Advertisement

How to Assess Confidentiality Requirements of Corporate Assets?

  • Gabriela Varona Cervantes
  • Stefan Fenz
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 428)

Abstract

Confidentiality is an important property that organizations relying on information technology have to preserve. The purpose of this work is to provide a structured approach for identifying confidentiality requirements. A key step in the information security risk management process is the determination of the impact level arisen from a loss of confidentiality, integrity or availability. We deal here with impact level determination regarding confidentiality by proposing a method to calculate impact levels based on the different kind of consequences typically arisen from threats. The proposed approach assesses the impact arisen from confidentiality losses on different areas separately and uses a parameterized model that allows organizations to adjust it according to their specific needs. A validation of the developed approach has been conducted in a small software development company.

Keywords

Business Process Business Process Model Impact Level Security Breach Risk Management Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Accorsi, R., Wonnemann, C.: InDico: Information flow analysis of business processes for confidentiality requirements. In: Cuellar, J., Lopez, J., Barthe, G., Pretschner, A. (eds.) STM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6710, pp. 194–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Accorsi, R., Wonnemann, C.: Strong non-leak guarantees for workflow models. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, New York, USA, pp. 308–314 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. Accorsi, R., Lehmann, A.: Automatic information flow analysis of business process models. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7481, pp. 172–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barker W., Stine K., Kissel R., Fahlsing J., Gulick J.: Volume I: Guide for mapping types of information and information systems to security categories. In: NIST Special Publication 800-60 Volume I Revision 1, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930 (2008a) Google Scholar
  5. Barker, W., Stine, K., Kissel, R., Fahlsing, J., Lee, A.: Volume II: Appendices to Guide for Mapping Types of Information and Information Systems to Security Categories” in NIST Special Publication 800-60 Volume II Revision 1, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930 (2008b)Google Scholar
  6. Club for the Security of Information in France (CLUSIF). Method for Harmonized Analysis of Risk (Mehari) (2010)Google Scholar
  7. Department for business innovation and skills, United Kingdom. Information security breaches survey.Technical report (2013)Google Scholar
  8. Fenz, S., Ekelhart, A., Neubauer, T.: Business process-based resource importance determination. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 113–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ISO/IEC, ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Information technology - Security techniques -Information security risk management (2013)Google Scholar
  10. Lehmann, A., Fahland, D.: Information flow security for business process models -just one click away. In: Lohmann, N., Moser, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Demo Track of the 10th International Conference on Business Process Management 2012, Tallinn, Estonia (2012)Google Scholar
  11. Lehmann, A., Lohmann, N.: Modeling wizard for confidential business processes. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2012. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 675–688. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lohmann, N., Verbeek, E., Dijkman, R.: Petri net transformations for business processes – A survey. In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) ToPNaC II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 46–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McCallister, E., Grance, T., Scarfone, K.: Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in NIST Special Publication 800-122, NIST Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems. In: Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 199, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Guide for conducting risk assessment in NIST Special Publication 800-30 Revision 1, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. Spanish Ministry for Public Administrations, Methodology for Information Systems Risk Analysis and Management (MAGERIT) v2 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Varona Cervantes
    • 1
    • 2
  • Stefan Fenz
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University Carlos III of MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Vienna University of Technology and SBA ResearchViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations