|
|
The Final HIPAA Security Rule -- Conducting Effective
Risk Analysis
By Steve Weil, CISSP, CISA
Introduction
Risk analysis is a key requirement of the HIPAA final Security
Rule. The Security Rule requires covered entities (CEs) to "conduct
an accurate and thorough assessment of the potential risks and vulnerabilities
to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of electronic
protected health information held by the covered entity." The
rule further states that "[t]he required risk analysis is also
a tool to allow flexibility for entities in meeting the requirements
of this final rule... ." This article presents a high-level
overview of the risk analysis process.
"Risk" is the likelihood that a specific threat will
exploit a certain vulnerability, and the resulting impact of that
event. "Risk analysis," the starting point in an overall
risk management process, is a systematic and analytical approach
that identifies and assesses risks and provides recommendations
to reduce risk to a reasonable and appropriate level. This process
will enable senior management to understand their organization's
risks to electronic protected health information (EPHI), and to
allocate appropriate resources to reduce and correct potential losses.
General Methodology
Risk analysis is an eight-part process that CEs should carry out
step-by-step:
- EPHI boundary definition
- Threat identification
- Vulnerability identification
- Security control analysis
- Risk likelihood determination
- Impact analysis
- Risk determination
- Security control recommendations
Step 1: EPHI Boundary Definition
CEs should begin the risk analysis process by conducting a detailed
inventory of their EPHI and information systems that contain EPHI.
Using questionnaires, on-site interviews and inspections, document
review, and automated scanning tools, the inventory should obtain
and document a wide variety of information, including:
- Information system hardware and software details
- Internal and external interfaces of information systems
- Identification of the primary users of the information systems
and EPHI
- Basic function and purpose of the EPHI and information system
- Technical controls (e.g., hardware or software access control
mechanisms, encryption) and non technical controls (e.g., security
policies, employee training) being used to protect EPHI and information
systems
Information systems can be complex, with a wide range of components,
interfaces, and processes; the inventory should seek to identify
all interdependencies among these items.
Step 2: Threat Identification
The CE should next identify all potential threats to its EPHI and
related information systems. A threat is defined as "something
or someone that can intentionally or accidentally exploit a vulnerability."
In general, there are three types of threats to EPHI:
- Natural: Floods, earthquakes, tornados, etc.
- Human: Unintentional (incorrect data entry or accidental
deletion of data) and intentional (denial of service attack,
installing malicious software)
- Environmental: Power failures, hazardous material spill,
etc.
Detailed information about threats can be acquired from a wide
variety of sources including:
- Hazard identification and vulnerability assessment studies
conducted by local and state governments
- Security organizations such as SANS, CERT, and NIPC
- Security web pages such as www.securityfocus.com
and www.searchsecurity.com
Step 3: Vulnerability Identification
CEs should then identify the vulnerabilities of their EPHI and
related information systems. A vulnerability is a flaw or weakness
in system security procedures, design, implementation, or internal
controls that can be exploited by a threat and result in misuse
or abuse of EPHI. CEs can identify these vulnerabilities by (1)
reviewing vulnerability sources and (2) performing security assessments.
Vulnerability sources include system and data owner questionnaires,
on-site review of information systems, audit reports, and information
system test and evaluation reports. Vulnerability lists such as
the NIST vulnerability database (http://icat.nist.gov)
and Bugtraq, as well as advisories from security vendors and security
organizations such as CERT are also good tools.
Security assessments use a variety of software tools and auditing
techniques to check specific data and information systems for an
array of vulnerabilities. They typically define the "footprint"
(what systems and services are available to a threat). CEs should
be sure to establish clearly defined rules of engagement (what time
of day the assessments can occur, what types of attacks are appropriate,
what systems will be assessed, etc.) BEFORE the assessment begins.
Step 4: Security Control Analysis
CEs should next analyze the security controls that have been implemented
or will be implemented to protect EPHI; this includes both preventive
and detective controls.
Preventive security controls are designed to prevent or restrict
the exploitation of vulnerabilities (e.g., access control, authentication).
Detective controls detect and report when violations occur (e.g.,
audit trail, alarm). The analysis should clearly define what security
controls are being used to protect specific EPHI, how they're being
used, and any gaps between how they're being used and how they're
supposed to be used.
Step 5: Risk Likelihood Determination
The goal of this step is to assign to specific risks ratings that
indicate the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited
by a particular threat. Three factors should be considered: 1) threat
motivation and capability, 2) type of vulnerability, and 3) existence
and effectiveness of security controls. Table 1 below presents three
risk likelihood levels that CEs might use:
|
Table 1
|
|
Likelihood
|
Definition
|
|
High
|
Threat is highly capable, motivated, or likely and current
security controls are ineffective |
|
Medium
|
Threat is capable, motivated or likely, but there are security
controls in place that may prevent exploitation of specific
vulnerabilities |
|
Low
|
Threat is not capable, motivated or likely or current security
controls will likely prevent exploitation of specific vulnerabilities |
Step 6: Impact Analysis
Next, CEs determine the impact that would result if a threat were
to successfully exploit a vulnerability. Information system and
EPHI owners should be interviewed to determine the impact in the
following areas:
- Confidentiality: EPHI is disclosed or accessed in an
unauthorized manner
- Integrity: EPHI is improperly modified
- Availability: EPHI is unavailable to authorized users
CEs should define the impacts as high, medium or low.
Step 7: Risk Determination
At this point, CEs use the information obtained in the above steps
to identify the level of risk to specific EPHI and related information
systems. For each vulnerability and associated possible threat,
CEs should make a risk determination based on:
- The likelihood a certain threat will attempt to exploit a specific
vulnerability
- The level of impact should the threat successfully exploit
the vulnerability
- The adequacy of planned or existing security controls
Table 2 below presents three levels of risk that CEs might use:
|
Table 2
|
|
Risk Level
|
Required Action
|
|
High
|
Security controls should be implemented or improved as quickly
as possible |
|
Medium
|
Security controls should be implemented or improved in a reasonable
amount of time |
|
Low
|
Existing security controls are likely adequate or the risk
is acceptable |
Step 8: Security Control Recommendations
Using all of the above information, CEs should conclude the Risk
Analysis process by proposing security controls that can mitigate
or eliminate the identified unacceptable risks to EPHI. These controls
should reduce the level of risk to EPHI and related information
systems to an acceptable level. These proposed controls would then
be evaluated when the CE moves into risk mitigation.
Conclusion
Thorough and accurate risk analysis is essential for complying
with the HIPAA final Security Rule. CEs can use the above risk analysis
process to evaluate their risks and determine appropriate and reasonable
security controls for protecting their EPHI.
Steven Weil, CISSP, CISA, is senior security consultant with Seitel
Leeds & Associates, a full service consulting firm based in Seattle,
WA. Mr. Weil specializes in the areas of security policy development,
HIPAA compliance, disaster recovery planning and security assessments.
He can be reached at sweil@sla.com.
|
 |
 |