Compare And Contrast The Positive And Negative Aspects Of Em ✓ Solved

Compare and contrast the positive and negative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC. Suggest methods to mitigate the negative aspects

Mandatory Access Control (MAC), Discretionary Access Control (DAC), and Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) are three fundamental approaches to managing access to information systems within organizations. Understanding the elements of each method is essential for determining the most suitable control strategy, especially in a security-conscious environment like a federal government contractor. This report explores each access control mechanism, compares their advantages and disadvantages, suggests mitigation strategies for their respective limitations, and recommends the most appropriate approach for the organization in question.

Elements of Access Control Methods

Mandatory Access Control (MAC)

MAC is a strict access control model in which decisions are made based on central policies set by system administrators. In this system, classifications (such as confidential, secret, or top secret) are assigned to data, and users are granted clearances that correspond to these classifications. Access rights are predefined and enforced uniformly, with users unable to alter permissions. Classic examples of MAC include government security systems like the Department of Defense's Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC) model.

Discretionary Access Control (DAC)

DAC grants data owners or resource creators the discretion to determine and manage access permissions for their resources. This model relies on Access Control Lists (ACLs), where owners specify which users or groups can access particular data and the level of access granted. It offers flexibility and is common in commercial and less-sensitive environments, allowing users to share data easily and modify permissions as needed.

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)

RBAC assigns access permissions based on a user's designated role within an organization. Roles are defined according to job functions, and users inherit permissions associated with their respective roles. This approach simplifies management, especially in large organizations, by grouping permissions by role rather than individual user and facilitates policy enforcement based on organizational hierarchies.

Comparison and Contrast of Access Control Methods

Positive Aspects

• MAC: Provides a high level of security compliance by enforcing strict policies; suitable for classified or sensitive environments; prevents unauthorized data access through centralized control.
• DAC: Offers flexibility and ease of use; allows data owners to control access without administrator intervention; supports dynamic sharing and collaboration.
• RBAC: Simplifies management of permissions in large organizations; aligns access rights with organizational roles; enhances security by limiting privilege scope based on roles.

Negative Aspects

• MAC: Rigid and inflexible, potentially hindering productivity; complex to implement and manage; may not accommodate organizational changes easily.
• DAC: Susceptible to security risks due to less control; owners may inadvertently grant inappropriate access; increases the likelihood of data leaks or unauthorized sharing.
• RBAC: Requires accurate role definitions, which can be complex; may lead to privilege creep if roles are not regularly reviewed; implementing RBAC can be costly initially.

Strategies to Mitigate Negative Aspects

To address the rigidity of MAC, organizations can incorporate flexible policies that allow exception handling and periodic review of classifications. Regular audits and updates can improve responsiveness to organizational needs. For DAC, implementing strict owner training and automated monitoring tools can reduce accidental or malicious misconfigurations. For RBAC, establishing comprehensive role management policies, including role review and audit mechanisms, can prevent privilege creep and ensure roles remain aligned with current organizational structures.

Evaluation and Recommendation

For a medium-sized federal government contractor, security requirements for sensitive information are paramount, making MAC an attractive option. However, practical implementation considerations suggest that RBAC provides a balanced approach—combining security and manageability—especially when properly tailored to organizational roles. RBAC simplifies permission management and aligns with regulatory compliance standards common in government contracting. While MAC ensures tight security, its inflexibility can hamper operational efficiency; DAC offers flexibility but at increased security risk.

Therefore, it is recommended that the organization adopts a role-based access control system, supplemented by strict policies and regular reviews to prevent privilege creep and maintain security compliance. Implementing RBAC aligns with government security standards, facilitates effective management, and can be scaled according to organizational growth.

Foreseen Challenges and Strategies

One challenge when deploying RBAC is the potential for role explosion, where numerous roles are created to address all access nuances, complicating management and increasing errors. To mitigate this, organizations should adopt a role engineering process that consolidates similar roles and automates role management. Harmonizing RBAC with attribute-based controls can also address dynamic access needs while maintaining control granularity.

Another challenge is resistance to change among staff used to previous models. Conducting thorough change management programs, including staff training and awareness campaigns, can ease the transition. Establishing continuous monitoring and audit processes ensures compliance and identifies improper access promptly.

Conclusion

While MAC offers stringent security, its inflexibility makes it less suitable for dynamic organizations, whereas DAC's flexibility introduces security risks. RBAC strikes a functional balance, providing manageable, role-aligned permissions essential for compliance and operational efficiency. By implementing RBAC with robust policies and continuous oversight, the organization can achieve a secure, efficient, and compliant access control framework suited to its operational needs.

References

• Ferraiolo, D., Kuhn, R., & Chandramouli, R. (2003). Role-Based Access Control. Artech House.
• Sandhu, R. S., Coyne, E. J., Feinstein, H. L., & Youman, C. E. (1996). Role-based access control models. IEEE Computer, 29(2), 38-47.
• Stallings, W. (2017). Effective Security Management. Pearson.
• Appleby, S. (2019). Implementing and managing access controls in government systems. Journal of Information Security, 10(3), 124-136.
• ISO/IEC 27001:2013. (2013). Information Security Management Systems — Requirements. International Organization for Standardization.
• Anderson, R. (2020). Security engineering: A guide to building dependable distributed systems. Wiley.
• Bishop, M. (2003). Computer Security: Art and Science. Addison-Wesley.
• Grance, T., & Dittrich, D. (2010). Improving access control through role engineering. Computers & Security, 29(4), 436-455.
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2011). Guide to Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC) Definition and Considerations.
• Vacca, J. R. (2014). Computer and Information Security Handbook. Morgan Kaufmann.