DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

INFORMATION SECURITY: Additional Actions Needed to Address Vulnerabilities That Put VA Data at Risk – GAO

Posted on November 18, 2014 by Dissent

Highlights of a new GAO study also addressing VA infosecurity:

What GAO Found

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has taken actions to mitigate previously identified vulnerabilities, but it has not fully addressed these weaknesses:

Incident response: VA took actions to contain and eradicate the effects of a network intrusion detected in 2012, but it could not show that these actions were fully effective. Specifically, the department’s Network and Security Operations Center (NSOC) analyzed the incident and documented actions taken in response, but the department could not provide forensics analysis or digital evidence associated with its efforts. Thus, the effectiveness of its incident response could not be demonstrated. VA policy does not require evidence related to security incidents to be kept for at least 3 years, as recommended by federal guidance. This hinders the department’s ability to show its efforts have been effective. Further, VA did not fully address the vulnerability that led to the original incident, increasing the risk that such an incident may recur. In addition, VA policy does not provide the NSOC with sufficient authority to monitor activity on the department’s networks, limiting its ability to detect and respond to security incidents.

Vulnerabilities in web applications: VA’s NSOC identified nine significant vulnerabilities in two key applications that process veterans’ personal information, and validated that the department had corrected six of them. However, corrective actions for the remaining three vulnerabilities had not been validated, and the department had not developed action plans to ensure they were addressed in a timely manner. VA also did not fully implement a type of testing that can identify root causes of security vulnerabilities in application source code.

Weaknesses on network devices: VA periodically scans the devices (e.g., laptop computers) connected to its network for security vulnerabilities and summarizes the most critical vulnerabilities. For May 2014, the 10 most critical vulnerabilities were related to security patches that had not been applied to VA’s network devices. These missing patches had been available for periods ranging from 4 to 31 months, even though department policy requires critical patches to be applied within 30 days. While the department documented decisions not to apply 3 of the patches, pending tests of the effect they could have on functionality, it did not document controls to compensate for not applying up-to-date security features. Further, the department did not document any reasons for not applying the other 7 patches. The department has established an organization tasked with remediating security vulnerabilities, but it has not developed specific actions, priorities, and milestones for this organization to carry out its responsibilities.

Until VA fully addresses identified security weaknesses, its systems and the information they contain—including veterans’ personal information—will be at an increased risk of unauthorized access, modification, disclosure, or loss.

GAO-15-220T (full report, pdf)

Related: INFORMATION SECURITY: VA Needs to Address Identified Vulnerabilities – GAO (GAO-15-117)

Category: Commentaries and AnalysesGovernment Sector

Post navigation

← Hackers went after Detroit database, official
The Evolution Store updates its breach notification →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files
  • A guilty plea in the PowerSchool case still leaves unanswered questions
  • Brussels Parliament hit by cyber-attack
  • Sweden under cyberattack: Prime minister sounds the alarm
  • Former CIA Analyst Sentenced to Over Three Years in Prison for Unlawfully Transmitting Top Secret National Defense Information

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe
  • AI tools collect and store data about you from all your devices – here’s how to be aware of what you’re revealing
  • 23andMe Privacy Ombudsman Urges User Consent Pre-Data Sale

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.