Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
NIST Special Publication 800-53 is an information security standard that provides a catalog of privacy and security controls for information systems.Originally intended for U.S. federal agencies except those related to national security, since the 5th revision it is a standard for general usage.
The Risk Management Framework (RMF) is a United States federal government guideline, standard, and process for managing risk to help secure information systems (computers and networks). The RMF was developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and provides a structured process that integrates information security ...
Version 1.1, released in 2018, introduced enhancements related to supply chain risk management and self-assessment processes. The most recent update, Version 2.0, was published in 2024, expanding the framework’s applicability and adding new guidance on cybersecurity governance and continuous improvement practices.
NIST Special Publication 800-37 Rev. 1 was published in February 2010 under the title "Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems: A Security Life Cycle Approach". This version described six steps in the RMF lifecycle. Rev. 1 was withdrawn on December 20, 2019 and superseded by SP 800-37 Rev. 2. [1]
Based on the results of the review, the information system is accredited. The certification and accreditation process is defined in NIST SP 800-37 "Guide for the Security Certification and Accreditation of Federal Information Systems". [11]
Compliance with SP 800-171 is often a prerequisite for participating in federal contracts. [31] For the secure development of software, NIST introduced SP 800-218, known as the "Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF)." This document emphasizes integrating security throughout all stages of the software development lifecycle, from design to ...
I am planning to make updates about Revision 5. This will include the December 2020 update to Rev 5 and the changes to the nature of the document between rev 4 and ...
This might help explain how a random number generator later shown to be inferior to the alternatives (in addition to the back door) made it into the NIST SP 800-90A standard. The potential for a backdoor in Dual_EC_DRBG had already been documented by Dan Shumow and Niels Ferguson in 2007, [ 10 ] but continued to be used in practice by companies ...