAH-11 H-513.2 Apply Metrics
Template
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. Organizations should document their performance
measures in a standard format (see paragraph b below) to ensure repeatability
of metric development tailoring, collection and reporting processes. A
standard format provides detail to guide metrics collection, analysis, and
reporting activities.
b. Examples of control metric templates are shown in 5 FAH-11
Exhibit H-513.2(1) (for a control-specific template) and 5 FAH-11
Exhibit H-513.2(2) (for a cross-cutting control template).
5 FAH-11 H-514 MAINTAINING Information
security performance measures
5 FAH-11 H-514.1 Collect Data
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
a. The Departments automated FISMA reporting tool is
IA-supported and provides systems owners and managers with a mechanism for
capturing all of the NIST recommended IT security performance measures,
including identification and remediation of POA&MS.
b. Systems owners may need to develop other tracking
tools to document current performance and archive recorded performance
measurement data.
c. Depending on the complexity of the system and the
measures selected, a data collection tool may be as simple as an MS Excel
spreadsheet or as complex as a custom database with a Web-based front end to
display real-time performance measurement information.
5 FAH-11 H-514.2 Meet Reporting
Requirements
(CT:IM:03; 03-26-2007)
a. Timing and format for reporting system security
performance measures should support the Departments Corrective Action Plan
(CAP), quarterly reporting.
b. FISMA data calls issued by IRM/IA will prompt system
owners to submit information on the status of their IT security performance
measures.
5 FAH-11 H-515 THROUGH 519 UNASSIGNED
5 FAH-11 Exhibit H-512.2
Families of Security Controls
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
This exhibit lists the families of controls presented in
NIST Special Publication 800-53. It presents the breadth of controls that must
be addressed in an Information Assurance Program.
Access Control (AC): Organizations must limit
information system access to authorized users, processes acting on behalf of
authorized users or devices (including other information systems), and to the
types of transactions and functions that authorized users are permitted to
exercise.
Awareness and Training (AT): Organizations must:
Ensure that managers and users of organizational
information systems are made aware of the security risks associated with their
activities and of the applicable laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies,
standards, instructions, regulations or procedures related to the security of
organizational information systems; and
Ensure that organizational personnel are adequately
trained to carry out their assigned information security-related duties and
responsibilities.
Audit and Accountability (AU): Organizations must:
Create, protect, and retain information system audit
records to the extent needed to enable the monitoring, analysis, investigation,
and reporting of unlawful, unauthorized or inappropriate information system
activity; and
Ensure that the actions of individual information
system users can be uniquely traced to those users so that they can be held
accountable for their actions.
Certification, Accreditation, and Security Assessments
(CA): Organizations must:
Periodically assess the security controls in
organizational information systems to determine if the controls are effective
in their application;
Develop and implement plans of action designed to
correct deficiencies and reduce or eliminate vulnerabilities in organizational
information systems;
Authorize the operation of organizational information
systems and any associated information system connections; and
Monitor information system security controls on an
ongoing basis to ensure the continued effectiveness of the controls.
Configuration Management (CM): Organizations must:
Establish and maintain baseline configurations and
inventories of organizational information systems (including hardware,
software, firmware, and documentation) throughout the respective system
development life cycles; and
Establish and enforce security configuration settings
for information technology products employed in organizational information
systems.
Contingency Planning (CP): Organizations must
establish, maintain, and effectively implement plans for emergency response,
backup operations, and post-disaster recovery for organizational information
systems to ensure the availability of critical information resources and
continuity of operations in emergency situations.
Identification and Authentication (IA): Organizations
must identify information system users, processes acting on behalf of users or
devices, and authenticate (or verify) the identities of those users, processes
or devices, as a prerequisite to allowing access to organizational information
systems.
Incident Response (IR): Organizations must:
Establish an operational incident handling capability
for organizational information systems that includes adequate preparation,
detection, analysis, containment, recovery, and user response activities; and
Track, document, and report incidents to appropriate
organizational officials and/or authorities.
Maintenance (MA): Organizations must:
Perform periodic and timely maintenance on
organizational information systems; and
Provide effective controls on the tools, techniques,
mechanisms, and personnel used to conduct information system maintenance.
Media Protection (MP): Organizations must:
Protect information system media, both paper and
digital;
Limit access to information on information system media
to authorized users; and
Sanitize or destroy information system media before
disposal or release for reuse.
Physical and Environmental Protection (PE):
Organizations must:
limit physical access to information systems,
equipment, and the respective operating environments to authorized individuals;
Protect the physical plant and support infrastructure
for information systems;
Provide supporting utilities for information systems;
Protect information systems against environmental
hazards; and
Provide appropriate environmental controls in
facilities containing information systems.
Planning (PL): Organizations must develop, document,
periodically update, and implement security plans for organizational
information systems that describe the security controls in place or planned for
the information systems and the rules of behavior for individuals accessing the
information systems.
Personnel Security (PS): Organizations must:
Ensure that individuals occupying positions of
responsibility within organizations (including third-party service providers)
are trustworthy and meet established security criteria for those positions;
Ensure that organizational information and information
systems are protected during personnel actions such as terminations and
transfers; and
Employ formal sanctions for personnel failing to comply
with organizational security policies and procedures.
Risk Assessment (RA): Organizations must periodically
assess the risk to organizational operations (including mission, functions,
image, or reputation), organizational assets and individuals, resulting from
the operation of organizational information systems and the associated
processing, storage, or transmission of organizational information.
System and Services Acquisition (SA): Organizations
must:
Allocate sufficient resources to adequately protect
organizational information systems;
Employ system development life cycle processes that
incorporate information security considerations;
(3) Employ software usage and installation
restrictions; and
Ensure that third-party providers employ adequate
security measures to protect information, applications, and/or services outsourced
from the organization.
System and Communications Protection (SC):
Organizations must:
Monitor, control, and protect organizational
communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational
information systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of
the information systems; and
Employ architectural designs, software development
techniques, and systems engineering principles that promote effective
information security within organizational information systems.
System and Information Integrity (SI): Organizations
must:
(1) Identify, report, and correct information and
information system flaws in a timely manner;
(2) Provide protection from malicious code at
appropriate locations within organizational information systems; and
(3) Monitor information system security alerts and
advisories and take appropriate actions in response.
5 FAH-11 EXHIBIT H-513.1(1)
CONTROL-SPECIFIC APPROACH TEMPLATE REQUIREMENTS
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Control-Specific Approach Template
|
|
Applicability
|
|
Details
|
L
|
M
|
H
|
Control Family
|
As cited in NIST SP 800-53
|
|
|
|
Metric ID
|
Associated control number from SP 800-53
|
|
|
|
Strategic Goal or Objective
|
Agency strategic goal or objective that the metric
supports
|
|
|
|
Information Security Goal
|
Statement of requirement or security goal for the metric
|
|
|
|
Control
|
Individual control being measured
|
|
|
|
Control Enhancement
|
Control enhancement, if any, associated with the
selected control
|
|
|
|
Control Question
|
Describes what this metric is measuring
|
|
|
|
Metric
|
What is being measured
|
|
|
|
Metric Type
|
Implementation-Effectiveness-Impact
|
|
|
|
Frequency of Data Collection
|
How often the data is collected and analyzed to be
reported internally or externally
|
|
|
|
Target
|
Minimum standard for a satisfactory rating for the
metric
|
|
|
|
Formula
|
Formula for calculating the metric
|
|
|
|
Information Source
|
The organization(s) or function(s) responsible for
collecting the metric data
|
|
|
|
Related Control Families
|
Dependencies for the metric with other control families
|
|
|
|
Applicability
|
Corresponding security categorization for measured
control
(Low, Moderate, High)
|
|
|
|
5 FAH-11 EXHIBIT H-513.1(2)
Cross-Cutting Metrics Development Approach Template reQUIREMENTS
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Cross-Cutting Metrics Development Approach Template
|
|
Details
|
Control Families
|
As cited in NIST SP 800-53
|
Metric ID
|
Associated control number from SP 800-53
|
Strategic Goal or Objective
|
Agency strategic goal or objective that the metric
supports
|
Information Security Goal
|
Statement of requirement or security goal for the metric
|
Control Question(s)
|
Describes what this metric is measuring
|
Metric(s)
|
What is being measured
|
Metric Type(s)
|
Implementation-Effectiveness-Impact
|
Frequency of Data Collection
|
How often the data is collected and analyzed to be
reported internally or externally
|
Target(s)
|
Minimum standard for a satisfactory rating for the
metric
|
Formula(s)
|
Formula for calculating the metric
|
Information Source
|
The organization(s) or function(s) responsible for
collecting the metric data
|
5 FAH-11 Exhibit H-513.2(1)
EXAMPLE of A Control-Specific Approach Template
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Control-Specific Approach Template
|
|
Applicability
|
|
Details
|
L
|
M
|
H
|
Control Family
|
Contingency Planning
|
|
Metric ID
|
Contingency Plan Testing
|
|
X
|
X
|
Strategic Goal or Objective
|
Identify and assess the vulnerability of critical
infrastructure and key assets
|
|
Information Security Goal
|
Organizations must establish, maintain, and effectively
implement plans for emergency response, backup operations, and post disaster
recovery for Department information systems
|
|
Control
|
Organizations must test system contingency plans
annually to determine the plans effectiveness and the organizations
readiness to execute the plan
|
|
X
|
x
|
Control Enhancement(s)
|
(1) The organization tests the contingency plan at the
alternate processing site to familiarize contingency personnel with the
facility and available resources and to evaluate the sites capabilities to
support contingency operations
|
|
X
|
X
|
(2) The organization employs automated mechanisms to
more thoroughly and effectively test the contingency plan
|
|
Control Questions
|
(1) Did the contingency plan get tested at the alternate
processing site?
|
|
X
|
X
|
(2) What systems were successfully addressed in the testing
of the contingency plan?
|
|
X
|
X
|
Metric(s)
|
(1) Percentage of systems successfully testing the
contingency plan at the alternate processing site
|
|
X
|
X
|
(2) Percentage of systems successfully addressed in the
testing of the contingency plan
|
|
X
|
X
|
Metric Type
|
Implementation
|
|
X
|
X
|
Frequency of Data Collection
|
At least annually
|
|
X
|
X
|
Target
|
100 % of High
|
|
X
|
X
|
Formula
|
(1) Number of systems tested at the alternate processing
site divided by the number of systems in Information Technology Application Baseline
(ITAB)
(2) Number of systems successfully addressed divided
by the number of systems in ITAB
|
|
X
|
X
|
Information Sources
|
CIO, IRM/OPS, Computer Incident Response Team (CIRT),
CISO, System Owner, ISSO
|
|
Related Control Families
|
Dependencies for the metric with other control families
|
Applicability
|
Corresponding security categorization for measured
control
(Low, Moderate, High)
|
|
X
|
X
|
5 FAH-11 Exhibit H-513.2(2)
Example of A Cross-Cutting Metrics Development Approach Template
(CT:IAH-3; 03-26-2007)
Cross-Cutting Metrics Development Approach Template
|
|
Details
|
Control Families
|
Physical and Environmental Protection, Access Control,
Incident Response
|
Metric ID
|
Unique identifier to be filled out by the organization
|
Strategic Goal or Objective
|
Manage IT resources, using e-Gov, to improve service for
our customers and partners
|
Information Security Goal
|
Integrate physical and information security protection
mechanisms to ensure appropriate protection of the organizations IT
resources
|
Control Question(s)
|
Has the organization implemented appropriate physical
security measures to reduce the risks to its IT resources?
|
Metric(s)
|
Percentage of physical security incidents allowing
unauthorized entry into facilities containing information systems
|
Percentage of information security incidents caused by
physical access control failures
|
Cost of information security incidents of unauthorized
ace access to information systems, due to physical security failures
|
Metric Type(s)
|
Effectiveness
|
Effectiveness
|
Impact
|
Frequency of Data Collection
|
Organization defined (example, monthly report)
|
Organization defined (example, quarterly report)
|
Organization defined (example, quarterly report)
|
Target(s)
|
Organization defined (example zero)
|
Organization defined
|
|
Organization defined
|
Formula(s)
|
No of physical security incidents allowing unauthorized
entry divided by the total number of physical security incidents times 100
|
No. of information security incidents due to physical
security breaches divided by the total no. of information security
incidents times 100
|
Sum of costs of each incident within the reporting
period
|
Information Sources
|
Computer Security Incident Response Team (CIRT); The DS
Office of Physical Security (DS/C/PSP)
|