Snyder and Stiennon Debate NAC; ANA Makes Guest Appearance

A recent Network World article highlights a lengthy debate between Joel Snyder and Richard Stiennon on the merits of NAC. It is a good read overall and ANA even makes a brief appearance thanks to a mention by Joel (Thanks Joel!). Here’s the relevant exchange:

Joel_Snyder: I’ll jump in here too. Sean Convery just wrote a paper on NAC. (He doesn’t want to call it NAC, he calls it Authenticated Network Architecture — ANA). Anyway, the point he makes is that you don’t need to have super fine-grained ACLs to get a huge reduction in risk.

Richard_Stiennon: *My* point would be that you NEED to get to fine-grained access control to secure your enterprise.

Joel_Snyder: Fine-grained is a spectrum. Aren’t you the guy who just advocated VLANs? I’m saying that if you have coarse control, even go/no-go, that’s a reduction in risk.

Richard_Stiennon: We agree.

Joel brings out one of the central novel points of the paper. Here’s the relevant text (from section 7.3, page 14):

Organization architects that appreciate the capabilities that ANA provides often adopt a design that has many user roles. Larger organizations might have hundreds or thousands of groups in their user directory, and the natural conclusion is to define a network-access profile for each group. This approach, however, is very problematic, primarily because of the complexity involved in managing the large number of roles. In addition, the goal of ANA is not to supplant the application security infrastructure you have already built but rather to augment it. Instead of defining hundreds of roles for the network, a smaller number—likely much fewer than a dozen—can provide a huge boost in the sophistication of your network infrastructure, while remaining completely manageable.

If you think of your network now as essentially a network with one role (full access), then the rationale for adding more roles is to define the high-level separation of rights that provides the most significant security improvement at the most operationally insignificant cost. The roles most organizations should consider follow, beginning with the roles that should be created first. It is not important to deploy all the roles at once. Each additional role adds another layer of delineation to the existing definitions already deployed.

Standard access – This role is the default role that every user and device is currently a part of, whether through explicit authentication or implicit network connectivity. As you roll out ANA, you will gradually assign each user to a more specific role, with the goal of minimizing the number of users and devices that are a part of the standard access role.

Guest access – This role is the most significant role you can add, because it enables any sponsored visitor to connect to your network and gain authenticated access to the Internet at large. By providing easy-to-use guest access, you minimize occurrences of users trying to connect to your private internal network where they might have full access. Most individuals are just trying to get their work done, and if you give them an easy way to get to the Internet (and the network of their home location) everyone is better off. Section 11 details the specific design considerations and policy trade-offs of guest access.

Contractor access – Adding this role means that you no longer have to grant every contractor full access to your network. You can send contractors through a contractor VPN portal where they have access only to the specific systems that they need to fulfill their contract. This setup gives your organization the option to treat contractors more like guests and less like employees. You can grant specific access for only the defined duration of the contract. This solution also facilitates remote vendor troubleshooting or technical support in which an external support engineer needs, for example, 30 minutes of access to one specific system on your network.

Privileged access – When you introduce the privileged-access role, you curtail the rights of the standard-access role so that it no longer offers access to areas of the network deemed extremely sensitive, such as HR, finance, and R&D areas. Only the users who require access to such resources are placed in the privileged-access role.

In summary, with only four roles, you can significantly reduce unauthorized access to sensitive data. In most organizations, approximately 50% of the user base is part of the standard-access role, 10% has guest access, 20% has contractor access, and 20% has privileged access. With these four roles in place, sensitive systems remain exposed to a mere 20% of the user community.

The thing that often gets lost in these sorts of debates is that the network and the application security are cooperating to reduce risk. The network reduces the size of the funnel of potential attackers and attacks but the applications still provide their own–application specific–fine-grained access control. This isn’t an all or nothing proposition, defense-in-depth still applies.

Technorati Tags: ,

3 Responses to “Snyder and Stiennon Debate NAC; ANA Makes Guest Appearance”

  1. The debate of the detail level of NAC controls is entirely moot. Naturally, in large organizations both IT and auditors recommend a lesser number of groups with different privileges, since it is much easier to control and manage the infrastructure.

    But the main point that the article misses is the actual success of implementing a NAC infrastructure – it is still a solution laced with problems and difficulties. And this fact is actually the main driver to minimize the number of profiles – the less profiles, the easier to debug and recover from issues

    I did a series of interviews on the topic within a company, from CEO down to NetAdmin. You can read the conclusions here
    http://www.shortinfosec.net/2008/06/network-access-control-solution-with.html

    Bozidar Spirovski
    http://www.shortinfosec.net

  2. Sean says:

    Hi Bozidar,

    Thanks for the pointers, I read your post. I agree NAC has been tough to implement. That’s why I’ve spent the last couple years focusing on establishing the identity controls that provide meaningful audit and compliance actions rather than looking at only the health of the machine (typically the focus of NAC). I think machine health is actually the least important factor in a network identity decision because there are so many controls already on the endpoint to enforce this. This is the core focus of the ANA paper and why I think a small number of roles in a network coupled with comprehensive authentication is an enormous benefit to most organizations. I’d love your feedback.

    Thanks,

    Sean

  3. chijioke obiekezie says:

    I am presently carrying out a research on NAC boundaries because it seems to comprise a lot.

    would be glad if you can throw more light on the peculiarities of NAC detailing it’s authentication process and cryptography technique involved.

    thanks

    Chijioke
    MSc student
    Wireless network(QMUL)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.