Dear Engineering Construction Industry Training Board,

I am writing to make an open government request for all the information to which I am entitled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Please forward responses to the attached questions below.

I would like the above information to be provided to me as an electronic document.
If this request is too wide or unclear, I would be grateful if you could contact me as I understand that under the Act, you are required to advise and assist requesters. If any of this information is already in the public domain, please can you direct me to it, with page references and URLs if necessary.

If the release of any of this information is prohibited on the grounds of breach of confidence, I ask that you supply me with copies of the confidentiality agreement and remind you that information should not be treated as confidential if such an agreement has not been signed.
I understand that you are required to respond to my request within the 20 working days after you receive this letter. I would be grateful if you could confirm in writing that you have received this request.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Gloria Zimba.

1. Do you have a formal IT security strategy? (Please provide a link to the strategy)

A) Yes
B) No

2. Does this strategy specifically address the monitoring of network attached device configurations to identify any malicious or non-malicious change to the device configuration?

A) Yes
B) No
C) Don’t know

3. If yes to Question 2, how do you manage this identification process – is it:

A) Totally automated – all configuration changes are identified and flagged without manual intervention.
B) Semi-automated – it’s a mixture of manual processes and tools that help track and identify configuration changes.
C) Mainly manual – most elements of the identification of configuration changes are manual.

4. Have you ever encountered a situation where user services have been disrupted due to an accidental/non malicious change that had been made to a device configuration?

A) Yes
B) No
C) Don’t know

5. If a piece of malware was maliciously uploaded to a device on your network, how quickly do you think it would be identified and isolated?

A) Immediately
B) Within days
C) Within weeks
D) Not sure

6. How many devices do you have attached to your network that require monitoring?

A) Physical Servers: record number
B) PC’s & Notebooks: record number

7. Have you ever discovered devices attached to the network that you weren’t previously aware of?

A) Yes
B) No

If yes, how do you manage this identification process – is it:

A) Totally automated – all device configuration changes are identified and flagged without manual intervention.
B) Semi-automated – it’s a mixture of manual processes and tools that help track and identify unplanned device configuration changes.
C) Mainly manual – most elements of the identification of unexpected device configuration changes are manual.

8. How many physical devices (IP’s) do you have attached to your network that require monitoring for configuration vulnerabilities?

Record Number:

9. Have you suffered any external security attacks that have used malware on a network attached device to help breach your security measures?

A) Never
B) Not in the last 1-12 months
C) Not in the last 12-36 months

10. Have you ever experienced service disruption to users due to an accidental, non-malicious change being made to device configurations?

A) Never
B) Not in the last 1-12 months
C) Not in the last 12-36 months

11. When a scheduled audit takes place for the likes of PSN or Cyber Essentials, how likely are you to get significant numbers of audit fails relating to the status of the IT infrastructure?

A) Never
B) Occasionally
C) Frequently
D) Always

foi, Engineering Construction Industry Training Board

Dear Gloria

As a matter of policy, ECITB does not respond to specific requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 concerning IT security policies, practices, systems and suppliers. We consider this information to be exempt under section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 because disclosure of this information could make ECITB a target of crime.
Section 31(1)(a) of the Act says that we do not need to provide information that would be likely to prejudice the functions of law enforcement- the prevention and detection of crime. ECITB believes that releasing this information would increase the likelihood of criminals using the information to either:
• target attacks against ECITB systems OR
• focus on other more vulnerable organisations, in the knowledge that ECITB is strongly protected.
As Section 31 is a qualified exemption we have considered the public interest test.
Factors in favour of disclosure:
• It would help transparency and accountability of ECITB.
• It would reassure people about whether our systems are vulnerable or not.
• It would provide information about how effective our security systems are.
Factors in favour of withholding
• There is an inherent public interest in crime prevention.
• There is public interest in avoiding the costs (financial, distress, inconvenience, publicity, regulatory) associated with any attacks.
• There is public interest in preventing any threat to the integrity of ECITB data.
• There is public interest in ensuring that ECITB can comply with its duties to take all necessary steps to safeguard data.
We believe that the balance of public interest lies in upholding the exemption and not releasing the information.

Kind regards
FOI Team

show quoted sections