Separation of Duties in Security Administration: Best Practices and Examples

Proper Separation of Duties in Security Administration

Prev Question Next Question

Question

Which of the following exemplifies proper separation of duties?

Answers

Explanations

Click on the arrows to vote for the correct answer

A. B. C. D.

A.

This is an example of Separation of Duties because operators are prevented from modifying the system time which could lead to fraud.

Tasks of this nature should be performed by they system administrators.

AIO defines Separation of Duties as a security principle that splits up a critical task among two or more individuals to ensure that one person cannot complete a risky task by himself.

The following answers are incorrect: Programmers are permitted to use the system console.

Is incorrect because programmers should not be permitted to use the system console, this task should be performed by operators.

Allowing programmers access to the system console could allow fraud to occur so this is not an example of Separation of Duties.

Console operators are permitted to mount tapes and disks.

Is incorrect because operators should be able to mount tapes and disks so this is not an example of Separation of Duties.

Tape operators are permitted to use the system console.

Is incorrect because operators should be able to use the system console so this is not an example of Separation of Duties.

References: OIG CBK Access Control (page 98 - 101) AIOv3 Access Control (page 182)

Proper separation of duties is a security principle that requires dividing sensitive tasks among different individuals or groups to avoid conflicts of interest and ensure accountability. By doing so, it minimizes the risk of fraud, errors, or unauthorized access to resources.

Option A: Operators are not permitted to modify the system time. This exemplifies proper separation of duties. Restricting operators from modifying the system time ensures that they cannot manipulate timestamps or backdate events to conceal their activities. This control reduces the risk of data tampering, ensures the integrity of audit trails, and prevents operators from abusing their privileges.

Option B: Programmers are permitted to use the system console. This violates the principle of separation of duties because it allows programmers to access and manipulate system settings, configurations, and logs that should be under the control of system administrators. Allowing programmers to access the system console increases the risk of accidental or intentional system damage, unauthorized access, or data theft.

Option C: Console operators are permitted to mount tapes and disks. This can be considered proper separation of duties if the tasks are not overly sensitive and the console operators have a legitimate need to access the tapes or disks. However, if the tapes or disks contain confidential or sensitive data, then it would be best to limit access to authorized personnel only.

Option D: Tape operators are permitted to use the system console. This violates the principle of separation of duties because tape operators should not have access to the system console. The console provides powerful privileges that can be used to alter system settings, access data, or escalate privileges. Tape operators should be limited to their specific tasks, such as loading and unloading tapes or performing backups, without having access to system controls.

In summary, option A exemplifies proper separation of duties, while options B, C, and D violate this principle. Proper separation of duties is essential for ensuring the security, integrity, and availability of information systems and preventing insider threats.