Tag: pci (Page 3 of 3)

IATA PCI-DSS: New FAQs!

So, it has been a while since we’ve updated on the ongoing PCI-DSS program from IATA. Just a brief recap then: Airlines have demanded that IATA support their own internal compliance project by making the BSP (Billing Settlement Plan) card sales channel PCI DSS compliant. This is why IATA Accredited Travel Agents now need to become PCI DSS compliant by 1st March 2018. Yes, that’s roughly 6 weeks ahead of this writing. And no, it doesn’t seem like there might be any extension towards this compliance from IATA. However, there are some pretty big news headed your way on this compliance, as we are in touch with IATA over the last couple of months and also assisting many travel agencies to get PCI-DSS sorted out in their payment channels.

However, for this article, we will focus on the brand new FAQs that just came out a few days ago (18 Jan 2018)! You can find the updated FAQs here at http://www.iata.org/services/finance/Documents/pci-dss-faqs.pdf, and we are going to look through a few changes.

FAQ #3

What if I do not have an acquirer?

Old FAQ: We suggest that you contact the credit card branch that you are working with.

New FAQ: In that case, you are solely accountable for the PCI DSS compliance of the BSP card transactions you are making on account of the airline whose ticket you are selling. We suggest you contact your GDS provider who can provide some guidance, and then review through which of your systems card details transit or are stored. Starting from this you will know which of your systems
must undergo a PCI DSS evaluation.

Our opinion: The first FAQ was of course, not exactly extremely helpful, since most credit card branch does not give two hoots about travel agencies banging down their doors in search of their response. The new FAQ is basically saying, well – you just need to figure out yourself then, but you can ask the GDS guys if you wish. We have. The GDS guys are very important in this factor, because they first need to be PCI compliant. Sabre, Amadeus and I think Galileo Travelport is. Secondly, they can give some guidance on how agencies can approach PCI based on the client software that is installed on the agency side.

What do we mean by this? Because for agencies not storing credit card, they can possibly be eligible for shorter SAQ (Self Assessment Questionnaires) for PCI. An SAQ D has 340+ questions. An SAQ A has only 20+. If an agency uses the GDS for credit card passthrough transactions (i.e the credit card form of payment), and not store credit card information in the back office or any electronic form (email, skype, excel etc), they might qualify for shorter SAQs. The question is which?

Some advisors claim the SAQ C is correct due to the fact that the GDS is a payment system. The reasoning is that this is no different from integrated POS systems like Micros. In Malaysia, we have hundreds of different vendors in POS solutions for retailers, F&B franchisees etc. But is the GDS really like an integrated POS solution? SAQ C has around 160 questions. The amount of time you will spend on this is probably the same amount of time taken to watch two seasons of the Game of Thrones. Or three, depending on whether you binge watch or not.

Some advisors veer to the other extreme, claiming that the GDS client is simply a browser system that is redirecting the entire card data processing work to the GDS provider, so they are eligible for A. 22 questions. Maybe an episode of Seinfeld. But A is generally for a web browser based site with absolutely zero handling of credit card on their end, not just systematic, but also manual. The only way this works for travel agency is that they outsource an entire call center to handle their MOTO business and do not accept walk-in customers. I don’t think that’s happening. Most feedback I get from livid agencies about PCI-DSS is that they are struggling too much on thin margins. So, no, SAQ A is entirely too liberal.

SAQ C-VT has a seemingly better balance to it, as discussed in our previous articles Part 1 and Part 2.

We even sent out queries to two GDS (their names pending once I get their agreement to publish) and their responses were these

Amadeus: (When Queried if SAQ C-VT is correct to be filled, and if the Amadeus Selling Platform can be eligible for VT): Basically, if the payment is done via Amadeus and entered manually from a personal computer directly into the GDS – you have a right form for Amadeus agents and tick it off with confidence. 

I believe your original question was ‘If Amadeus is considered virtual payment terminal?’

Our answer is Yes.

Sabre: (When asked if their client acts as a VT, defined by PCI as having “Internet-based access to an acquirer, processor or third-party service provider website to authorize payment card transactions.”) Yes, Sabre Red Workspace client requires an internet connection to authenticate and then it requires connections (dedicated or ISP with VPN) to connect to Sabre and no, it does not do batch processing. You may consider SRW is a virtual terminal and guiding your travel agency clients to achieve their goal.

Travelport (Galileo):  (When asked if their client acts as a VT, defined by PCI as having “Internet-based access to an acquirer, processor or third-party service provider website to authorize payment card transactions.”)

Yes. Galileo client does not store credit card information on the client software and client software requires internet connectivity, and cannot do batch transactions.

Based on these ‘guidance’ from GDS which IATA seem to defer to, SAQ C-VT is a likely possibility, as long as all the other eligibility are met. The GDS all claims they are virtual terminals, but that itself (while an important eligibility) isn’t the ONLY eligibility for SAQ C-VT, so you need to ensure the others are met before claiming SAQ C-VT is correct or your business.

Whew. That was a long one. Now back to our FAQs.

FAQ #9 : As a travel professional issuing and selling airline tickets, am I considered a merchant?

This is removed and rightly so. Though the previous response was right: “All the airline transactions processed through a GDS (Global Distribution System) and IATA BSP, the airline itself is considered as the merchant, not the travel agent.”

It only serves to confuse an already confused population further. It’s better they don’t explain this, because some agencies interpret this as IATA saying they are not ‘merchants’ so they need to be ‘service providers’. WHAT! So, yeah, we can explain in another article but this is better left out.

FAQ #22: We already have a PCI DSS Compliant certificate issued by a third party.
Is this enough to cover our BSP or do we need to complete more forms?

Not an addition or whatever, but I still wish that they would change this because the answer doesn’t match the question. The answer is lifted directly out of the PCI-DSS Top 10 Myths addressing the need for a QSA to be involved in the process. The answer is , it is recommended, but NO, for Level 3 and 4 merchants, there is no requirement to get a QSA involved.

Finally, a bonus opinion here.

Many agencies are still faltering in their PCI-DSS compliance. Some equate that just because they are level 3 and 4, they do not need to do ASV scans or penetration testing. Likewise, there are those who *might* theoretically (we don’t know any) qualify for level 1 or level 2 based on their volume, automatically assume they need to do ASV scans and do pentest for everything in scope.

NO.

Your merchant level DOES NOT dictate whether you need to conduct PCI scans or not. We need this to be clear. Because the table published in the FAQ from IATA for FAQ#13 isn’t clear (not their fault, this was lifted from the Mastercard site) – the column “Validated By” states ‘merchant’ and below “Approved Scanning vendor” for level 2 and below. This immediately presupposes that an ASV must be involved. This is incorrect.

Your level (determined by your card transaction volume) determines your VALIDATION TYPE. Validation type there are 3: QSA Certified/Validated; Validated SAQ by QSA/ISA and SELF SIGNED SAQ by MERCHANT OFFICER. That’s it. Your level doesn’t determine how you go through PCI, it determines how it is validated. And it’s not set in stone. Your acquirer can bypass these guidelines and decide that even if you only do ONE transaction a year, you still must go through level 1 compliance (audited by QSA). This is actually quite common!

So what actually determines what on earth you actually do in PCI-DSS?

Well, it’s your business. Or, for Level 2 merchants and below, your type of SAQ. You see, it’s your business that determines your SAQ type, it’s your SAQ that determines what you need to do, and based on what you have done, it will be validated in either of the 3 ways we’ve described above. That’s the harmony of PCI. That’s the zen. The yin and yang. The balance in the Force.

So, for instance, if you are doing SAQ A, SAQ B or SAQ C-VT, please point out to us the fact that you are REQUIRED to do ASV scans on all your internet address (some are told, even their dynamically allocated broadband IP must be scanned by ASV).

None. Magically, SAQ A, SAQ B and SAQ C-VT DOES NOT HAVE ANY requirement for ASV or penetration testing. For us who can provide these services, of course it kind of sucks since now those going through these SAQs don’t need our services anymore. But we rather tell them straight the correct way and sacrifice that part of our business than to let them know wrongly and give consultants a bad name. So what SAQ you are doing will determine whether you need to get something scanned or not.

Now, of course, do not be tempted to fit your business into the easiest SAQ for the sake of it (see the example of travel agencies with GDS doing SAQ A) – there are huge eligibility requirements for these 3 SAQs and not many agencies can meet it. If you practice accepting cards through email, or photos on Whatsapp for your credit card; or store in back office for later processing, or have Enhanced Data Services from Visa/Mastercard or a thousand other ways you can be receiving credit card, you likely need to fit back into the dreaded SAQ D. But what we are saying is that if you ARE eligible for A, B or C-VT, then those will determine whether you need to do any testing or not.

It is our opinion that testing and scans should be done regardless for security sake, not so much for compliance but the choice is yours. You need to make that decision for your own business. Because that’s what heroes do.

If you have further queries on PCI-DSS or just how we are currently helping our clients get through PCI, drop us an email at avantedge@pkfmalaysia.com. We will respond ASAP!

The Long Road of PCI Recertification

pci-compliance

We have been in PCI-DSS for six years.

When we began back in 2010, we were tasked by one of our offshore customers in Brunei to get them “PCI” certified. Honestly, back then, early 2010, we were mainly doing IT audits under COBIT, a lot of penetration testing, some IT forensics and bogged down with piles of ISO27001 ISMS opportunities.Back then PCI was more known as Peripheral Card Interconnect, which are those add-on cards that you slot into your motherboard back in the days when you wanted to extend your network interfaces, graphics accelerators etc. I used to build computers in those dodgy computer shops back in the days, so I kind know that very well.

Fast forward six years, and now we are getting more and more queries for PCI-DSS. So much so that we have dedicated an entire team from our company to work only on PCI-DSS projects.

In earlier years, we brought our PCI clients through their first year certification, and many of them are now going through their 2nd, 3rd year recertification etc.You would think that most companies will find re-certification easy compared to the first time certification.

Don’t be fooled.

The thing about PCI is, during the re-certification, there is a lot more expectations on your organisation for compliance. An example – PCI requires logs to be retained 3 months online, 12 months offline. It also requires daily log reviews, as well as quarterly internal and external vulnerability scans.

Now for the first time certification, some of these requirements get a free pass: meaning, if our client had just installed a SIEM and only has 2 – 3 months logging set up, we verify those controls and based on those controls, we can pass their PCI. We don’t need to wait for 12 months to get the offline requirement passed. Likewise, if our client provides us with one internal and external scan, we can pass them for first time, we do not need a 4 quarterly scan before we sign off on the initial AoC.

However – once the re-certification arrives, these become MUSTs. Some of our clients want to undertake internal scans themselves and missed one quarter and expects us to still pass them. Or they have a SIEM, but no action done on daily reviews, or their SIEM was not set up properly and no logs were sent there. They get upset when we say we can’t pass them on those basis because their response was “We did this last year!”

Also, evidences.

Whenever we conduct our audits, we conduct it onsite. Onsite, the QSA will verify these controls if they are in place or not. On top of that, we require audit evidences. This is normal even out of PCI – in our governance audit or ITGC we often rely on audit artefacts (we call it), to supplement our opinion on whether certain controls are in place. In PCI, these evidences might come in forms of documents, policies, screenshots, configs etc – anything that can prove controls are in place, and effective, and accordingly used as per PCI requirements.

The onsite audit confirms these controls. The evidences supplement the QA process. Each QSA needs to go through a stringent QA (quality assurance) process internally, whereby, the QA requires supplementary evidences to prove why the QSA arrives to such and such an opinion. Therefore,  there is always that post-audit work of compiling audit evidences.

Some clients are of the opinion that the onsite audit should end the process and the auditor passes PCI then and there. Unfortunately it’s not so simple as there is a check and balance involved. An example is this: one of our clients recently added in a few out of scope devices into the CDE. During the onsite audit, we referred these and requested these systems removed or resettled in another segment. They said, OK, we will put it in another VLAN. So, if they do that, is that ok? We said OK.

Fast forward to the post-audit work, we asked “Hey, have you done your VLAN yet?”

“Yes, we have. Can you pass us?”

“OK, can you give a screenshot of the new configuration in your firewall or switch to prove that you have done this action?”

“WHAT??! Why??!”

You see – as auditors, we simply cannot trust you for your word. It’s not personal. It’s not that because we find you are a shifty trader looking to spin some yarn and fleece us of our money. It’s simply because it’s part of our job. Evidences provide us with some measure of assurance that these controls are done correctly and in place. It’s not that we question your integrity. It’s strange that even at this stage, many people find this difficult to accept, and we have gone through many, many strange situations whereby I have faced a red-faced, yelling executive thinking that I am personally insulting him and his family name by not trusting what he is saying.

Audit evidences. It’s part of PCI.

There are of course some exceptions, such as certain private and confidential documents or config that cannot be shared – even in that case, we generally ask these information to be anonymized, but evidences to be submitted all the same: for instance, evidence of VLAN config, you can screenshot the config, and remove elements deemed sensitive (IP Address, versions, other information etc).

In summary – the second year onwards, this is where the real PCI battles begin. Your recertification efforts will be a whole lot more than the first time, so get started early. We will be posting more articles on tips and actions that will make your PCI certification successful.

In the meantime, drop us a note at pcidss@pkfmalaysia.com and we will attend to any queries you have.

PCI DSS and the Problem of Scoping

pci-compliance

I recall in an actual case a few years back when I received a call from a company requesting us to do a certification for PCI for them. So I met them and drew out their PCI plan starting with a gap assessment, remediation and certification audit.

They said they have already done their own gap assessments internally by their ISMS guys. And they will be doing all their remediation on their own and they just needed me to quote for certification audit because “PCI is forcing us to be certified by a third party, which we believe we can do it better than you can”.

There was nothing much to talk to them about, but I did mention that if we find major NC (non compliances, in ISMS speak), we would then use that ‘certification audit’ as our own gap assessment and that we might be required to come back again to verify.

The company truly believed that PCI was a subset of ISMS and they handled it as such.

So we came in for the certification and found out that their entire scope was completely messed up. For instance, there was another out of scope network and systems connecting into their CDE for monitoring. Because card data wasn’t passing through, they marked it as out of scope. Unfortunately, PCI doesn’t see it that way. This would be considered an Non CDE In Scope, and systems within this network will need to be secured as well, and hardened as per PCI. The logic is that if these systems are compromised, there is a path into the CDE that can be exploited.

They made a huge fuss on this, claiming that they are willing to absorb the risk and that their management signs off on the risk assessment.

ISMS is a best practice/guideline at best – it’s a great marker for security, but PCI is a standard. If you can’t meet it, then you don’t meet it. Of course, there are ways around this particular issue, but they insisted we passed them simply because their management accepted the risk.

Here’s another idea: PCI-DSS generally doesn’t really care about your business. It’s not about you. It’s about card data. Visa/Mastercard and the Jedi PCI council are not concerned about your business – they are concerned about the confidentiality and integrity of card data. That’s why you will not find any BCM or DRP requirement in PCI. RTO and RPO? Pfft. They don’t care. Your business can go down for 10 weeks but as long as card data is safe, it’s good.

And that’s why, scoping is HUGELY important. Many people might think that a gap assessment is a waste of time. It is, if it’s done incorrectly. I recently witnessed a ‘gap assessment’ report that was a complete mess. It just detailed the PCI twelve requirements and in each requirement gave an overview of the company’s controls and what they should be doing: ripped off almost verbatim from the actual standard itself. That can be downloaded for free.

A gap assessment needs to bring you from one place to another and needs to provide these:

a) A clear understanding of your scope, including a writeup on your network, and processes that have been assessed. It should also be clear what is out of scope. This initial scope usually is not set in stone as remediation would sometimes change what is in scope and what is not in scope. But at least you have something concrete to start with.

b) If possible, an asset register. For PCI. If this is not possible (for many reasons, e.g they have not purchase some assets required for a control), then the asset inventory needs to be prioritised a quickly as possible to see what is scoped and not. Asset should be clear on: Public ips, internal devices, servers, network devices, people involved, desktops, databases etc.

c) Network in scope and out of scope. This is key as companies are required to identify segments scoped out, and do segmentation testing. Also, CDE is clearly marked, NON-CDE IN SCOPE (we call it NCIS) must also be identified. Systems in NCIS could be monitoring system, SIEM, AD etc. Any system that connects to the CDE, but does not store, transmit or process credit card data are considered NCIS. NCIS must be scoped for testing, quarterly scans, hardening and such.

d) Clear roadmap for remediation and recommendations to proceed, specific to the organisation. These ‘gaps’ should all have a corresponding solution(s).

If the gap assessment doesn’t give you any of these, then it’s pretty useless. If it doesn’t move you forward or provide you with the information to move forward, it’s not a gap assessment. It’s an expensive training session.

So back to the first example of a customer. It wasn’t possible for us to certify them no matter how they argued, because simply they were not compliant (there were also many issues that they did not comply, for instance storage of card data in text files and sending via emails).

As a lesson – don’t neglect the proper scoping. It’s hard work, but as I always say: Start wrongly, do wrongly, finish wrongly. And that’s 6 – 8 months down the drain, with thousands of ringgit gone in investing, and job on the line. The second example is pertinent also. There is always a chance to OVERSCOPE as there is to UNDERscope.

An overscoping example would be to purchase all sort of snazzy security systems worth thousands of ringgit only to find that these were not needed, or that current controls were sufficient. It’s nice to have – but most of our customers, no matter how big they are, always have a trigger on the budget and cost optimisation is the topmost in their priority.

If you want us to help you in your PCI-DSS scoping, drop us a note at avantedge@pkfmalaysia.com and we can get you started with the initial understanding straight away!

MPSB is PCI-DSS Certified!

What started out as a simple enquiry in 2012 turned into a full fledged PCI-DSS Level 1 project for Manage Pay Services Berhad (MPSB), one of our success stories in PCI-DSS compliance. MPSB was one of our first client together, and while the follow ups and clarifications took some time, we once again demonstrated the value of client relationship and customer closeness that sets our service apart. With PKF, and working with the QSA vendor Control Case, we are just a call, just a drive away. With additional value added services like update talks, training, technical services and consultancy, we definitely gave MPSB more than they bargained for. It was precisely this working relationship between MPSB, our local team of PCI consultants and the QSAs from India that made this project a resounding success. It was indeed with great pride that in 2014, less than a year from our gap assessment, that we can say: it was a great journey, and now it continues on through maintenance and yearly review.

PCI-DSS can be an extremely arduous project, as it touches major parts of the business and is oftentimes more than 5 – 6 months. Due to this, we have specialised Project Management Professionals (PMP) doing PCI based projects for banks and large enterprises. For more details, drop us an email at avantedge@pkfmalaysia.com. We will contact you immediately and set you up on your compliance journey.

Newer posts »

© 2024 PKF AvantEdge

Up ↑