Re: [Panic] Scope Draft is Available

[Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>]

David,

Do you have an update to your draft?

I don't see anything past the Apr 11 01.txt draft.

thanks

On 05/19/2017 10:09 AM, Waltermire, David A. (Fed) wrote:
>
> Diego, thanks for the edits.
>
> All,
>
> I am going to drop this text into an update of the scope draft. I’ll 
> wait until Monday to work on posting the draft update. Please let me 
> know if any other changes to the draft are desired.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
>
> *From:*Panic [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Diego R. Lopez
> *Sent:* Friday, May 19, 2017 2:23 AM
> *To:* Waltermire, David A. (Fed) <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail]; Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Panic] Scope Draft is Available
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree with David’s proposal, with just a few minor changes with 
> respect to the original text, to make it more general, completely 
> covering the virtual cases (NFV) and eliminating the term “device” to 
> avoid too many equivalences...
>
> Network operators need to know what is connected to their 
> organization's networks so that they can properly manage those network 
> elements. Managing these network endpoints, consisting of physical and 
> virtual network infrastructure, requires access to information 
> pertaining to them, including endpoint identity, the identity of 
> software installed on the element, and the configuration setting 
> values for the installed software. This information can be collected 
> from different classes of elements over different protocols and using 
> different data models. PANIC will identify a standardized solution to 
> collect posture information for network element, and allow that 
> information to be shared with authorized users and elements on the 
> network supporting security automation. PANIC aims to reuse available 
> standards for posture assessment where possible. The PANIC effort will 
> avoid redefining information exchange technologies for use cases that 
> have already been defined.
>
> Be goode,
>
>     On 18 May 2017, at 20:01 , Waltermire, David A. (Fed)
>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     Panos, thanks for providing text.
>
>     We have participants that are approaching this problem space that
>     are accustomed to using endpoint and network element. How about
>     the following introduction text to draw an equivalence between
>     these terms?
>
>     Network operators need to know what is connected to their
>     organization's networks so that they can properly manage those
>     network elements. Managing these network elements, consisting of
>     physical and virtual network infrastructure devices, requires
>     access to information pertaining to these endpoint devices,
>     including device identity, the identity of software installed on
>     the endpoint, and the configuration setting values for the
>     installed software. This information can be collected from
>     different classes of endpoints over different protocols and using
>     different data models. PANIC will identify a standardized solution
>     to collect posture information for network devices, and allow that
>     information to be shared with authorized users and devices on the
>     network supporting security automation. PANIC aims to reuse
>     available standards for posture assessment where possible. The
>     PANIC effort will avoid redefining information exchange
>     technologies for use cases that have already been defi
>     ned.
>
>     Also, I added your text to the security considerations section. I
>     will post this in the -02 revision once we sort out the Introduction.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Dave
>
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) [mailto:[e-mail]]
>         Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 12:30 PM
>         To: Waltermire, David A. (Fed) <[e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         Subject: RE: Scope Draft is Available
>
>         ACK. Below some proposed text:
>
>         For the Security Considerations Section:
>           Further discussion here will address the threat introduced
>         to the network
>         elements by the posture information collection. There should
>         be protections
>         implemented to prevent the element from being vulnerable to
>         DoS attacks
>         by frequent polling or pushing of posture data.
>
>         For the Introduction Section:
>           ...automation. PANIC aims to reuse available standards for
>         posture
>         assessment where possible. It will avoid redefining info exchange
>         technologies for usecases that have already been defined.
>
>         For the Introduction Section:
>           ...manage those
>           endpoints. Endpoints / Elements include hardware, software
>         of virtual
>         network infrastructure devices.
>
>
>
>
>
>         hardware, software or virtual (NFV fails in this
>
>             category)
>
>
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Waltermire, David A. (Fed)
>         [mailto:[e-mail]]
>         Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:59 AM
>         To: Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) <[e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         Subject: RE: Scope Draft is Available
>
>         Panos,
>
>         Thank you for providing feedback on the PANIC scope draft.
>
>         Comments are inline below.
>
>
>             -----Original Message-----
>             From: Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) [mailto:[e-mail]]
>             Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:37 AM
>             To: Waltermire, David A. (Fed) <[e-mail]
>             <mailto:[e-mail]>>;
>             [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             Subject: RE: Scope Draft is Available
>
>             Hi David,
>
>             The document is clear.
>
>             One semantic objection I have is about the use of the word
>             endpoint. I
>             believe the term is commonly used for user machines
>             (laptops, cells,
>             tablets) . Network element or element is a little clearer.
>
>
>         I don't have a dog in this fight. I am happy to go either way
>         (e.g., endpoint,
>         network element) if there is a preference in the group for one
>         term or the
>         other. I'd like to hear other opinions on this.
>
>
>             A susggestion: The security section could mention the
>             importance of
>             not introducing security concerns with the posture info
>             collection.
>             For example a device should not be DoSable by too many
>             polls, or it
>             should not push often enough that would introduce
>             performance concerns
>
>         etc.
>
>         I think this is a good idea. Do you have some text in mind to
>         drop in?
>
>
>             I think it will also be beneficial to be explicit about
>             the types of
>             network elements. In the broad technologies that exist
>             today, these
>             elements could be hardware, software or virtual (NFV fails
>             in this
>             category). All of those should be in scope for this work.
>
>
>         All of these are in scope in my view.
>
>
>             Side comment: I would like this standardization effort to
>             try to reuse
>             data formats and transports wherever possible and not come
>             up with new
>             posture information descriptions. I think this is a common
>             goal that
>             SACM has as well.
>
>
>         I share this goal as well. Should we document this in the draft?
>
>
>             Thanks,
>             Panos
>
>
>         Regards,
>         Dave
>
>
>             -----Original Message-----
>             From: Panic [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>             Waltermire,
>             David A. (Fed)
>             Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:03 AM
>             To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             Subject: [Panic] Scope Draft is Available
>
>             Welcome to the posture assessment through network information
>             collection
>             (PANIC) email list. At the side meeting on March 29th, we
>             started
>             discussing the problem of how to measure the health of network
>             devices. We discussed the need to collect posture
>             information from
>             network devices to support asset, software, vulnerability, and
>             configuration management use cases. We were asked by the
>             group to
>             share a more detailed description of the intended scope
>             for the PANIC
>             effort. The follow draft is an attempt to do
>             so:
>
>             https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-waltermire-panic-scope/
>
>             We would appreciate review of and comments on this draft.
>             At this
>             point, we want to know if the this scope clearly defines
>             the problem to be
>
>         solved.
>
>             Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns,
>             or if you
>             think the scope draft is adequate.
>
>             Regards,
>             David Waltermire
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             Panic mailing list
>             [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/panic
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Panic mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/panic
>
> --
> "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"
>
> Dr Diego R. Lopez
> Telefonica I+D
> http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/
>
> e-mail: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Tel:    [phone]
> Mobile: [phone]
> ----------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su 
> destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y 
> es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es 
> usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, 
> utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar 
> prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este 
> mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por 
> esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual 
> or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the 
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
> If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. 
> Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this 
> communication in error and then delete it.
>
> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu 
> destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é 
> para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa 
> senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, 
> utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida 
> em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, 
> rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e 
> proceda a sua destruição
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Panic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/panic