Governing Identity Attributes in a Contextual and Dynamic Access Control Environment

Posted on by Frank Briguglio

In the rapidly evolving landscape of cybersecurity, federal agencies, the Department of Defense (DoD), and critical infrastructure sectors face unique challenges in governing identity attributes within dynamic and contextual access control environments. The Department of Defense Instruction 8520.04, Identity Authentication for Information Systems, underscores the importance of identity governance in establishing trust and managing access across DoD systems. In parallel, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (DHS CISA) guidance and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) frameworks further emphasize the critical need for secure and adaptive access controls in safeguarding critical infrastructure and federal systems.

This article examines the governance of identity attributes in this complex environment, linking these practices to Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC) and Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) models. It highlights how adherence to DoD 8520.04, CISA’s Zero Trust Maturity Model, and NIST guidelines enable organizations to maintain the accuracy, security, and provenance of identity attributes. These efforts are particularly crucial for critical infrastructure, where the ability to dynamically evaluate and protect access can prevent disruptions to essential services and minimize security risks. By integrating these principles, organizations not only achieve regulatory compliance but also strengthen their defense against evolving threats, ensuring the resilience of national security systems and vital infrastructure.

SailPoint Governing Identity Attributes Blog Embedded Image 2025

Importance of Governing Identity Attributes

Dynamic Access Control

In a dynamic access control environment (Zero Trust), access decisions are made based on real-time evaluation of identity attributes and contextual information. Identity governance plays a pivotal role in ensuring that these attributes are accurate, up-to-date, and relevant. Effective identity governance facilitates:

Real-time Access Decisions: By maintaining a comprehensive and current view of identity attributes, organizations can make informed and timely access decisions, ensuring that users have appropriate access rights based on their roles, responsibilities, and the context of their access request.
Adaptive Security: Identity governance enables adaptive security measures that can dynamically adjust access controls in response to changing risk levels, user behaviors, and environmental conditions.

Attribute Provenance

Attribute provenance refers to the history and origin of identity attributes. Understanding the provenance of attributes is critical for ensuring their reliability and trustworthiness. Identity governance supports attribute provenance by:

Tracking Attribute Sources: Implementing mechanisms to track the origins of identity attributes, including the systems and processes involved in their creation and modification.
Ensuring Data Integrity: Establishing validation and verification processes to ensure the integrity and accuracy of identity attributes over time.

Attribute Protection

Protecting identity attributes from unauthorized access, alteration, or misuse is fundamental to maintaining a secure access control environment. Identity governance enhances attribute protection through:

Access Controls: Implementing stringent access controls to limit who can view, modify, or manage identity attributes.
Encryption and Masking: Utilizing encryption and data masking techniques to protect sensitive identity attributes both at rest and in transit.
Monitoring and Auditing: Continuously monitoring and auditing access to identity attributes to detect and respond to any suspicious activities or policy violations.

Attribute Effectiveness

The effectiveness of identity attributes in supporting access control decisions is contingent upon their relevance, accuracy, and granularity. Identity governance ensures attribute effectiveness by:

Regular Reviews and Updates: Conducting periodic reviews and updates of identity attributes to align with evolving business needs, regulatory requirements, and security policies.
Feedback Mechanisms: Establishing feedback mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of identity attributes in real-world access control scenarios and make necessary adjustments.

Risks Associated with ABAC and RBAC

ABAC Risks

ABAC relies on the evaluation of attributes to make access control decisions. While ABAC offers flexibility and granularity, it also presents several risks:

Complexity: The complexity of managing a large number of attributes and policies can lead to misconfigurations and errors, potentially resulting in unauthorized access or access denials.
Scalability: As the number of attributes and policies grows, the scalability of the ABAC system can be challenged, affecting performance and responsiveness.
Attribute Quality: The effectiveness of ABAC is heavily dependent on the quality of the attributes. Inaccurate, outdated, or incomplete attributes can compromise access control decisions.

RBAC Risks

RBAC assigns access rights based on predefined roles. While RBAC simplifies access management, it also has inherent risks:

Role Explosion: The proliferation of roles to accommodate varying access needs can lead to role explosion, complicating role management and increasing administrative overhead.
Stale Roles: Over time, roles may become stale or misaligned with current job functions, leading to over-privileged or under-privileged access.
Inflexibility: RBAC may lack the flexibility to handle dynamic and context-specific access requirements, limiting its effectiveness in modern, agile environments.

Importance to a Zero Trust Model

The Zero Trust model is predicated on the principle of “never trust, always verify,” emphasizing continuous verification of identity and context for access decisions. Governing identity attributes is integral to the Zero Trust model for several reasons:

Continuous Verification: Accurate and reliable identity attributes are essential for continuous verification processes that dynamically assess access requests in real-time.
Context-Aware Security: By governing identity attributes, organizations can implement context-aware security measures that consider a wide range of factors, including user behavior, device health, and network conditions.
Minimizing Attack Surface: Effective governance of identity attributes helps minimize the attack surface by ensuring that access rights are tightly controlled and aligned with current security policies and threat landscapes.

Governing identity attributes is a cornerstone of modern access control strategies, particularly within the dynamic and contextual environments that characterize today’s IT ecosystems. By supporting dynamic access, ensuring attribute provenance, protection, and effectiveness, and addressing the risks associated with ABAC and RBAC, identity governance enhances the security and efficiency of access control mechanisms. In the context of a Zero Trust model, the rigorous governance of identity attributes is indispensable for maintaining robust and adaptive security postures, ultimately contributing to the resilience and integrity of organizational systems and data.

To learn more about SailPoint’s cybersecurity capabilities and how it can support mission-critical DoD initiatives, view our technology solutions portfolio. Additionally, check out our other blog highlighting the latest insights into “The Role of Identity Governance in the Implementation of DoD Instruction 8520.04”.

Carahsoft Technology Corp. is The Trusted Government IT Solutions Provider, supporting Public Sector organizations across Federal, State and Local Government agencies and Education and Healthcare markets. As the Master Government Aggregator for our vendor partners, including SailPoint, we deliver solutions for Geospatial, Cybersecurity, MultiCloud, DevSecOps, Artificial Intelligence, Customer Experience and Engagement, Open Source and more. Working with resellers, systems integrators and consultants, our sales and marketing teams provide industry leading IT products, services and training through hundreds of contract vehicles. Explore the Carahsoft Blog to learn more about the latest trends in Government technology markets and solutions, as well as Carahsoft’s ecosystem of partner thought-leaders.

Cyberattack Trends Impacting Local Government and Education Sectors

Posted on by Jeffrey Wheat

Today’s cybercriminals are no longer driven solely by financial gain, the geopolitical impact of attacks has shifted with nation-state actors now targeting critical infrastructure. While Local Governments have long been a part of this, schools have also become key targets, especially after COVID-19. The pandemic’s disruption to education has left a lasting impact, making attacks on schools and Local Governments both physically and psychologically significant. These institutions, essential to society, are under siege not just for their sensitive data but for their societal importance. With advanced capabilities and financial backing, nation-state actors are accelerating their efforts, heightening the urgency for robust cybersecurity.

Why Threat Actors Target Local Government and Education

Local Governments are frequent cyberattack targets due to their political significance and the essential services they provide. When one city is attacked, neighboring cities often become hyper-vigilant, particularly smaller municipalities managing critical services like water supply. These vital functions make them high-value targets. While financial institutions are seen as obvious targets for their direct connection to money, Government agencies hold more financial value than many realize. The stakes are even higher when political positions are involved, making Local Governments attractive to financially motivated attackers and nation-state actors seeking leverage.

Lumu Technologies SLED Cyberattack Trends Blog Embedded Image 2024

Education has also become increasingly vulnerable. Schools were initially targeted for geopolitical reasons, with attackers seeking to influence the “hearts and minds” of society by disrupting education. However, cybercriminals discovered the financial value of student records, which are worth more on the dark web than credit card or healthcare information due to students not checking their credit scores. This extended window for identity theft, combined with the vast amount of data schools hold, makes educational institutions prime targets for cybercriminals.

Both Local Governments and schools face shared challenges in defending their systems. For Governments, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) networks that manage infrastructure are often isolated but still present large attack surfaces due to their distributed nature. Schools, on the other hand, struggle with the complexity of students bringing their own devices, which introduces uncontrolled entry points into the network. These vulnerabilities make Local Government and education uniquely attractive and susceptible targets in the cyber landscape.

Two Main Attack Vectors: Phishing and Infostealers

Cybercriminals use various tactics to infiltrate Local Governments and schools, exploiting both technological weaknesses and human behavior. People are often the weakest link, making them prime targets for attackers. The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has further advanced these attacks, making them more difficult to detect. While agencies and schools cannot fully eliminate the risk through training alone, understanding these evolving threats can significantly reduce the chances of successful attacks.

Phishing and information stealing are two of the most prevalent methods used by cybercriminals. Research from Lumu Technologies shows that phishing accounts for 52% of attacks, while information stealing makes up 48%, illustrating their near-equal presence as cyber threats.

Phishing

Phishing is often used to gain initial access into a network, accounting for approximately 90% of attacks. By tricking users into clicking malicious links or downloading malware, attackers establish a presence in the system. The preliminary malware allows them to move laterally, escalate privileges and locate sensitive data. Attackers either sell the data or use it to launch ransomware attacks. In ransomware scenarios, the attacker takes control of the network, encrypts critical data and issues a ransom demand. Phishing is thus the starting point for a larger chain of events leading to data theft and/or financial extortion.

Information Stealing

Infostealers are designed to capture sensitive information, often to sell on the dark web or to facilitate ransomware attacks. Like intelligence operations, they collect data to spread through an environment or identify new attack points. Keyloggers record keystrokes to capture usernames and passwords for unauthorized access. Other methods include form grabbers, which intercept forms and alter them, and browser hijackers, which mimic legitimate sites to bypass multi-factor authentication. Sensitive data from Local Government and education sectors is highly valuable, with threat actors intensifying efforts to exploit it for profit.

In addition to phishing and infostealers, cybercriminals continually find new ways to exploit technology and human behavior, such as man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks, credential stuffing and supply chain attacks. These often-overlooked attack vectors can cause significant damage to agencies and schools. Recognizing these methods is crucial for developing comprehensive defenses.

Why These Attack Methods are Successful

These attack methods succeed against Local Governments and schools due to the constantly evolving nature of cyber warfare. Like traditional warfare, attackers adapt, finding new ways in after one vulnerability is closed. Defenders must be equally dynamic.

Even with security measures like Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), attackers find ways to bypass them. EDR relies on behavior analysis, which takes time, while attackers use advanced AI to quickly develop new methods. Local Governments and schools are often slower to adapt, giving attackers an advantage. The challenge is not just implementing security measures but continuously evolving defenses to keep up with new threats.

AI Versus AI

In the battle against evolving cyberattacks, Local Governments and schools must leverage advanced technologies like AI and automation. As attackers adopt AI to improve the sophistication and speed of attacks, defenders need equally powerful tools. Cybercriminals use AI to bypass traditional defenses, identifying weaknesses faster than humans can.

To keep up, Local Government and education sectors must deploy AI-driven systems to detect threats in real time. AI helps identify vulnerabilities, enabling proactive defense, while automation blocks threats at machine speed. For smaller institutions with limited resources, automation is especially crucial to defend against attacks effectively.

In a landscape where cyber threats continually evolve, matching the speed and sophistication of attackers is crucial for a strong cyber defense. Government agencies and educational institutions must stay vigilant, leveraging AI and automation to outpace attackers and protect the critical infrastructure and data that comprise the foundation of society.

Discover the latest trends in cyberattacks and learn how AI and automation are reshaping the fight against modern cybercriminals in Lumu Technologies’ webinar, “Emerging Cyber Attack Trends Targeting Local Government & Education.”

Carahsoft Technology Corp. is The Trusted Government IT Solutions Provider, supporting Public Sector organizations across Federal, State and Local Government agencies and Education and Healthcare markets. As the Master Government Aggregator for our vendor partners, including Lumu Technologies, we deliver solutions for Geospatial, Cybersecurity, MultiCloud, DevSecOps, Artificial Intelligence, Customer Experience and Engagement, Open Source and more. Working with resellers, systems integrators and consultants, our sales and marketing teams provide industry leading IT products, services and training through hundreds of contract vehicles. Explore the Carahsoft Blog to learn more about the latest trends in Government technology markets and solutions, as well as Carahsoft’s ecosystem of partner thought-leaders.

Grammarly and Carahsoft: Elevating Secure, Private Government Communication

Posted on by Ty Rottare

Grammarly and Carahsoft have partnered to provide Government agencies with trustworthy AI assistance supported by robust security measures. Thanks to this collaboration, Government agencies gain access to Grammarly’s trusted AI assistant, which can help them improve communication and boost operational efficiency. This partnership marks a notable advancement in supporting Government agencies in navigating the evolving digital landscape.

Unlocking the Benefits for Government Agencies

As a recognized leader in providing IT solutions to the public sector, Carahsoft offers extensive experience navigating the Government procurement process. Combined with Grammarly’s AI assistant, their expertise creates a powerful resource for Government agencies aiming to improve efficiency and productivity. When your agency works with Carahsoft and Grammarly, you’ll experience the following benefits:

Grammarly Government Communications AI Blog Embedded Image 2024

Rapid Implementation: Our streamlined setup process enables agencies to implement Grammarly across their organization in one day. This allows teams to start benefiting from enhanced communication support almost immediately.
Time Efficiency: On average, our users save about 35 minutes per day per person on communication tasks. This time can be redirected toward more strategic tasks, leading to improved project outcomes and better service delivery to the public.
Enhanced Communication Quality: Effective communication is crucial for Government agencies. Grammarly’s tools help teams craft clear, concise, and impactful messages, ensuring that important information is conveyed accurately. With over 70,000 teams already benefiting from our services, our track record speaks for itself.
Boosting Brand Compliance: Our advanced communication tools can help agencies improve brand compliance by a remarkable 71%. This consistency in communication enhances public trust and strengthens the agency’s reputation.

Our Commitment to Privacy, Security, and Compliance

Grammarly’s commitment to enterprise-grade security offers significant benefits for Government agencies. As a trusted partner, Grammarly adheres to the highest industry standards, ensuring that sensitive information remains secure. The collaboration with Carahsoft further underscores this dedication. Grammarly provides tailored AI solutions that meet the specific security needs of the public sector. By emphasizing stringent security measures, Grammarly helps agencies confidently use their tools while safeguarding critical data.

Additionally, Grammarly’s subscription-based revenue model ensures that customer content is never sold, placing a strong emphasis on user privacy and control. This transparency is essential for Government agencies, allowing them to maintain oversight of their data usage at all times. With a solid foundation supported by third-party audits and certifications, Grammarly provides compliance and regulatory support that agencies can rely on, reinforcing their ability to operate within legal and ethical boundaries while maximizing operational efficiency.

Empowering the Public Sector with AI

Through our partnership with Carahsoft, we are dedicated to helping Government agencies lead, learn, and grow amid evolving demands. With Grammarly, your teams can confidently communicate, innovate, and serve the public more effectively.

For more information on implementing Grammarly within your agency, visit our website or contact Carahsoft today! Together, we can enhance Government operations’ efficiency and ensure that every message counts.

Carahsoft Technology Corp. is The Trusted Government IT Solutions Provider, supporting Public Sector organizations across Federal, State and Local Government agencies and Education and Healthcare markets. As the Master Government Aggregator for our vendor partners, including Grammarly, we deliver solutions for Geospatial, Cybersecurity, MultiCloud, DevSecOps, Artificial Intelligence, Customer Experience and Engagement, Open Source and more. Working with resellers, systems integrators and consultants, our sales and marketing teams provide industry leading IT products, services and training through hundreds of contract vehicles. Explore the Carahsoft Blog to learn more about the latest trends in Government technology markets and solutions, as well as Carahsoft’s ecosystem of partner thought-leaders.

A Guide to the Continuous Diagnostic and Mitigation Program by CISA

Posted on by Steve Jacyna

The Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) Program, established in 2012 by the Cyber Security Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), provides a dynamic approach to fortifying the cybersecurity of Government networks and systems by improving security posture of participating agencies and mitigating risk to the nation’s cyber and physical infrastructure.

Carahsoft’s long and supportive history of CISA’s CDM program allows Carahsoft to provide cutting edge software to benefit the governments pressing national security requirements. Currently, Carahsoft supports more than 70 vendor partners on the CDM Approved Products List, assisting in completing the submission process and maintaining communication with CISA for APL updates. Our extensive vendor and partner network allows the Government to procure asset and identity management, network security and data protection tools in support of the CDM program.

How the CDM Program Works

The goal of the CDM program is to find and prioritize risks in cybersecurity, increasing visibility into the Federal cybersecurity space and improving the Government’s ability to respond to issues or threats. In the past few years, the CDM program has grown to become a proactive, coordinated and efficient entity. In CISA’s projected budget for 2025, $469.8M will be allotted for the CDM program to strengthen the security posture of Federal Government networks and systems.

Carahsoft CISA CDM Program Update Blog Embedded Image 2024

CISA has a congressional mandate at the national level to extend cybersecurity and the availability of CDM tools. It also supplies capabilities and knowledge into the framework of State and Local Governments and works to protect the nation’s vital infrastructure. Government agencies have specific funding that they can use—in essence as a grant. Different agencies and governmental entities can apply to get funding from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enable the purchase of CDM technologies. DHS and CISA work with emerging, established and developing cyber technologies to counter threats from a wide variety of adversaries.

The CDM Program APL and Procurement Process

The CDM program offers a set of certified tools and sensors, known as the APL. To begin the process for a solution to be approved for the APL, a vendor must submit information about its capabilities to CISA. For example, where that tool sits in the network and what it is capable of. Tools that are part of the CDM program provide capabilities in the following 4 areas:

Asset Management

Identity and Access Management

Network Security Management

Data Protection Management

The CDM office at CISA evaluates the offeror’s claims for that solution for acceptability and applicability onto the APL. If it meets the defined cybersecurity criteria, it is then classified into a specific category. Products labeled by CDM listed on the GSA MAS IT schedule through GSA Advantage have already been vetted and approved by CISA, signifying that they meet the technical standards needed for Government procurement. Therefore, agencies do not need to repeat the evaluation process when purchasing through GSA. While CISA manages the CDM program, GSA provides the ease of buying and the ability to expedite awards. CDM products can also be acquired through the NASA SEWP CDM catalog and are added to this contract via customer request.

The CDM program includes cybersecurity tools and sensors reviewed for conformance with Section 508, Federal license users and CDM technical requirements. Each month, the program offers a weeklong submission window for new tools to be submitted for addition to the APL, which allows for unique flexibility for a Government program and strengthens the program over time. Since the acquisition of new and innovative technology can oftentimes lead to longer implementation timelines for the Government, monthly rolling submissions allow for a quicker and more flexible process for agencies obtaining new products. Not only is this a benefit for Government, but for industry, too, as a larger submission window allows technology vendors the opportunity for their products to be added to the APL more frequently.

Cybersecurity threats are ever evolving—and consequently so are the tools and the defensive measures needed to mitigate them. CDM products expire from the APL every 3 years to ensure the products listed continuously comply with modern cybersecurity standards. For more information on the technical evaluation process, please review the APL Product Submission Instructions.

Benefits of Acquiring CDM Tools for End Users

Broad Base of Customers: The CDM program focuses on Federal infrastructure but works with GSA and its broad customer base, including buyers such as the Departments of Agriculture, Transportation, Justice and Education, as well as tribal and territorial Governments, for example.

High Levels of Support: At CISA, the CDM program delivers high levels of support to Federal civilian agencies. It has direct program management resources, funding resources, and outreach resources, among others.

Election Security: Election security is top of mind for 2024. The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) is an organization whose funding focuses on securing elections, ensuring confidence in election results, having robust voting technology and withstanding potential cyber threats. This is a bipartisan issue since all parties agree that user experience and cybersecurity require improvement. The CDM program and its robust suite of tools address these crucial objectives.

Critical Infrastructure: DHS prioritizes protective services to critical infrastructure organizations like power companies, oil refineries and railroads. For example, $130.3M of CISA’s FY25 budget will ensure emergency communication interoperability and assistance.

Integrators for the CDM Program

Integrators are an integral part of the CDM Program, providing cybersecurity expertise, consulting, technology, tools, solutions and services to participating Government agencies. These organizations work directly with the agencies to strengthen IT security posture, zero trust maturity and other mission critical cybersecurity needs. The following integrators are currently the contract holders for agencies participating in the CDM Program in groups A-F, which are categorized by the task orders each agency holds.

To learn more about defending Federal networks and systems with the CDM Program, the partners we support on the CDM APL and how you can sell your products under CDM, visit our CDM Program Overview and contact us today.

Quantum Computing’s Latest Breakthrough: Why Government Encryption Standards Face a New, Unexpected Threat

Posted on by Harvey Morrison

Last week, international scientists made headlines by successfully cracking a 50-bit RSA encryption integer using D-Wave’s Advantage quantum computer. While it’s true that a 50-bit key is vastly smaller than the 2048-bit keys used in modern RSA encryption, the significance of this achievement lies in how it was done. Unlike traditional attacks based on Shor’s algorithm and quantum gate computers, the researchers utilized a quantum annealing system, designed for optimization rather than direct factoring. This shift in approach raises important questions about the timeline for when quantum computers could crack full-scale RSA encryption, potentially accelerating the threat to current cryptographic standards far sooner than expected.

Marion Square Quantum Computing and Cybersecurity Blog Embedded Image 2024

For years, the vulnerability of public key encryption has been understood primarily as a factoring problem, since the security of encryption algorithms like RSA relies on the difficulty of factoring large composite numbers. Shor’s algorithm, widely regarded as the most probable path to breaking public key encryption, is designed specifically to factor these numbers exponentially faster than classical methods, posing a significant future threat to encryption systems. However, in a surprising turn, the international researchers in this recent attack used a quantum annealing computer, which is designed for optimization tasks, not factoring. This innovative approach represents a completely different method of breaking RSA encryption, highlighting that the threat from quantum computing may emerge from unexpected directions, advancing the risk timeline beyond what many experts anticipated.

This breakthrough also underscores the growing versatility of quantum annealing in solving problems once thought exclusive to gate-based quantum computers. Traditionally, annealing systems have been seen as ideal for optimization problems in fields such as logistics, material science, and machine learning—not for cryptographic attacks. However, the international researchers effectively re-framed RSA decryption as an optimization challenge, unlocking new potential in quantum annealing. While quantum annealing computers like D-Wave’s systems were not originally designed for factorization tasks, this achievement raises important questions about their ability to scale to larger key sizes and tackle more complex encryption algorithms. If quantum annealing can be adapted for cryptography at higher levels, it could potentially shorten the timeline for when quantum computers might become a real-world threat to encryption standards. Though hurdles remain, this new approach widens the scope of quantum threats to cryptographic systems, showing that the race to quantum-safe encryption may need to accelerate.

In conclusion, this breakthrough in quantum annealing highlights the increasing urgency for federal agencies to prioritize their post-quantum encryption (PQE) transition. The rapid evolution of quantum computing, coupled with the potential for new cryptographic vulnerabilities, underscores the need to meet the milestones set by NSM 10 and OMB 23-02. Agencies that have not yet initiated or fully engaged in this process risk falling behind as quantum advancements accelerate. The time to act is now—establishing cryptographic leadership, conducting comprehensive inventories, and securing appropriate resources are critical first steps. Preparing today will ensure the resilience of federal systems in a quantum-enabled future.

To learn about the latest standards set forth by NIST and how Marion Square can support your Quantum Computing and compliance initiatives, view our webinar, “Mastering NIST PQE Standards: A Guide for Federal Compliance.”

Classified Data Spillage: Considerations for Risk Mitigation and Containment

Posted on by Maurice Uenuma

Classified data spillage has always been a concern to those in the national security community. When sensitive information spills onto an unauthorized medium or network, there can be grave consequences.

The risk of data spillage continues to rise with the growth of data from broader collection and production, along with increased access to and use of this data for analytics and operations. Digital transformation, AI adoption, and data-driven decision-making have delivered great value to federal agencies, but these trends have made protecting classified data even more challenging than it already was.

This situation warrants new consideration for how sensitive data can be protected against unintentional exposure, and how spillage is remediated when it occurs. Data sanitization plays an important role in this arena.

How Spillage Occurs

Data spillage is one way that unauthorized disclosure of classified information takes place. According to NIST, it is a “security incident that results in the transfer of classified information onto an information system not authorized to store or process that information.”

Blancco Classified Data Spillage Blog Embedded Image 2024

The spilled data could have been moved to an unclassified environment for nefarious purposes (e.g., espionage) or as a result of inadvertently mishandling the data (e.g., not following classification procedures). Examples of the former would include leaks such as those committed by high-profile conspirators Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning. Examples of the latter would include incidents that involve cleared personnel who physically relocate or improperly dispose of sensitive materials.

Spillage can also happen as an unintended consequence of a loss of control of classified data systems (e.g., an email server misconfiguration). The growing size and complexity of the government’s data management landscape has led to an increase in data spillage risk.

More Data to Protect… and Contain

More classified data is being shared for the benefit of national security decision making and operations. Effectively extracting value from that data means sharing data across more systems and giving access to more people. This can produce long-term national security benefits but also near-term data security challenges.

The sheer volume of classified data is a contributing factor.The rapid emergence of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and internet of things (IoT), more automated data collection, and the government’s digital modernization efforts have exponentially increased the volume of sensitive data being transmitted, processed, and stored, increasing the possibility of spillage.

Some examples of this include:

Generative AI (GenAI) that produces sensitive or even classified information before humans can properly manage and classify the outputs.
Broadly deployed sensors that gather or contain classified data and transmit that data across broad networks.
A growing number of cleared personnel with access to classified information.
Large sensitive or classified data sets being fed into large language models (LLM) that may spill during the extract, transfer, load (ETL) process.

The Role of Data Sanitization

There are numerous security controls available to federal agencies to prevent data spillage and respond to it when it occurs. These include data protection measures such as access control, multi-factor authentication (MFA), encryption, data loss prevention (DLP), email security, and employee training.

Data sanitization also plays an increasingly important role.

According to Gartner, data sanitization is the process of deliberately, permanently, and irreversibly removing or destroying the data stored on a memory device to make it unrecoverable⁠. In other words, a device that has been sanitized has no usable residual data, and even with the assistance of advanced forensic tools, the data will not ever be recovered. Data sanitization can also be performed on individual files, folders, virtual machines, and logical storage (without sanitizing the entire device or drive).

Sanitization of a device at decommissioning and ongoing data sanitization in live environments are both critical steps to reducing an organization’s data attack surface and potential risk of classified spillage. In this way, it helps to both prevent and mitigate it.

Prevention: Permanently removing classified data when it is no longer needed reduces the risk of this data ending up where it should not be. By deploying data sanitization tools, federal agencies can:

Remove redundant, obsolete, trivial (ROT), or dark (unused or unknown) data from storage environments.
Erase specific network files, folders, logical drives, or virtual environments to comply with classified data protection mandates.
Securely remove data from data storage drives or devices before storage or transport of those assets, including those slated for shredding or other physical destruction.
Integrate with data classification tools to proactively (and even automatically) identify, contain, and sanitize classified files when they are no longer needed.

Remediation: After a data spillage incident is discovered, action must be taken to ensure it is isolated and contained. Software-based data sanitization (including binary overwrite of all user-accessible and non-accessible partitions of the affected drive) can be applied to permanently remove classified data, even before physical destruction of the device or drive, as a robust risk mitigation measure. When done properly, data sanitization also provides additional assurance through erasure verification and reporting.

In its National Instruction on Classified Information Spillage,the Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) provides the minimum actions required when responding to a spillage of classified information. According to CNSS, appropriate procedures for sanitizing or remediating the effects of a spill may include:

Using the operating system to delete the spilled information.
Re-labeling the media containing the spilled information to the appropriate classification/category and transferring the media into an appropriate environment.
Removing the classified information from the media by organization-approved technical means to render the information unrecoverable.
Erasing operating system, program files, and all data files.
Erasing all partition tables and drive formats.
Erasing and sanitizing the media.
Forfeiting the media.

Many of these procedures can be effectively implemented through a mature data sanitization platform and process.

To note, this guidance was issued before the recent developments in AI, IoT, etc., noted above. Likely, the emphasis on data sanitization in live environments will increase as policy is updated to better reflect—and keep pace with—the sheer volume of sensitive data being shared and processed at scale.

Data spillage is a real and growing risk to national security, demanding a measured response. There are many security controls and associated policies available to prevent spillage and remediate it when it occurs. Robust data sanitization tools are likely to become more widely used, as agencies implement these capabilities in routine end-of-life data and device management, as well as in non-routine data spillage scenarios.

Reach out if you are interested in learning how Blancco’s solutions can help you prevent data spillage.

Unified Security Readiness During the Election Season

Posted on by Chris Dawson, Doug Palermo and Garrett Guinivan

Elections are the backbone of American democracy. Every vote counts, and agencies can help protect the integrity of voting by solidifying IT security. Keeping hardware and software updated is vital for successful cybersecurity. Through proper training and inter-organization communication, security industry leaders and Government agencies can help raise awareness on election-related issues.

Cyber Threat Landscape and Security Challenges in Modern Elections

By taking advantage of interest in elections, bad actors use common and highly trafficked websites to distribute remote access tools, allowing them to exfiltrate massive amounts of data. Traffic distribution system (TDS)—which are utilized to target ads to users, their search history and their location—are used by bad actors to push pop-up ads that prompt users to update their computer system or software. These pop-ups, hidden in TDSs, install ransomware and malware on the user’s device when clicked, making them difficult to find and fix. There is an uptick in these non-stop, ubiquitous attacks every election cycle. Bad actors target users that visit websites to stay updated on election news through pop-ups, phishing, web browser alerts and website subscriptions. All these methods lead users to socially engineered, compromised websites. However, agencies can prevent cybersecurity attacks at the office and at home by administering relevant security awareness training as part of a Human Risk Management Program.

Optimize Company Training on Security Awareness

ProofPoint Election Security Blog Embedded Image 2024

Employees trust their organization as a valuable source of security information. Therefore, it is important that agencies communicate training and awareness effectively to all users. Some anti-phishing modules rely on realignment methods such as enrolling employees for anti-phishing training after they are misled by these kinds of threats. This can create an environment where employees question whether to alert IT when they click on false updates or phishing scams. Instead, agencies can focus on promoting positive behaviors such as congratulating employees who report phishing attempts, small bite sized trainings, and focused awareness campaigns around threats in the landscape. Here are several ways agencies can support their employees in learning and implementing security best practices during this election season:

Focus on real-time awareness: Agencies should prioritize keeping employees up to date on live threats. Traditionally, users were encouraged to keep systems up-to-date by accepting update notices. Now, to keep systems up-to-date while simultaneously discouraging pop-up clicks,

Contextualize email warning tags (EWTs): Emails are a great way to communicate awareness surrounding popular hacking methods. Including banners or visual cues, such as color themes, can help employees recognize company emails, giving them pause when faced with phishing threats. During election cycles, newsletters should focus on deepfakes and their effect on elections.

Utilize modules on demand: People trust their tech company or Government agency’s knowledge more than the news. Security awareness modules, training modules and weekly reminders can all help raise awareness among employees. By allowing users to access education modules at their own pace, agencies can pass on valuable knowledge in a way that is pressure and judgement free.

Focus on relevant topics: Modules should be relevant to employees. For example, training modules should be specific to each user’s job role. Short, one-to-two-minute targeted modules that hold the viewer’s attention can be more valuable than long, untargeted modules. During election cycles, the best modules cover election security, fake updates and safe browsing habits.

Teach at the trainee’s level: Agencies should meet employees at their level. Training should be tailored differently for users who may have more experience using the internet on a regular basis and users who did not have internet as a daily part of their education. Agencies must communicate with employees on security strategies, especially those with higher permission access.

Through all these methods, agencies should focus on the good, positively reinforcing employees and building trust between the individual and their organization.

Transform Company Culture Through Transparent, Unified Security

Focus on the Why: To protect from fake updates and phishing scams, organizations can implement training and assessment strategies into their work culture. Transparency is key: by explaining the purpose of phishing simulations, employers can get employees on board with cybersecurity training. Agencies can use realistic, election-themed phishing simulations during module assessments, which work best in real-time scenarios rather than during training. By monitoring results, agencies can gauge whether users are adequately equipped with the knowledge to report threats within simulations.

Encourage Feedback and Build Trust: By checking in with users after training modules and simulations, agencies can ensure the training has resonated with users, as well as ensuring users do not view trainings as punitive action. The most important part to training simulations is that employees report phishing or pop-up scams to their organization, regardless of if they clicked on them or not. Trainers and leadership teams should use positive reinforcement as corrective behavior to encourage employees to better understand modern scams and how to spot them. It is important to establish that the employee is not in trouble, lest they feel that they cannot report future scams to the organization. Instead, training administrators should build conversations around the reason for clicking. Whether or not the employee was in a hurry, if they had specific training, if they need help or if scams were fallen for at a particular time of day are all valuable information points for preventing future oversights.

Creating a Security Culture: Visual aids placed in common areas are also a valuable learning reinforcement because repetition can help employees remember the most important details surrounding security. Common-sense posters and announcements can be placed in elevators, breakrooms and even on the back of bathroom stall doors. Additionally, agencies should administer regular updates and ongoing education through newsletters, and programming should be consistent and personable. Agencies can:

Send reminders
Share real-world examples
Encourage discussion
Provide easy action items (such as restarting computers daily)
Provide resources for learning and reporting

Unity is key to transforming organizations’ culture, creating awareness around digital hygiene and cybersecurity. Ultimately, repetition, consistency and discussion can help users stay safe and protect the organization from phishing, pop-up scams and other cybersecurity related risks during the election cycle.

To learn more about election security readiness, visit Proofpoint and Carahsoft’s webinar, Navigating the Cyber Threat Landscape: Election Scams. To learn more about Proofpoint’s Human Risk Reduction Solutions, please visit their website. Check out Proofpoint and Carahsofts’ past webinars into the cyber threat landscape.

Securing Systems Through Segmentation and Zero Trust

Posted on by John Kindervag

Zero Trust is a cybersecurity strategy that recognizes trust as a vulnerability that may potentially allow malicious actors to exploit system environments. Traditionally, systems operated by granting permissions, visibility and trust to a user once they gain access. Rather than minimize trust and opportunity for breaches, Zero Trust eliminates trusted packets, systems and users altogether.

Implementing Zero Trust’s Fundamental Design Concepts

While breaches are inevitable, agencies can equip themselves with a Zero Trust framework to prevent successful cyber-attacks. Zero Trust encompasses identity, access permissions and micro segmentation, per the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) architecture. All three enforcement points are required to complete the Zero Trust model. While security products are a component of Government agency’s implementation of Zero Trust, it is a strategy that requires proper planning.

To successfully implement Zero Trust, agencies must understand its fundamental design concepts.

Focus on business outcomes: Determine key agency objectives and design strategies with those in mind.

Design security strategies from the “inside out”: Typically, networks are designed from the “outside in,” beginning with the software and moving onto data. This can introduce vulnerabilities. By designing software accessibility around data and assets that need to be protected, agencies can personalize security and minimize vulnerabilities.

Determine who or what needs to have access: Individuals should default with the least amount of privilege, having additional access granted on a need-to-know basis.

Inspect and log all traffic: Multiple factors should be considered to determine whether to allow traffic, not just authentication. Understanding what traffic is moving in and out of the network prevents breaches.

Fundamentally, Zero Trust is simple. Trust is a human concept, not a digital concept. Once agencies understand the basics of Zero Trust, they can decide which tactics they will use to help them deploy it across their network.

Breaking Up Breaches with Segmentation

Illumio Microsegmentation Zero Trust Blog Embedded Image 2024

In other security strategies, security is implemented on perimeters or endpoints. This places IT far from the data that needs monitoring. The average time between a breach and its discovery is 277 days and is usually discovered by independent third parties. With flat, unsegmented surfaces, once breachers gain access to a network, they can take advantage of the entire system. Zero Trust alleviates this by transforming a system’s attack surface into a “protect surface.” Through proper segmentation, systems make the attack surface as small as possible, then places users adjacent to the attack surface to protect it. This area then becomes a more manageable surface for agencies to monitor and protect, eliminating the time gap between breach and discovery.

Once the strategy method is chosen, agencies must decide which tactics and tools they will use to deploy Zero Trust. Here is a simple, five-step process for deploying Zero Trust.

1. Define the protect surface: It is important to start with knowing what data needs protection. A great first step is to follow the DAAS element—protect data, assets, applications and services. Segmentation can help separate these four elements and posit each on its own protect surface, giving IT employees a manageable surface to monitor.

2. Map transaction flows: With a robust protect surface, agencies can begin tailoring their Zero Trust environment. Understanding how the entire system functions together is imperative. With visibility into transaction flow mapping, agencies can build and architecture the environment around the protect surface.

3. Architect a Zero Trust environment: Agencies should personalize their security to best fit their protect surface. That way, Zero Trust can work for the agency and its environment.

4. Create policy: It is important to ask questions when creating policy, as Zero Trust is a set of granular allowance rules. Who should be allowed access and via what application? When should access be enabled? Where is the data located on the protect surface? Why is the agency doing this? These questions help agencies map out their personalized cybersecurity strategy.

5. Monitor and maintain the protect surface: By creating an anti-fragile system, which increases its capability after exposure to shocks and violations, agencies can adapt and strengthen from stressors.

Segmentation is vital to the theory of Zero Trust. Through centralized management, agencies can utilize segmentation to their benefit, positing IT adjacent to the specialized surface they protect. Zero Trust can be a learning curve. By implementing each protect surface individually, agencies can avoid becoming overwhelming. Building from the foundation up allows agencies to control their networks. Additional technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), help give defenders the advantage by enabling them to focus on protect surfaces. Through a personalized and carefully planned Zero Trust strategy, agencies can stop breaches and protect their network and data.

Illumio & Zero Trust

Zero Trust often incorporates threat-hunting solutions, to detect a problem and then try to block or remove it. But no solution will ever be 100% and it must be assumed that eventually a threat will slip through, undetected. Undetected threats will eventually move between workloads, further compromising the network. Illumio, a cloud computing security company that specializes in Zero Trust micro segmentation, can future-proof agencies against malware.

While threat-hunting tools focus on the workload, Illumio focuses on the segment, which means that Illumio enforces the Protect Surface via the vectors used by any and all threats that try to breach it. Any complex AI-generated malware which will appear in the near future will also want to move across segments, and Illumio will protect the environment today against threats which will appear tomorrow.

To learn more about Zero Trust and Segmentation, visit Illumio’s webinar, Segmentation is the Foundation of Zero Trust.

Highlights from the SANS Government Security Forum on Zero Trust, CMMC Compliance and AI

Posted on by Steve Jacyna

Carahsoft Technology Corporation, a leader in Government IT solutions, partnered with the SANS Institute for the fourth year in a row to host the 2024 Government Security Solutions Forum. The event gathered cybersecurity professionals and Public Sector leaders to address evolving cyber threats facing Government agencies. Experts led discussions on key topics, including Zero Trust implementation, achieving Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) compliance and harnessing artificial intelligence (AI). This blog highlights key takeaways from three of the six sessions surrounding these imperative industry topics, providing actionable insights to strengthen cybersecurity defenses in today’s digital landscape. During the event a visual artist Ashton Rodenhiser summarized the sessions which are featured in this blog.

Carahsoft SANS Government Security Solutions Forum Blog Zero Trust Image 2024

Zero Trust Implementation

During the session “Zero Trust Implementation Strategies,” experts explored the growing challenges security professionals face with emerging technologies and provided key insights into building a robust Zero Trust framework.

As new technologies rapidly emerge, security professionals face increasing challenges in keeping pace, especially with the integration of on-prem environments and the cloud. A key principle of Zero Trust is the enforcement of least privilege policies, which requires a shift in how identity management is applied. This begins with strong governance to ensure the accuracy and reliability of policies and attributes.

Building a comprehensive security framework also involves implementing contextual authorization through micro-segmentation, considering factors like device, location and time to create a robust protective barrier. Furthermore, integrating identity management with Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools is becoming increasingly important for tracking authorized processes and addressing the extended presence of threat actors who exploit admin identities to execute malware.

One of the biggest challenges in managing security policies is their complexity. Many security policies lack human readability due to their intricate structure, making automation essential for managing actions and enforcing compliance. The National Security Administration’s (NSA) recent Zero Trust guide emphasizes automation as a key pillar, highlighting its importance in responding to data flow deviations and maintaining security.

Despite the advanced systems in place, human error continues to be a major vulnerability. Employees can unknowingly compromise security through phishing attacks or by interacting with malicious links. To mitigate this, organizations must prioritize improving employee awareness and addressing the human factor as a critical component of cybersecurity.

Explore how Carahsoft’s Zero Trust portfolio can help Government implement a comprehensive Zero Trust strategy, strengthening organization’s security and protecting critical assets.

Carahsoft SANS Government Security Solutions Forum Blog CMMC Image 2024

Achieving CMMC Compliance

The session “Navigating Supply Chain Security and CMMC Compliance” provided valuable insights into the upcoming implementation of the CMMC framework and its implications for Defense Industrial Base (DIB) organizations. This certification will ensure that DIB organizations meet stringent cybersecurity standards through third-party assessments and will soon be mandatory for both prime contractors and subcontractors working with the Department of Defense (DoD).

CMMC consists of multiple certification levels, with Level 1 covering basic practices for Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Level 2 addressing 110 practices based on NIST 800-171, extending to around 320 actions. To prepare, organizations should work with Registered Practitioner Organizations (RPOs) to assess their readiness. These RPOs employ Certified CMMC Professionals (CCPs) and Certified CMMC Assessors (CCAs), who are trained and certified by the Cybersecurity Assessor and Instructor Certification Organization (CAICO), a subsidiary of Cyber AB, which oversees the curriculum and training programs.

After preparation, organizations will undergo an official assessment by a CMMC Third-Party Assessment Organization (C3PAO), which hires CCPs and CCAs to evaluate the cybersecurity measures in place. As the CMMC rule takes effect, organizations must ensure they work with certified professionals listed on the Cyber AB marketplace, as uncertified entities will not be recognized by the DoD.

Given the complexity of CMMC and the fact that preparation for certification can take at least six months, organizations are encouraged to start early to meet the new requirements.

Carahsoft is proud to be part of the CMMC ecosystem, with around 800 employees focused on cybersecurity and partnerships with over 150 vendors. By closely tracking policies and industry trends, Carahsoft aligns customer needs with relevant technologies, promoting “better together” integrations to maximize the value of existing investments. Carahsoft works with vendors that address every CMMC maturity level and capability domain, guiding customers through the complex decision-making process to ensure that they select the most suitable technologies to fill security gaps effectively and efficiently. Explore Carahsoft’s CMMC portfolio.

Carahsoft SANS Government Security Solutions Forum Blog AI Image 2024

Harnessing AI

Amid the complexities of cybersecurity, effective threat detection and response are increasingly reliant on advanced technologies like AI. The session “Harnessing AI for Advanced Threat Detection” explored the benefits and risks of integrating AI into security operations, highlighting key strategies for balancing automation with rigorous security practices.

“Advanced threat detection” spans various aspects of security operations, including the development and collection of threat intelligence. AI offers significant benefits in early threat detection, helping organizations quickly identify and respond to malicious activity. However, its use must be approached cautiously across the entire security chain.

With the rise of generative AI, industries are applying AI to automate time-consuming tasks. A key benefit is AI’s ability to condense information quickly. Tasks like threat searching or intelligence analysis, which once took hours, can now be completed in minutes, freeing experts to focus on higher-level tasks. This “toil reduction” is vital, as AI automates routine work and creates immediate efficiencies with minimal effort.

While AI brings advantages, there are inherent risks in implementing AI models and infrastructure. It is crucial to approach AI from two perspectives: using it to enhance security while ensuring the security of AI itself.

Organizations must also consider how they can trust AI-generated information. Trust and validation are essential. Provenance—knowing the source of data and models—is key to building confidence. While AI can handle most of the work, experienced engineers and analysts are still needed to verify and analyze the results so security teams can focus on more complex matters.

The siloed nature of work within security operations may limit intelligence sharing. Maintaining control of input data is critical, especially with public models hosted by technology vendors. If training data enters public models, organizations may compromise sensitive information. In regulated environments, private models offer safer options, allowing companies train AI while retaining control.

When integrating AI into security operations, organizations should build trust by validating each use case, allowing AI to be operationalized while ensuring accuracy. Experimentation is key to identifying where AI can provide a return on investment. However, implementing AI requires careful consideration of security models, AI safety and governance, particularly as organizations scale AI into operations.

Unlock the potential of AI to drive innovation and efficiency in Government organizations with Carahsoft’s AI and machine learning portfolio.

Frank Briguglio, Federal CTO at SailPoint, and Fatih Akar, Security Product Manager at VMRay, led the discussion on Zero Trust. Melanie ‘Kyle’ Gingrich, Interim Executive Director at The Cyber AB, provided guidance on navigating CMMC compliance. Josh Lemon, Director of Managed Detection and Response at Uptycs, and Ron Bushar, Managing Director of Mandiant Solutions at Google Public Sector, explored the role of AI in advanced threat detection.

Explore more insightful sessions on how Public Sector cybersecurity teams are strengthening their security posture by watching the SANS 2024 Government Security Forum in partnership with Carahsoft.

The Role of Identity Governance in the Implementation of DoD Instruction 8520.04

Posted on by Frank Briguglio

On September 3, 2024, The Department of Defense (DoD) released Instruction 8520.04, titled “Access Management for DoD Information Systems,” that serves as a foundational policy guiding the secure and efficient management of access to DoD information systems. The instruction mandates protocols for managing access across various environments, including military networks and systems used by both person entities (PEs) and non-person entities (NPEs) such as devices, applications, and automated processes. At the core of this policy is the principle of identity governance, which is essential for ensuring that access to sensitive systems and data is granted, monitored, and revoked based on verified identity attributes and defined security policies.

In the dynamic cybersecurity landscape, the concept of identity governance refers to the frameworks and processes that manage the lifecycle of digital identities. This includes the creation, management, and deletion of user accounts as well as the provisioning and de-provisioning of access rights based on a combination of user attributes, roles, and organizational policies. Identity governance is critical for compliance with the DoD’s Zero Trust Architecture, as outlined in the DoD Zero Trust Strategy. It emphasizes least privilege, continuous verification, and dynamic access control, all of which are key components of DoD Instruction 8520.04.

The policy serves as maturation of the departments ICAM initiatives over the past few years and highlights some key concepts that need to be adopted across the departments ecosystem. Here are some key examples of how identity governance aligns with and strengthens this policy:

1. Access Control and Provisioning

One of the primary elements of identity governance is the effective provisioning and de-provisioning of access. This aligns with Section 4 of DoD Instruction 8520.04, which mandates that access to systems be carefully controlled through explicit or dynamic mechanisms. Explicit access involves manually provisioning access rights to specific users, which must be meticulously documented and approved by system or resource owners. On the other hand, dynamic access relies on real-time attribute verification to grant or deny access based on the most current information available, such as the user’s role, location, or security clearance.

SailPoint Identity Governance for the DoD Blog Embedded Image 2024

Identity governance solutions play a crucial role in these processes by automating provisioning and de-provisioning based on predefined policies. When a user’s role changes or they leave the organization, governance systems automatically adjust access rights, ensuring compliance with de-provisioning requirements. This automatic adjustment helps prevent orphaned accounts—user accounts that are no longer needed or authorized—which can pose serious security risks if left unmanaged.

2. Authoritative Attribute Services

DoD Instruction 8520.04 emphasizes the importance of authoritative attribute services (AAS) in maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and security of identity attributes used in dynamic access decisions. Identity governance frameworks are designed to integrate with these authoritative services, ensuring that identity attributes such as security clearance levels, employment status, and role-based entitlements are accurate and up-to-date. This enables the DoD to enforce dynamic access control based on real-time identity data.

For example, a DoD system that relies on dynamic access might check a user’s current security clearance, job function, or location in real time before granting access to a sensitive file or system, or assign a critical role. These checks are enabled by robust identity governance systems that pull data from authoritative attribute services and apply organizational policies to ensure that access is only granted to those who are fully authorized and meet the predefined criteria.

3. Least Privilege and Separation of Duties (SoD)

The concept of least privilege—granting users the minimum level of access necessary to perform their duties—is another foundational principle of both identity governance and DoD Instruction 8520.04. In Section 4.2 of the instruction, system and IT resource owners are required to document and implement explicit access policies that adhere to least privilege standards. Furthermore, systems must implement SoD controls to prevent a single user from having conflicting roles, such as both creating and approving financial transactions.

Identity governance frameworks are uniquely equipped to manage SoD by automating the assignment of roles and enforcing policies that prevent users from being granted conflicting privileges. Governance solutions continuously monitor user access and provide alerts if SoD violations occur. By integrating these capabilities with the DoD’s access management protocols, identity governance helps ensure that users cannot escalate their privileges or circumvent access controls, thereby reducing the risk of insider threats and security breaches.

4. Continuous Auditing and Compliance

Continuous auditing and monitoring of user access is a critical requirement under DoD Instruction 8520.04, particularly for privileged users. Identity governance solutions enable DoD components to implement robust audit trails that track every access request, change in privileges, and system interaction. This is particularly important for IT privileged users—those with elevated access to critical systems and sensitive data—who require enhanced monitoring to detect and respond to suspicious activity.

Through the use of identity governance tools, DoD organizations can enforce periodic access reviews, as mandated by the instruction, to ensure that users only have the access they need and that privileged access is justified and properly documented. These reviews are automated and documented within governance systems, reducing the manual workload on administrators and enhancing the overall security posture by ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements.

5. Integration with Zero Trust Architecture

The DoD Zero Trust Strategy emphasizes the need for continuous verification of users and devices as they request access to systems and data, rather than assuming trust based on their presence inside the network perimeter. Identity governance systems are integral to the implementation of Zero Trust principles within the DoD, as they enable real-time verification of identity attributes and ensure that access is granted only after all conditions are met.

For instance, an identity governance system might check not only a user’s identity but also their security status, the network they are using, and the time of the access request before enabling access to sensitive data. This multi-layered approach to access control ensures that even if one security measure is compromised, others are in place to protect critical resources.

In Conclusion

Identity governance is a foundational element of the DoD’s efforts to secure access to information systems under DoD Instruction 8520.04. By providing a structured approach to managing digital identities, provisioning access, enforcing least privilege and separation of duties, and maintaining continuous auditing and compliance, identity governance systems enable the DoD to meet the stringent security requirements laid out in the instruction. Furthermore, identity governance is a critical enabler of the DoD’s shift toward a Zero Trust Architecture, ensuring that access to sensitive systems is dynamically controlled based on real-time identity attributes and organizational policies.

As cyber threats continue to evolve, the integration of identity governance with access management protocols like those found in DoD Instruction 8520.04 will be crucial in maintaining the security and integrity of the DoD’s information systems and the data they protect.

For a details of how SailPoint Identity Security supports the departments current ICAM and Zero Trust initiatives, and specifically how the capabilities of the platform align with the requirements of the policy, please download the report here.