 |
New QA Review Toughens PCI Assessors
Written by David Taylor
October 15, 2008
Guest Columnist David Taylor is the Founder of the PCI Knowledge Base, Research Director of the PCI Alliance and a former E-Commerce and Security analyst with Gartner.
I wrote in last week's column that there are changes in the PCI 1.2 standard that should increase the focus on risk assessment as part of an effort to be responsive to concerns about the perceived "checklist mentality" of the PCI standards. But in the last week I've been given an "earful" from merchants I've spoken with that the PCI SSC's new Quality Assurance process is actually having the opposite effect.
Specifically, we are hearing that assessors, fearful of having their work more closely reviewed, are being very "letter of the law" when doing their assessments. There are several specific areas of security where this is affecting merchants, so we'll offer advice about how best to address each of these problems, to avoid bloodshed between merchants and their assessors.
Wireless Networking There is additional clarification in PCI 1.2 on this topic, and Wireless IDS/IPS is mentioned specifically, which is the only technology to be named for the first time with the 1.2 version.
Because of the TJX security breach and general concerns about "war driving," assessors are being extra careful when doing wireless security reviews. In addition to doing scans at headquarters, they are doing more scans at the stores, as well.
More importantly, it seems that some assessors are also insisting on quarterly wireless scans of all facilities with wireless networks, which is a very comprehensive interpretation of the testing procedure for requirement 11.1a.
As a response to this, we'd recommend using a wireless IDS/IPS. Now that they're named in the standard, the purchase of such a tool could have a "halo effect" by producing comprehensive reports that the assessor can use to document his/her review for the QA review. They also have a better ROI when the cost of doing in-store wireless scans is taken into consideration.
Store Visits As we noted last week, PCI 1.2 includes additional focus on sampling facilities outside headquarters. In the past, most assessors did few if any store visits. They focused on the IT infrastructure documentation.
As long as the merchant could show that store IT configurations were standardized and the proper networking, access control and encryption controls were in place, the need for (or number of) store visits was subject to negotiation.
With the new QA process and specific mention of sampling non-HQ facilities, there seems to be less flexibility on this topic. One possible response to this is for the merchant's PCI manager (or team) to assemble all of the store security documentation into a neat package for the assessor, requirement by requirement.
Focus on providing the assessor with what he/she needs for a QA review. Another possible response is to carefully "orchestrate" the store visits by doing significant preparation with store operations and regional managers to select "representative" stores where local management understands security and is "sympathetic" to the cause of security. Either way, documentation is the key to reducing the cost and impact of additional focus on stores.
Software Development Merchants who do not use a rigorous, standardized software development process (or who haven't documented or don't enforce the one they have, which is more likely) are learning that between PCI 1.2 and the new QA process, they are being told to make changes to their SDLC methods and procedures.
This is particularly true for Web applications development and any applications that involve card data. But because no one uses a separate SDLC for certain applications, essentially your whole software development methodology comes under review. One of the most important responses is to be able to prove that code involving confidential data (or all code) is under change control and that access to (and encryption of) card data in development/test is functioning properly.
Closer scrutiny of "power users" is likely, as is conformance to the current version of the OWASP development guidelines. Documentation that these controls and techniques are followed is the key to making this review go more smoothly.
QSAs vs. Internal Audit In PCI 1.2, the role of the Internal Audit team is mentioned for the first time. If the QA process and the prospect of an even more strict interpretation of the PCI standards is causing concern, then it may be time to go for the Internal Audit option, even if you're a Level 1 merchant.
If you have an IT-savvy Internal Auditor, it may be more cost-effective to send that person to a 2-day class on PCI assessment and "bring your assessment in house." You will need to prove that this person is independent from the IT organization he or she assessing, but that is what having Internal Audit is all about anyway.
It's important to understand that this option may not make PCI "easier." It will give your company additional control of the process. But because Internal Auditors tend to "know where the bodies are buried," their review may be even more rigorous than that of a QSA.
There are, of course, political implications to controlling this process and it's reasonable to believe that the PCI Council's QA process will be expecting Internal Audit teams to be "easy graders" and will test for this prospect. Nonetheless, for those Level 1 merchants staffed to handle this (and most should be) bringing assessment in house could increase the awareness, control and predictability of a process that has been problematic, at best, for many larger merchants.
If you have a question about PCI 1.2, you can ask the PCI Knowledge Base panel of more than 75 PCI experts in our discussion forums. Also, if you're a retailer, we want to get you involved in the PCI Best Practices study we're doing with the National Retail Federation. It's 100 percent anonymous. Just send us an E-mail at David.Taylor@KnowPCI.com. |
|
 |
 |
Evan Schuman is the former retail technology editor for eWEEK.com, PCMagazine, CIOInsight and retail reporter for RISNews and Consumer Goods Technology. Having covered IT issues for 21 years - and other stuff like legal affairs, politics, Wall Street and the environment for about eight years before that - Schuman is in a good position to gripe about technology trends and sometimes accidentally make a good point.
|
 |
 |
Sears.com Melts Down On Black Friday, But Costco, Walmart, Saks and Kmart Have Issues, Too
Sears.com suffered the worst Web problems on Black Friday (Nov. 28), experiencing a series of complete site crashes for much of the day. Although no other major retailer came close, according to preliminary reports, many of the industry's largest merchants suffered site slowdowns or other Web problems, including Walmart, Kmart, Saks, Overstock, Amazon, Target, Kohl's, Costco and Buy.com.
|
|
 |
|
 |