NIST SP 800 provides thorough and detailed guidelines for creating a disaster recovery plan. I t goes into detail regarding commonly available tools, resources, and systems that can be employed by organizations as well as common structures for DRPs and systems for securing an organization. NIST is an extremely detailed and thorough document, and outlines just how many options and choices must be made when making security and DRP considerations. What’s important to remember about this document, however, is that while it is highly detailed, not every resource or structure provided by NIST will apply to the same organization. As with most NIST documents, these recommendations and guidelines are broad. Organizations must pick and choose which systems and provisions work for them to avoid needlessly bogging down their systems with superfluous and unnecessary provisions. On the other hand, making sure that security and recovery plans are robust and adequate is just as important. This fine line is necessary to walk in order to ensure that organizations are able to function properly
Hi Andrew,
According to your post, The National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800 (NIST SP 800) provides a comprehensive blueprint for creating a robust disaster recovery plan. Its professional tone of voice underscores its authority as it meticulously details the utilization of commonly available tools, resources, and systems. The guidelines are thorough and detailed, leaving no stone unturned in the quest for a resilient and effective disaster recovery strategy. NIST SP 800 is, therefore, an invaluable resource for organizations seeking to ensure continuity and resilience in the face of potential disasters.
The NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is a critical document that sets forth comprehensive guidelines for ensuring the continuity and recovery of information systems during and after a disruption. The guide provides a systematic approach to assess risks, develop contingency strategies, and implement effective plans to mitigate the impacts of potential system disruptions.
Its emphasis on risk assessment, system categorization, and contingency plan testing is particularly noteworthy. The guide underscores the importance of establishing a robust contingency planning policy, which is instrumental in defining the scope and objectives of the contingency plan.
However, the guide could benefit from more detailed instructions on integrating contingency plans with other risk management activities. Additionally, while it provides a general framework, the guide could be more explicit in its recommendations for specific types of information systems.
Overall, the NIST SP 800 34r1 serves as a valuable resource for federal agencies and other organizations seeking to enhance their information system contingency planning efforts.
I agree that the guide emphasizes the importance of risk assessments, system categorizations, and contingency plan testing as well as how to establish each of these in organizations. Although the guide itself does not provide information on integrating plans with other risk management activities, I think the guide is designed to work in tandem with other publications from NIST such that plans developed through their methodologies would work with other aspects of risk management based on NIST.
Michael, I agree with your assessment of NIST SP 800-34r1. This document provides a crucial framework for managing IT systems during a crisis. It’s helpful that it outlines a step-by-step approach for identifying risks, building recovery strategies, and implementing plans to minimize damage. The system categorization and testing process is particularly essential. You wouldn’t want to have an unreliable plan when things go wrong. The policy mentioned in the document also makes sense, as it establishes clear goals and boundaries for the entire contingency plan, ensuring that it stays focused.
NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems provides a comprehensive guide for contingency planning specific to federal information systems, Which are measures put in place to recover and restore the system after a disruption. Contingency Plan is important because it helps organizations to prepare for and effectively respond to unplanned events. The information systems contingency planning process is comprised of seven steps and All federal information systems must have a unique contingency plan for each system. Before developing a contingency plan, an organization must develop a contingency planning policy that defines the organization’s overall contingency objectives and establishes the organizational framework and responsibilities for system contingency planning. One thing that stood out for me in this article was BIA(Business Impact Analysis) which is a process used to evaluate and quantify the potential impacts of disruptions to critical business operations, where organizations can use this information to determine contingency planning requirements and priorities. BIA should be performed in the initial phase of the Software Development Lifecycle(SDLC) key aspects involved in this process are the Identification of Critical Business Functions and, Firms should identify and prioritize critical business processes along with the impact of a system disruption and estimate downtime which can be determined as (Maximum Tolerable Downtime (MTD), Recovery Time Objective (RTO), Recovery Point Objective (RPO)). The second is resource identification, this step involves the identification of all resources that will be required to resume operation. The final stage is identifying recovery priorities for system resources, where FIPS 199 can be used to identify priority levels. Business Impact Analysis enables organizations to make informed decisions about resource allocation, risk management, and continuity planning.
Another key takeaway that the article emphasized was the TTE(Testing, Training, Exercise ) similar to an incident response plan contingency plan should also be tested to validate its effectiveness, train key personnel to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities, and Exercise which is a simulation of an emergency designed to validate the operability of the developed plan. A contingency ensures organizations respond to disruptions effectively and maintain essential business operations.
Your post is absolutely correct, NIST SP 800-34r1 is vital for federal information systems, offering a structured approach to contingency planning. It outlines steps for developing unique plans, starting with a policy defining objectives and responsibilities. The guide emphasizes Business Impact Analysis (BIA) to assess critical functions, resource identification, and setting recovery priorities. Regular testing, training, and exercises validate plans, ensuring organizations can respond effectively to disruptions and maintain crucial operations.
This document is packed with a ton of information on contingency planning. The NIST Special Publication 800-34 Rev1 gives you framework, said instructions and recovery information for system services after a disruption. It goes through off-site redundancy, recovery of systems while using alternative equipment and performance of IS using manual methods. There are several topics and subjects that are in this article from several classes that I have taken now in this program. Some of those topics are Business Impact Analysis, which helps identify and prioritize information IS and components, FIPS199, Recovery phases, and NIST SP 800-53. This is the first time I’ve heard of continuity of operations (COOP) and what I found interesting about that is the logistics that must be involved for a company to have an alternative site up and running while recovering from an attack etc. Thes COOP plans are actually mandated for organizations by HSPD-20/NSPD 51. While I thought COOP as a BCP the document states, “Federal directives distinguish COOP plans as a specific type of plan that should not be confused with information System Contingency Plans, Disaster Recovery Plans or BCP’s. Which is a little confusing to me and even states that non-government organizations typically use BCP’s rather than COOP plans to address mission/business processes. From what I gleaned from Table 2-2 COOP is more of a short-term plan vs BCP provision for sustain mission/business operations while recovering from disruption while the COOP provides products and guidance to sustain an organization for up to 30 days. Now I also see that COOP functions must be sustained within 12 hours and for up to 30 days for an alternative site. There were also several other new plans that I have never heard of before and found the Occupant Emergency Plan to be interesting but at the same time a sobering reality to what this industry can expose you to. Section 3.4.4 also made me think of the logistics that must go into this section of equipment replacement. I was not aware that in the Contingency plan, the vendor agreements that come with SLA requirements with hardware, software and support vendors must be made for emergency maintenance service. Being in sales I can see where the vendor negotiations must be intense as there are very strict guidelines that they have to adhere to just to be eligible to be a vendor to one of the organizations. Has anyone in this class ever been part of an organization where you had to activate a contingency plan?
Thanks for your contribution Jeffrey, Your reflection on NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1 demonstrates a deep understanding of the comprehensive framework it provides for contingency planning. The distinction between continuity of operations (COOP) plans and other types of plans, as well as the logistical challenges involved, underscores the complexity of ensuring business resilience in the face of disruptions. Your insight into vendor agreements and emergency maintenance services highlights the critical role of partnerships in effective contingency planning. While I haven’t personally activated a contingency plan, I appreciate your perspective on the intense vendor negotiations and adherence to strict guidelines in such scenarios.
NIST SP 800-34r1 is a guide developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to assist federal agencies in developing contingency plans for their information systems. Its importance lies in providing a structured framework for identifying and mitigating risks, ensuring continuity of operations, and minimizing disruptions in the event of unexpected incidents or disasters.
The guide covers areas such as business impact analysis, contingency planning strategies, testing procedures, and communication protocols, all of which are essential for maintaining operational resilience and protecting critical information assets.
Moreover, by adhering to the NIST SP 800-34r1, federal agencies can enhance resilience against potential cyber-attacks, system failures, and natural disasters. It also aids in fulfilling legal and regulatory requirements related to information security and risk management.
In essence, the NIST SP 800-34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is an indispensable resource for maintaining the integrity, availability, and confidentiality of federal information systems, thereby safeguarding national security and public trust.
As always, great summary. The NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-34, Revision 1 serves as a critical resource for federal agencies by providing structured guidance for developing contingency plans for information systems. Some of the key points emphasized include risk identification and mitigation, business impact analysis.
In summary, the NIST SP 800-34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is an indispensable tool for federal agencies to protect the integrity, availability, and confidentiality of their information systems. It supports national security efforts and helps maintain public trust by ensuring operational continuity and effective response to incidents.
The NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-34, Revision 1, titled “Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems,” offers detailed guidance on establishing and maintaining a contingency planning program for information systems. The publication presents a seven-step process for creating an effective contingency plan. These steps include establishing a contingency planning policy statement, conducting a business impact analysis, identifying preventive measures, developing contingency strategies, crafting a detailed information system contingency plan, conducting testing, training, and exercises, and maintaining the plan.
Additionally, the document provides specific recommendations tailored to three types of platforms: client/server systems, telecommunications systems, and mainframe systems. It also covers strategies and techniques applicable across all system types. The publication includes instructions, recommendations, and considerations to aid personnel in evaluating information systems and operations to determine contingency planning requirements and priorities.
Furthermore, the guide underscores the importance of validating personnel readiness through testing, training, and exercises to prepare for plan activation and identify any potential gaps. It is designed to be integrated into every phase of an organization’s system development life cycle, ensuring the contingency plan remains current and relevant with system enhancements and organizational changes.
I agree that the guide emphasizes how important testing and planning is for utilizing plan activation and identifying issues for fixing in preparation for real disasters and incidents. Having a plan in place, while a good thing, means little if the plan is not regularly tested for potential issues as problems may arise in the event of an actual incident. Through testing and in-depth planning, aspects of contingency planning that are not well-prepared or have an issue will be shown and can be fixed prior to a real incident.
NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is a publication that provides instructions, recommendations, and considerations for federal system contingency planning. Specifically, this means the measures necessary for recovering information systems after a disruption of some kind. The publication provides information on IS contingency planning processes, IS contingency plan development, and the necessary considerations for technical contingency planning. One key point of interest from this publication for me is the necessary technical contingencies for telecommunications systems in Chapter 5 Section 3.
In reference to telecommunications systems, there are two primary classes: LANs and WANs. LANs are local area networks and relevant to smaller environments such as an office or a campus. WANs are larger networks consisting of two or more systems dispersed in a larger geographical area. When planning contingencies for telecommunications, you need to have separate documentations relevant to layouts as well as configurations, documentation, relevant security policies and controls, and results from the BIA should be reviewed. Solutions to implement depend on the recovery strategy, which may vary based on geographic and connectivity ownership. Additionally, consider redundant communications links, service providers, network-connecting devices, and redundancy from NSP or ISPs to have reliable connections in the case of a disaster.
NIST Special Publication 800-34 outlines guidelines for creating Information System Contingency Plans to ensure the effective and efficient recovery of information systems after a disruption. Contingency planning is essential for maintaining operational integrity and availability of critical information systems during and after emergencies. It involves a comprehensive approach, including preventive measures, recovery strategies, and technical considerations tailored to the system’s security impact level. The publication serves as a guide for federal organizations, detailing processes and technical measures for contingency planning across different system platforms, such as client/server, telecommunications, and mainframe systems, and integrates federal standards and policies like FIPS 199 and NIST SP 800-53 into the planning process.
Something I found interesting from this publication is that contingency planning is part of a broader strategy for organizational resilience, focusing on the ability to sustain mission-critical functions under all circumstances, which is crucial for maintaining the continuity of operations during and after unexpected disruptions.
Hi Nicholas, your summary is quite concise. NIST SP 800-34 positions contingency planning as a pivotal component of broader organizational resilience strategies. It underscores the necessity of sustaining mission-critical functions under all circumstances to ensure continuity of operations during and after disruptions. By embedding contingency planning within a comprehensive resilience framework, organizations can fortify their ability to withstand and recover from diverse challenges, ranging from natural disasters to cybersecurity incidents.
NIST SP 800-34r1 is a guide that helps federal agencies develop contingency plans for their information systems. The guide provides a roadmap for recovering critical IT systems after disruptions and explains how contingency planning fits into the bigger picture of security, emergency management, and organizational resilience. The guide also helps assess information systems and prioritize which ones need the most robust recovery plans. It provides practical steps to create a contingency plan outlining procedures, roles, and resources required to swiftly get essential systems back online, minimizing downtime and ensuring business continuity. While the guide is designed for federal agencies, its principles are valuable for any organization seeking to improve its IT disaster recovery preparedness.
No doubt NIST SP 800-34r1 offers federal agencies a roadmap for IT system recovery post-disruptions, fitting into security, emergency management, and resilience frameworks. I like the part you emphasized it assesses and prioritizes systems for recovery, outlining procedures and resources for swift restoration, making it valuable beyond federal agencies for improving disaster recovery preparedness.
Loved your breakdown of NIST SP 800-34r1 and how it is utilized as a “roadmap” for getting systems up and back online. I appreciate how you pointed out that although it is a government guideline that the document also has value in the corporate sector as it is also used to assist to improve disaster recovery.
After skimming NIST SP 800-34r1 section 3.5 Planning, Training, and Exercises (TT&E) I realize to properly respond to an incident there must be a good plan in place. How do you know if you plan is any good if it is not tried a few times a year? This is what section 3.5 discusses, going into how critical is it that your plan can withstand an attack. This is why testing is so important. Testing evaluates the validity of your plan and can provide metrics that can validate how well your system operates when attacked. Next there training involved for the security team on how to respond in an attack. I am a former basketball player, and we would practice what we may see when playing an opponent. So, to me this is the same thing, how do you know how good you are in a game if they never were tested. Testing allows helps to find flaws in your “game” and how to correct and improve your response. This segues into training and exercises to again test how the team reacts in an incident. The sections closes with a summary of the TT&E program that breaks down the types of events, along with a activity type, also providing the FIPS 199 availability objective.
Chapter 3, information system contingency planning process stood out to me because I can tell this will be a big part of our job. The chart shows the process in a clear way, by showing the process involving development, analysis, identification, creation, planning, and testing. The process itself can seem daunting, but having this chart does simplify it. There is another chart in the chapter, figure 3-2, which shows every process for the business, impacts, tolerable downtime, system components, and recovery time objective. It does seem to me that every business process won’t be able to be listed, which is why it’s great that this chapter does mention priority levels can be established, as companies will most likely only focus on high priority processes. Maximum Tolerable Downtime does seem like something difficult to calculate only because at the end of the day, it’s only an assumption.
NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 offers comprehensive guidance on developing contingency plans for federal records systems. The document outlines the steps involved in contingency planning, including risk assessment, business impact analysis, and plan improvement. NIST underscores the importance of tailoring contingency plans to the specific needs and requirements of each organization, considering factors such as device criticality, data sensitivity, and regulatory obligations.
Additionally, NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 discusses various types of contingency plans, such as continuity of operations (COOP) plans, disaster recovery plans (DRP), and incident response plans (IRP). The document provides templates and examples to assist organizations in creating their contingency plans and underscores the significance of regularly reviewing and updating these plans to address changes in the environment and emerging threats.
Well said Akintunde, Your insight into NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 highlights the crucial steps involved in developing comprehensive contingency plans for federal records systems. Tailoring plans to specific organizational needs and regularly updating them are key takeaways, emphasizing the importance of adaptability in addressing evolving threats and environmental changes.
The NIST800-34r1 is a detailed guide used for contingency planning with federal information systems, it emphasizes the importance of preparation beforehand to make responses swift and effective, stressing that the more prepared an organization is for a incident the more preparation put in can lead to better CIA maintained for the information system. Regular communication and planning for testing, exercises, maintenance, and recovery procedures will make it easier to recover from incidents and get the systems back in action. Overall this document is a great instruction for federal agencies to establish robust contingency planning and to mitigate the impact of disruptions on their information systems as well as maintaining continuity of operations in the face of continuous threats.
I agree with you, Alex. Effective communication is essential. Strong communication ensures a smooth disaster recovery process. The initial step of contingency planning is identifying critical processes in the business to know which one to prioritize. Fostering good communication among different departments helps identify critical business processes and makes the whole Training, testing, and exercise(TTE) process easier.
Good point about the level of preparedness. Making sure that a robust and detailed recovery plan is in place for any possible issues and inevitable failures of a system is essential in ensuring business continuity. Without these guidelines and a clear path for business or organizational continuity and recovery any business or organization may suffer far more from an incident
Hello Alex
You did a great job explaining the NIST800-34r1. While I do agree that companies that are prepared generally respond better to attacks, I wonder if there has ever been a cyberattack where every company has been affected equally, meaning no matter how prepared an organization was, the impact they faced was the exact same as their non prepared counterparts. I would think that incident response plans cover unknown types of attacks and unknown types of damage to a company, but especially these days, it’s interesting seeing all the new kinds of attacks that are out there, and I wonder how incident response planning will change in the future.
The Information Systems Contingency Planning Process describes a process for creating and sustaining effective information systems contingency measures. There are seven steps in all: 1. Create contingency plan policies; 2. Conduct a business impact analysis (BIA); 3. Identify preventive measures; 4. Develop contingency strategies; 5. Create information system contingency plans; and 6. Plan maintenance. These phases represent major elements of an integrated information system contingency strategy. Plan formulation is the foundation of information systems contingency planning; it is efficient and ensures that workers are completely aware of the organization’s contingency planning requirements, which must be based on clearly established policies.
Hi Samuel,
I like the part where you stated that employees should be aware of an organization’s contingency plans and requirements. Familiarity with the contingency plan guarantees that employees adhere to regulatory mandates and receive suitable training to adeptly handle emergencies, thus mitigating liability and fortifying the organization’s resilience.
NIST SP 800 provides thorough and detailed guidelines for creating a disaster recovery plan. I t goes into detail regarding commonly available tools, resources, and systems that can be employed by organizations as well as common structures for DRPs and systems for securing an organization. NIST is an extremely detailed and thorough document, and outlines just how many options and choices must be made when making security and DRP considerations. What’s important to remember about this document, however, is that while it is highly detailed, not every resource or structure provided by NIST will apply to the same organization. As with most NIST documents, these recommendations and guidelines are broad. Organizations must pick and choose which systems and provisions work for them to avoid needlessly bogging down their systems with superfluous and unnecessary provisions. On the other hand, making sure that security and recovery plans are robust and adequate is just as important. This fine line is necessary to walk in order to ensure that organizations are able to function properly
Hi Andrew,
According to your post, The National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800 (NIST SP 800) provides a comprehensive blueprint for creating a robust disaster recovery plan. Its professional tone of voice underscores its authority as it meticulously details the utilization of commonly available tools, resources, and systems. The guidelines are thorough and detailed, leaving no stone unturned in the quest for a resilient and effective disaster recovery strategy. NIST SP 800 is, therefore, an invaluable resource for organizations seeking to ensure continuity and resilience in the face of potential disasters.
The NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is a critical document that sets forth comprehensive guidelines for ensuring the continuity and recovery of information systems during and after a disruption. The guide provides a systematic approach to assess risks, develop contingency strategies, and implement effective plans to mitigate the impacts of potential system disruptions.
Its emphasis on risk assessment, system categorization, and contingency plan testing is particularly noteworthy. The guide underscores the importance of establishing a robust contingency planning policy, which is instrumental in defining the scope and objectives of the contingency plan.
However, the guide could benefit from more detailed instructions on integrating contingency plans with other risk management activities. Additionally, while it provides a general framework, the guide could be more explicit in its recommendations for specific types of information systems.
Overall, the NIST SP 800 34r1 serves as a valuable resource for federal agencies and other organizations seeking to enhance their information system contingency planning efforts.
Hi Michael,
I agree that the guide emphasizes the importance of risk assessments, system categorizations, and contingency plan testing as well as how to establish each of these in organizations. Although the guide itself does not provide information on integrating plans with other risk management activities, I think the guide is designed to work in tandem with other publications from NIST such that plans developed through their methodologies would work with other aspects of risk management based on NIST.
Michael, I agree with your assessment of NIST SP 800-34r1. This document provides a crucial framework for managing IT systems during a crisis. It’s helpful that it outlines a step-by-step approach for identifying risks, building recovery strategies, and implementing plans to minimize damage. The system categorization and testing process is particularly essential. You wouldn’t want to have an unreliable plan when things go wrong. The policy mentioned in the document also makes sense, as it establishes clear goals and boundaries for the entire contingency plan, ensuring that it stays focused.
NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems provides a comprehensive guide for contingency planning specific to federal information systems, Which are measures put in place to recover and restore the system after a disruption. Contingency Plan is important because it helps organizations to prepare for and effectively respond to unplanned events. The information systems contingency planning process is comprised of seven steps and All federal information systems must have a unique contingency plan for each system. Before developing a contingency plan, an organization must develop a contingency planning policy that defines the organization’s overall contingency objectives and establishes the organizational framework and responsibilities for system contingency planning. One thing that stood out for me in this article was BIA(Business Impact Analysis) which is a process used to evaluate and quantify the potential impacts of disruptions to critical business operations, where organizations can use this information to determine contingency planning requirements and priorities. BIA should be performed in the initial phase of the Software Development Lifecycle(SDLC) key aspects involved in this process are the Identification of Critical Business Functions and, Firms should identify and prioritize critical business processes along with the impact of a system disruption and estimate downtime which can be determined as (Maximum Tolerable Downtime (MTD), Recovery Time Objective (RTO), Recovery Point Objective (RPO)). The second is resource identification, this step involves the identification of all resources that will be required to resume operation. The final stage is identifying recovery priorities for system resources, where FIPS 199 can be used to identify priority levels. Business Impact Analysis enables organizations to make informed decisions about resource allocation, risk management, and continuity planning.
Another key takeaway that the article emphasized was the TTE(Testing, Training, Exercise ) similar to an incident response plan contingency plan should also be tested to validate its effectiveness, train key personnel to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities, and Exercise which is a simulation of an emergency designed to validate the operability of the developed plan. A contingency ensures organizations respond to disruptions effectively and maintain essential business operations.
Hi Mariam,
Your post is absolutely correct, NIST SP 800-34r1 is vital for federal information systems, offering a structured approach to contingency planning. It outlines steps for developing unique plans, starting with a policy defining objectives and responsibilities. The guide emphasizes Business Impact Analysis (BIA) to assess critical functions, resource identification, and setting recovery priorities. Regular testing, training, and exercises validate plans, ensuring organizations can respond effectively to disruptions and maintain crucial operations.
This document is packed with a ton of information on contingency planning. The NIST Special Publication 800-34 Rev1 gives you framework, said instructions and recovery information for system services after a disruption. It goes through off-site redundancy, recovery of systems while using alternative equipment and performance of IS using manual methods. There are several topics and subjects that are in this article from several classes that I have taken now in this program. Some of those topics are Business Impact Analysis, which helps identify and prioritize information IS and components, FIPS199, Recovery phases, and NIST SP 800-53. This is the first time I’ve heard of continuity of operations (COOP) and what I found interesting about that is the logistics that must be involved for a company to have an alternative site up and running while recovering from an attack etc. Thes COOP plans are actually mandated for organizations by HSPD-20/NSPD 51. While I thought COOP as a BCP the document states, “Federal directives distinguish COOP plans as a specific type of plan that should not be confused with information System Contingency Plans, Disaster Recovery Plans or BCP’s. Which is a little confusing to me and even states that non-government organizations typically use BCP’s rather than COOP plans to address mission/business processes. From what I gleaned from Table 2-2 COOP is more of a short-term plan vs BCP provision for sustain mission/business operations while recovering from disruption while the COOP provides products and guidance to sustain an organization for up to 30 days. Now I also see that COOP functions must be sustained within 12 hours and for up to 30 days for an alternative site. There were also several other new plans that I have never heard of before and found the Occupant Emergency Plan to be interesting but at the same time a sobering reality to what this industry can expose you to. Section 3.4.4 also made me think of the logistics that must go into this section of equipment replacement. I was not aware that in the Contingency plan, the vendor agreements that come with SLA requirements with hardware, software and support vendors must be made for emergency maintenance service. Being in sales I can see where the vendor negotiations must be intense as there are very strict guidelines that they have to adhere to just to be eligible to be a vendor to one of the organizations. Has anyone in this class ever been part of an organization where you had to activate a contingency plan?
Thanks for your contribution Jeffrey, Your reflection on NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1 demonstrates a deep understanding of the comprehensive framework it provides for contingency planning. The distinction between continuity of operations (COOP) plans and other types of plans, as well as the logistical challenges involved, underscores the complexity of ensuring business resilience in the face of disruptions. Your insight into vendor agreements and emergency maintenance services highlights the critical role of partnerships in effective contingency planning. While I haven’t personally activated a contingency plan, I appreciate your perspective on the intense vendor negotiations and adherence to strict guidelines in such scenarios.
NIST SP 800-34r1 is a guide developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to assist federal agencies in developing contingency plans for their information systems. Its importance lies in providing a structured framework for identifying and mitigating risks, ensuring continuity of operations, and minimizing disruptions in the event of unexpected incidents or disasters.
The guide covers areas such as business impact analysis, contingency planning strategies, testing procedures, and communication protocols, all of which are essential for maintaining operational resilience and protecting critical information assets.
Moreover, by adhering to the NIST SP 800-34r1, federal agencies can enhance resilience against potential cyber-attacks, system failures, and natural disasters. It also aids in fulfilling legal and regulatory requirements related to information security and risk management.
In essence, the NIST SP 800-34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is an indispensable resource for maintaining the integrity, availability, and confidentiality of federal information systems, thereby safeguarding national security and public trust.
As always, great summary. The NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-34, Revision 1 serves as a critical resource for federal agencies by providing structured guidance for developing contingency plans for information systems. Some of the key points emphasized include risk identification and mitigation, business impact analysis.
In summary, the NIST SP 800-34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is an indispensable tool for federal agencies to protect the integrity, availability, and confidentiality of their information systems. It supports national security efforts and helps maintain public trust by ensuring operational continuity and effective response to incidents.
The NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-34, Revision 1, titled “Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems,” offers detailed guidance on establishing and maintaining a contingency planning program for information systems. The publication presents a seven-step process for creating an effective contingency plan. These steps include establishing a contingency planning policy statement, conducting a business impact analysis, identifying preventive measures, developing contingency strategies, crafting a detailed information system contingency plan, conducting testing, training, and exercises, and maintaining the plan.
Additionally, the document provides specific recommendations tailored to three types of platforms: client/server systems, telecommunications systems, and mainframe systems. It also covers strategies and techniques applicable across all system types. The publication includes instructions, recommendations, and considerations to aid personnel in evaluating information systems and operations to determine contingency planning requirements and priorities.
Furthermore, the guide underscores the importance of validating personnel readiness through testing, training, and exercises to prepare for plan activation and identify any potential gaps. It is designed to be integrated into every phase of an organization’s system development life cycle, ensuring the contingency plan remains current and relevant with system enhancements and organizational changes.
Hi Chidiebere,
I agree that the guide emphasizes how important testing and planning is for utilizing plan activation and identifying issues for fixing in preparation for real disasters and incidents. Having a plan in place, while a good thing, means little if the plan is not regularly tested for potential issues as problems may arise in the event of an actual incident. Through testing and in-depth planning, aspects of contingency planning that are not well-prepared or have an issue will be shown and can be fixed prior to a real incident.
NIST SP 800 34r1 Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is a publication that provides instructions, recommendations, and considerations for federal system contingency planning. Specifically, this means the measures necessary for recovering information systems after a disruption of some kind. The publication provides information on IS contingency planning processes, IS contingency plan development, and the necessary considerations for technical contingency planning. One key point of interest from this publication for me is the necessary technical contingencies for telecommunications systems in Chapter 5 Section 3.
In reference to telecommunications systems, there are two primary classes: LANs and WANs. LANs are local area networks and relevant to smaller environments such as an office or a campus. WANs are larger networks consisting of two or more systems dispersed in a larger geographical area. When planning contingencies for telecommunications, you need to have separate documentations relevant to layouts as well as configurations, documentation, relevant security policies and controls, and results from the BIA should be reviewed. Solutions to implement depend on the recovery strategy, which may vary based on geographic and connectivity ownership. Additionally, consider redundant communications links, service providers, network-connecting devices, and redundancy from NSP or ISPs to have reliable connections in the case of a disaster.
NIST Special Publication 800-34 outlines guidelines for creating Information System Contingency Plans to ensure the effective and efficient recovery of information systems after a disruption. Contingency planning is essential for maintaining operational integrity and availability of critical information systems during and after emergencies. It involves a comprehensive approach, including preventive measures, recovery strategies, and technical considerations tailored to the system’s security impact level. The publication serves as a guide for federal organizations, detailing processes and technical measures for contingency planning across different system platforms, such as client/server, telecommunications, and mainframe systems, and integrates federal standards and policies like FIPS 199 and NIST SP 800-53 into the planning process.
Something I found interesting from this publication is that contingency planning is part of a broader strategy for organizational resilience, focusing on the ability to sustain mission-critical functions under all circumstances, which is crucial for maintaining the continuity of operations during and after unexpected disruptions.
Hi Nicholas, your summary is quite concise. NIST SP 800-34 positions contingency planning as a pivotal component of broader organizational resilience strategies. It underscores the necessity of sustaining mission-critical functions under all circumstances to ensure continuity of operations during and after disruptions. By embedding contingency planning within a comprehensive resilience framework, organizations can fortify their ability to withstand and recover from diverse challenges, ranging from natural disasters to cybersecurity incidents.
NIST SP 800-34r1 is a guide that helps federal agencies develop contingency plans for their information systems. The guide provides a roadmap for recovering critical IT systems after disruptions and explains how contingency planning fits into the bigger picture of security, emergency management, and organizational resilience. The guide also helps assess information systems and prioritize which ones need the most robust recovery plans. It provides practical steps to create a contingency plan outlining procedures, roles, and resources required to swiftly get essential systems back online, minimizing downtime and ensuring business continuity. While the guide is designed for federal agencies, its principles are valuable for any organization seeking to improve its IT disaster recovery preparedness.
Hi Kelly.
No doubt NIST SP 800-34r1 offers federal agencies a roadmap for IT system recovery post-disruptions, fitting into security, emergency management, and resilience frameworks. I like the part you emphasized it assesses and prioritizes systems for recovery, outlining procedures and resources for swift restoration, making it valuable beyond federal agencies for improving disaster recovery preparedness.
Hi Kelly,
Loved your breakdown of NIST SP 800-34r1 and how it is utilized as a “roadmap” for getting systems up and back online. I appreciate how you pointed out that although it is a government guideline that the document also has value in the corporate sector as it is also used to assist to improve disaster recovery.
After skimming NIST SP 800-34r1 section 3.5 Planning, Training, and Exercises (TT&E) I realize to properly respond to an incident there must be a good plan in place. How do you know if you plan is any good if it is not tried a few times a year? This is what section 3.5 discusses, going into how critical is it that your plan can withstand an attack. This is why testing is so important. Testing evaluates the validity of your plan and can provide metrics that can validate how well your system operates when attacked. Next there training involved for the security team on how to respond in an attack. I am a former basketball player, and we would practice what we may see when playing an opponent. So, to me this is the same thing, how do you know how good you are in a game if they never were tested. Testing allows helps to find flaws in your “game” and how to correct and improve your response. This segues into training and exercises to again test how the team reacts in an incident. The sections closes with a summary of the TT&E program that breaks down the types of events, along with a activity type, also providing the FIPS 199 availability objective.
Chapter 3, information system contingency planning process stood out to me because I can tell this will be a big part of our job. The chart shows the process in a clear way, by showing the process involving development, analysis, identification, creation, planning, and testing. The process itself can seem daunting, but having this chart does simplify it. There is another chart in the chapter, figure 3-2, which shows every process for the business, impacts, tolerable downtime, system components, and recovery time objective. It does seem to me that every business process won’t be able to be listed, which is why it’s great that this chapter does mention priority levels can be established, as companies will most likely only focus on high priority processes. Maximum Tolerable Downtime does seem like something difficult to calculate only because at the end of the day, it’s only an assumption.
NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 offers comprehensive guidance on developing contingency plans for federal records systems. The document outlines the steps involved in contingency planning, including risk assessment, business impact analysis, and plan improvement. NIST underscores the importance of tailoring contingency plans to the specific needs and requirements of each organization, considering factors such as device criticality, data sensitivity, and regulatory obligations.
Additionally, NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 discusses various types of contingency plans, such as continuity of operations (COOP) plans, disaster recovery plans (DRP), and incident response plans (IRP). The document provides templates and examples to assist organizations in creating their contingency plans and underscores the significance of regularly reviewing and updating these plans to address changes in the environment and emerging threats.
Well said Akintunde, Your insight into NIST SP 800-34 Revision 1 highlights the crucial steps involved in developing comprehensive contingency plans for federal records systems. Tailoring plans to specific organizational needs and regularly updating them are key takeaways, emphasizing the importance of adaptability in addressing evolving threats and environmental changes.
The NIST800-34r1 is a detailed guide used for contingency planning with federal information systems, it emphasizes the importance of preparation beforehand to make responses swift and effective, stressing that the more prepared an organization is for a incident the more preparation put in can lead to better CIA maintained for the information system. Regular communication and planning for testing, exercises, maintenance, and recovery procedures will make it easier to recover from incidents and get the systems back in action. Overall this document is a great instruction for federal agencies to establish robust contingency planning and to mitigate the impact of disruptions on their information systems as well as maintaining continuity of operations in the face of continuous threats.
I agree with you, Alex. Effective communication is essential. Strong communication ensures a smooth disaster recovery process. The initial step of contingency planning is identifying critical processes in the business to know which one to prioritize. Fostering good communication among different departments helps identify critical business processes and makes the whole Training, testing, and exercise(TTE) process easier.
Good point about the level of preparedness. Making sure that a robust and detailed recovery plan is in place for any possible issues and inevitable failures of a system is essential in ensuring business continuity. Without these guidelines and a clear path for business or organizational continuity and recovery any business or organization may suffer far more from an incident
Hello Alex
You did a great job explaining the NIST800-34r1. While I do agree that companies that are prepared generally respond better to attacks, I wonder if there has ever been a cyberattack where every company has been affected equally, meaning no matter how prepared an organization was, the impact they faced was the exact same as their non prepared counterparts. I would think that incident response plans cover unknown types of attacks and unknown types of damage to a company, but especially these days, it’s interesting seeing all the new kinds of attacks that are out there, and I wonder how incident response planning will change in the future.
The Information Systems Contingency Planning Process describes a process for creating and sustaining effective information systems contingency measures. There are seven steps in all: 1. Create contingency plan policies; 2. Conduct a business impact analysis (BIA); 3. Identify preventive measures; 4. Develop contingency strategies; 5. Create information system contingency plans; and 6. Plan maintenance. These phases represent major elements of an integrated information system contingency strategy. Plan formulation is the foundation of information systems contingency planning; it is efficient and ensures that workers are completely aware of the organization’s contingency planning requirements, which must be based on clearly established policies.
Hi Samuel,
I like the part where you stated that employees should be aware of an organization’s contingency plans and requirements. Familiarity with the contingency plan guarantees that employees adhere to regulatory mandates and receive suitable training to adeptly handle emergencies, thus mitigating liability and fortifying the organization’s resilience.