Database Security Requirements Guide

V2R8 2017-11-30       U_Database_V2R8_SRG_Manual-xccdf.xml
V2R4 2016-03-18       U_Database_V2R4_SRG_Manual-xccdf.xml
The Database Security Requirements Guide (SRG) is published as a tool to improve the security of Department of Defense (DoD) information systems. The requirements are derived from the NIST 800-53 and related documents. Comments or proposed revisions to this document should be sent via e-mail to the following address: [email protected]
Comparison
All 126
No Change 116
Updated 10
Added 0
Removed 0
V-32157 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000001-DB-000031 Rule ID: SV-42474r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000054

Discussion

Database management includes the ability to control the number of users and user sessions utilizing a DBMS. Unlimited concurrent connections to the DBMS could allow a successful Denial of Service (DoS) attack by exhausting connection resources; and a system can also fail or be degraded by an overload of legitimate users. Limiting the number of concurrent sessions per user is helpful in reducing these risks.

This requirement addresses concurrent session control for a single account. It does not address concurrent sessions by a single user via multiple system accounts; and it does not deal with the total number of sessions across all accounts.

The capability to limit the number of concurrent sessions per user must be configured in or added to the DBMS (for example, by use of a logon trigger), when this is technically feasible. Note that it is not sufficient to limit sessions via a web server or application server alone, because legitimate users and adversaries can potentially connect to the DBMS by other means.

The organization will need to define the maximum number of concurrent sessions by account type, by account, or a combination thereof. In deciding on the appropriate number, it is important to consider the work requirements of the various types of users. For example, 2 might be an acceptable limit for general users accessing the database via an application; but 10 might be too few for a database administrator using a database management GUI tool, where each query tab and navigation pane may count as a separate session.

(Sessions may also be referred to as connections or logons, which for the purposes of this requirement are synonyms.)

Checks

Determine whether the system documentation specifies limits on the number of concurrent DBMS sessions per account by type of user. If it does not, assume a limit of 10 for database administrators and 2 for all other users.

Review the concurrent-sessions settings in the DBMS and/or the applications using it, and/or the system software supporting it.

If the DBMS is capable of enforcing this restriction but is not configured to do so, this is a finding. This holds even if the restriction is enforced by applications or supporting software.

If it is not technically feasible for the DBMS to enforce this restriction, but the application(s) or supporting software are configured to do so, this is not a finding.

If it is not technically feasible for the DBMS to enforce this restriction, and applications and supporting software are not so configured, this is a finding.

If the value for any type of user account is not set, this is a finding.

If a value is set but is not equal to the value specified in the documentation (or the default value defined in this check) for the type of user, this is a finding.

Fix

If the DBMS is capable of enforcing this restriction, but is not configured to do so, configure it to do so. (This may involve the development of one or more triggers.)

If it is not technically feasible for the DBMS to enforce this restriction, and the application(s) and supporting software are not configured to do so, configure them to do so.

If the value for any type of user account is not set, determine the correct value and set it.

If a value is set but is not equal to the value specified for the type of user, determine the correct value, set it, and update the documentation, as appropriate.
V-32192 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000023-DB-000001 Rule ID: SV-42509r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000015

Discussion

Enterprise environments make account management for applications and databases challenging and complex. A manual process for account management functions adds the risk of a potential oversight or other error. Managing accounts for the same person in multiple places is inefficient and prone to problems with consistency and synchronization.

A comprehensive application account management process that includes automation helps to ensure that accounts designated as requiring attention are consistently and promptly addressed.

Examples include, but are not limited to, using automation to take action on multiple accounts designated as inactive, suspended, or terminated, or by disabling accounts located in non-centralized account stores, such as multiple servers. Account management functions can also include: assignment of group or role membership; identifying account type; specifying user access authorizations (i.e., privileges); account removal, update, or termination; and administrative alerts. The use of automated mechanisms can include, for example: using email or text messaging to notify account managers when users are terminated or transferred; using the information system to monitor account usage; and using automated telephone notification to report atypical system account usage.

The DBMS must be configured to automatically utilize organization-level account management functions, and these functions must immediately enforce the organization's current account policy.

Automation may be comprised of differing technologies that when placed together contain an overall mechanism supporting an organization's automated account management requirements.

Checks

If all accounts are authenticated by the organization-level authentication/access mechanism and not by the DBMS, this is not a finding.

If there are any accounts managed by the DBMS, review the system documentation for justification and approval of these accounts.

If any DBMS-managed accounts exist that are not documented and approved, this is a finding.

Fix

Integrate DBMS security with an organization-level authentication/access mechanism providing account management for all users, groups, roles, and any other principals.

For each DBMS-managed account that is not documented and approved, either transfer it to management by the external mechanism, or document the need for it and obtain approval, as appropriate.
V-32203 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000033-DB-000084 Rule ID: SV-42520r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000213

Discussion

Authentication with a DoD-approved PKI certificate does not necessarily imply authorization to access the DBMS. To mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to sensitive information by entities that have been issued certificates by DoD-approved PKIs, all DoD systems, including databases, must be properly configured to implement access control policies.

Successful authentication must not automatically give an entity access to an asset or security boundary. Authorization procedures and controls must be implemented to ensure each authenticated entity also has a validated and current authorization. Authorization is the process of determining whether an entity, once authenticated, is permitted to access a specific asset. Information systems use access control policies and enforcement mechanisms to implement this requirement.

Access control policies include identity-based policies, role-based policies, and attribute-based policies. Access enforcement mechanisms include access control lists, access control matrices, and cryptography. These policies and mechanisms must be employed by the application to control access between users (or processes acting on behalf of users) and objects (e.g., devices, files, records, processes, programs, and domains) in the information system.

This requirement is applicable to access control enforcement applications, a category that includes database management systems. If the DBMS does not follow applicable policy when approving access, it may be in conflict with networks or other applications in the information system. This may result in users either gaining or being denied access inappropriately and in conflict with applicable policy.

Checks

Check DBMS settings to determine whether users are restricted from accessing objects and data they are not authorized to access.

If appropriate access controls are not implemented to restrict access to authorized users and to restrict the access of those users to objects and data they are authorized to see, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS settings and access controls to permit user access only to objects and data that the user is authorized to view or interact with, and to prevent access to all other objects and data.
V-32347 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000080-DB-000063 Rule ID: SV-42684r4_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000166

Discussion

Non-repudiation of actions taken is required in order to maintain data integrity. Examples of particular actions taken by individuals include creating information, sending a message, approving information (e.g., indicating concurrence or signing a contract), and receiving a message.

Non-repudiation protects against later claims by a user of not having created, modified, or deleted a particular data item or collection of data in the database.

In designing a database, the organization must define the types of data and the user actions that must be protected from repudiation. The implementation must then include building audit features into the application data tables and configuring the DBMS's audit tools to capture the necessary audit trail. Design and implementation also must ensure that applications pass individual user identification to the DBMS, even where the application connects to the DBMS with a standard, shared account.

Checks

Review system documentation to determine the data and the actions on data that need to be protected from repudiation by means of audit trails.

Review DBMS settings to determine whether users can be identified as individuals when using shared accounts. If the individual user who is using a shared account cannot be identified, this is a finding.

Review the design and the contents of the application data tables. If they do not include the necessary audit data, this is a finding.

Review the configuration of audit logs to determine whether auditing includes details identifying the individual user. If it does not, this is a finding.

Fix

Use accounts assigned to individual users. Where the application connects to the DBMS using a standard, shared account, ensure that it also captures the individual user identification and passes it to the DBMS.

Modify application database tables and all supporting code to capture the necessary audit data.

Modify the configuration of audit logs to include details identifying the individual user.
V-32362 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000089-DB-000064 Rule ID: SV-42699r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000169

Discussion

Without the capability to generate audit records, it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

Audit records can be generated from various components within the DBMS (e.g., process, module). Certain specific application functionalities may be audited as well. The list of audited events is the set of events for which audits are to be generated. This set of events is typically a subset of the list of all events for which the system is capable of generating audit records.

DoD has defined the list of events for which the DBMS will provide an audit record generation capability as the following:

(i) Successful and unsuccessful attempts to access, modify, or delete privileges, security objects, security levels, or categories of information (e.g., classification levels);

(ii) Access actions, such as successful and unsuccessful logon attempts, privileged activities, or other system-level access, starting and ending time for user access to the system, concurrent logons from different workstations, successful and unsuccessful accesses to objects, all program initiations, and all direct access to the information system; and

(iii) All account creation, modification, disabling, and termination actions.

Organizations may define additional events requiring continuous or ad hoc auditing.

Checks

Check DBMS auditing to determine whether organization-defined auditable events are being audited by the system.

If organization-defined auditable events are not being audited, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS that supports the DoD minimum set of auditable events.

Configure the DBMS to generate audit records for at least the DoD minimum set of events.
V-32363 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000090-DB-000065 Rule ID: SV-42700r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000171

Discussion

Without the capability to restrict which roles and individuals can select which events are audited, unauthorized personnel may be able to prevent or interfere with the auditing of critical events.

Suppression of auditing could permit an adversary to evade detection.

Misconfigured audits can degrade the system's performance by overwhelming the audit log. Misconfigured audits may also make it more difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and documentation to determine whether designated personnel are able to select which auditable events are being audited.

If designated personnel are not able to configure auditable events, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS's settings to allow designated personnel to select which auditable events are audited.
V-32364 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000091-DB-000066 Rule ID: SV-42701r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Under some circumstances, it may be useful to monitor who/what is reading privilege/permission/role information. Therefore, it must be possible to configure auditing to do this. DBMSs typically make such information available through views or functions.

This requirement addresses explicit requests for privilege/permission/role membership information. It does not refer to the implicit retrieval of privileges/permissions/role memberships that the DBMS continually performs to determine if any and every action on the database is permitted.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are retrieved.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

If the DBMS is currently required to audit the retrieval of privilege/permission/role membership information, review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are retrieved.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are retrieved.

If currently required, configure the DBMS to produce audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are retrieved.
V-32365 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000092-DB-000208 Rule ID: SV-42702r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001464

Discussion

Session auditing is for use when a user's activities are under investigation. To be sure of capturing all activity during those periods when session auditing is in use, it needs to be in operation for the whole time the DBMS is running.

Checks

Review DBMS vendor documentation to determine whether the DBMS software is capable of session auditing.

If the DBMS is not capable of session auditing and a third party product is not being used for session level auditing, this is a finding.

If the DBMS is capable of session level auditing and specific session audits are currently defined but session auditing is not enabled; or if a third-party product is available for session auditing and specific session audits are currently defined but session auditing is not enabled, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of session auditing.

Configure the DBMS software or third-party product to enable session auditing.
V-32366 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000093-DB-000052 Rule ID: SV-42703r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001462

Discussion

Without the capability to capture, record, and log all content related to a user session, investigations into suspicious user activity would be hampered.

Typically, this DBMS capability would be used in conjunction with comparable monitoring of a user's online session, involving other software components such as operating systems, web servers and front-end user applications. The current requirement, however, deals specifically with the DBMS.

Checks

Review DBMS vendor documentation to determine whether the DBMS is capable of capturing, recording, and logging all content related to an established user session.

If the DBMS is not capable of these actions, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of capturing, recording, and logging all content related to an established user session, or acquire a third-party application to perform this function.
V-32368 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000095-DB-000039 Rule ID: SV-42705r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000130

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without establishing what type of event occurred, it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

Audit record content that may be necessary to satisfy the requirement of this policy includes, for example, time stamps, user/process identifiers, event descriptions, success/fail indications, filenames involved, and access control or flow control rules invoked.

Associating event types with detected events in the application and audit logs provides a means of investigating an attack; recognizing resource utilization or capacity thresholds; or identifying an improperly configured application.

Database software is capable of a range of actions on data stored within the database. It is important, for accurate forensic analysis, to know exactly what actions were performed. This requires specific information regarding the event type an audit record is referring to. If event type information is not recorded and stored with the audit record, the record itself is of very limited use.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify information specific to the audit event type is being captured and stored with the audit records.

If audit records exist without information regarding what type of event occurred, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include event type as part of the audit record.
V-32369 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000096-DB-000040 Rule ID: SV-42706r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000131

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without establishing when events occurred, it is impossible to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident.

In order to compile an accurate risk assessment and provide forensic analysis, it is essential for security personnel to know the date and time when events occurred.

Associating the date and time with detected events in the application and audit logs provides a means of investigating an attack; recognizing resource utilization or capacity thresholds; or identifying an improperly configured application.

Database software is capable of a range of actions on data stored within the database. It is important, for accurate forensic analysis, to know exactly when specific actions were performed. This requires the date and time an audit record is referring to. If date and time information is not recorded and stored with the audit record, the record itself is of very limited use.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify information specific to the date and time of the event is being captured and stored with the audit records.

If audit records exist without the date and time of the event, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include the date and time of the occurrence of the event as part of the audit record.
V-32370 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000097-DB-000041 Rule ID: SV-42707r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000132

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without establishing where events occurred, it is impossible to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident.

In order to compile an accurate risk assessment and provide forensic analysis, it is essential for security personnel to know where events occurred, such as application components, modules, session identifiers, filenames, host names, and functionality.

Associating information about where the event occurred within the application provides a means of investigating an attack; recognizing resource utilization or capacity thresholds; or identifying an improperly configured application.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify information specific to where the event occurred is being captured and stored with the audit records.

If audit records exist without information regarding where the event occurred, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include where the event occurred as part of the audit record.
V-32371 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000098-DB-000042 Rule ID: SV-42708r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000133

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without establishing the source of the event, it is impossible to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident.

In order to compile an accurate risk assessment and provide forensic analysis, it is essential for security personnel to know where events occurred, such as application components, modules, session identifiers, filenames, host names, and functionality.

In addition to logging where events occur within the application, the application must also produce audit records that identify the application itself as the source of the event.

Associating information about the source of the event within the application provides a means of investigating an attack; recognizing resource utilization or capacity thresholds; or identifying an improperly configured application.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify information specific to the source (origin) of the event is being captured and stored with audit records.

If audit records exist without information regarding the source of the event, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include the source of the event as part of the audit record.
V-32373 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000099-DB-000043 Rule ID: SV-42710r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000134

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without information about the outcome of events, security personnel cannot make an accurate assessment as to whether an attack was successful or if changes were made to the security state of the system.

Event outcomes can include indicators of event success or failure and event-specific results (e.g., the security state of the information system after the event occurred). As such, they also provide a means to measure the impact of an event and help authorized personnel to determine the appropriate response.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify information specific to the outcome of the event is being captured and stored with the audit records.

If audit records exist without the outcome of the event that occurred, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include the outcome of the event as part of the audit record.
V-32374 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000100-DB-000201 Rule ID: SV-42711r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001487

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Without information that establishes the identity of the subjects (i.e., users or processes acting on behalf of users) associated with the events, security personnel cannot determine responsibility for the potentially harmful event.

Identifiers (if authenticated or otherwise known) include, but are not limited to, user database tables, primary key values, user names, or process identifiers.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify a user name associated with the event is being captured and stored with the audit records. If audit records exist without specific user information, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include user name as part of the audit record.
V-32375 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000101-DB-000044 Rule ID: SV-42712r4_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000135

Discussion

Information system auditing capability is critical for accurate forensic analysis. Reconstruction of harmful events or forensic analysis is not possible if audit records do not contain enough information. To support analysis, some types of events will need information to be logged that exceeds the basic requirements of event type, time stamps, location, source, outcome, and user identity. If additional information is not available, it could negatively impact forensic investigations into user actions or other malicious events.

The organization must determine what additional information is required for complete analysis of the audited events. The additional information required is dependent on the type of information (e.g., sensitivity of the data and the environment within which it resides). At a minimum, the organization must employ either full-text recording of privileged commands or the individual identities of users of shared accounts, or both. The organization must maintain audit trails in sufficient detail to reconstruct events to determine the cause and impact of compromise.

Examples of detailed information the organization may require in audit records are full-text recording of privileged commands or the individual identities of shared account users.

Checks

Review the system documentation to identify what additional information the organization has determined to be necessary.

Check DBMS settings and existing audit records to verify that all organization-defined additional, more detailed information is in the audit records for audit events identified by type, location, or subject.

If any additional information is defined and is not contained in the audit records, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to include all organization-defined detailed information in the audit records for audit events identified by type, location, or subject.
V-32383 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000109-DB-000049 Rule ID: SV-42720r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000140

Discussion

It is critical that when the DBMS is at risk of failing to process audit logs as required, it take action to mitigate the failure. Audit processing failures include: software/hardware errors; failures in the audit capturing mechanisms; and audit storage capacity being reached or exceeded. Responses to audit failure depend upon the nature of the failure mode.

When the need for system availability does not outweigh the need for a complete audit trail, the DBMS should shut down immediately, rolling back all in-flight transactions.

Systems where audit trail completeness is paramount will most likely be at a lower MAC level than MAC I; the final determination is the prerogative of the application owner, subject to Authorizing Official concurrence. In any case, sufficient auditing resources must be allocated to avoid a shutdown in all but the most extreme situations.

Checks

If the application owner has determined that the need for system availability outweighs the need for a complete audit trail, this is not applicable (NA).

Review DBMS, OS, or third-party logging application settings and/or documentation to determine whether the system is capable of shutting down, rolling back all in-flight transactions, in the case of an auditing failure. If it is not, this is a finding.

If the system is capable of shutting down upon audit failure but is not configured to do so, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the system to shut down, rolling back all in-flight transactions, in the case of an auditing failure.
V-32391 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000116-DB-000057 Rule ID: SV-42728r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000159

Discussion

Internal system clocks are typically a feature of server hardware and are maintained and used by the operating system. They are typically synchronized with an authoritative time server at regular intervals.

Without an internal system clock used as the reference for the time stored on each event to provide a trusted common reference for the time, forensic analysis would be impeded. Determining the correct time a particular event occurred on a system is critical when conducting forensic analysis and investigating system events.

Time stamps generated by the internal system clock and used by the DBMS shall include both date and time. The time may be expressed in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), a modern continuation of Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), or local time with an offset from UTC.

If time sources other than the system time are used for audit records, the timeline of events can get skewed. This makes forensic analysis of the logs much less reliable.

Checks

Using product documentation, verify that the DBMS uses current time stamp values obtained from or synchronized with the internal system clock used by the operating system.

If it is not able to, this is a finding.

If it is able to but is configured so that it does not do so, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS that can use time stamp values obtained from or synchronized with the internal system clock used by the operating system.

Configure the DBMS to use time stamp values obtained from or synchronized with the internal system clock used by the operating system.
V-32393 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000118-DB-000059 Rule ID: SV-42730r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000162

Discussion

If audit data were to become compromised, then competent forensic analysis and discovery of the true source of potentially malicious system activity is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. In addition, access to audit records provides information an attacker could potentially use to his or her advantage.

To ensure the veracity of audit data, the information system and/or the application must protect audit information from any and all unauthorized access. This includes read, write, copy, etc.

This requirement can be achieved through multiple methods which will depend upon system architecture and design. Some commonly employed methods include ensuring log files enjoy the proper file system permissions utilizing file system protections and limiting log data location.

Additionally, applications with user interfaces to audit records should not allow for the unfettered manipulation of or access to those records via the application. If the application provides access to the audit data, the application becomes accountable for ensuring that audit information is protected from unauthorized access.

Audit information includes all information (e.g., audit records, audit settings, and audit reports) needed to successfully audit information system activity.

Checks

Review locations of audit logs, both internal to the database and database audit logs located at the operating system level.

Verify there are appropriate controls and permissions to protect the audit information from unauthorized access.

If appropriate controls and permissions do not exist, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply controls and modify permissions to protect database audit log data from unauthorized access, whether stored in the database itself or at the OS level.
V-32394 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000119-DB-000060 Rule ID: SV-42731r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000163

Discussion

If audit data were to become compromised, then competent forensic analysis and discovery of the true source of potentially malicious system activity is impossible to achieve.

To ensure the veracity of audit data the information system and/or the application must protect audit information from unauthorized modification.

This requirement can be achieved through multiple methods that will depend upon system architecture and design. Some commonly employed methods include ensuring log files enjoy the proper file system permissions and limiting log data locations.

Applications providing a user interface to audit data will leverage user permissions and roles identifying the user accessing the data and the corresponding rights that the user enjoys in order to make access decisions regarding the modification of audit data.

Audit information includes all information (e.g., audit records, audit settings, and audit reports) needed to successfully audit information system activity.

Modification of database audit data could mask the theft of, or the unauthorized modification of, sensitive data stored in the database.

Checks

Review locations of audit logs, both internal to the database and database audit logs located at the operating system level.

Verify there are appropriate controls and permissions to protect the audit information from unauthorized modification.

If appropriate controls and permissions do not exist, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply controls and modify permissions to protect database audit log data from unauthorized modification, whether stored in the database itself or at the OS level.
V-32395 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000120-DB-000061 Rule ID: SV-42732r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000164

Discussion

If audit data were to become compromised, then competent forensic analysis and discovery of the true source of potentially malicious system activity is impossible to achieve.

To ensure the veracity of audit data, the information system and/or the application must protect audit information from unauthorized deletion. This requirement can be achieved through multiple methods which will depend upon system architecture and design.

Some commonly employed methods include: ensuring log files enjoy the proper file system permissions utilizing file system protections; restricting access; and backing up log data to ensure log data is retained.

Applications providing a user interface to audit data will leverage user permissions and roles identifying the user accessing the data and the corresponding rights the user enjoys in order make access decisions regarding the deletion of audit data.

Audit information includes all information (e.g., audit records, audit settings, and audit reports) needed to successfully audit information system activity.

Deletion of database audit data could mask the theft of, or the unauthorized modification of, sensitive data stored in the database.

Checks

Review locations of audit logs, both internal to the database, and database audit logs located at the operating system level.

Verify there are appropriate controls and permissions to protect the audit information from unauthorized deletion.

If appropriate controls and permissions do not exist, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply controls and modify permissions to protect database audit log data from unauthorized deletion, whether stored in the database itself or at the OS level.
V-32397 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000121-DB-000202 Rule ID: SV-42734r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001493

Discussion

Protecting audit data also includes identifying and protecting the tools used to view and manipulate log data.

Depending upon the log format and application, system and application log tools may provide the only means to manipulate and manage application and system log data. It is, therefore, imperative that access to audit tools be controlled and protected from unauthorized access.

Applications providing tools to interface with audit data will leverage user permissions and roles identifying the user accessing the tools and the corresponding rights the user enjoys in order make access decisions regarding the access to audit tools.

Audit tools include, but are not limited to, OS-provided audit tools, vendor-provided audit tools, and open source audit tools needed to successfully view and manipulate audit information system activity and records.

If an attacker were to gain access to audit tools, he could analyze audit logs for system weaknesses or weaknesses in the auditing itself. An attacker could also manipulate logs to hide evidence of malicious activity.

Checks

Review the access permissions to tools used to view or modify audit log data. These tools may include features within the DBMS itself or software external to the database.

If appropriate permissions and access controls to prevent unauthorized access are not applied to these tools, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply or modify access controls and permissions (both within the DBMS and in the file system/operating system) to tools used to view or modify audit log data. Tools must be accessible by authorized personnel only.
V-32398 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000122-DB-000203 Rule ID: SV-42735r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001494

Discussion

Protecting audit data also includes identifying and protecting the tools used to view and manipulate log data. Therefore, protecting audit tools is necessary to prevent unauthorized operation on audit data.

Applications providing tools to interface with audit data will leverage user permissions and roles identifying the user accessing the tools and the corresponding rights the user enjoys in order make access decisions regarding the modification of audit tools.

Audit tools include, but are not limited to, vendor-provided and open source audit tools needed to successfully view and manipulate audit information system activity and records. Audit tools include custom queries and report generators.

Checks

Review the access permissions to tools used to view or modify audit log data. These tools may include features within the DBMS itself or software external to the database.

If appropriate permissions and access controls to prevent unauthorized configuration are not applied to these tools, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply or modify access controls and permissions (both within the DBMS and in the file system/operating system) to tools used to view or modify audit log data. Tools must be configurable by authorized personnel only.
V-32399 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000123-DB-000204 Rule ID: SV-42736r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001495

Discussion

Protecting audit data also includes identifying and protecting the tools used to view and manipulate log data. Therefore, protecting audit tools is necessary to prevent unauthorized operation on audit data.

Applications providing tools to interface with audit data will leverage user permissions and roles identifying the user accessing the tools and the corresponding rights the user enjoys in order make access decisions regarding the deletion of audit tools.

Audit tools include, but are not limited to, vendor-provided and open source audit tools needed to successfully view and manipulate audit information system activity and records. Audit tools include custom queries and report generators.

Checks

Review the access permissions to tools used to view or modify audit log data. These tools may include features within the DBMS itself or software external to the database.

If appropriate permissions and access controls to prevent unauthorized removal are not applied to these tools, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply or modify access controls and permissions (both within the DBMS and in the file system/operating system) to tools used to view or modify audit log data. Ensure that tools may be removed by authorized personnel only.
V-32412 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000133-DB-000200 Rule ID: SV-42749r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001499

Discussion

Within the database, object ownership implies full privileges to the owned object, including the privilege to assign access to the owned objects to other subjects. Database functions and procedures can be coded using definer's rights. This allows anyone who utilizes the object to perform the actions if they were the owner. If not properly managed, this can lead to privileged actions being taken by unauthorized individuals.

Conversely, if critical tables or other objects rely on unauthorized owner accounts, these objects may be lost when an account is removed.

Checks

Review system documentation to identify accounts authorized to own database objects. Review accounts that own objects in the database(s).

If any database objects are found to be owned by users not authorized to own database objects, this is a finding.

Fix

Assign ownership of authorized objects to authorized object owner accounts.
V-32413 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000133-DB-000199 Rule ID: SV-42750r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001499

Discussion

When dealing with change control issues, it should be noted any changes to the hardware, software, and/or firmware components of the information system and/or application can potentially have significant effects on the overall security of the system.

Multiple applications can provide a cumulative negative effect. A vulnerability and subsequent exploit to one application can lead to an exploit of other applications sharing the same security context. For example, an exploit to a web server process that leads to unauthorized administrative access to host system directories can most likely lead to a compromise of all applications hosted by the same system. Database software not installed using dedicated directories both threatens and is threatened by other hosted applications. Access controls defined for one application may by default provide access to the other application's database objects or directories. Any method that provides any level of separation of security context assists in the protection between applications.

Checks

Review the DBMS software library directory and note other root directories located on the same disk directory or any subdirectories.

If any non-DBMS software directories exist on the disk directory, examine or investigate their use. If any of the directories are used by other applications, including third-party applications that use the DBMS, this is a finding.

Only applications that are required for the functioning and administration, not use, of the DBMS should be located in the same disk directory as the DBMS software libraries.

If other applications are located in the same directory as the DBMS, this is a finding.

For databases located on mainframes, confirm that the database and its configuration files are isolated in their own DASD pools.

If database software and database configuration files share DASD with other applications, this is a finding.

Fix

Install all applications on directories separate from the DBMS software library directory. Relocate any directories or reinstall other application software that currently shares the DBMS software library directory.

For mainframe-based databases, locate database software and configuration files in separate DASD pools from other mainframe applications.
V-32414 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000133-DB-000198 Rule ID: SV-42751r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001499

Discussion

When dealing with change control issues, it should be noted any changes to the hardware, software, and/or firmware components of the information system and/or application can have significant effects on the overall security of the system.

If the system were to allow any user to make changes to software libraries, then those changes might be implemented without undergoing the appropriate testing and approvals that are part of a robust change management process.

Accordingly, only qualified and authorized individuals shall be allowed access to information system components for purposes of initiating changes, including upgrades and modifications.

DBA and other privileged administrative or application owner accounts are granted privileges that allow actions that can have a great impact on database security and operation. It is especially important to grant privileged access to only those persons who are qualified and authorized to use them.

Checks

Review procedures for controlling, granting access to, and tracking use of the DBMS software installation account.

If access or use of this account is not restricted to the minimum number of personnel required or if unauthorized access to the account has been granted, this is a finding.

Fix

Develop, document, and implement procedures to restrict and track use of the DBMS software installation account.
V-32415 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000133-DB-000179 Rule ID: SV-42752r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001499

Discussion

If the system were to allow any user to make changes to software libraries, then those changes might be implemented without undergoing the appropriate testing and approvals that are part of a robust change management process.

Accordingly, only qualified and authorized individuals shall be allowed to obtain access to information system components for purposes of initiating changes, including upgrades and modifications.

Unmanaged changes that occur to the database software libraries or configuration can lead to unauthorized or compromised installations.

Checks

Review monitoring procedures and implementation evidence to verify monitoring of changes to database software libraries, related applications, and configuration files is done.

Verify the list of files, directories, and database application objects (procedures, functions, and triggers) being monitored is complete.

If monitoring does not occur or is not complete, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement procedures to monitor for unauthorized changes to DBMS software libraries, related software application libraries, and configuration files. If a third-party automated tool is not employed, an automated job that reports file information on the directories and files of interest and compares them to the baseline report for the same will meet the requirement.

Use file hashes or checksums for comparisons, as file dates may be manipulated by malicious users.
V-32423 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000141-DB-000090 Rule ID: SV-42760r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000381

Discussion

Information systems are capable of providing a wide variety of functions and services. Some of the functions and services, provided by default, may not be necessary to support essential organizational operations (e.g., key missions, functions).

It is detrimental for software products to provide, or install by default, functionality exceeding requirements or mission objectives. Examples include, but are not limited to, installing advertising software, demonstrations, or browser plugins not related to requirements or providing a wide array of functionality, not required for every mission, that cannot be disabled.

DBMSs must adhere to the principles of least functionality by providing only essential capabilities.

Demonstration and sample database objects and applications present publicly known attack points for malicious users. These demonstration and sample objects are meant to provide simple examples of coding specific functions and are not developed to prevent vulnerabilities from being introduced to the DBMS and host system.

Checks

Review vendor documentation and vendor websites to identify vendor-provided demonstration or sample databases, database applications, objects, and files.

Review the DBMS to determine if any of the demonstration and sample databases, database applications, or files are installed in the database or are included with the DBMS application.

If any are present in the database or are included with the DBMS application, this is a finding.

Fix

Remove any demonstration and sample databases, database applications, objects, and files from the DBMS.
V-32424 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000141-DB-000091 Rule ID: SV-42761r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000381

Discussion

Information systems are capable of providing a wide variety of functions and services. Some of the functions and services, provided by default, may not be necessary to support essential organizational operations (e.g., key missions, functions).

It is detrimental for software products to provide, or install by default, functionality exceeding requirements or mission objectives.

DBMSs must adhere to the principles of least functionality by providing only essential capabilities.

Checks

Review the list of components and features installed with the database.

Use the DBMS product installation tool if supported and review the product installation documentation.

If unused components or features are installed and are not documented and authorized, this is a finding.

Fix

Uninstall unused components or features that are installed and can be uninstalled. Remove any database objects and applications that are installed to support them.
V-32426 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000141-DB-000092 Rule ID: SV-42763r4_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000381

Discussion

Information systems are capable of providing a wide variety of functions and services. Some of the functions and services, provided by default, may not be necessary to support essential organizational operations (e.g., key missions, functions).

It is detrimental for software products to provide, or install by default, functionality exceeding requirements or mission objectives.

DBMSs must adhere to the principles of least functionality by providing only essential capabilities.

Unused, unnecessary DBMS components increase the attack vector for the DBMS by introducing additional targets for attack. By minimizing the services and applications installed on the system, the number of potential vulnerabilities is reduced. Components of the system that are unused and cannot be uninstalled must be disabled. The techniques available for disabling components will vary by DBMS product, OS, and the nature of the component and may include DBMS configuration settings, OS service settings, OS file access security, and DBMS user/role permissions.

Checks

Review the DBMS for unused components of the system that cannot be uninstalled.

If unused components or features are present on the system, can be disabled, and are not disabled, this is a finding.

Fix

Disable any unused components or features that cannot be uninstalled.
V-32427 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000141-DB-000093 Rule ID: SV-42764r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000381

Discussion

Information systems are capable of providing a wide variety of functions and services. Some of the functions and services, provided by default, may not be necessary to support essential organizational operations (e.g., key missions, functions).

It is detrimental for applications to provide, or install by default, functionality exceeding requirements or mission objectives.

Applications must adhere to the principles of least functionality by providing only essential capabilities.

DBMSs may spawn additional external processes to execute procedures that are defined in the DBMS but stored in external host files (external procedures). The spawned process used to execute the external procedure may operate within a different OS security context than the DBMS and provide unauthorized access to the host system.

Checks

Review the database for definitions of application executable objects stored external to the database.

Determine if there are methods to disable use or access, or to remove definitions for external executable objects.

Verify each application executable object listed is authorized by the ISSO. If any are not, this is a finding.

Fix

Disable use of or remove any external application executable object definitions that are not authorized.
V-32428 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000142-DB-000094 Rule ID: SV-42765r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000382

Discussion

In order to prevent unauthorized connection of devices, unauthorized transfer of information, or unauthorized tunneling (i.e., embedding of data types within data types), organizations must disable or restrict unused or unnecessary physical and logical ports/protocols/services on information systems.

Applications are capable of providing a wide variety of functions and services. Some of the functions and services provided by default may not be necessary to support essential organizational operations. Additionally, it is sometimes convenient to provide multiple services from a single component (e.g., email and web services); however, doing so increases risk over limiting the services provided by any one component.

To support the requirements and principles of least functionality, the application must support the organizational requirements providing only essential capabilities and limiting the use of ports, protocols, and/or services to only those required, authorized, and approved to conduct official business or to address authorized quality of life issues.

Database Management Systems using ports, protocols, and services deemed unsafe are open to attack through those ports, protocols, and services. This can allow unauthorized access to the database and through the database to other components of the information system.

Checks

Review the DBMS settings and local documentation for functions, ports, protocols, and services that are not approved. If any are found, this is a finding.

Fix

Disable functions, ports, protocols, and services that are not approved.
V-32442 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000148-DB-000103 Rule ID: SV-42779r4_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000764

Discussion

To assure accountability and prevent unauthenticated access, organizational users must be identified and authenticated to prevent potential misuse and compromise of the system.

Organizational users include organizational employees or individuals the organization deems to have equivalent status of employees (e.g., contractors). Organizational users (and any processes acting on behalf of users) must be uniquely identified and authenticated for all accesses, except the following:

(i) Accesses explicitly identified and documented by the organization. Organizations document specific user actions that can be performed on the information system without identification or authentication; and
(ii) Accesses that occur through authorized use of group authenticators without individual authentication. Organizations may require unique identification of individuals using shared accounts, for detailed accountability of individual activity.

Checks

Review DBMS settings to determine whether organizational users are uniquely identified and authenticated when logging on/connecting to the system.

If organizational users are not uniquely identified and authenticated, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings to uniquely identify and authenticate all organizational users who log on/connect to the system.
V-32468 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000171-DB-000074 Rule ID: SV-42805r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000196

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates.

Authentication based on User ID and Password may be used only when it is not possible to employ a PKI certificate, and requires AO approval.

In such cases, database passwords stored in clear text, using reversible encryption, or using unsalted hashes would be vulnerable to unauthorized disclosure. Database passwords must always be in the form of one-way, salted hashes when stored internally or externally to the DBMS.

Checks

Review the list of DBMS database objects, database configuration files, associated scripts, and applications defined within and external to the DBMS that access the database. The list should also include files or settings used to configure the operational environment for the DBMS and for interactive DBMS user accounts.

Determine whether any DBMS database objects, database configuration files, associated scripts, applications defined within or external to the DBMS that access the database, and DBMS/user environment files/settings contain database passwords. If any do, confirm that DBMS passwords stored internally or externally to the DBMS are hashed using FIPS-approved cryptographic algorithms and include a salt. If any passwords are stored in clear text, this is a finding. If any passwords are stored with reversible encryption, this is a finding. If any passwords are stored using unsalted hashes, this is a finding.

Fix

Develop, document, and maintain a list of DBMS database objects, database configuration files, associated scripts, applications defined within or external to the DBMS that access the database, and DBMS/user environment files/settings in the System Security Plan.

Record whether they do or do not contain DBMS passwords. If passwords are present, ensure that they are correctly hashed using one-way, salted hashing functions, and that the hashes are protected by host system security.
V-32469 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000172-DB-000075 Rule ID: SV-42806r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000197

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates.

Authentication based on User ID and Password may be used only when it is not possible to employ a PKI certificate, and requires AO approval.

In such cases, passwords need to be protected at all times, and encryption is the standard method for protecting passwords during transmission.

DBMS passwords sent in clear text format across the network are vulnerable to discovery by unauthorized users. Disclosure of passwords may easily lead to unauthorized access to the database.

Checks

Review configuration settings for encrypting passwords in transit across the network. If passwords are not encrypted, this is a finding.

If it is determined that passwords are passed unencrypted at any point along the transmission path between the source and destination, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure encryption for transmission of passwords across the network. If the database does not provide encryption for logon events natively, employ encryption at the OS or network level.

Ensure passwords remain encrypted from source to destination.
V-32475 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000175-DB-000067 Rule ID: SV-42812r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000185

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates.

A certificate’s certification path is the path from the end entity certificate to a trusted root certification authority (CA). Certification path validation is necessary for a relying party to make an informed decision regarding acceptance of an end entity certificate. Certification path validation includes checks such as certificate issuer trust, time validity and revocation status for each certificate in the certification path. Revocation status information for CA and subject certificates in a certification path is commonly provided via certificate revocation lists (CRLs) or online certificate status protocol (OCSP) responses.

Database Management Systems that do not validate certificates by performing RFC 5280-compliant certification path validation are in danger of accepting certificates that are invalid and/or counterfeit. This could allow unauthorized access to the database.

Checks

Review DBMS configuration to verify that certificates being accepted by the DBMS are validated by performing RFC 5280-compliant certification path validation.

If certificates are not being validated by performing RFC 5280-compliant certification path validation, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS to validate certificates by performing RFC 5280-compliant certification path validation.
V-32476 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000176-DB-000068 Rule ID: SV-42813r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000186

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates. PKI certificate-based authentication is performed by requiring the certificate holder to cryptographically prove possession of the corresponding private key.

If the private key is stolen, an attacker can use the private key(s) to impersonate the certificate holder. In cases where the DBMS-stored private keys are used to authenticate the DBMS to the system’s clients, loss of the corresponding private keys would allow an attacker to successfully perform undetected man in the middle attacks against the DBMS system and its clients.

Both the holder of a digital certificate and the issuing authority must take careful measures to protect the corresponding private key. Private keys should always be generated and protected in FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules.

All access to the private key(s) of the DBMS must be restricted to authorized and authenticated users. If unauthorized users have access to one or more of the DBMS's private keys, an attacker could gain access to the key(s) and use them to impersonate the database on the network or otherwise perform unauthorized actions.

Checks

Review DBMS configuration to determine whether appropriate access controls exist to protect the DBMS's private key(s). If the DMBS’s private key(s) are not stored in a FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic module, this is a finding.

If access to the DBMS’s private key(s) is not restricted to authenticated and authorized users, this is a finding.

Fix

Store all DBMS PKI private keys in a FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic module. Ensure access to the DBMS PKI private keys is restricted to only authenticated and authorized users.
V-32478 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000177-DB-000069 Rule ID: SV-42815r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000187

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates. Once a PKI certificate has been validated, it must be mapped to a DBMS user account for the authenticated identity to be meaningful to the DBMS and useful for authorization decisions.

Checks

Review DBMS configuration to verify DBMS user accounts are being mapped directly to unique identifying information within the validated PKI certificate.

If user accounts are not being mapped to authenticated identities, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS to map the authenticated identity directly to the DBMS user account.
V-32479 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000178-DB-000083 Rule ID: SV-42816r34_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000206

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates.

Normally, with PKI authentication, the interaction with the user for authentication will be handled by a software component separate from the DBMS, such as ActivIdentity ActivClient. However, in cases where the DBMS controls the interaction, this requirement applies.

To prevent the compromise of authentication information such as passwords and PINs during the authentication process, the feedback from the system must not provide any information that would allow an unauthorized user to compromise the authentication mechanism.

Obfuscation of user-provided authentication secrets when typed into the system is a method used in addressing this risk.

Displaying asterisks when a user types in a password or a smart card PIN is an example of obscuring feedback of authentication secrets.


This calls for review of applications, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

If all interaction with the user for purposes of authentication is handled by a software component separate from the DBMS, this is not a finding.

If any application, tool or feature associated with the DBMS/database displays any authentication secrets (to include PINs and passwords) during - or after - the authentication process, this is a finding.

Fix

Modify and configure each non-compliant application, tool, or feature associated with the DBMS/database so that it does not display authentication secrets.
V-32480 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000179-DB-000114 Rule ID: SV-42817r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000803

Discussion

Use of weak or not validated cryptographic algorithms undermines the purposes of utilizing encryption and digital signatures to protect data. Weak algorithms can be easily broken and not validated cryptographic modules may not implement algorithms correctly. Unapproved cryptographic modules or algorithms should not be relied on for authentication, confidentiality or integrity. Weak cryptography could allow an attacker to gain access to and modify data stored in the database as well as the administration settings of the DBMS.

Applications, including DBMSs, utilizing cryptography are required to use approved NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules that meet the requirements of applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, standards, and guidance.

The security functions validated as part of FIPS 140-2 for cryptographic modules are described in FIPS 140-2 Annex A.

NSA Type-X (where X=1, 2, 3, 4) products are NSA-certified, hardware-based encryption modules.

Checks

Review DBMS configuration to verify it is using NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules for cryptographic operations.

If NIST FIPS 140-2 validated modules are not being used for all cryptographic operations, this is a finding.

Fix

Utilize NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules for all cryptographic operations.
V-32481 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000180-DB-000115 Rule ID: SV-42818r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000804

Discussion

Non-organizational users include all information system users other than organizational users, which include organizational employees or individuals the organization deems to have equivalent status of employees (e.g., contractors, guest researchers, individuals from allied nations).

Non-organizational users shall be uniquely identified and authenticated for all accesses other than those accesses explicitly identified and documented by the organization when related to the use of anonymous access, such as accessing a web server.

Accordingly, a risk assessment is used in determining the authentication needs of the organization.

Scalability, practicality, and security are simultaneously considered in balancing the need to ensure ease of use for access to federal information and information systems with the need to protect and adequately mitigate risk to organizational operations, organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation.

Checks

Review DBMS settings to determine whether non-organizational users are uniquely identified and authenticated when logging onto the system.

If non-organizational users are not uniquely identified and authenticated, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings to uniquely identify and authenticate all non-organizational users who log onto the system.
V-32514 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000211-DB-000122 Rule ID: SV-42851r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001082

Discussion

Information system management functionality includes functions necessary to administer databases, network components, workstations, or servers and typically requires privileged user access.

The separation of user functionality from information system management functionality is either physical or logical and is accomplished by using different computers, different central processing units, different instances of the operating system, different network addresses, combinations of these methods, or other methods, as appropriate.

An example of this type of separation is observed in web administrative interfaces that use separate authentication methods for users of any other information system resources.

This may include isolating the administrative interface on a different domain and with additional access controls.

If administrative functionality or information regarding DBMS management is presented on an interface available for users, information on DBMS settings may be inadvertently made available to the user.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and vendor documentation to verify that administrative functionality is separate from user functionality.

If administrator and general user functionality are not separated either physically or logically, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS to separate database administration and general user functionality.
V-32523 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000220-DB-000149 Rule ID: SV-42860r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001185

Discussion

Captured sessions can be reused in "replay" attacks. This requirement limits the ability of adversaries to capture and continue to employ previously valid session IDs.

This requirement focuses on communications protection for the DBMS session rather than for the network packet. The intent of this control is to establish grounds for confidence at each end of a communications session in the ongoing identity of the other party and in the validity of the information being transmitted.

Session IDs are tokens generated by DBMSs to uniquely identify a user's (or process's) session. DBMSs will make access decisions and execute logic based on the session ID.

Unique session IDs help to reduce predictability of said identifiers. Unique session IDs address man-in-the-middle attacks, including session hijacking or insertion of false information into a session. If the attacker is unable to identify or guess the session information related to pending application traffic, they will have more difficulty in hijacking the session or otherwise manipulating valid sessions.

When a user logs out, or when any other session termination event occurs, the DBMS must terminate the user session(s) to minimize the potential for sessions to be hijacked.

Checks

Review DBMS settings and vendor documentation to verify user sessions are terminated, and session identifiers invalidated, upon user logout. If they are not, this is a finding.

Review system documentation and organization policy to identify other events that should result in session terminations.

If other session termination events are defined, review DBMS settings to verify occurrences of these events would cause session termination, invalidating the session identifiers.

If occurrences of defined session terminating events do not cause session terminations, invalidating the session identifiers, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings to terminate sessions, invalidating their session identifiers, upon user logout.

Configure DBMS settings to terminate sessions, invalidating their session identifiers, upon the occurrence of any organization- or policy-defined session termination event.
V-32526 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000223-DB-000168 Rule ID: SV-42863r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001664

Discussion

DBMSs utilize sessions and session identifiers to control application behavior and user access. If an attacker can guess the session identifier or can inject or manually insert session information, the session may be compromised.

This requirement focuses on communications protection for the DBMS session rather than for the network packet. The intent of this control is to establish grounds for confidence at each end of a communications session in the ongoing identity of the other party and in the validity of the information being transmitted.

The DBMS must recognize only system-generated session identifiers. If an attacker were able to generate a session with a non-system-generated session identifier and have it recognized by the system, the attacker could gain access to the system without passing through access controls designed to limit database sessions to authorized users.

Checks

Review DBMS settings and vendor documentation to determine whether the DBMS recognizes session identifiers that are not system-generated.

If the DBMS recognizes session identifiers that are not system generated, this is a finding.

Fix

Utilize a DBMS product that only recognizes session identifiers that are system-generated.
V-32528 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000225-DB-000153 Rule ID: SV-42865r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001190

Discussion

Failure to a known state can address safety or security in accordance with the mission/business needs of the organization.

Failure to a known secure state helps prevent a loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability in the event of a failure of the information system or a component of the system.

Failure to a known safe state helps prevent systems from failing to a state that may cause loss of data or unauthorized access to system resources. Systems that fail suddenly and with no incorporated failure state planning may leave the hosting system available but with a reduced security protection capability. Preserving information system state data also facilitates system restart and return to the operational mode of the organization with less disruption of mission/business processes.

Databases must fail to a known consistent state. Transactions must be successfully completed or rolled back.

In general, security mechanisms should be designed so that a failure will follow the same execution path as disallowing the operation. For example, application security methods, such as isAuthorized(), isAuthenticated(), and validate(), should all return false if there is an exception during processing. If security controls can throw exceptions, they must be very clear about exactly what that condition means.

Abort refers to stopping a program or function before it has finished naturally. The term abort refers to both requested and unexpected terminations.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and vendor documentation to verify the DBMS properly handles transactions in the event of a system failure.

If open transactions are not rolled back to a consistent state during system failure, this is a finding.

The consistent state must include a security configuration that is at least as restrictive as before the system failure. If this is not guaranteed, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings so that, in the event of a system failure, the DBMS will roll back open transactions to a consistent state, to include a security configuration that is at least as restrictive as before the system failure.
V-32529 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000226-DB-000147 Rule ID: SV-42866r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001665

Discussion

Failure to a known state can address safety or security in accordance with the mission/business needs of the organization.

Failure to a known secure state helps prevent a loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability in the event of a failure of the information system or a component of the system.

Preserving information system state information helps to facilitate system restart and return to the operational mode of the organization with less disruption of mission/business processes.

Since it is usually not possible to test this capability in a production environment, systems should either be validated in a testing environment or prior to installation. This requirement is usually a function of the design of the IDPS component. Compliance can be verified by acceptance/validation processes or vendor attestation.

Checks

Check DBMS settings to determine whether organization-defined system state information is being preserved in the event of a system failure.

If organization-defined system state information is not being preserved, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings to preserve any organization-defined system state information in the event of a system failure.
V-32534 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000231-DB-000154 Rule ID: SV-42871r34_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001199

Discussion

This control is intended to address the confidentiality and integrity of information at rest in non-mobile devices and covers user information and system information. Information at rest refers to the state of information when it is located on a secondary storage device (e.g., disk drive, tape drive) within an organizational information system. Applications and application users generate information throughout the course of their application use.

User data generated, as well as application-specific configuration data, needs to be protected. Organizations may choose to employ different mechanisms to achieve confidentiality and integrity protections, as appropriate.

If the confidentiality and integrity of application data is not protected, the data will be open to compromise and unauthorized modification.

Checks

If the application owner and Authorizing Official have determined that encryption of data at rest is NOT required, this is not a finding.

Review DBMS settings to determine whether controls exist to protect the confidentiality and integrity of data at rest in the database.

If controls do not exist or are not enabled, this is a finding.

Fix

Apply appropriate controls to protect the confidentiality and integrity of data at rest in the database.
V-32536 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000233-DB-000124 Rule ID: SV-42873r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001084

Discussion

An isolation boundary provides access control and protects the integrity of the hardware, software, and firmware that perform security functions.

Security functions are the hardware, software, and/or firmware of the information system responsible for enforcing the system security policy and supporting the isolation of code and data on which the protection is based.

Developers and implementers can increase the assurance in security functions by employing well-defined security policy models; structured, disciplined, and rigorous hardware and software development techniques; and sound system/security engineering principles.

Database Management Systems typically separate security functionality from non-security functionality via separate databases or schemas. Database objects or code implementing security functionality should not be commingled with objects or code implementing application logic. When security and non-security functionality are commingled, users who have access to non-security functionality may be able to access security functionality.

Checks

Check DBMS settings to determine whether objects or code implementing security functionality are located in a separate security domain, such as a separate database or schema created specifically for security functionality.

If security-related database objects or code are not kept separate, this is a finding.

Fix

Locate security-related database objects and code in a separate database, schema, or other separate security domain from database objects and code implementing application logic.
V-32547 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000243-DB-000128 Rule ID: SV-42884r3_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001090

Discussion

Applications, including DBMSs, must prevent unauthorized and unintended information transfer via shared system resources.

Data used for the development and testing of applications often involves copying data from production. It is important that specific procedures exist for this process, to include the conditions under which such transfer may take place, where the copies may reside, and the rules for ensuring sensitive data are not exposed.

Copies of sensitive data must not be misplaced or left in a temporary location without the proper controls.

Checks

Review the procedures for the refreshing of development/test data from production.

Review any scripts or code that exists for the movement of production data to development/test systems, or to any other location or for any other purpose.

Verify that copies of production data are not left in unprotected locations.

If the code that exists for data movement does not comply with the organization-defined data transfer policy and/or fails to remove any copies of production data from unprotected locations, this is a finding.

Fix

Modify any code used for moving data from production to development/test systems to comply with the organization-defined data transfer policy, and to ensure copies of production data are not left in unsecured locations.
V-32555 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000251-DB-000160 Rule ID: SV-42892r34_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001310

Discussion

Invalid user input occurs when a user inserts data or characters into an application's data entry fields and the application is unprepared to process that data. This results in unanticipated application behavior, potentially leading to an application or information system compromise. Invalid user input is one of the primary methods employed when attempting to compromise an application.

With respect to database management systems, one class of threat is known as SQL Injection, or more generally, code injection. It takes advantage of the dynamic execution capabilities of various programming languages, including dialects of SQL. Potentially, the attacker can gain unauthorized access to data, including security settings, and severely corrupt or destroy the database.

Even when no such hijacking takes place, invalid input that gets recorded in the database, whether accidental or malicious, reduces the reliability and usability of the system. Available protections include data types, referential constraints, uniqueness constraints, range checking, and application-specific logic. Application-specific logic can be implemented within the database in stored procedures and triggers, where appropriate.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Review DBMS code (stored procedures, functions, and triggers), application code, settings, column and field definitions, and constraints to determine whether the database is protected against invalid input.

If code exists that allows invalid data to be acted upon or input into the database, this is a finding.

If column/field definitions do not exist in the database, this is a finding.

If columns/fields do not contain constraints and validity checking where required, this is a finding.

Where a column/field is noted in the system documentation as necessarily free-form, even though its name and context suggest that it should be strongly typed and constrained, the absence of these protections is not a finding.

Where a column/field is clearly identified by name, caption or context as Notes, Comments, Description, Text, etc., the absence of these protections is not a finding.

Fix

Modify database code to properly validate data before it is put into the database or acted upon by the database.

Modify the database to contain column/field definitions for each column/field in the database.

Modify the database to contain constraints and validity checking on database columns and tables that require them for data integrity.
V-32570 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000266-DB-000162 Rule ID: SV-42907r34_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001312

Discussion

Any DBMS or associated application providing too much information in error messages on the screen or printout risks compromising the data and security of the system. The structure and content of error messages need to be carefully considered by the organization and development team.

Databases can inadvertently provide a wealth of information to an attacker through improperly handled error messages. In addition to sensitive business or personal information, database errors can provide host names, IP addresses, user names, and other system information not required for troubleshooting but very useful to someone targeting the system.

Carefully consider the structure/content of error messages. The extent to which information systems are able to identify and handle error conditions is guided by organizational policy and operational requirements. Information that could be exploited by adversaries includes, for example, logon attempts with passwords entered by mistake as the username, mission/business information that can be derived from (if not stated explicitly by) information recorded, and personal information, such as account numbers, social security numbers, and credit card numbers.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and custom database code to verify that error messages do not contain information beyond what is needed for troubleshooting the issue.

If database errors contain PII data, sensitive business data, or information useful for identifying the host system or database structure, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings, custom database code, and associated application code not to divulge sensitive information or information useful for system identification in error messages.
V-32571 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000267-DB-000163 Rule ID: SV-42908r45_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001314

Discussion

If the DBMS provides too much information in error logs and administrative messages to the screen, this could lead to compromise. The structure and content of error messages need to be carefully considered by the organization and development team. The extent to which the information system is able to identify and handle error conditions is guided by organizational policy and operational requirements.

Some default DBMS error messages can contain information that could aid an attacker in, among others things, identifying the database type, host address, or state of the database. Custom errors may contain sensitive customer information.

It is important that detailed error messages be visible only to those who are authorized to view them; that general users receive only generalized acknowledgment that errors have occurred; and that these generalized messages appear only when relevant to the user's task. For example, a message along the lines of, "An error has occurred. Unable to save your changes. If this problem persists, please contact your help desk" would be relevant. A message such as "Warning: your transaction generated a large number of page splits" would likely not be relevant.

Administrative users authorized to review detailed error messages typically are the ISSO, ISSM, SA, and DBA. Other individuals or roles may be specified according to organization-specific needs, with appropriate approval.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Check DBMS settings and custom database code to determine if detailed error messages are ever displayed to unauthorized individuals.

If detailed error messages are displayed to individuals not authorized to view them, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS settings, custom database code, and associated application code not to display detailed error messages to those not authorized to view them.
V-58019 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000328-DB-000301 Rule ID: SV-72449r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002165

Discussion

Discretionary Access Control (DAC) is based on the notion that individual users are "owners" of objects and therefore have discretion over who should be authorized to access the object and in which mode (e.g., read or write). Ownership is usually acquired as a consequence of creating the object or via specified ownership assignment. DAC allows the owner to determine who will have access to objects they control. An example of DAC includes user-controlled table permissions.

When discretionary access control policies are implemented, subjects are not constrained with regard to what actions they can take with information for which they have already been granted access. Thus, subjects that have been granted access to information are not prevented from passing (i.e., the subjects have the discretion to pass) the information to other subjects or objects.

A subject that is constrained in its operation by Mandatory Access Control policies is still able to operate under the less rigorous constraints of this requirement. Thus, while Mandatory Access Control imposes constraints preventing a subject from passing information to another subject operating at a different sensitivity level, this requirement permits the subject to pass the information to any subject at the same sensitivity level.

The policy is bounded by the information system boundary. Once the information is passed outside of the control of the information system, additional means may be required to ensure the constraints remain in effect. While the older, more traditional definitions of discretionary access control require identity-based access control, that limitation is not required for this use of discretionary access control.

Checks

Review system documentation to identify the required discretionary access control (DAC).

Review the security configuration of the database and DBMS. If applicable, review the security configuration of the application(s) using the database.

If the discretionary access control defined in the documentation is not implemented in the security configuration, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement the organization's DAC policy in the security configuration of the database and DBMS, and, if applicable, the security configuration of the application(s) using the database.
V-58021 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000342-DB-000302 Rule ID: SV-72451r12_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002233

Discussion

In certain situations, to provide required functionality, a DBMS needs to execute internal logic (stored procedures, functions, triggers, etc.) and/or external code modules with elevated privileges. However, if the privileges required for execution are at a higher level than the privileges assigned to organizational users invoking the functionality applications/programs, those users are indirectly provided with greater privileges than assigned by organizations.

Privilege elevation must be utilized only where necessary and protected from misuse.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Review the system documentation, database and DBMS security configuration, source code for DBMS internal logic, source code of external modules invoked by the DBMS, and source code of the application(s) using the database.

If elevation of DBMS privileges is utilized but not documented, this is a finding.

If elevation of DBMS privileges is documented, but not implemented as described in the documentation, this is a finding.

If the privilege-elevation logic can be invoked in ways other than intended, or in contexts other than intended, or by subjects/principals other than intended, this is a finding.

Fix

Determine where, when, how, and by what principals/subjects elevated privilege is needed.

Modify the database and DBMS security configuration, DBMS internal logic, external modules invoked by the DBMS, and the application(s) using the database, to ensure privilege elevation is used only as required.
V-58023 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000340-DB-000304 Rule ID: SV-72453r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002235

Discussion

Preventing non-privileged users from executing privileged functions mitigates the risk that unauthorized individuals or processes may gain unnecessary access to information or privileges.

System documentation should include a definition of the functionality considered privileged.

Depending on circumstances, privileged functions can include, for example, establishing accounts, performing system integrity checks, or administering cryptographic key management activities. Non-privileged users are individuals that do not possess appropriate authorizations. Circumventing intrusion detection and prevention mechanisms or malicious code protection mechanisms are examples of privileged functions that require protection from non-privileged users.

A privileged function in the DBMS/database context is any operation that modifies the structure of the database, its built-in logic, or its security settings. This would include all Data Definition Language (DDL) statements and all security-related statements. In an SQL environment, it encompasses, but is not necessarily limited to:
CREATE
ALTER
DROP
GRANT
REVOKE
DENY

There may also be Data Manipulation Language (DML) statements that, subject to context, should be regarded as privileged. Possible examples include:

TRUNCATE TABLE;
DELETE, or
DELETE affecting more than n rows, for some n, or
DELETE without a WHERE clause;

UPDATE or
UPDATE affecting more than n rows, for some n, or
UPDATE without a WHERE clause;

any SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE to an application-defined security table executed by other than a security principal.

Depending on the capabilities of the DBMS and the design of the database and associated applications, the prevention of unauthorized use of privileged functions may be achieved by means of DBMS security features, database triggers, other mechanisms, or a combination of these.

Checks

Review the system documentation to obtain the definition of the database/DBMS functionality considered privileged in the context of the system in question.

Review the DBMS security configuration and/or other means used to protect privileged functionality from unauthorized use.

If the configuration does not protect all of the actions defined as privileged, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS security to protect all privileged functionality.
V-58025 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000295-DB-000305 Rule ID: SV-72455r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002361

Discussion

This addresses the termination of user-initiated logical sessions in contrast to the termination of network connections that are associated with communications sessions (i.e., network disconnect). A logical session (for local, network, and remote access) is initiated whenever a user (or process acting on behalf of a user) accesses an organizational information system. Such user sessions can be terminated (and thus terminate user access) without terminating network sessions.

Session termination ends all processes associated with a user's logical session except those batch processes/jobs that are specifically created by the user (i.e., session owner) to continue after the session is terminated.

Conditions or trigger events requiring automatic session termination can include, for example, organization-defined periods of user inactivity, targeted responses to certain types of incidents, and time-of-day restrictions on information system use.

This capability is typically reserved for specific cases where the system owner, data owner, or organization requires additional assurance.

Checks

Review system documentation to obtain the organization's definition of circumstances requiring automatic session termination. If the documentation explicitly states that such termination is not required or is prohibited, this is not a finding.

If the documentation requires automatic session termination, but the DBMS is not configured accordingly, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS to automatically terminate a user session after organization-defined conditions or trigger events requiring session termination.
V-58035 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000296-DB-000306 Rule ID: SV-72465r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002363

Discussion

If a user cannot explicitly end a DBMS session, the session may remain open and be exploited by an attacker; this is referred to as a zombie session.

Such logout may be explicit or implicit. Examples of explicit are: clicking on a "Log Out" link or button in the application window; clicking the Windows Start button and selecting "Log Out" or "Shut Down." Examples of implicit logout are: closing the application's (main) window; powering off the workstation without invoking the OS shutdown.

Both the explicit and implicit logouts must be detected by the DBMS.

In all cases, the DBMS must ensure that the user's DBMS session and all processes owned by the session are terminated.

This should not, however, interfere with batch processes/jobs initiated by the user during his/her online session: these should be permitted to run to completion.

Checks

Determine, by reviewing DBMS documentation and/or inquiring of the vendor's technical support staff, whether the DBMS satisfies this requirement; and, if it does, determine whether this is inherent, unchangeable behavior, or a configurable feature.

If the DBMS does not satisfy the requirement, this is a permanent finding.

If the behavior is inherent, this is permanently not a finding.

If the behavior is configurable, and the current configuration does not enforce it, this is a finding.

Fix

Where relevant, modify the configuration to allow the user to manually terminate a session initiated by that user.
V-58037 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000311-DB-000308 Rule ID: SV-72467r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002262

Discussion

Without the association of security labels to information, there is no basis for the DBMS to make security-related access-control decisions.

Security labels are abstractions representing the basic properties or characteristics of an entity (e.g., subjects and objects) with respect to safeguarding information.

These labels are typically associated with internal data structures (e.g., tables, rows) within the database and are used to enable the implementation of access control and flow control policies, reflect special dissemination, handling or distribution instructions, or support other aspects of the information security policy.

One example includes marking data as classified or FOUO. These security labels may be assigned manually or during data processing, but, either way, it is imperative these assignments are maintained while the data is in storage. If the security labels are lost when the data is stored, there is the risk of a data compromise.

The mechanism used to support security labeling may be a feature of the DBMS product, a third-party product, or custom application code.

Checks

If security labeling is not required, this is not a finding.

If security labeling requirements have been specified, but the security labeling is not implemented or does not reliably maintain labels on information in storage, this is a finding.

Fix

Enable DBMS features, deploy third-party software, or add custom data structures, data elements and application code, to provide reliable security labeling of information in storage.
V-58039 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000313-DB-000309 Rule ID: SV-72469r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002263

Discussion

Without the association of security labels to information, there is no basis for the DBMS to make security-related access-control decisions.

Security labels are abstractions representing the basic properties or characteristics of an entity (e.g., subjects and objects) with respect to safeguarding information.

These labels are typically associated with internal data structures (e.g., tables, rows) within the database and are used to enable the implementation of access control and flow control policies, reflect special dissemination, handling or distribution instructions, or support other aspects of the information security policy.

One example includes marking data as classified or FOUO. These security labels may be assigned manually or during data processing, but, either way, it is imperative these assignments are maintained while the data is in storage. If the security labels are lost when the data is stored, there is the risk of a data compromise.

The mechanism used to support security labeling may be a feature of the DBMS product, a third-party product, or custom application code.

Checks

If security labeling is not required, this is not a finding.

If security labeling requirements have been specified, but the security labeling is not implemented or does not reliably maintain labels on information in process, this is a finding.

Fix

Enable DBMS features, deploy third-party software, or add custom data structures, data elements and application code, to provide reliable security labeling of information in process.
V-58041 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000314-DB-000310 Rule ID: SV-72471r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002264

Discussion

Without the association of security labels to information, there is no basis for the DBMS to make security-related access-control decisions.

Security labels are abstractions representing the basic properties or characteristics of an entity (e.g., subjects and objects) with respect to safeguarding information.

These labels are typically associated with internal data structures (e.g., tables, rows) within the database and are used to enable the implementation of access control and flow control policies, reflect special dissemination, handling or distribution instructions, or support other aspects of the information security policy.

One example includes marking data as classified or FOUO. These security labels may be assigned manually or during data processing, but, either way, it is imperative these assignments are maintained while the data is in storage. If the security labels are lost when the data is stored, there is the risk of a data compromise.

The mechanism used to support security labeling may be a feature of the DBMS product, a third-party product, or custom application code.

Checks

If security labeling is not required, this is not a finding.

If security labeling requirements have been specified, but the security labeling is not implemented or does not reliably maintain labels on information in transmission, this is a finding.

Fix

Enable DBMS features, deploy third-party software, or add custom data structures, data elements and application code, to provide reliable security labeling of information in transmission.
V-58049 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000356-DB-000314 Rule ID: SV-72479r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001844

Discussion

Without the ability to centrally manage the content captured in the audit records, identification, troubleshooting, and correlation of suspicious behavior would be difficult and could lead to a delayed or incomplete analysis of an ongoing attack.

The content captured in audit records must be managed from a central location (necessitating automation). Centralized management of audit records and logs provides for efficiency in maintenance and management of records, as well as the backup and archiving of those records.

The DBMS may write audit records to database tables, to files in the file system, to other kinds of local repository, or directly to a centralized log management system. Whatever the method used, it must be compatible with off-loading the records to the centralized system.

Checks

Review the system documentation for a description of how audit records are off-loaded and how local audit log space is managed.

If the DBMS audit records are not written directly to or systematically transferred to a centralized log management system, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure and/or deploy software tools to ensure that DBMS audit records are written directly to or systematically transferred to a centralized log management system.
V-58051 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000356-DB-000315 Rule ID: SV-72481r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001844

Discussion

If the configuration of the DBMS's auditing is spread across multiple locations in the database management software, or across multiple commands, only loosely related, it is harder to use and takes longer to reconfigure in response to events.

The DBMS must provide a unified tool for audit configuration.

Checks

Review DBMS vendor documentation.

If the DBMS does not provide a unified tool for audit configuration, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS that provides a unified tool for audit configuration.
V-58053 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000357-DB-000316 Rule ID: SV-72483r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001849

Discussion

In order to ensure sufficient storage capacity for the audit logs, the DBMS must be able to allocate audit record storage capacity. Although another requirement (SRG-APP-000515-DB-000318) mandates that audit data be off-loaded to a centralized log management system, it remains necessary to provide space on the database server to serve as a buffer against outages and capacity limits of the off-loading mechanism.

The task of allocating audit record storage capacity is usually performed during initial installation of the DBMS and is closely associated with the DBA and system administrator roles. The DBA or system administrator will usually coordinate the allocation of physical drive space with the application owner/installer and the application will prompt the installer to provide the capacity information, the physical location of the disk, or both.

In determining the capacity requirements, consider such factors as: total number of users; expected number of concurrent users during busy periods; number and type of events being monitored; types and amounts of data being captured; the frequency/speed with which audit records are off-loaded to the central log management system; and any limitations that exist on the DBMS's ability to reuse the space formerly occupied by off-loaded records.

Checks

Investigate whether there have been any incidents where the DBMS ran out of audit log space since the last time the space was allocated or other corrective measures were taken.

If there have been, this is a finding.

Fix

Allocate sufficient audit file/table space to support peak demand.
V-58055 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000515-DB-000318 Rule ID: SV-72485r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001851

Discussion

Information stored in one location is vulnerable to accidental or incidental deletion or alteration.

Off-loading is a common process in information systems with limited audit storage capacity.

The DBMS may write audit records to database tables, to files in the file system, to other kinds of local repository, or directly to a centralized log management system. Whatever the method used, it must be compatible with off-loading the records to the centralized system.

Checks

Review the system documentation for a description of how audit records are off-loaded.

If the DBMS has a continuous network connection to the centralized log management system, but the DBMS audit records are not written directly to the centralized log management system or transferred in near-real-time, this is a finding.

If the DBMS does not have a continuous network connection to the centralized log management system, and the DBMS audit records are not transferred to the centralized log management system weekly or more often, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS or deploy and configure software tools to transfer audit records to a centralized log management system, continuously and in near-real time where a continuous network connection to the log management system exists, or at least weekly in the absence of such a connection.
V-58057 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000359-DB-000319 Rule ID: SV-72487r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001855

Discussion

Organizations are required to use a central log management system, so, under normal conditions, the audit space allocated to the DBMS on its own server will not be an issue. However, space will still be required on the DBMS server for audit records in transit, and, under abnormal conditions, this could fill up. Since a requirement exists to halt processing upon audit failure, a service outage would result.

If support personnel are not notified immediately upon storage volume utilization reaching 75%, they are unable to plan for storage capacity expansion.

The appropriate support staff include, at a minimum, the ISSO and the DBA/SA.

Checks

Review system configuration.

If appropriate support staff are not notified immediately upon storage volume utilization reaching 75%, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the system to notify appropriate support staff immediately upon storage volume utilization reaching 75%.
V-58059 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000360-DB-000320 Rule ID: SV-72489r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001858

Discussion

It is critical for the appropriate personnel to be aware if a system is at risk of failing to process audit logs as required. Without a real-time alert, security personnel may be unaware of an impending failure of the audit capability, and system operation may be adversely affected.

The appropriate support staff include, at a minimum, the ISSO and the DBA/SA.

Alerts provide organizations with urgent messages. Real-time alerts provide these messages immediately (i.e., the time from event detection to alert occurs in seconds or less).

Checks

Review the system documentation to determine which audit failure events require real-time alerts.

Review the DBMS settings and code. If the real-time alerting that is specified in the documentation is not enabled, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the system to provide an immediate real-time alert to appropriate support staff when a specified audit failure occurs.
V-58061 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000109-DB-000321 Rule ID: SV-72491r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000140

Discussion

It is critical that when the DBMS is at risk of failing to process audit logs as required, it take action to mitigate the failure. Audit processing failures include: software/hardware errors; failures in the audit capturing mechanisms; and audit storage capacity being reached or exceeded. Responses to audit failure depend upon the nature of the failure mode.

When availability is an overriding concern, approved actions in response to an audit failure are as follows:

(i) If the failure was caused by the lack of audit record storage capacity, the DBMS must continue generating audit records, if possible (automatically restarting the audit service if necessary), overwriting the oldest audit records in a first-in-first-out manner.

(ii) If audit records are sent to a centralized collection server and communication with this server is lost or the server fails, the DBMS must queue audit records locally until communication is restored or until the audit records are retrieved manually. Upon restoration of the connection to the centralized collection server, action should be taken to synchronize the local audit data with the collection server.

Systems where availability is paramount will most likely be MAC I; the final determination is the prerogative of the application owner, subject to Authorizing Official concurrence. In any case, sufficient auditing resources must be allocated to avoid audit data loss in all but the most extreme situations.

Checks

If the application owner has determined that the need for system availability does not outweigh the need for a complete audit trail, this is not applicable (NA).

Review DBMS, OS, or third-party logging application settings and/or documentation to determine whether the system is capable of continuing to generate audit records, overwriting the oldest existing records, in the case of an auditing failure. If it is not, this is a finding.

If the system is capable of continuing to generate audit records upon audit failure but is not configured to do so, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of continuing to generate audit records upon audit failure.

Configure the system to continue to generate audit records, overwriting the oldest existing records, in the case of an auditing failure.
V-58063 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000374-DB-000322 Rule ID: SV-72493r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001890

Discussion

If time stamps are not consistently applied and there is no common time reference, it is difficult to perform forensic analysis.

Time stamps generated by the DBMS must include date and time. Time is commonly expressed in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), a modern continuation of Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), or local time with an offset from UTC.

Some DBMS products offer a data type called TIMESTAMP that is not a representation of date and time. Rather, it is a database state counter and does not correspond to calendar and clock time. This requirement does not refer to that meaning of TIMESTAMP.

Checks

Verify that the DBMS generates time stamps, in audit records and application data, that maps to UTC.

If it does not, this is a finding.

Fix

Ensure the DBMS generates time stamps, in audit records and application data, that maps to UTC.
V-58065 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000375-DB-000323 Rule ID: SV-72495r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001889

Discussion

Without sufficient granularity of time stamps, it is not possible to adequately determine the chronological order of records.

Time stamps generated by the DBMS must include date and time. Granularity of time measurements refers to the precision available in time stamp values. Granularity coarser than one second is not sufficient for audit trail purposes. Time stamp values are typically presented with three or more decimal places of seconds; however, the actual granularity may be coarser than the apparent precision. For example, SQL Server's GETDATE()/CURRENT_TMESTAMP values are presented to three decimal places, but the granularity is not one millisecond: it is about 1/300 of a second.

Some DBMS products offer a data type called TIMESTAMP that is not a representation of date and time. Rather, it is a database state counter and does not correspond to calendar and clock time. This requirement does not refer to that meaning of TIMESTAMP.

Checks

Review product documentation to verify that the DBMS can generate time stamps with a granularity of one second or finer. If it cannot, this is a finding.

Review audit log records produced by the DBMS for confirmation that time stamps are recorded to a precision of one second or finer. If not, this is a finding.

Review time stamp values in audit trail columns/fields in application data in the database. If the time stamps are not recorded to a precision of one second or finer, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS that can generate and record time stamps with a granularity of one second or finer.

Configure auditing so that the time stamps are recorded to a precision of one second or finer.

Modify applications and/or column/field definitions so that the time stamps in audit trail columns/fields in application data are recorded to a precision of one second or finer.
V-58067 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000353-DB-000324 Rule ID: SV-72497r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001914

Discussion

If authorized individuals do not have the ability to modify auditing parameters in response to a changing threat environment, the organization may not be able to effectively respond, and important forensic information may be lost.

This requirement enables organizations to extend or limit auditing as necessary to meet organizational requirements. Auditing that is limited to conserve information system resources may be extended to address certain threat situations. In addition, auditing may be limited to a specific set of events to facilitate audit reduction, analysis, and reporting. Organizations can establish time thresholds in which audit actions are changed, for example, near real time, within minutes, or within hours.

Checks

If the DBMS does not provide the ability for users in authorized roles to reconfigure auditing at any time of the user's choosing, this is a finding.

If changes in audit configuration cannot take effect until after a certain time or date, or until some event, such as a server restart, has occurred, and if that time or event does not meet the requirements specified by the application owner, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS that provides the ability for users in authorized roles to reconfigure auditing at any time.

Deploy a DBMS that allows audit configuration changes to take effect within the timeframe required by the application owner and without involving actions or events that the application owner rules unacceptable.
V-58069 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000091-DB-000325 Rule ID: SV-72499r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Under some circumstances, it may be useful to monitor who/what is reading privilege/permission/role information. Therefore, it must be possible to configure auditing to do this. DBMSs typically make such information available through views or functions.

This requirement addresses explicit requests for privilege/permission/role membership information. It does not refer to the implicit retrieval of privileges/permissions/role memberships that the DBMS continually performs to determine if any and every action on the database is permitted.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to retrieve privileges/permissions/role membership.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

If the DBMS is currently required to audit the retrieval of privilege/permission/role membership information, review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the DBMS denies retrieval of privileges/permissions/role memberships.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent retrieval of privileges/permissions/role memberships.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete access to privileges/permissions/role membership.

If currently required, configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies access to privileges/permissions/role membership.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent access to privileges/permissions/role membership.
V-58071 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000495-DB-000326 Rule ID: SV-72501r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized elevation or restriction of privileges could go undetected. Elevated privileges give users access to information and functionality that they should not have; restricted privileges wrongly deny access to authorized users.

In an SQL environment, adding permissions is typically done via the GRANT command, or, in the negative, the DENY command.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are added.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are added.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are added.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are added.
V-58073 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000495-DB-000327 Rule ID: SV-72503r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Failed attempts to change the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized attempts to elevate or restrict privileges could go undetected.

In an SQL environment, adding permissions is typically done via the GRANT command, or, in the negative, the DENY command.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to add privileges/permissions/role membership.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the DBMS denies the addition of privileges/permissions/role membership.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent the addition of privileges/permissions/role membership.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to add privileges/permissions/role membership.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to add privileges/permissions/role membership.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to add privileges/permissions/role membership.
V-58075 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000495-DB-000328 Rule ID: SV-72505r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized elevation or restriction of privileges could go undetected. Elevated privileges give users access to information and functionality that they should not have; restricted privileges wrongly deny access to authorized users.

In an SQL environment, modifying permissions is typically done via the GRANT, REVOKE, and DENY commands.

Checks

If there is no distinction in the DBMS's security architecture between modifying permissions on the one hand, and adding and deleting permissions on the other hand, this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are modified.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are modified.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are modified.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are modified.
V-58077 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000495-DB-000329 Rule ID: SV-72507r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Failed attempts to change the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized attempts to elevate or restrict privileges could go undetected.

In an SQL environment, modifying permissions is typically done via the GRANT, REVOKE, and DENY commands.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

If there is no distinction in the DBMS's security architecture between modifying permissions on the one hand, and adding and deleting permissions on the other hand, this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to modify privileges/permissions/role membership.
V-58079 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000499-DB-000330 Rule ID: SV-72509r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized elevation or restriction of privileges could go undetected. Elevated privileges give users access to information and functionality that they should not have; restricted privileges wrongly deny access to authorized users.

In an SQL environment, deleting permissions is typically done via the REVOKE or DENY command.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are removed, revoked, or denied to any user or role.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when privileges/permissions/role memberships are removed, revoked, or denied to any user or role.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when privileges/permissions/role memberships are removed, revoked, or denied to any user or role.

Configure DBMS audit settings to generate an audit record when privileges/permissions/role memberships are removed, revoked, or denied to any user or role.
V-58081 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000499-DB-000331 Rule ID: SV-72511r2_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Failed attempts to change the permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized attempts to elevate or restrict privileges could go undetected.

In an SQL environment, deleting permissions is typically done via the REVOKE or DENY command.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to remove, revoke, or deny privileges/permissions/role membership to any user or role.
V-58083 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000492-DB-000332 Rule ID: SV-72513r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes to the security configuration must be tracked.

This requirement applies to situations where security data is retrieved or modified via data manipulation operations, as opposed to via specialized security functionality.

In an SQL environment, types of access include, but are not necessarily limited to:
SELECT
INSERT
UPDATE
DELETE
EXECUTE

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to directly view or directly modify the contents of its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are accessed.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.
V-58085 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000492-DB-000333 Rule ID: SV-72515r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes to the security configuration must be tracked.

This requirement applies to situations where security data is retrieved or modified via data manipulation operations, as opposed to via specialized security functionality.

In an SQL environment, types of access include, but are not necessarily limited to:
SELECT
INSERT
UPDATE
DELETE
EXECUTE

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to directly view or directly modify the contents of its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to access security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to access security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to access security object.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete access to security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies access to security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent access to security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions of data, and execution of logic.
V-58087 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000496-DB-000334 Rule ID: SV-72517r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in the database objects (tables, views, procedures, functions) that record and control permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized changes to the security subsystem could go undetected. The database could be severely compromised or rendered inoperative.

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to modify the structure and logic of its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when security objects are modified.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when security objects are modified.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are modified.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions, are modified.
V-58089 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000496-DB-000335 Rule ID: SV-72519r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in the database objects (tables, views, procedures, functions) that record and control permissions, privileges, and roles granted to users and roles must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized changes to the security subsystem could go undetected. The database could be severely compromised or rendered inoperative.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to modify the structure and logic of its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to modify security objects.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to modify security objects.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to modify security objects.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to modify security objects, such as tables, views, procedures, and functions.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to modify security objects, to include reads, creations, modifications, and deletions.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to modify security objects, to include reads, creations, modifications, and deletions.
V-58091 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000501-DB-000336 Rule ID: SV-72521r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

The removal of security objects from the database/DBMS would seriously degrade a system's information assurance posture. If such an event occurs, it must be logged.

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to drop its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when security objects are drop.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when security objects are drop.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when security objects are deleted.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when security objects are deleted.
V-58093 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000501-DB-000337 Rule ID: SV-72523r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

The removal of security objects from the database/DBMS would seriously degrade a system's information assurance posture. If such an action is attempted, it must be logged.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

If the DBMS architecture makes it impossible for any user, even with the highest privileges, to drop its built-in security objects, and if there are no additional, locally-defined security objects in the database(s), this is not a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to drop security objects.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to drop security objects.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to drop security objects.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to delete security objects.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to delete security objects.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to delete security objects.
V-58095 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000494-DB-000344 Rule ID: SV-72525r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when categories of information are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications, and deletions.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when categories of information are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications, and deletions.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when categories of information are accessed.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when categories of information are accessed, to include reads, creations, modifications, and deletions.
V-58097 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000494-DB-000345 Rule ID: SV-72527r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to access categories of information, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to access categories of information, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to access categories of information, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete access to categories of information.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies access to categories of information, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent access to categories of information, such access to include reads, creations, modifications and deletions.
V-58099 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000498-DB-000346 Rule ID: SV-72529r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when categories of information are modified.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when categories of information are modified.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when categories of information are modified.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when categories of information are modified.
V-58101 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000498-DB-000347 Rule ID: SV-72531r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to modify categories of information.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to modify categories of information.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to modify categories of information.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete modification of categories of information.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies modification of categories of information.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent modification of categories of information.
V-58103 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000502-DB-000348 Rule ID: SV-72533r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when categories of information are deleted.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when categories of information are deleted.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when categories of information are deleted.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when categories of information are deleted.
V-58105 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000502-DB-000349 Rule ID: SV-72535r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Changes in categories of information must be tracked. Without an audit trail, unauthorized access to protected data could go undetected.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

For detailed information on categorizing information, refer to FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, and FIPS Publication 200, Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to delete categories of information.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to delete categories of information.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to delete categories of information.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete deletion of categories of information.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies deletion of categories of information.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent deletion of categories of information.
V-58107 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000503-DB-000350 Rule ID: SV-72537r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

For completeness of forensic analysis, it is necessary to track who/what (a user or other principal) logs on to the DBMS.

Checks

Review the DBMS audit settings. If an audit record is not generated each time a user (or other principal) logs on or connects to the DBMS, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to generate an audit record each time a user (or other principal) logs on or connects to the DBMS. Ensure that the audit record contains the time of the event, the user ID, and session identifier.
V-58109 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000503-DB-000351 Rule ID: SV-72539r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

For completeness of forensic analysis, it is necessary to track failed attempts to log on to the DBMS. While positive identification may not be possible in a case of failed authentication, as much information as possible about the incident must be captured.

Checks

Review the DBMS audit settings. If an audit record is not generated each time a user (or other principal) attempts but fails to log on or connect to the DBMS (including attempts where the user ID is invalid/unknown), this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to generate an audit record each time a user (or other principal) attempts but fails to log on or connect to the DBMS.

Include attempts where the user ID is invalid/unknown. Ensure that the audit record contains the time of the event and the user ID that was entered (if any).
V-58111 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000505-DB-000352 Rule ID: SV-72541r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

For completeness of forensic analysis, it is necessary to know how long a user's (or other principal's) connection to the DBMS lasts. This can be achieved by recording disconnections, in addition to logons/connections, in the audit logs.

Disconnection may be initiated by the user or forced by the system (as in a timeout) or result from a system or network failure. To the greatest extent possible, all disconnections must be logged.

Checks

Review the DBMS audit settings. If an audit record is not generated each time a user (or other principal) logs off or disconnects from the DBMS voluntarily, or forced by the system, or because of connection or other failure, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to generate an audit record each time a user (or other principal) logs off or disconnects, whether voluntarily or forced by the system, or because of connection or other failure, from the DBMS.

Ensure that the audit record contains the time of the event, the user ID, and session identifier.
V-58113 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000506-DB-000353 Rule ID: SV-72543r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

For completeness of forensic analysis, it is necessary to track who logs on to the DBMS.

Concurrent connections by the same user from multiple workstations may be valid use of the system; or such connections may be due to improper circumvention of the requirement to use the CAC for authentication; or they may indicate unauthorized account sharing; or they may be because an account has been compromised.

(If the fact of multiple, concurrent logons by a given user can be reliably reconstructed from the log entries for other events (logons/connections; voluntary and involuntary disconnections), then it is not mandatory to create additional log entries specifically for this.)

Checks

Review the DBMS audit settings.

If the fact of multiple, concurrent logons by a given user (or other principal) can be reliably reconstructed from the log entries for other events, then this is not a finding.

If an audit record is not generated each time a user (or other principal) who is already connected to the DBMS logs on or connects to the DBMS from a different workstation, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure DBMS audit settings to generate an audit record each time a user (or other principal) who is already connected to the DBMS logs on or connects to the DBMS from a different workstation.
V-58115 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000504-DB-000354 Rule ID: SV-72545r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Without tracking privileged activity, it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

System documentation should include a definition of the functionality considered privileged.

A privileged function in this context is any operation that modifies the structure of the database, its built-in logic, or its security settings. This would include all Data Definition Language (DDL) statements and all security-related statements. In an SQL environment, it encompasses, but is not necessarily limited to:
CREATE
ALTER
DROP
GRANT
REVOKE
DENY

There may also be Data Manipulation Language (DML) statements that, subject to context, should be regarded as privileged. Possible examples in SQL include:

TRUNCATE TABLE;
DELETE, or
DELETE affecting more than n rows, for some n, or
DELETE without a WHERE clause;

UPDATE or
UPDATE affecting more than n rows, for some n, or
UPDATE without a WHERE clause;

any SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE to an application-defined security table executed by other than a security principal.

Depending on the capabilities of the DBMS and the design of the database and associated applications, audit logging may be achieved by means of DBMS auditing features, database triggers, other mechanisms, or a combination of these.

Note that it is particularly important to audit, and tightly control, any action that weakens the implementation of this requirement itself, since the objective is to have a complete audit trail of all administrative activity.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that authorized administrative users can designate actions as privileged and that audit records can be produced when privileged actions occur.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the system documentation to obtain the definition of the database/DBMS functionality considered privileged in the context of the system in question.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations and/or other means used to implement audit logging.

If audit logging covers at least all of the actions defined as privileged, this is not a finding; otherwise, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when privileged actions occur.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when privileged actions occur.
V-58117 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000504-DB-000355 Rule ID: SV-72547r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Without tracking privileged activity, it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

System documentation should include a definition of the functionality considered privileged.

A privileged function in this context is any operation that modifies the structure of the database, its built-in logic, or its security settings. This would include all Data Definition Language (DDL) statements and all security-related statements. In an SQL environment, it encompasses, but is not necessarily limited to:
CREATE
ALTER
DROP
GRANT
REVOKE
DENY

Note that it is particularly important to audit, and tightly control, any action that weakens the implementation of this requirement itself, since the objective is to have a complete audit trail of all administrative activity.

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that authorized administrative users can designate actions as privileged and that audit records can be produced when the DBMS prevents attempted privileged actions.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the DBMS prevents attempted privileged actions.

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when the DBMS prevents attempted privileged action.

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when the DBMS prevents attempted privileged actions.
V-58119 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000507-DB-000356 Rule ID: SV-72549r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Without tracking all or selected types of access to all or selected objects (tables, views, procedures, functions, etc.), it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident, or identify those responsible for one.

In an SQL environment, types of access include, but are not necessarily limited to:
SELECT
INSERT
UPDATE
DELETE
EXECUTE

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that administrative users can specify database objects for which access must be audited and can specify which kinds of access must be audited.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review system documentation to determine whether the application owner has specified database objects (tables, views, procedures, functions, etc.) for which access must be audited. Review the DBMS/database security and audit settings to verify that the specified access to the specified objects is audited.

If not, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when object access occurs.

Configure audit settings to create audit records when the specified access to the specified objects occurs.
V-58121 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000507-DB-000357 Rule ID: SV-72551r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

Without tracking all or selected types of access to all or selected objects (tables, views, procedures, functions, etc.), it would be difficult to establish, correlate, and investigate the events relating to an incident or identify those responsible for one.

In an SQL environment, types of access include, but are not necessarily limited to:
SELECT
INSERT
UPDATE
DELETE
EXECUTE

To aid in diagnosis, it is necessary to keep track of failed attempts in addition to the successful ones.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that administrative users can specify database objects for which access must be audited, and can specify which kinds of access must be audited.

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review DBMS documentation to determine whether the application owner has specified database objects (tables, views, procedures, functions, etc.) for which access must be audited.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit settings to verify that audit records are created for unsuccessful attempts at the specified access to the specified objects.

If not, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when object access occurs.

Configure audit settings to create audit records when the specified access to the specified objects is unsuccessfully attempted.
V-58123 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000508-DB-000358 Rule ID: SV-72553r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000172

Discussion

In this context, direct access is any query, command, or call to the DBMS that comes from any source other than the application(s) that it supports. Examples would be the command line or a database management utility program. The intent is to capture all activity from administrative and non-standard sources.

Checks

If the DBMS does not generate audit records for all direct access to the database(s), this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS to generate audit records for all direct access to the database(s).
V-58125 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000380-DB-000360 Rule ID: SV-72555r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001813

Discussion

Failure to provide logical access restrictions associated with changes to configuration may have significant effects on the overall security of the system.

When dealing with access restrictions pertaining to change control, it should be noted that any changes to the hardware, software, and/or firmware components of the information system can potentially have significant effects on the overall security of the system.

Accordingly, only qualified and authorized individuals should be allowed to obtain access to system components for the purposes of initiating changes, including upgrades and modifications.

Checks

Review DBMS vendor documentation with respect to its ability to enforce access restrictions associated with changes to the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

If it is not able to do this, this is a finding.

Review the security configuration of the DBMS and database(s).

If it does not enforce access restrictions associated with changes to the configuration of the DBMS or database(s), this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of enforcing access restrictions associated with changes to the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

Configure the DBMS to enforce access restrictions associated with changes to the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).
V-58127 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000381-DB-000361 Rule ID: SV-72557r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001814

Discussion

Without auditing the enforcement of access restrictions against changes to configuration, it would be difficult to identify attempted attacks and an audit trail would not be available for forensic investigation for after-the-fact actions.

Enforcement actions are the methods or mechanisms used to prevent unauthorized changes to configuration settings. Enforcement action methods may be as simple as denying access to a file based on the application of file permissions (access restriction). Audit items may consist of lists of actions blocked by access restrictions or changes identified after the fact.

Checks

Review DBMS documentation to verify that audit records can be produced when the system denies or fails to complete attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

If the DBMS is not capable of this, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when the system denies attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Review the DBMS/database security and audit configurations to verify that audit records are produced when other errors prevent attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

If they are not produced, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of producing the required audit records when it denies or fails to complete attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when it denies attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).

Configure the DBMS to produce audit records when other errors prevent attempts to change the configuration of the DBMS or database(s).
V-58129 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000133-DB-000362 Rule ID: SV-72559r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001499

Discussion

If the DBMS were to allow any user to make changes to database structure or logic, then those changes might be implemented without undergoing the appropriate testing and approvals that are part of a robust change management process.

Accordingly, only qualified and authorized individuals shall be allowed to obtain access to information system components for purposes of initiating changes, including upgrades and modifications.

Unmanaged changes that occur to the database software libraries or configuration can lead to unauthorized or compromised installations.

Checks

Identify the group(s)/role(s) established for DBMS modification.

Obtain the list of users in those group(s)/roles.

Identify the individuals authorized to modify the DBMS.

If unauthorized access to the group(s)/role(s) has been granted, this is a finding.

Fix

Revoke unauthorized memberships in the DBMS modification group(s)/role(s).
V-58131 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000516-DB-000363 Rule ID: SV-72561r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000366

Discussion

Configuring the DBMS to implement organization-wide security implementation guides and security checklists ensures compliance with federal standards and establishes a common security baseline across DoD that reflects the most restrictive security posture consistent with operational requirements.

In addition to this SRG, sources of guidance on security and information assurance exist. These include NSA configuration guides, CTOs, DTMs, and IAVMs. The DBMS must be configured in compliance with guidance from all such relevant sources.

Checks

Review the DBMS documentation and configuration to determine if the DBMS is configured in accordance with DoD security configuration and implementation guidance, including STIGs, NSA configuration guides, CTOs, and DTMs and IAVMs.

If the DBMS is not configured in accordance with security configuration settings, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS in accordance with DoD security configuration and implementation guidance, including STIGs, NSA configuration guides, CTOs, and DTMs and IAVMs.
V-58133 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000383-DB-000364 Rule ID: SV-72563r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001762

Discussion

Use of nonsecure network functions, ports, protocols, and services exposes the system to avoidable threats.

Checks

Review the network functions, ports, protocols, and services supported by the DBMS.

If any protocol is prohibited by the PPSM guidance and is enabled, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of disabling a network function, port, protocol, or service prohibited by the PPSM guidance.

Disable each prohibited network function, port, protocol, or service.
V-58135 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000378-DB-000365 Rule ID: SV-72565r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001812

Discussion

Allowing regular users to install software, without explicit privileges, creates the risk that untested or potentially malicious software will be installed on the system. Explicit privileges (escalated or administrative privileges) provide the regular user with explicit capabilities and control that exceed the rights of a regular user.

DBMS functionality and the nature and requirements of databases will vary; so while users are not permitted to install unapproved software, there may be instances where the organization allows the user to install approved software packages such as from an approved software repository. The requirements for production servers will be more restrictive than those used for development and research.

The DBMS must enforce software installation by users based upon what types of software installations are permitted (e.g., updates and security patches to existing software) and what types of installations are prohibited (e.g., software whose pedigree with regard to being potentially malicious is unknown or suspect) by the organization).

In the case of a database management system, this requirement covers stored procedures, functions, triggers, views, etc.

Checks

If the DBMS supports only software development, experimentation and/or developer-level testing (that is, excluding production systems, integration testing, stress testing, and user acceptance testing), this is not a finding.

Review the DBMS and database security settings with respect to non-administrative users' ability to create, alter, or replace logic modules, to include but not necessarily only stored procedures, functions, triggers, and views.

If any such permissions exist and are not documented and approved, this is a finding.

Fix

Document and obtain approval for any non-administrative users who require the ability to create, alter or replace logic modules.

Implement the approved permissions. Revoke any unapproved permissions.
V-58137 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000400-DB-000367 Rule ID: SV-72567r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002007

Discussion

If cached authentication information is out-of-date, the validity of the authentication information may be questionable.

Checks

Review system settings to determine whether the organization-defined limit for cached authentication is implemented.

If it is not implemented, this is a finding.

Fix

Modify system settings to implement the organization-defined limit on the lifetime of cached authenticators.
V-58147 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000389-DB-000372 Rule ID: SV-72577r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002038

Discussion

The DoD standard for authentication of an interactive user is the presentation of a Common Access Card (CAC) or other physical token bearing a valid, current, DoD-issued Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certificate, coupled with a Personal Identification Number (PIN) to be entered by the user at the beginning of each session and whenever re-authentication is required.

Without re-authentication, users may access resources or perform tasks for which they do not have authorization.

When applications provide the capability to change security roles or escalate the functional capability of the application, it is critical the user re-authenticate.

In addition to the re-authentication requirements associated with session locks, organizations may require re-authentication of individuals and/or devices in other situations, including (but not limited to) the following circumstances:

(i) When authenticators change;
(ii) When roles change;
(iii) When security categories of information systems change;
(iv) When the execution of privileged functions occurs;
(v) After a fixed period of time; or
(vi) Periodically.

Within the DoD, the minimum circumstances requiring re-authentication are privilege escalation and role changes.

Checks

Review the system documentation and the configuration of the DBMS and related applications and tools.

If there are any circumstances under which a user is not required to re-authenticate when changing role or escalating privileges, this is a finding.

If the information owner has identified additional cases where re-authentication is needed, but there are circumstances where the system does not ask the user to re-authenticate when those cases occur, this is a finding.

Fix

Modify and/or configure the DBMS and related applications and tools so that users are always required to re-authenticate when changing role or escalating privileges.

Modify and/or configure the DBMS and related applications and tools so that users are always required to re-authenticate when the specified cases needing reauthorization occur.
V-58149 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000243-DB-000373 Rule ID: SV-72579r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001090

Discussion

The purpose of this control is to prevent information, including encrypted representations of information, produced by the actions of a prior user/role (or the actions of a process acting on behalf of a prior user/role) from being available to any current user/role (or current process) that obtains access to a shared system resource (e.g., registers, main memory, secondary storage) after the resource has been released back to the information system. Control of information in shared resources is also referred to as object reuse.

Checks

Review the DBMS architecture to find out if and how it protects the private resources of one process or user (such as working memory, temporary tables, uncommitted data) from unauthorized access by another user or process.

If it does not effectively do so, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of effectively protecting the private resources of one process or user from unauthorized access by another user or process.

Configure the DBMS to effectively protect the private resources of one process or user from unauthorized access by another user or process.
V-58151 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000243-DB-000374 Rule ID: SV-72581r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001090

Discussion

Applications, including DBMSs, must prevent unauthorized and unintended information transfer via shared system resources. Permitting only DBMS processes and authorized, administrative users to have access to the files where the database resides helps ensure that those files are not shared inappropriately and are not open to backdoor access and manipulation.

Checks

Review the permissions granted to users by the operating system/file system on the database files, database log files and database backup files.

If any user/role who is not an authorized system administrator with a need to know or database administrator with a need to know, or a system account for running DBMS processes, is permitted to read/view any of these files, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the permissions granted by the operating system/file system on the database files, database log files, and database backup files so that only relevant system accounts and authorized system administrators and database administrators with a need to know are permitted to read/view these files.
V-58153 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000441-DB-000378 Rule ID: SV-72583r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002420

Discussion

Information can be either unintentionally or maliciously disclosed or modified during preparation for transmission, including, for example, during aggregation, at protocol transformation points, and during packing/unpacking. These unauthorized disclosures or modifications compromise the confidentiality or integrity of the information.

Use of this requirement will be limited to situations where the data owner has a strict requirement for ensuring data integrity and confidentiality is maintained at every step of the data transfer and handling process.

When transmitting data, the DBMS, associated applications, and infrastructure must leverage transmission protection mechanisms.

Checks

If the data owner does not have a strict requirement for ensuring data integrity and confidentiality is maintained at every step of the data transfer and handling process, this is not a finding.

If the DBMS does not employ protective measures against unauthorized disclosure and modification during preparation for transmission, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement protective measures against unauthorized disclosure and modification during preparation for transmission.
V-58155 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000442-DB-000379 Rule ID: SV-72585r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002422

Discussion

Information can be either unintentionally or maliciously disclosed or modified during reception, including, for example, during aggregation, at protocol transformation points, and during packing/unpacking. These unauthorized disclosures or modifications compromise the confidentiality or integrity of the information.

This requirement applies only to those applications that are either distributed or can allow access to data nonlocally. Use of this requirement will be limited to situations where the data owner has a strict requirement for ensuring data integrity and confidentiality is maintained at every step of the data transfer and handling process.

When receiving data, the DBMS, associated applications, and infrastructure must leverage protection mechanisms.

Checks

If the data owner does not have a strict requirement for ensuring data integrity and confidentiality is maintained at every step of the data transfer and handling process, this is not a finding.

If the DBMS, associated applications, and infrastructure do not employ protective measures against unauthorized disclosure and modification during reception, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement protective measures against unauthorized disclosure and modification during reception.
V-58157 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000416-DB-000380 Rule ID: SV-72587r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002450

Discussion

Use of weak or untested encryption algorithms undermines the purposes of utilizing encryption to protect data. The application must implement cryptographic modules adhering to the higher standards approved by the federal government since this provides assurance they have been tested and validated.

It is the responsibility of the data owner to assess the cryptography requirements in light of applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards.

NSA-approved cryptography for classified networks is hardware based. This requirement addresses the compatibility of a DBMS with the encryption devices.

Checks

If the DBMS is deployed in an unclassified environment, this is not applicable (NA).

If the DBMS is incompatible with the use of NSA-approved cryptography, this is a finding.

If the DBMS is capable but does not use NSA-approved cryptography to protect classified information in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS compatible with the use of NSA-approved cryptography.

Configure the DBMS and related system components to use NSA-approved cryptography to protect classified information in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards.
V-58159 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000514-DB-000381 Rule ID: SV-72589r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002450

Discussion

Use of weak or untested encryption algorithms undermines the purposes of utilizing encryption to protect data. The application must implement cryptographic modules adhering to the higher standards approved by the federal government since this provides assurance they have been tested and validated.

For detailed information, refer to NIST FIPS Publication 140-2, Security Requirements For Cryptographic Modules. Note that the product's cryptographic modules must be validated and certified by NIST as FIPS-compliant.

Checks

If the DBMS does not employ NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules to provision digital signatures, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules to provision digital signatures.
V-58161 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000514-DB-000382 Rule ID: SV-72591r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002450

Discussion

Use of weak or untested encryption algorithms undermines the purposes of utilizing encryption to protect data. The application must implement cryptographic modules adhering to the higher standards approved by the federal government since this provides assurance they have been tested and validated.

For detailed information, refer to NIST FIPS Publication 140-2, Security Requirements For Cryptographic Modules. Note that the product's cryptographic modules must be validated and certified by NIST as FIPS-compliant.

Checks

If the DBMS does not employ NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules to generate and verify cryptographic hashes, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement a NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic module in the DBMS for generation and verification of cryptographic hashes.
V-58163 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000514-DB-000383 Rule ID: SV-72593r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002450

Discussion

Use of weak or untested encryption algorithms undermines the purposes of utilizing encryption to protect data. The application must implement cryptographic modules adhering to the higher standards approved by the federal government since this provides assurance they have been tested and validated.

It is the responsibility of the data owner to assess the cryptography requirements in light of applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards.

For detailed information, refer to NIST FIPS Publication 140-2, Security Requirements For Cryptographic Modules. Note that the product's cryptographic modules must be validated and certified by NIST as FIPS-compliant.

Checks

If the DBMS contains, or is intended to contain, unclassified information requiring confidentiality and cryptographic protection, and does not employ NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules to provide this protection, this is a finding.

Fix

Implement NIST FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules to provide cryptographic protection for the unclassified information that requires it.
V-58165 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000224-DB-000384 Rule ID: SV-72595r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001188

Discussion

One class of man-in-the-middle, or session hijacking, attack involves the adversary guessing at valid session identifiers based on patterns in identifiers already known.

The preferred technique for thwarting guesses at Session IDs is the generation of unique session identifiers using a FIPS 140-2 approved random number generator.

However, it is recognized that available DBMS products do not all implement the preferred technique yet may have other protections against session hijacking. Therefore, other techniques are acceptable, provided they are demonstrated to be effective.

Checks

Review DBMS vendor documentation and system behavior (and if necessary, consult vendor representatives) to determine whether the DBMS can provide demonstrably effective protection against man-in-the-middle attacks that guess at session identifier values.

If not, this is a finding.

Review DBMS settings to determine whether protections against man-in-the-middle attacks that guess at session identifier values are enabled.

If they are not, this is a finding.

Fix

Utilize a DBMS product that can provide demonstrably effective protection against man-in-the-middle attacks that guess at session identifier values.

Configure DBMS settings to enable protections against man-in-the-middle attacks that guess at session identifier values.
V-58167 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000427-DB-000385 Rule ID: SV-72597r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002470

Discussion

Only DoD-approved external PKIs have been evaluated to ensure that they have security controls and identity vetting procedures in place which are sufficient for DoD systems to rely on the identity asserted in the certificate. PKIs lacking sufficient security controls and identity vetting procedures risk being compromised and issuing certificates that enable adversaries to impersonate legitimate users.

The authoritative list of DoD-approved PKIs is published at http://iase.disa.mil/pki-pke/interoperability.

This requirement focuses on communications protection for the DBMS session rather than for the network packet.

Checks

If the DBMS will accept non-DoD approved PKI end-entity certificates, this is a finding.

Fix

Revoke trust in any certificates not issued by a DoD-approved certificate authority. Configure the DBMS to accept only DoD and DoD-approved PKI end-entity certificates.
V-58169 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000428-DB-000386 Rule ID: SV-72599r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002475

Discussion

DBMSs handling data requiring "data at rest" protections must employ cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure and modification of the information at rest. These cryptographic mechanisms may be native to the DBMS or implemented via additional software or operating system/file system settings, as appropriate to the situation.

Selection of a cryptographic mechanism is based on the need to protect the integrity of organizational information. The strength of the mechanism is commensurate with the security category and/or classification of the information. Organizations have the flexibility to either encrypt all information on storage devices (i.e., full disk encryption) or encrypt specific data structures (e.g., files, records, or fields).

The decision whether and what to encrypt rests with the data owner and is also influenced by the physical measures taken to secure the equipment and media on which the information resides.

Checks

Review the system documentation to determine whether the organization has defined the information at rest that is to be protected from modification, which must include, at a minimum, PII and classified information.

If no information is identified as requiring such protection, this is not a finding.

Review the configuration of the DBMS, operating system/file system, and additional software as relevant.

If any of the information defined as requiring cryptographic protection from modification is not encrypted in a manner that provides the required level of protection, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS, operating system/file system, and additional software as relevant, to provide the required level of cryptographic protection.
V-58171 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000429-DB-000387 Rule ID: SV-72601r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002476

Discussion

DBMSs handling data requiring "data at rest" protections must employ cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure and modification of the information at rest. These cryptographic mechanisms may be native to the DBMS or implemented via additional software or operating system/file system settings, as appropriate to the situation.

Selection of a cryptographic mechanism is based on the need to protect the integrity of organizational information. The strength of the mechanism is commensurate with the security category and/or classification of the information. Organizations have the flexibility to either encrypt all information on storage devices (i.e., full disk encryption) or encrypt specific data structures (e.g., files, records, or fields).

The decision whether and what to encrypt rests with the data owner and is also influenced by the physical measures taken to secure the equipment and media on which the information resides.

Checks

Review the system documentation to determine whether the organization has defined the information at rest that is to be protected from disclosure, which must include, at a minimum, PII and classified information.

If the documentation indicates no information requires such protections, this is not a finding.

Review the configuration of the DBMS, operating system/file system, and additional software as relevant.

If any of the information defined as requiring protection is not encrypted in a manner that provides the required level of protection and is not physically secured to the required level, this is a finding.

Fix

Configure the DBMS, operating system/file system, and additional software as relevant, to provide the required level of cryptographic protection for information requiring cryptographic protection against disclosure.

Secure the premises, equipment, and media to provide the required level of physical protection.
V-58173 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000431-DB-000388 Rule ID: SV-72603r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002530

Discussion

Database management systems can maintain separate execution domains for each executing process by assigning each process a separate address space. Each process has a distinct address space so that communication between processes is controlled through the security functions, and one process cannot modify the executing code of another process. Maintaining separate execution domains for executing processes can be achieved, for example, by implementing separate address spaces.

Checks

Review the DBMS architecture to find out if and how it protects the private resources of one process (such as working memory, temporary tables, uncommitted data and, especially, executable code) from unauthorized access or modification by another user or process.

If it is not capable of maintaining a separate execution domain for each executing process, this is a finding.

If the DBMS is capable of maintaining a separate execution domain for each executing process, but is configured not to do so, this is a finding.

Fix

Deploy a DBMS capable of maintaining a separate execution domain for each executing process.

If this is a configurable feature, configure the DBMS to implement it.
V-58175 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000454-DB-000389 Rule ID: SV-72605r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002617

Discussion

Previous versions of DBMS components that are not removed from the information system after updates have been installed may be exploited by adversaries.

Some DBMSs' installation tools may remove older versions of software automatically from the information system. In other cases, manual review and removal will be required. In planning installations and upgrades, organizations must include steps (automated, manual, or both) to identify and remove the outdated modules.

A transition period may be necessary when both the old and the new software are required. This should be taken into account in the planning.

Checks

If software components that have been replaced or made unnecessary are not removed, this is a finding.

Fix

Identify and remove software components that have been replaced or made unnecessary.
V-58177 No Change
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000456-DB-000390 Rule ID: SV-72607r1_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002605

Discussion

Security flaws with software applications, including database management systems, are discovered daily. Vendors are constantly updating and patching their products to address newly discovered security vulnerabilities. Organizations (including any contractor to the organization) are required to promptly install security-relevant software updates (e.g., patches, service packs, and hot fixes). Flaws discovered during security assessments, continuous monitoring, incident response activities, or information system error handling must also be addressed expeditiously.

Organization-defined time periods for updating security-relevant software may vary based on a variety of factors including, for example, the security category of the information system or the criticality of the update (i.e., severity of the vulnerability related to the discovered flaw).

This requirement will apply to software patch management solutions that are used to install patches across the enclave and also to applications themselves that are not part of that patch management solution. For example, many browsers today provide the capability to install their own patch software. Patch criticality, as well as system criticality, will vary. Therefore, the tactical situations regarding the patch management process will also vary. This means that the time period utilized must be a configurable parameter. Time frames for application of security-relevant software updates may be dependent upon the Information Assurance Vulnerability Management (IAVM) process.

The application will be configured to check for and install security-relevant software updates within an identified time period from the availability of the update. The specific time period will be defined by an authoritative source (e.g. IAVM, CTOs, DTMs, and STIGs).

Checks

Obtain evidence that software patches are consistently applied to the DBMS within the time frame defined for each patch.

If such evidence cannot be obtained, or the evidence that is obtained indicates a pattern of noncompliance, this is a finding.

Fix

Institute and adhere to policies and procedures to ensure that patches are consistently applied to the DBMS within the time allowed.
V-58179 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000251-DB-000391 Rule ID: SV-72609r12_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001310

Discussion

With respect to database management systems, one class of threat is known as SQL Injection, or more generally, code injection. It takes advantage of the dynamic execution capabilities of various programming languages, including dialects of SQL. In such cases, the attacker deduces the manner in which SQL statements are being processed, either from inside knowledge or by observing system behavior in response to invalid inputs. When the attacker identifies scenarios where SQL queries are being assembled by application code (which may be within the database or separate from it) and executed dynamically, the attacker is then able to craft input strings that subvert the intent of the query. Potentially, the attacker can gain unauthorized access to data, including security settings, and severely corrupt or destroy the database.

The principal protection against code injection is not to use dynamic execution except where it provides necessary functionality that cannot be utilized otherwise. Use strongly typed data items rather than general-purpose strings as input parameters to task-specific, pre-compiled stored procedures and functions (and triggers).


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Review DBMS source code (stored procedures, functions, triggers) and application source code, to identify cases of dynamic code execution.

If dynamic code execution is employed in circumstances where the objective could practically be satisfied by static execution with strongly typed parameters, this is a finding.

Fix

Where dynamic code execution is employed in circumstances where the objective could practically be satisfied by static execution with strongly typed parameters, modify the code to do so.
V-58181 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000251-DB-000392 Rule ID: SV-72611r12_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-001310

Discussion

With respect to database management systems, one class of threat is known as SQL Injection, or more generally, code injection. It takes advantage of the dynamic execution capabilities of various programming languages, including dialects of SQL. In such cases, the attacker deduces the manner in which SQL statements are being processed, either from inside knowledge or by observing system behavior in response to invalid inputs. When the attacker identifies scenarios where SQL queries are being assembled by application code (which may be within the database or separate from it) and executed dynamically, the attacker is then able to craft input strings that subvert the intent of the query. Potentially, the attacker can gain unauthorized access to data, including security settings, and severely corrupt or destroy the database.

The principal protection against code injection is not to use dynamic execution except where it provides necessary functionality that cannot be utilized otherwise. Use strongly typed data items rather than general-purpose strings as input parameters to task-specific, pre-compiled stored procedures and functions (and triggers).

When dynamic execution is necessary, ways to mitigate the risk include the following, which should be implemented both in the on-screen application and at the database level, in the stored procedures:
-- Allow strings as input only when necessary.
-- Rely on data typing to validate numbers, dates, etc. Do not accept invalid values. If substituting other values for them, think carefully about whether this could be subverted.
-- Limit the size of input strings to what is truly necessary.
-- If single quotes/apostrophes, double quotes, semicolons, equals signs, angle brackets, or square brackets will never be valid as input, reject them.
-- If comment markers will never be valid as input, reject them. In SQL, these are -- or /* */
-- If HTML and XML tags, entities, comments, etc., will never be valid, reject them.
-- If wildcards are present, reject them unless truly necessary. In SQL these are the underscore and the percentage sign, and the word ESCAPE is also a clue that wildcards are in use.
-- If SQL key words, such as SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, CREATE, ALTER, DROP, ESCAPE, UNION, GRANT, REVOKE, DENY, MODIFY will never be valid, reject them. Use case-insensitive comparisons when searching for these. Bear in mind that some of these words, particularly Grant (as a person's name), could also be valid input.
-- If there are range limits on the values that may be entered, enforce those limits.
-- Institute procedures for inspection of programs for correct use of dynamic coding, by a party other than the developer.
-- Conduct rigorous testing of program modules that use dynamic coding, searching for ways to subvert the intended use.
-- Record the inspection and testing in the system documentation.
-- Bear in mind that all this applies not only to screen input, but also to the values in an incoming message to a web service or to a stored procedure called by a software component that has not itself been hardened in these ways. Not only can the caller be subject to such vulnerabilities; it may itself be the attacker.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Review DBMS source code (stored procedures, functions, triggers) and application source code to identify cases of dynamic code execution.

If dynamic code execution is employed without protective measures against code injection, this is a finding.

Fix

Where dynamic code execution is used, modify the code to implement protections against code injection.
V-58183 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000447-DB-000393 Rule ID: SV-72613r12_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-002754

Discussion

A common vulnerability is unplanned behavior when invalid inputs are received. This requirement guards against adverse or unintended system behavior caused by invalid inputs, where information system responses to the invalid input may be disruptive or cause the system to fail into an unsafe state.

The behavior will be derived from the organizational and system requirements and includes, but is not limited to, notification of the appropriate personnel, creating an audit record, and rejecting invalid input.


This calls for inspection of application source code, which will require collaboration with the application developers. It is recognized that in many cases, the database administrator (DBA) is organizationally separate from the application developers, and may have limited, if any, access to source code. Nevertheless, protections of this type are so important to the secure operation of databases that they must not be ignored. At a minimum, the DBA must attempt to obtain assurances from the development organization that this issue has been addressed, and must document what has been discovered.

Checks

Review system documentation to determine how input errors are to be handled in general and if any special handling is defined for specific circumstances.

Review the source code for database program objects (stored procedures, functions, triggers) and application source code to identify how the system responds to invalid input.

If it does not implement the documented behavior, this is a finding.

Fix

Revise and deploy the source code for database program objects (stored procedures, functions, triggers) and application source code, to implement the documented behavior.
V-61407 Updated
Findings ID: SRG-APP-000164-DB-000401 Rule ID: SV-75897r13_rule Severity: medium CCI: CCI-000192

Discussion

OS/enterprise authentication and identification must be used (SQL2RG-APP-00-0023600-DB-000001). Native DBMS authentication may be used only when circumstances make it unavoidable; and must be documented and AO-approved.

The DoD standard for authentication is DoD-approved PKI certificates. Authentication based on User ID and Password may be used only when it is not possible to employ a PKI certificate, and requires AO approval.

In such cases, the DoD standards for password complexity and lifetime must be implemented. DBMS products that can inherit the rules for these from the operating system or access control program (e.g., Microsoft Active Directory) must be configured to do so. For other DBMSs, the rules must be enforced using available configuration parameters or custom code.

Checks

If DBMS authentication, using passwords, is not employed, this is not a finding.

If the DBMS is configured to inherit password complexity and lifetime rules from the operating system or access control program, this is not a finding.

Review the DBMS settings relating to password complexity. Determine whether the following rules are enforced. If any are not, this is a finding.
a. minimum of 15 characters, including at least one of each of the following character sets:
- Upper-case
- Lower-case
- Numerics
- Special characters (e.g., ~ ! @ # $ % ^ & * ( ) _ + = - ' [ ] / ? > <)
b. Minimum number of characters changed from previous password: 50 percent of the minimum password length; that is, eight

Review the DBMS settings relating to password lifetime. Determine whether the following rules are enforced. If any are not, this is a finding.
a. Password lifetime limits
for interactive accounts: Minimum 24 hours, maximum 60 days
b.
Password lifetime limits for non-interactive accounts: Minimum 24 hours, maximum 365 days
c.
Number of password changes before an old one may be reused: Minimum of five

Fix

If the use of passwords is not needed, configure the DBMS to prevent their use if it is capable of this; if it is not so capable, institute policies and procedures to prohibit their use.

If the DBMS can inherit password complexity rules from the operating system or access control program, configure it to do so.

Otherwise, use DBMS configuration parameters and/or custom code to enforce the following rules for passwords:

a. minimum of 15 characters, including at least one of each of the following character sets:
- Upper-case
- Lower-case
- Numerics
- Special characters (e.g., ~ ! @ # $ % ^ & * ( ) _ + = - ' [ ] / ? > <)
b. Minimum number of characters changed from previous password: 50 percent of the minimum password length; that is, eight
c. Password lifetime limits
for interactive accounts: Minimum 24 hours, maximum 60 days
d.
Password lifetime limits for non-interactive accounts: Minimum 24 hours, maximum 365 days
e.
Number of password changes before an old one may be reused: Minimum of five