InfoSec Midterm Studyguide

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
Card Sorting

1/57

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

58 Terms

1
New cards
Bell-LaPadula Model
Focuses on confidentiality; no read up, no write down.
2
New cards
Biba's Model

Integrity through MAC; no write up and no read down

3
New cards
Clark-Wilson Model
Designed for Businesses to protect Integrity at all levels ("Well formed" Separation of duties and transactions)
4
New cards
Chinese Wall Model
Model designed to avoid conflicts of interest
5
New cards
RBAC Model
Bases controls on Job functions
6
New cards
Confidentiality
John copies Marys homework
7
New cards
Integrity
Gina Forges Rogers signature
8
New cards
Availability
Rhonda registers the domain name \Cocacola.com" and refuses to the soft drink company buy or use that domain name.
9
New cards
TLP:RED
For the eyes and ears of individual recipients only, no further disclosure
10
New cards
TLP:AMBER
Limited disclosure, recipients can only spread this on a need-to-know basis within their organization and its clients
11
New cards
TLP:AMBER+STRICT
Restricts sharing to organization only
12
New cards
TLP:GREEN
Limited disclosure, recipients can spread this within their community
13
New cards
TLP:CLEAR
Recipients can spread this to the world, there is no limit on disclosure
14
New cards
Community
a group who share common goals, practices, and informal trust relationships
15
New cards
Organization
A group who share a common affiliation by formal membership and are bound by common policies.
16
New cards
Clients
people or entities that receive cybersecurity services from an organization.
17
New cards
Govern (GV)
The organization's cybersecurity risk management strategy, expectations, and policy are established, communicated, and monitored
18
New cards
Identify(ID)
The organizations current cybersecurity risks are understood
19
New cards
Protect(PR)
Safeguards to manage the organization's cybersecurity risks are used
20
New cards
Detect(DE)
Possible cybersecurity attacks and compromises are found and analyzed
21
New cards
Respond(RS)
Actions regarding a detected cybersecurity incident are taken
22
New cards
Recover(RC)
Assets and operations affected by a cybersecurity incident are restored.
23
New cards
CSF Functions are represented as a wheel because all of the functions relate to one another
True
24
New cards
The CSF provides a basis for improved communication regarding cybersecurity expectations, planning, and resources.
True
25
New cards
Cybersecurity risk management is not essential for addressing privacy risks related to the loss of the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of individuals' data
False
26
New cards
CSF Core
A taxonomy of high-level cybersecurity outcomes that can help any organization manage its cybersecurity risks. Its components are a hierarchy of Functions, Categories, and Subcategories that detail each outcome.
27
New cards
CSF Function
The highest level of organization for cybersecurity outcomes. There are six CSF Functions: Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover
28
New cards
CSF Tier
A characterization of the rigor of an organization's cybersecurity risk governance and management practices.
29
New cards
One-Way
The original data could not be reconstructed from the hash
30
New cards
Diffusion
any variation in the input data should result in changing at least half of the output hash.
31
New cards
Determinism
hashing a given input will always produce the same digest.
32
New cards
Collision resistance
getting the same digest from two different input data should be extremely hard.
33
New cards
Non-predictable
the hash value could not be predicted.
34
New cards
Data Encryption Standard (DES)
One of the earliest symmetric encryption algorithms. It is no longer considered secure and should be avoided.
35
New cards
Triple DES
Performs faster in hardware than software. Although better than DES, it is not the strongest symmetric encryption algorithm
36
New cards
Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
One of the most popular symmetric encryption algorithms today. There are no known attacks thus, it is often the recommended symmetric encryption algorithm to use
37
New cards

In Asymmetric encryption; if the private key encrypts the data, only the public key can decrypt it. If the public key encrypts the data, only the private key can decrypt it.

38
New cards
RSA is an acronym for its inventors Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman.
True
39
New cards
A digital signature can verify the sender's identity, prevent the sender from denying that they sent the message (known as non-repudiation), and prove the integrity of the message.
True
40
New cards
Digital Signatures leverage the mathematical relationship between symmetric keys
False
41
New cards
Diffie Hellman (DH) is a popular symmetric encryption algorithm that allows two parties that have no prior knowledge of each other to agree on a shared secret over an insecure channel.
False
42
New cards
A computer system without integrity can provide confidentiality
False
43
New cards
A computer system without confidentiality can provide integrity
False
44
New cards

A01:2021 – Broken Access Control

moves up from the fifth position; 94% of applications were tested for some form of broken access control. The 34 Common Weakness Enumerations (CWEs) mapped to Broken Access Control had more occurrences in applications than any other category

45
New cards

A02:2021 – Cryptographic Failures

shifts up one position to #2, previously known as Sensitive Data Exposure, which was broad symptom rather than a root cause. The renewed focus here is on failures related to cryptography which often leads to sensitive data exposure or system compromise.

46
New cards

A03:2021-Injection

slides down to the third position. 94% of the applications were tested for some form of injection, and the 33 CWEs mapped into this category have the second most occurrences in applications. Cross-site Scripting is now part of this category in this edition.

47
New cards

A04:2021 – Insecure Design

is a new category for 2021, with a focus on risks related to design flaws. If we genuinely want to “move left” as an industry, it calls for more use of threat modeling, secure design patterns and principles, and reference architectures.

48
New cards

A06:2021-Vulnerable and Outdated Components

was previously titled Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities and is #2 in the Top 10 community survey, but also had enough data to make the Top 10 via data analysis. This category moves up from #9 in 2017 and is a known issue that we struggle to test and assess risk. It is the only category not to have any Common Vulnerability and Exposures (CVEs) mapped to the included CWEs, so a default exploit and impact weights of 5.0 are factored into their scores.

49
New cards

A07:2021-Identification and Authentication Failures

was previously Broken Authentication and is sliding down from the second position, and now includes CWEs that are more related to identification failures. This category is still an integral part of the Top 10, but the increased availability of standardized frameworks seems to be helping

50
New cards

A08:2021-Software and Data Integrity Failures i

is a new category for 2021, focusing on making assumptions related to software updates, critical data, and CI/CD pipelines without verifying integrity. One of the highest weighted impacts from Common Vulnerability and Exposures/Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVE/CVSS) data mapped to the 10 CWEs in this category. Insecure Deserialization from 2017 is now a part of this larger category.

51
New cards

A09:2021-Security Logging and Monitoring Failures

was previously Insufficient Logging & Monitoring and is added from the industry survey (#3), moving up from #10 previously. This category is expanded to include more types of failures, is challenging to test for, and isn’t well represented in the CVE/CVSS data. However, failures in this category can directly impact visibility, incident alerting, and forensics.

52
New cards

A10:2021-Server-Side Request Forgery

is added from the Top 10 community survey (#1). The data shows a relatively low incidence rate with above average testing coverage, along with above-average ratings for Exploit and Impact potential. This category represents the scenario where the security community members are telling us this is important, even though it’s not illustrated in the data at this time.

53
New cards

HTTP

Port 80

54
New cards

HTTPS

Port 443

55
New cards

FTP

Ports 20 and 21

56
New cards

SSH

Port 22

57
New cards

DNS

Port 53

58
New cards

A 05:2021-Security Misconfiguration

moves up from #6 in the previous edition; 90% of applications were tested for some form of misconfiguration. With more shifts into highly configurable software, it’s not surprising to see this category move up. The former category for XML External Entities (XXE) is now part of this category