Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Provide example OSCAL Profile representation for controls with testing requirements included #342

Open
Tracked by #387
mlysaght2017 opened this issue Sep 10, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
OSCAL representation of FINOS CCC Work related to representing CCC in OSCAL, partnering with NIST to understand how to represent in OS security

Comments

@mlysaght2017
Copy link
Contributor

mlysaght2017 commented Sep 10, 2024

Feature Request

Description of Problem:

#326 includes an attempt at representing a sample of common controls in an OSCAL Profile representation, with the inclusion of associated testing requirements. It is still unclear how best to represent the testing requirements for the controls within an OSCAL profile and it is agreed that the current OSCAL profile "PoC" in #326 needs to be massaged.

Potential Solutions:

With the controls and testing requirements in #326 as a starting point, provide an updated OSCAL control catalog/profile representation that aligns with best practice/NIST guidance so that we have an example target state to start building automation for.

@mlysaght2017 mlysaght2017 added security OSCAL representation of FINOS CCC Work related to representing CCC in OSCAL, partnering with NIST to understand how to represent in OS labels Sep 10, 2024
@iMichaela
Copy link
Contributor

Based on the current content, the OSCAL artifact will be a catalog (mini). A profile can be created from that catalog afterwards.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
OSCAL representation of FINOS CCC Work related to representing CCC in OSCAL, partnering with NIST to understand how to represent in OS security
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants