Energy told to tighten cybersecurity policies

The Energy Department's inspector general on Thursday released an audit of the department's certification and accreditation procedures for national security information systems that revealed a number of potentially serious weaknesses.

Auditors concluded that the problems were similar to those that led to the theft of classified information at Los Alamos National Laboratory in 2006. "In our judgment, the findings in the report suggest the department could be at risk for similar diversions," they wrote.

Specifically, auditors found that the department had not fully developed and implemented adequate cybersecurity policies, and federal and contractor officials did not always use effective mechanisms to monitor the performance of security controls.

Auditors reviewed 65 systems at six major sites, the locations of which were omitted from the public version of the report for security reasons. The systems were managed by various components of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Office of Environmental Management and the Office of Science. Many of the systems reviewed were not appropriately certified and accredited for operation.

Inspectors found that information security officers for 31 of the 56 systems reviewed at five of the sites were granted system administrator access in violation of department policies. Such an arrangement is an inadequate separation of duties that essentially allows employees to supervise and approve their own work, which is why the practice is prohibited. What's more, the practice could be far more widespread, since officials at two sites told auditors similar situations existed for many of their systems that weren't selected for review.

Auditors also found that classified and unclassified systems were operating in the same environment at some locations, which raised the possibility that classified data could be transferred to unclassified computer systems. Additionally, employees at one site were allowed to manually change computer-generated passwords without oversight. User-created passwords are more vulnerable than computer-generated ones, which is why they are not permitted on national security systems.

Besides system risks, auditors found weaknesses in security and contingency planning. One of the most significant problems was that several sites did not have accurate inventories of hardware associated with and permitted for use with various systems.

"As a demonstration of the harm that can be caused by unapproved devices, we specifically identified an unapproved network device during our previous review at the Los Alamos National Laboratory that may have contributed to a significant theft of classified information," auditors noted.

The IG report recommended that Energy update its policies to reflect current security requirements. It also said the administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, undersecretary of Energy and undersecretary for science should immediately implement controls to protect classified information systems.

Energy officials concurred. Auditors modified other recommendations after program officials provided more technical data.

"Without improvements, the department lacks assurance that its classified data and systems are secure from both internal and external threats," the auditors wrote.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.