Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Example SSP #1163

Open
3 of 9 tasks
Rene2mt opened this issue Feb 17, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1162
Open
3 of 9 tasks

Update Example SSP #1163

Rene2mt opened this issue Feb 17, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1162

Comments

@Rene2mt
Copy link
Member

Rene2mt commented Feb 17, 2025

This is a ...

improvement - something could be better

This relates to ...

  • the FedRAMP OSCAL baselines
  • the FedRAMP SSP OSCAL Example
  • the FedRAMP SAP OSCAL Example
  • the FedRAMP SAR OSCAL Example
  • the FedRAMP POA&M OSCAL Example
  • the FedRAMP OSCAL Validations
  • the Not sure

User Story

As a FedRAMP developer, I want to make sure the sample SSP has the latest content (and any modeling changes), so that the unit test suite and developed constraints are run against valid example SSP content.

Goals

  • Merge SSP changes from working branch.
  • Run validations on the example SSP and resolve discovered issues

Dependencies

No response

Acceptance Criteria

  • All FedRAMP Documents Related to OSCAL Adoption (https://github.com/GSA/fedramp-automation) affected by the changes in this issue have been updated.
  • A Pull Request (PR) is submitted that fully addresses the goals of this User Story. This issue is referenced in the PR.

Other information

No response

@Rene2mt Rene2mt moved this from 🆕 New to 🏗 In progress in FedRAMP Automation Feb 17, 2025
@Rene2mt Rene2mt linked a pull request Feb 17, 2025 that will close this issue
6 tasks
@Rene2mt
Copy link
Member Author

Rene2mt commented Feb 19, 2025

Below is summary of remaining / blocked SSP validation issues

User Role and Type Info

The example SSP has the following remaining user-has-role-id and user-has-user-type validation errors, however, we are considering deprecating these two constraints since the SSP rev5 template has significantly changed the user table.

[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[1]] user-has-role-id: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with at least one role by a role identifier.
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[1]] user-has-user-type: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with a type.       
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[2]] user-has-role-id: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with at least one role by a role identifier.
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[2]] user-has-user-type: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with a type.       
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[3]] user-has-role-id: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with at least one role by a role identifier.
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[3]] user-has-user-type: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with a type.       
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[4]] user-has-role-id: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with at least one role by a role identifier.
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[4]] user-has-user-type: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with a type.       
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[5]] user-has-role-id: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with at least one role by a role identifier.
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/user[5]] user-has-user-type: A FedRAMP document MUST define a user with a type.

Automation team will confirm with review teams if information mapping user -> role is still required. See #902.

Ports & Protocols on Non-Service Components

There are also several errors due to non "service" components providing protocol information.

[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[5]] Expect constraint 'not(exists((.)[not(@type='service')]/protocol))' did not match the data at path '/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[5]'
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[20]] Expect constraint 'not(exists((.)[not(@type='service')]/protocol))' did not match the data at path '/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[20]'
[ERROR] [/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[36]] Expect constraint 'not(exists((.)[not(@type='service')]/protocol))' did not match the data at path '/system-security-plan/system-implementation[1]/component[36]'

However, this is because we are using OSCAL v1.1.3. These errors will go away once

  1. NIST releases next version of OSCAL (usnistgov/OSCAL@c1374a0 is queued up for next OSCAL release) which will close out OSCAL/issues/2082
  2. OSCAL CLI uses the next OSCAL version (e.g. v1.1.4)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: 🏗 In progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants