September Supersedes: SP (October ). Author(s). Karen Scarfone (NIST), Murugiah Souppaya (NIST), Amanda Cody (BAH), Angela Orebaugh (BAH) Local Download. Supplemental Material: SP (EPUB) (txt). Testing Methodology • ISSAF/NIST • OSSTMM v2 • OWASP Testing Guide • Other Penetration Testing Methodologies; //NIST-SPpdf). Vulnerability Assessment Tools. There are literally dozens of vulnerability assessment tools and vendors to choose from, each with.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Dutch|
|ePub File Size:||16.75 MB|
|PDF File Size:||18.57 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication Natl. See echecs16.info for more information and free download. 9. SP GUIDELINE ON NETWORK SECURITY TESTING See http://www. echecs16.info for more information and free download. 9. SP Guideline on Author(s). John Wack (NIST), Miles Tracy (Federal Reserve Information Technology), Murugiah Souppaya (NIST) Local Download .
I am simply trying to gather the information that exists in a variety of places into one cohesive narrative, and adding my own perspective to move the conversation forward on this topic. One of the aspects of the Identity Oracle is that it is not a technology but a business that proposes to address the relationship between Subjects, Relying Parties and Authoritative Sources of Information via mechanisms such as Contract Law. I am not a lawyer and I do not play one on TV. Scott and I have ended up at a lot of the same identity focused events in recent months and I have really enjoyed conversing with him about the intersection of Identity, Privacy and Law. As someone who is passionate about those topics, and works in the domain, he brings a critical insight to this discussion. Here is Scott, in his own words: Anil — The following are my personal comments to your blog entry. I guess I would say you are "getting warmer," but there are some underlying assumptions on the legal side in the path that you outline that will likely prevent achieving internet scale through the path described.
In the Senate, the majority is at stake and that is where the big bucks will go because 35 out of seats up for grabs. Liberal forces will seek to maintain the status quo and will focus on their most vulnerable candidates to ensure continuity.
Republicans, meanwhile, are emboldened because they believe those contenders are, indeed, vulnerable. There are 14 Senate seats held by Republicans that are in play.
In 21 races Democrats are on the defensive, and in at least 12 Red, Blue and Purple states, the GOP smells blood and the opportunity to wrest control of the majority in the upper chamber. Voters are anticipating the election Mid-term contests are generally uninteresting to most voters. But this year there is a high level of enthusiasm among In the Senate, the majority is at stake and that is where the big bucks will go because 35 out of seats up for grabs.
Another survey, this one a generic voting poll by CNN and Opinion Research, shows Republicans outpacing Liberals in the November balloting by as much as 5 points. It is very likely that the Democratic Party in Red States and Purple States are considering the need to mount vigorous campaigns to help their candidates.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen. What we might expect We should remember that Mitt Romney won Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia by double digits and Republican candidates there are in good shape to win those three seats from Democrats.
But surely those incumbents will be receiving lots of liberal support as election day grows closer. Nonetheless, the pundits pick Rep.
Mike Rounds to win in South Dakota. He was a very popular governor there and his campaign coffers are full. Senator Jay Rockefeller. Thus, Congressman Steve Daines would face an incumbent in November. But Walsh carries a lot of baggage with him. And, liberal Senators in Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Virginia are considered potentially vulnerable by the experts.
Thus, the prospects for a Republican majority in the Senate this year are quite real. Enroll Now! Easy to read. Easy to see.
Easy to use. Just plug it in! NEW Now comes with Plus, you are constantly worrying about viruses and freeze-ups.
If this sounds familiar, we have great news for you. This computer is easy-to-use, worry-free and literally puts the world at your fingertips. The components are all connected; all you do is plug it into an outlet and your high-speed Internet connection. This is a completely new touch screen system, without the cluttered look of the normal computer screen. All you do is touch one of them, from the Web, Email, Calendar to Games— you name it… and a new screen opens up.
Until now the very people who could benefit most from E-mail and the Internet are the ones that have had the hardest time accessing it. Now, thanks to the WOW Computer, countless older Americans are discovering the wonderful world of the Internet every day. Call now, and a patient, knowledgeable product expert will tell you how you can try it in your home for 30 days.
If you are not totally satisfied, simply return it within 30 days for a refund of the product purchase price. Call today. Call now and find out how you can get the new WOW! Mention promotional code for special introductory pricing.
One of the aspects of the Identity Oracle is that it is not a technology but a business that proposes to address the relationship between Subjects, Relying Parties and Authoritative Sources of Information via mechanisms such as Contract Law. I am not a lawyer and I do not play one on TV. Scott and I have ended up at a lot of the same identity focused events in recent months and I have really enjoyed conversing with him about the intersection of Identity, Privacy and Law.
As someone who is passionate about those topics, and works in the domain, he brings a critical insight to this discussion. Here is Scott, in his own words: Anil — The following are my personal comments to your blog entry.
I guess I would say you are "getting warmer," but there are some underlying assumptions on the legal side in the path that you outline that will likely prevent achieving internet scale through the path described. If we treat law as a technology just as "language" is a "technology" in need of standardization, and look at law from a systems, information science, thermodynamics, AND economic incentives perspective, the following additional points quickly suggest themselves as requiring accommodation in internet scale systems.
Massively interoperable systems require Rules standardization not just technical standardization on a broad scale. The most system relevant rules the only one's on which system users can rely will be those that are enforceable.
Those are called legal duties. They arise two ways: by legislation regulation or other government action or contract. There is no single international legal jurisdiction see Peace of Westphalia - , so legislation and regulation alone cannot drive standardization. The international law is the law of contracts minimum coverage of treaties aside.
Lots to discuss here. There is another reason to rely on contract law. It is the strong "system support value" derived from the US tradition of deference to the "rule of law. It is for this reason, incidentally, that OIX processes were organized based on a variety of US and international trusted, developed "market" models in a variety of self-regulatory settings , and why they focus on reliable, predictable, transparent processes, etc.
Systems that offer the best solutions will enjoy the broadest adoption. Reliability and predictability are currently at a premium due to system fragmentation and so are highly desirable at present. Core enforceable legal structure yields reliability, predictability and a form of "trust. I introduced the alliterative concept of "Tools and Rules" early on as a rhetorical device to put laws on par with technology in the discussion which still takes place mainly among technologists.
As a former large software company attorney once said "in the world of software, the contract is the product. This is key see below. As a technologist it is sometimes hard for me to admit that the truly challenging problems in the Identity and Trust domain are not technical in nature but in the domain of Policy.
There is much to discuss here. The property paradigm does not scale without first establishing some ground rules.
First, the concept of private property was adopted by the Constitution's framers who were familiar with the work of Gladstone who believed that without property laws, every man must act as a "thief".
Those laws work very well where the asset is "rivalrous," i. This works for all physical assets. For intangible assets, rivalrousness requires a legal regime e. The analysis is then, what legal regime will work to support the interactions and transactions in the particular intangible assets involved here be it identified as "data," "information," "identity" etc. Data is non-rivalrous see discussion in 5 below. I believe that this is a "resource management" type situation like managing riparian, aquifer, fisheries, grazing or other similar rights that lends itself to that type of legal regime, rather than a traditional "property" regime.
In this alternative, the "property" interest held by a party is an "intangible contract right," rather than a direct interest in physical property. That contract right entitles the party to be the beneficiary of one or more duties of other people to perform actions relating to data in a way that benefits the rights holder.
The "value" of the contract right is measured by the value to the party benefited by the duty. The resource management structure emphasizes mutual performance promises among stakeholders, rather than underlying property interests.
Briefly, consider a river with three types of user groups 40 agricultural irrigation users upstream, 2 power plants midstream cooling , and a city of , residential water users downstream consumption and washing, etc.
Each rely on different qualities of the water irrigation is for supporting plant metabolism stomata turgidity, hydrogen source for manufacturing complex carbohydrates in photosynthesis, etc.
When there is plenty of water in the river, there is no conflict and each user can use it freely without restriction.
When there is too little water, or conflicting usage patterns, there can be conflicting interests. In that situation, it is not property interests, per se, that are applied to resolve the conflicts, but rather mutually agreed upon duties documented in standard agreements that bind all parties to act in ways consistent with the interests of other parties.
Like water, data is a resource that has many different user groups among them data subjects, relying parties and identity providers , with needs sometimes in conflict. Notably, because data is not a physical resource, the "scarcity" is not due to physical limitation of the resource, but rather is due to the exertion of the rights of other parties to restrict usage which is indistinguishable legally from a physical restriction.
The property paradigm can be employed for certain forms of intellectual property, such as copyrights, but those systems were not designed to accommodate large "many to many" data transfers.
In any event, there is also a question of ownership where "data" is generated by an interaction which is most or all? Who "owns" data about my interactions with my friends, me or them? If both parties "own" it, then it is more of a rights regime than a "property" regime as that term is generally understood. Who owns data about my purchase transactions at the supermarket, me or the store?
It takes two to tango. We will be able to attribute ownership of data about interactions and relationships to one or the other party in a non-arbitrary fashion only when we can also answer the question "who owns a marriage?
You quote Bob Blakley who speaks about "your" information. I take that to be a casual reference to the class of information about someone, rather than an assertion of a right of exclusive possession or control.
If it is the latter, it seems inconsistent with the indications that the database will be an "asset" of the Identity Oracle. That separation could be accomplished through a rights regime.