F5 NGINX Security Technical Implementation Guide - V1R1

NGINX management includes the ability to control the number of users and user sessions that use an application. Limiting the number of allowed users and sessions per user is helpful in limiting risks related to denial-of-service (DoS) attacks. This requirement can be met via the application or by using information system session control provided by a web server with specialized session management capabilities. If it has been specified that this requirement will be handled by the application, the capability to limit the maximum number of concurrent single user sessions must be designed and built into the application. This requirement addresses concurrent sessions for information system accounts and does not address concurrent sessions by single users via multiple system accounts. The maximum number of concurrent sessions should be defined based upon mission needs and the operational environment for each system.

To mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to sensitive information by entities that have been issued certificates by DOD-approved PKIs, all DOD systems (e.g., networks, web servers, and web portals) must be properly configured to incorporate access control methods that do not rely solely on the possession of a certificate for access. 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 (e.g., authentication servers) and other applications that perform information and system access control functions.

A mechanism to detect and prevent unauthorized communication flow must be configured or provided as part of the system design. If information flow is not enforced based on approved authorizations, the system may become compromised. Information flow control regulates where information is allowed to travel within a system and between interconnected systems. The flow of all system information must be monitored and controlled so it does not introduce any unacceptable risk to the systems or data. Application-specific examples of enforcement occur in systems that employ rule sets or establish configuration settings that restrict information system services, or message-filtering capability based on message content (e.g., implementing key word searches or using document characteristics). Applications providing information flow control must be able to enforce approved authorizations for controlling the flow of information within the system in accordance with applicable policy.

Display of the DOD-approved use notification before granting access to the application ensures privacy and security notification verbiage used is consistent with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, standards, and guidance. System use notifications are required only for access via logon interfaces with human users and are not required when such human interfaces do not exist. The banner must be formatted in accordance with DTM-08-060. Use the following verbiage for applications that can accommodate banners of 1300 characters: "You are accessing a U.S. Government (USG) Information System (IS) that is provided for USG-authorized use only. By using this IS (which includes any device attached to this IS), you consent to the following conditions: -The USG routinely intercepts and monitors communications on this IS for purposes including, but not limited to, penetration testing, COMSEC monitoring, network operations and defense, personnel misconduct (PM), law enforcement (LE), and counterintelligence (CI) investigations. -At any time, the USG may inspect and seize data stored on this IS. -Communications using, or data stored on, this IS are not private, are subject to routine monitoring, interception, and search, and may be disclosed or used for any USG-authorized purpose. -This IS includes security measures (e.g., authentication and access controls) to protect USG interests--not for your personal benefit or privacy. -Notwithstanding the above, using this IS does not constitute consent to PM, LE or CI investigative searching or monitoring of the content of privileged communications, or work product, related to personal representation or services by attorneys, psychotherapists, or clergy, and their assistants. Such communications and work product are private and confidential. See User Agreement for details." Use the following verbiage for operating systems that have severe limitations on the number of characters that can be displayed in the banner: "I've read & consent to terms in IS user agreem't." Satisfies: SRG-APP-000068, SRG-APP-000069, SRG-APP-000070

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 application (e.g., process, module). Certain 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 can generating audit records. DOD has defined the list of events for which NGINX 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. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000089, SRG-APP-000080, SRG-APP-000091, SRG-APP-000095, SRG-APP-000096, SRG-APP-000097, SRG-APP-000098, SRG-APP-000099, SRG-APP-000100, SRG-APP-000374, SRG-APP-000375, SRG-APP-000492, SRG-APP-000493, SRG-APP-000494, SRG-APP-000495, SRG-APP-000496, SRG-APP-000497, SRG-APP-000498, SRG-APP-000499, SRG-APP-000500, SRG-APP-000501, SRG-APP-000502, SRG-APP-000507

Without the capability to restrict which roles and individuals can select which events are audited, unauthorized personnel may be able to prevent the auditing of critical events. Misconfigured audits may 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. 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 can generating audit records.

Decisions regarding the employment of mobile code within organizational information systems are based on the potential for the code to cause damage to the system if used maliciously. Mobile code is defined as software modules obtained from remote systems, transferred across a network, and then downloaded and executed on a local system without explicit installation or execution by the recipient. Actions enforced before executing mobile code include prompting users prior to opening email attachments and disabling automatic execution. Usage restrictions and implementation guidance apply to both the selection and using the mobile code installed, downloaded, or executed on all endpoints (e.g., servers, workstations, and smart phones). This requirement applies to applications that execute, evaluate, or otherwise process mobile code (e.g., web applications, browsers, and antivirus applications).

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 their 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, and copy access. This requirement can be achieved through multiple methods, which will depend upon system architecture and design. Commonly employed methods for protecting audit information include least privilege permissions as well as restricting the location and number of log file repositories. Additionally, applications with user interfaces to audit records must 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 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. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000118, SRG-APP-000119, SRG-APP-000120, SRG-APP-000121, SRG-APP-000122, SRG-APP-000123, SRG-APP-000267

Authenticity protection provides protection against man-in-the-middle attacks/session hijacking and the insertion of false information into sessions. Application communication sessions are protected using transport encryption protocols, such as TLS. TLS provides web applications with a means to be able to authenticate user sessions and encrypt application traffic. Session authentication can be single (one-way) or mutual (two-way) in nature. Single authentication authenticates the server for the client, whereas mutual authentication provides a means for both the client and the server to authenticate each other. This requirement applies to applications that use communications sessions. This includes, but is not limited to, web-based applications and service-oriented architectures (SOA). This requirement addresses communications protection at the application session, versus the network packet, and establishes grounds for confidence at both ends of communications sessions in ongoing identities of other parties and in the validity of information transmitted. Depending on the required degree of confidentiality and integrity, web services/SOA will require using TLS mutual authentication (two-way/bidirectional). Satisfies: SRG-APP-000142, SRG-APP-000141, SRG-APP-000383, SRG-APP-000645

A replay attack may enable an unauthorized user to gain access to the application. Authentication sessions between the authenticator and the application validating the user credentials must not be vulnerable to a replay attack. Anti-replay is a cryptographically based mechanism; thus, it must use FIPS-approved algorithms. An authentication process resists replay attacks if it is impractical to achieve a successful authentication by recording and replaying a previous authentication message. Note that the anti-replay service is implicit when data contains monotonically increasing sequence numbers and data integrity is ensured. Using DOD PKI is inherently compliant with this requirement for user and device access. Using Transport Layer Security (TLS), including application protocols such as HTTPS and DNSSEC, is also compliant. Configure the information system to use the hash message authentication code (HMAC) algorithm for authentication services to Kerberos, SSH, web management tool, and any other access method.

Without path validation, an informed trust decision by the relying party cannot be made when presented with any certificate not already explicitly trusted. To meet this requirement, the information system must create trusted channels between itself and remote trusted authorized IT product (e.g., syslog server) entities that protect the confidentiality and integrity of communications. The information system must create trusted paths between itself and remote administrators and users that protect the confidentiality and integrity of communications. A trust anchor is an authoritative entity represented via a public key and associated data. It is most often used in the context of public key infrastructures, X.509 digital certificates, and DNSSEC. However, applications that do not use a trusted path are not approved for nonlocal and remote management of DOD information systems. Use of SSHv2 to establish a trusted channel is approved. Use of FTP, TELNET, HTTP, and SNMPV1 is not approved since they violate the trusted channel rule set. Use of web management tools that are not validated by common criteria may also violate trusted channel rule set. When there is a chain of trust, usually the top entity to be trusted becomes the trust anchor; it can be, for example, a Certification Authority (CA). A certification path starts with the subject certificate and proceeds through a number of intermediate certificates up to a trusted root certificate, typically issued by a trusted CA. This requirement verifies that a certification path to an accepted trust anchor is used for certificate validation and that the path includes status information. Path validation is necessary for a relying party to make an informed trust decision when presented with any certificate not already explicitly trusted. Status information for certification paths includes certificate revocation lists or online certificate status protocol responses. Validation of the certificate status information is out of scope for this requirement. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000175, SRG-APP-000401

If the private key is discovered, an attacker can use the key to authenticate as an authorized user and gain access to the network infrastructure. The cornerstone of the PKI is the private key used to encrypt or digitally sign information. If the private key is stolen, this will lead to the compromise of the authentication and nonrepudiation gained through PKI because the attacker can use the private key to digitally sign documents and pretend to be the authorized user. Both the holders of a digital certificate and the issuing authority must protect the computers, storage devices, or whatever they use to store private keys.

Decisions regarding the employment of mobile code within applications are based on the potential for the code to cause damage to the system if used maliciously. Mobile code is defined as software modules obtained from remote systems, transferred across a network, and then downloaded and executed on a local system without explicit installation or execution by the recipient. DOD has identified prohibited mobile code in DODI 8552.01 as: all Category 1X mobile code, unsigned Category 1A mobile code, Category 2 mobile code that violates usage requirements, all Emerging Technologies mobile code (all mobile code technologies, systems, platforms, or languages whose capabilities and threat level have not yet undergone a risk assessment and been assigned to a risk category), and all mobile code that downloads via an email body or email attachment that executes automatically when the user opens the email body or attachment. Usage restrictions and implementation guidance apply to both the selection and use of mobile code installed, downloaded, or executed on all endpoints (e.g., servers, workstations, and smart phones). This requirement applies to applications that execute, evaluate, or otherwise process mobile code (e.g., web applications, browsers, and antivirus applications). Satisfies: SRG-APP-000206, SRG-APP-000207, SRG-APP-000209, SRG-APP-000210

DoS is a condition in which a resource is not available for legitimate users. When this occurs, the organization either cannot accomplish its mission or must operate at degraded capacity. Individuals of concern can include hostile insiders or external adversaries that have successfully breached the information system and are using the system as a platform to launch cyberattacks on third parties. Applications and application developers must take the steps needed to ensure users cannot use an authorized application to launch DoS attacks against other systems and networks. For example, applications may include mechanisms that throttle network traffic so users are not able to generate unlimited network traffic via the application. Limiting system resources allocated to any user to a bare minimum may also reduce the ability of users to launch some DoS attacks. The methods employed to counter this risk will be dependent upon the application layer methods that can be used to exploit it.

Any application providing too much information in error messages risks compromising the data and security of the application and system. The structure and content of error messages must be carefully considered by the organization and development team. Organizations 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, erroneous logon attempts with passwords entered by mistake such 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.

Failure to provide logical access restrictions associated with changes to application configuration may have significant effects on the overall security of the system. When dealing with access restrictions pertaining to change control, it must be noted that 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. Accordingly, only qualified and authorized individuals must be allowed to obtain access to application components for the purposes of initiating changes, including upgrades and modifications. Logical access restrictions include, for example, controls that restrict access to workflow automation, media libraries, abstract layers (e.g., changes implemented into third-party interfaces rather than directly into information systems), and change windows (e.g., changes occur only during specified times, making unauthorized changes easy to discover). Satisfies: SRG-APP-000380, SRG-APP-000381

Using an allowlist provides a configuration management method for allowing the execution of only authorized software. Using only authorized software decreases risk by limiting the number of potential vulnerabilities. The organization must identify authorized software programs and permit execution of authorized software. The process used to identify software programs that are authorized to execute on organizational information systems is commonly referred to as allowlisting. Verification of allowlisted software can occur either prior to execution or at system startup. This requirement applies to configuration management applications or similar types of applications designed to manage system processes and configurations (e.g., ESS and software wrappers). Satisfies: SRG-APP-000386, SRG-APP-000384

Without reauthentication, 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 reauthenticate. In addition to the reauthentication requirements associated with session locks, organizations may require reauthentication 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 reauthentication are privilege escalation and role changes.

Using PIV credentials facilitates standardization and reduces the risk of unauthorized access. DOD has mandated using the CAC to support identity management and personal authentication for systems covered under HSPD 12, as well as a primary component of layered protection for national security systems. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000391, SRG-APP-000392, SRG-APP-000402, SRG-APP-000403

If cached authentication information is out of date, the validity of the authentication information may be questionable.

If security attributes are not associated with the information being transmitted between components, then access control policies and information flows that depend on these security attributes will not function and unauthorized access may result. Security attributes are values associated with data content/structure and source/destination objects. These attributes are bound to the user and data objects and may include information about the data's purpose, creator, origin, access restrictions, access permissions, or classification. Specific security attributes used depend on the application or technology context. However, these attributes are used in information systems to implement security policy for access control and flow control for users, data, and traffic. Security attributes may be explicitly or implicitly associated with the information contained within the information system. This requirement applies to those applications that transmit or receive data between components. Information system components include, for example, mainframes, workstations, servers (e.g., database, email, authentication, web, proxy, file, domain name), input/output devices (e.g., scanners, copiers, printers), network components (e.g., firewalls, routers, gateways, voice and data switches, process controllers, wireless access points, network appliances, sensors), operating systems, virtual machines, middleware, and applications.

Untrusted Certificate Authorities (CA) can issue certificates, but they may be issued by organizations or individuals that seek to compromise DOD systems or by organizations with insufficient security controls. If the CA used for verifying the certificate is not a DOD-approved CA, trust of this CA has not been established. The DOD will only accept PKI certificates obtained from a DOD-approved internal or external certificate authority. Reliance on CAs for the establishment of secure sessions includes, for example, using TLS certificates. This requirement focuses on communications protection for the application session rather than for the network packet. This requirement applies to applications that use communications sessions. This includes, but is not limited to, web-based applications and service-oriented architectures (SOAs). Satisfies: SRG-APP-000427, SRG-APP-000177, SRG-APP-000910

DoS is a condition when a resource is not available for legitimate users. When this occurs, the organization either cannot accomplish its mission or must operate at degraded capacity. This requirement addresses the configuration of applications to mitigate the impact of DoS attacks that have occurred or are ongoing on application availability. For each application, known and potential DoS attacks must be identified and solutions for each type implemented. A variety of technologies exist to limit or, in some cases, eliminate the effects of DoS attacks (e.g., limiting processes or restricting the number of sessions the application opens at one time). Employing increased capacity and bandwidth, combined with service redundancy, may reduce the susceptibility to some DoS attacks. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000435, SRG-APP-000247

Without protection of the transmitted information, confidentiality and integrity may be compromised since unprotected communications can be intercepted and either read or altered. 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 transmitting data, applications need to leverage transmission protection mechanisms, such as TLS, TLS VPNs, or IPsec. Communication paths outside the physical protection of a controlled boundary are exposed to the possibility of interception and modification. Protecting the confidentiality and integrity of organizational information can be accomplished by physical means (e.g., employing physical distribution systems) or by logical means (e.g., employing cryptographic techniques). If physical means of protection are employed, then logical means (cryptography) do not have to be employed, and vice versa. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000439, SRG-APP-000156, SRG-APP-000219, SRG-APP-000231, SRG-APP-000395, SRG-APP-000440, SRG-APP-000441, SRG-APP-000442, SRG-APP-000514, SRG-APP-000555, SRG-APP-000620

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 OCSP responses. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000605, SRG-APP-000875

FIPS 140-2/140-3 precludes using invalidated cryptography for the cryptographic protection of sensitive or valuable data within federal systems. Unvalidated cryptography is viewed by NIST as providing no protection to the information or data. In effect, the data would be considered unprotected plaintext. If the agency specifies that the information or data be cryptographically protected, then FIPS 140-2/140-3 is applicable. In essence, if cryptography is required, it must be validated. Cryptographic modules that have been approved for classified use may be used in lieu of modules that have been validated against the FIPS 140-2/140-3 standard. The cryptographic module used must have at least one validated digital signature function. This validated hash algorithm must be used to generate digital signatures for all cryptographic security function within the product being evaluated. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000630, SRG-APP-000635

Password-based authentication applies to passwords regardless of whether they are used in single-factor or multifactor authentication. Long passwords or passphrases are preferable over shorter passwords. Enforced composition rules provide marginal security benefits while decreasing usability. However, organizations may choose to establish certain rules for password generation (e.g., minimum character length for long passwords) under certain circumstances and can enforce this requirement in IA-5(1)(h). Account recovery can occur, for example, in situations when a password is forgotten. Cryptographically protected passwords include salted one-way cryptographic hashes of passwords. The list of commonly used, compromised, or expected passwords includes passwords obtained from previous breach corpuses, dictionary words, and repetitive or sequential characters. The list includes context-specific words, such as the name of the service, username, and derivatives thereof.

Nonlocal maintenance and diagnostic activities are conducted by individuals who communicate through either an external or internal network. Communications paths can be logically separated using encryption. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000880, SRG-APP-000039

Identity assertions and access tokens are typically digitally signed. The private keys used to sign these assertions and tokens are protected commensurate with the impact of the system and information resources that can be accessed. Satisfies: SRG-APP-000965, SRG-APP-000970

An access token is a piece of data that represents the authorization granted to a user or NPE to access specific systems or information resources. Access tokens enable controlled access to services and resources. Properly managing the lifecycle of access tokens, including their issuance, validation, and revocation, is crucial to maintaining confidentiality of data and systems. Restricting token validity to a specific audience, e.g., an application or security domain, and restricting token validity lifetimes are important practices. Access tokens are revoked or invalidated if they are compromised, lost, or are no longer needed to mitigate the risks associated with stolen or misused tokens. Satisfies: SRG-APP-001020, SRG-APP-001025