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

XCCDF-Results to HDF #103

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 17, 2021
Merged

XCCDF-Results to HDF #103

merged 6 commits into from
Jun 17, 2021

Conversation

zacharylc-mitre
Copy link
Contributor

  • Added hyperlinks to README.md
  • Added mapping tool for SCC XCCDF-Results to HDF
  • Made changes to heimdall_tools.rb and cli.rb to account for xccdf_mapper

Fixes #95

Signed-off-by: zacharylc zacharylc@mitre.org

@Bialogs
Copy link
Contributor

Bialogs commented Jun 8, 2021

needs a rebase

Copy link
Contributor

@Bialogs Bialogs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs a review by @ejaronne

@aaronlippold aaronlippold requested review from rbclark and removed request for rx294 June 10, 2021 12:53
@rbclark rbclark removed their request for review June 10, 2021 14:26
@ejaronne
Copy link
Contributor

The SCC xml sample doesn't seem to produce the check-content field, as seen in the base (non-results) xccdf of the STIG. Otherwise, mappings look correct. Is it possible to see a generic expected xccdf results xml that isn't generated by any particular client? Otherwise, I fear this has been tailored to SCC's own special XML interpretation, and therefore should be renamed "SCC-xxcdf-mapper"

Actual STIG:
image

Sample from SCC (lacks Check Text):
image

@aaronlippold aaronlippold requested a review from rx294 June 14, 2021 20:43
@rx294
Copy link
Collaborator

rx294 commented Jun 16, 2021

@zacharylc-mitre Please resolve merge conflicts on the Readme

@rx294
Copy link
Collaborator

rx294 commented Jun 16, 2021

@zacharylc-mitre I agree with @ejaronne that the scope should be limited to SCC xccdf type.

Possibly scc_xccdf_mapper is the correct title ... @aaronlippold @Bialogs please add you thoughts.

Besides xccdf_results_mapper breaks your current naming pattern, we don't specify results in our other mappers.

Copy link
Collaborator

@rx294 rx294 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just the naming change and associated metadata changes..

mapper code LTGM

README.md Outdated
10. [**scoutsuite_mapper**](#scoutsuite_mapper) - multi-cloud security auditing tool
11. [**snyk_mapper**](#snyk_mapper) - commercial package vulnerability scanner
12. [**sonarqube_mapper**](#sonarqube_mapper) - open-source static code analysis tool
13. [**xccdf_results_mapper**](#xccdf_results_mapper) - SCC Client XCCDF-Results scans
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Update to SCC Compliance Validation tool

@Bialogs
Copy link
Contributor

Bialogs commented Jun 17, 2021

It was originally named xccdf_mapper which I renamed to xccdf_results because the XCCDF schema and the XCCDF-results schema are different. Can we point to a SCC XCCDF-Results schema? I'm trying to call it what it is. Maybe we just call it an SCC mapper.

@ejaronne
Copy link
Contributor

Eventually, @aaronlippold wanted this to translate any client that generates the xccdf_results format. This has only been tested to convert SCC output. I agree though that leading with xccdf_results_mapper will go over the heads of many non-data-schema folks who just want that "SCAP mapper", but won't see it. How about we revamp:

The upper list should have links to the converters later in the README.

In the upper list, put in an entry called "SCC (SCAP Compliance Checker) results mapper", but link it to the xccdf_results_mapper later in the README. As the xccdf_results_mapper adapts to work with other SCAP validated tools such as OpenSCAP, place a new entry in the upper list, but link it to the same xcddf_results_mapper lower on the list.

@rx294
Copy link
Collaborator

rx294 commented Jun 17, 2021

Adding some notes for info

looks like test-system field identifies the test tool that generated xccdf

openscap
<TestResult xmlns="http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2" id="xccdf_org.open-scap_testresult_xccdf_mil.disa.stig_profile_MAC-1_Public" start-time="2021-06-16T16:01:29-05:00" end-time="2021-06-16T16:01:37-05:00" version="001.001" test-system="cpe:/a:redhat:openscap:1.3.4">

scc
<cdf:TestResult start-time="2021-04-29T14:16:20" end-time="2021-04-29T14:24:10" id="xccdf_mil.disa.stig_testresult_scap_mil.disa.stig_comp_U_RHEL_7_V3R2_STIG_SCAP_1-2_Benchmark-xccdf.xml---xccdf_mil.disa.stig_profile_MAC-1_Classified-1" version="003.002" test-system="cpe:/a:spawar:scc:5.4">

test-system seems to be universal field

https://csrc.nist.rip/library/alt-SP800-126r3.pdf
section: 4.5 XCCDF Results

@rx294
Copy link
Collaborator

rx294 commented Jun 17, 2021

Taking back my objection re xccdf_results_mapper

@Bialogs
Copy link
Contributor

Bialogs commented Jun 17, 2021

Okay so it seems the way ahead should just update the README to be clear

zacharylc-mitre and others added 6 commits June 17, 2021 11:55
Added mapping tool for SCC XCCDF-Results to HDF
Made changes to heimdall_tools.rb and cli.rb to account for xccdf_mapper*

Signed-off-by: zacharylc <zacharylc@mitre.org>
Signed-off-by: zacharylc-mitre <72886517+zacharylc-mitre@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: zacharylc <zacharylc@mitre.org>
Rename xccdf_mapper to xccdf_results_mapper
@Bialogs Bialogs merged commit 6e2ef76 into master Jun 17, 2021
@Bialogs Bialogs deleted the scc-converter branch June 17, 2021 19:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Convert SCC XCCDF XML to a Heimdall readable format
4 participants