Penetration Testing mailing list archives
Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework?
From: "SD List" <list () security-database com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 16:19:57 +0100 (CET)
Hi there, As for myself, Cobit is not suitable for penetration tests. It has been designed to give indicators and processes to better cover IT security in general. Cobit would say "auditors" or "IT staff" to perform security auditing using "controls". And one of the best practices (controls) is to apply a well developped penetration tests methodology. It happens to look that "OSSTMM" is on the greatest "Pentest" procedure to follow. Watch out, OSSTMM does not give people techniques to conduct pentests but what you expect to find during each stage. The techniques are different from each ethical hacker, auditor to another (or call it whatever you want). What counts here is the Procedure to follow. When digging for documents what you expect to find. Now, it is up to you to play with google or use automated softwares (like Maltego). So, dont try to map Cobit and Pentests. Cobit is not a technical framework but global overview. The view from the top of the IT Organization Security. Penetration tests is just a detail and a little part of "Security assessment" phase. Here is a list of some Cobit mappings http://www.isaca.org/Template.cfm?Section=COBIT_Mapping1&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=30523 And the most suitable for you here is the mapping against NIST SP800-53. But again, NIST SP800-53 is a set of best practices and requirements to better develop and apply a security strategy. Otherwise, i made some searches on Cobit 4.1. And the related topics to everything security testing or vulnerabilities reviews are : AI3.3 Infrastructure Maintenance Develop a strategy and plan for infrastructure maintenance, and ensure that changes are controlled in line with the organisations change management procedure. Include periodic reviews against business needs, patch management, upgrade strategies, risks, vulnerabilities assessment and security requirements. Chapter DS5 (Deliver and Support) Especially this point : DS5.5 Security Testing,Surveillance and Monitoring Test and monitor the IT security implementation in a proactive way. IT security should be reaccredited in a timely manner to ensure that the approved enterprises information security baseline is maintained. A logging and monitoring function will enable the early prevention and/or detection and subsequent timely reporting of unusual and/or abnormal activities that may need to be addressed. Chapter ME (Monitor & Evaluate) ME2.4 Control Self-assessment Evaluate the completeness and effectiveness of managements control over IT processes, policies and contracts through a continuing programme of self-assessment Good Luck Nabil Ouchn security-database.com
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008, Jon Kibler wrote:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, <rant> And what REALLY gets me is that organizations expect you to be able to do a PEN TEST using CoBIT! When I explain that something like OSSTMM is a more correct framework for a PEN TEST (or even NIST 800-115 or 800-53A), they don't want to hear it -- its gotta be CoBIT! They have so many misunderstandings as to what CoBIT is and is not useful for, it is incredible -- and they are not interested in learning anything different. Who / what is driving this "CoBIT is the only acceptable IT Security audit framework" mentality and what can we do to change it? </rant>I should have been a little more clear on my initial post so apologies for the second email on this. You're comparing apples and oranges here. ISECOM's OSSTMM framework is great for the penetration tester and for the testing methodologies used, especially for the verification purposes however it is solely a pentesting framework. Your client is probably under- clued with the differences and wants to maintain CoBIT compliance, keeping in tune with the checks and balances of CoBIT's framework. If you have the modules' information, they correlate them for your client on how you will match them up so they can understand the difference in your testing and how it maps into the CoBIT framework. In either case of whatever a company is choosing, there will be overlap, there will be one over the other, but the bottom line for those asking for it is likely a need to maintain compliance with the CoBIT framework. It is a lot more than meets the eye and is well structured on the information security scale to both macro and micro manage many portions of security frameworks. Irrespective of the testing methodologies used, there is one end result and its this result that is likely what your client is worried about. Cobit maps most of the given frameworks and models and exceeds a lot of them, when you understand it a little better, you'll likely see the disconnect in someone asking for a pentest to help make sure the company is CoBIT compliant: Search ISACA for the term mapping it will give you a clearer picture of the mappings and overlap with the following: ITIL, CMM, ISO 17799, PMBOK, PRINCE2, NIST SP800-53, TOGAF =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ J. Oquendo SGFA, SGFE, C|EH, CNDA, CHFI, OSCP "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." Voltaire 227C 5D35 7DCB 0893 95AA 4771 1DCE 1FD1 5CCD 6B5E http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5CCD6B5E ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is sponsored by: Cenzic Security Trends Report from Cenzic Stay Ahead of the Hacker Curve! Get the latest Q2 2008 Trends Report now www.cenzic.com/landing/trends-report ------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is sponsored by: Cenzic Security Trends Report from Cenzic Stay Ahead of the Hacker Curve! Get the latest Q2 2008 Trends Report now www.cenzic.com/landing/trends-report ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? Jon Kibler (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? J. Oquendo (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? Jon Kibler (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? J. Oquendo (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? Andre Gironda (Dec 02)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? Jon Kibler (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? J. Oquendo (Dec 01)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? SD List (Dec 02)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? hightch0 (Dec 02)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? R. DuFresne (Dec 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? Katuruza, Patrick (Dec 02)
- Re: CoBIT a Security Audit Framework? J. Oquendo (Dec 01)