Towards the quantification of cybersecurity footprint for SMBs using the CMMC 2.0

Y. Levy, Ruti Gafni
{"title":"Towards the quantification of cybersecurity footprint for SMBs using the CMMC 2.0","authors":"Y. Levy, Ruti Gafni","doi":"10.36965/ojakm.2022.10(1)43-61","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Organizations, small and big, are faced with major cybersecurity challenges over the past several decades, as the proliferation of information systems and mobile devices expand. While larger organizations invest significant efforts in developing approaches to deal with cybersecurity incidents, Small and Medium Businesses (SMBs) are still struggling with ways to both keep their businesses alive and secure their systems to the best of their abilities. When it comes to critical systems, such as defense industries, the interconnectivities of organizations in the supply-chain have demonstrated to be problematic given the depth required to provide a high-level cybersecurity posture. The United States (U.S.) Department of Defense (DoD) with the partnership of the Defense Industry Base (DIB) have developed the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) in 2020 with a third-party mandate for Level 1 certification. Following an outcry from many DIB organizations, a newly revised CMMC 2.0 was introduced in late 2021 where Level 1 (Fundamental) was adjusted for annual self-assessment. CMMC 2.0 provides the 17 practices that organizations should self-assess. While these 17 practices provide initial guidance for assessment, the specific level of measurement and how it impacts their overall cybersecurity posture is vague. Specifically, many of these practices use non-quantifiable terms such as “limit”, “verify”, “control”, “identify”, etc. The focus of this work is to provide SMBs with a quantifiable method to self-assess their Cybersecurity Footprint following the CMMC 2.0 Level 1 practices. This paper outlines the foundational literature work conducted in support of the proposed quantification Cybersecurity Footprint Index (CFI) using 26 elements that correspond to the relevant CMMC 2.0 Level 1 practices.","PeriodicalId":325473,"journal":{"name":"Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36965/ojakm.2022.10(1)43-61","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Organizations, small and big, are faced with major cybersecurity challenges over the past several decades, as the proliferation of information systems and mobile devices expand. While larger organizations invest significant efforts in developing approaches to deal with cybersecurity incidents, Small and Medium Businesses (SMBs) are still struggling with ways to both keep their businesses alive and secure their systems to the best of their abilities. When it comes to critical systems, such as defense industries, the interconnectivities of organizations in the supply-chain have demonstrated to be problematic given the depth required to provide a high-level cybersecurity posture. The United States (U.S.) Department of Defense (DoD) with the partnership of the Defense Industry Base (DIB) have developed the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) in 2020 with a third-party mandate for Level 1 certification. Following an outcry from many DIB organizations, a newly revised CMMC 2.0 was introduced in late 2021 where Level 1 (Fundamental) was adjusted for annual self-assessment. CMMC 2.0 provides the 17 practices that organizations should self-assess. While these 17 practices provide initial guidance for assessment, the specific level of measurement and how it impacts their overall cybersecurity posture is vague. Specifically, many of these practices use non-quantifiable terms such as “limit”, “verify”, “control”, “identify”, etc. The focus of this work is to provide SMBs with a quantifiable method to self-assess their Cybersecurity Footprint following the CMMC 2.0 Level 1 practices. This paper outlines the foundational literature work conducted in support of the proposed quantification Cybersecurity Footprint Index (CFI) using 26 elements that correspond to the relevant CMMC 2.0 Level 1 practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用CMMC 2.0对中小企业的网络安全足迹进行量化
在过去的几十年里,随着信息系统和移动设备的扩散,大大小小的组织都面临着重大的网络安全挑战。当大型组织投入大量精力开发处理网络安全事件的方法时,中小型企业(smb)仍在努力寻找既能保持业务活力又能尽其所能保护系统安全的方法。当涉及到关键系统时,例如国防工业,考虑到提供高水平网络安全态势所需的深度,供应链中组织的互连性已被证明是有问题的。美国(U.S.)美国国防部(DoD)与国防工业基地(DIB)合作,于2020年开发了网络安全成熟度模型认证(CMMC),并获得了第三方授权进行1级认证。在许多DIB组织的强烈抗议下,新修订的CMMC 2.0于2021年底推出,其中第1级(基础)调整为年度自我评估。CMMC 2.0提供了组织应该自我评估的17个实践。虽然这17个实践为评估提供了初步指导,但具体的测量水平以及它如何影响他们的整体网络安全态势是模糊的。具体地说,这些实践中有许多使用不可量化的术语,如“限制”、“验证”、“控制”、“识别”等。这项工作的重点是为中小企业提供一种可量化的方法,以根据CMMC 2.0 Level 1实践自我评估其网络安全足迹。本文概述了为支持拟议的量化网络安全足迹指数(CFI)而进行的基础文献工作,该指数使用了与相关CMMC 2.0 1级实践相对应的26个元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Understanding knowledge hiding behaviors in the workplace using a serious game data collection approach Special issue editorial: Knowledge hiding and knowledge hoarding in different environments Knowledge hiding and knowledge hoarding: Using grounded theory for conceptual development The impact of knowledge hiding and toxic leadership on knowledge worker productivity – Evidence from IT sector of Pakistan Pilot testing of experimental procedures to measure user's judgment errors in simulated social engineering attacks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1