Wednesday, October 31, 2007

A business is normally organised by its functions, e.g. marketing
department, accounts department and so on. This is because being grouped
together allows the functions to benefit from specialisation and division of
labour. This leads to lower unit costs and a greater efficiency. However it
can mean that there is departmental rivalry

Larger businesses might have a number of businesses within the whole
company. This would be coordinated by a Head Office, where all the major
decisions are made.

Other ways of organising the business could be more appropriate for
different types of businesses:

Product - the functions are organised around the product - so at a business
like ICI, who are the UK's leading chemical manufacturer, a product manager
would have a team of functions who would answer to them, like accounting,
marketing and production

Geographical - a hierarchy might be split according to different places that
the product is sold into - for instance a business may have a Far Eastern
division of its business, which would take into account the different
cultural and supply differences of the region

Market - the organisation is based on market segments - so an airline
business like British Airways could concentrate on long haul, short haul,
holiday makers, business clients and freight

A business whose decision-making comes from one place only is known as a
centralised organisation. Normally Head Office will decide on the major
elements of strategy, no matter where the manufacturing plants and sales
teams are positioned around the country or globe. This means that there are
good opportunities for economies of scale.

Other businesses, especially multinationals (see below) will opt for a more
decentralised organisation - where the individual businesses within the
whole company group, make decisions for themselves. This means that there is
more opportunity to react to the changing marketplace (one of the advantages
of a small firm). However there is a possibility that these businesses (who
may well be in different parts of the world) might be duplicating research
or not bargaining in such as strong position as a bigger overall company.

When a business reaches a certain size then it might split into different
departments. These departments will specialise, employing people with
expertise in these areas.

The main departments in a business might be:

Department
Role

Accounts
Provides a detailed record of the money coming in and going out of the
business and prepares accounts as a basis for financial decisions

Human Resources or Personnel
Deals with all the recruitment, training, health and safety and pay
negotiations with unions/workers

Production
Makes sure that the production plans are met on time and products of the
right quality are produced

Purchasing
Buys all the raw materials and goods required for production

Sales and marketing
Sales function deals with all aspects of selling to customers; the
marketing function carries out marketing research, organises advertising and
product promotion

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Guitar Zero T-Shirts! http://www.guitar0.com

If you play Guitar Hero you have to check out this site.  It’s my brother in Michigan who started the catchy fad of wearing Guitar Zero T’s. My favorite is the one that says, “I can rock your socks off, but only on Medium”.  Check them out on http://www.guitar0.com.

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Unified Communications: What it means to D&K

We've been specializing in computer networks based primarily on Microsoft
products with a wide range of networking hardware. Now we're offering our
newest phone system with 99.999% uptime based on Voice Over Internet
Protocol (VoIP). This revolutionary phone system is based on the same
premise as your computer system. It uses this internet protocol to send
data packets using Session Initiated Protocol (SIP) over your existing
network. This makes it easy for us to setup phones, or computer programs
that access phone calls much like an instant messenger.

Here's a bit more to explain the amazing and endless amount of features we
offer from small to medium size businesses to executive office suites all
around the country.

Calling Features
Class-5 Features
Caller ID, call forwarding, call hold, call transfer, call waiting, 7-digit
dialing for local numbers, 3-way calling, redial, do not disturb, and speed
dial.
Mobility
With Find Me, users can route calls to their mobile phones and still have
the ability to transfer, record, or send to voicemail. There is no
difference in functionality whether a user is at their desk or on their
mobile phone.
Personal Locator
Define how incoming calls are routed or forwarded for individuals or groups,
ensuring important calls are not missed.
Extension Dialing
Using extensions, users can call co-workers within their company regardless
of location. Extension dialing rolls to Find Me list.
Call Privacy
Choose to reveal or block your number when you make a call.
Call Screening
More intelligent than Caller ID - know who is calling before you answer the
phone. Choose to accept the call, send to voicemail, transfer to another
extension or phone number.
Announce Caller
As calls come in to departments, have an announcement identify who is on the
call and for which department. Very useful if you belong to multiple
department queues or would like to distinguish between personal and
department calls.
Call Flip
Flip a call from your desk phone to your mobile phone or vice-versa on the
fly.

Voicemail
Voicemail
Customized personal greeting. Play back, forward, and save each voicemail
you receive.
Voicemail Notification
Be informed of new voice messages via email or SMS. Receive voicemails as
email attachments. If available, the caller's name and phone number are
included in the subject line.
Voice Mailbox Integration
Configure voicemail inboxes to support a second line, such as a mobile
phone. This eliminates the hassles of checking multiple voicemail boxes.
Voicemail Indication
A visual indicator alerts you to new voicemail messages.
Voicemail Call Back
Respond to a message by calling the sender directly from the system.
Trusted Voicemail Access
Define trusted numbers when calling into the voicemail system to quickly
gain access without entering your extension and PIN.
Group Voicemails
Gain access to your department voicemails through the voicemail system.
Department voicemails show up in a separate inbox for easy management.

Web-Enhanced Controls
Web-based Portal
A web-based tool that allows employees to facilitate a variety of phone
functions via the web - click-to-dial, answer call, hold & transfer,
conference, call recording, and much more.
Message Logs
Displays real time records of incoming, missed, and outgoing calls to
individuals, departments, or the entire company.
Address Book (People)
Online directory and address book to manage your contacts. Click on a name
to make a call, access contact & call history, message logs and more.
Microsoft OutlookR Integration
The OutlookR integration plug-in allows you to call anyone from the OutlookR
contact list with a simple click of the mouse.
Call Room
See your calls in real time and have the abilty to transfer, place on hold,
flip, record, or change other settings on the fly.
Call Notes
Annotate call records with your notes for future reference.
Quickdial & Company Directory Phone Integration
When using CIT123-supported phones, access your quickdial and company
directory straight from the phone.
Web Call Manager
Place calls from any phone as if you were in the office. Avoid long distance
fees and hotel calling surcharges.

Web-Enhanced Controls (continued)
List Management
Create quicklists of people from your Address Book or Directory to create
conference calls, send emails and faxes.
Reporting
Generate reports based on resource usage - gain visibility into user and
department usage.
Address Book Call History
View a detailed history of all calls made or received to contacts in your
Address Book. See calls made into other departments as well.
Announcements
Send a blast announcement to employees to communicate important events or
information.
Dialing Restrictions
Administrator controlled dialing plans - e.g. allow or disallow
international calling for departments of individual users.
Integrated Instant Messaging
Chat with colleagues via a secure, integrated instant messaging service.
Click-to-Connect Web Widget
Create a link on your website that allows prospects and customers to call
you with a simple click of the mouse.

Call Tree
Call Tree (auto-attendant)
Automated menus allow incoming callers to reach the appropriate department
or individual, eliminating annoying holds and transfers.
Customizable Menu Options
Quickly customize the Call Tree to meet your unique business needs.
Department Ring Groups
Set up a sub-group of extensions to handle incoming calls. Choose from
multiple ring options; call screening and audio announcements. Departments
can be referenced from the Call Tree and / or directly with a dedicated
phone number.
Dial by Extension
Allows callers to reach employees by dialing their extension at any time
during the auto attendant greeting.
Dial by Name
Allows callers to reach employees by dialing the letters of the employee's
first or last name.
Transfer to Attendant
Route calls to an attendant receptionist or group before going to the Call
Tree.
Fax Back
Allows callers to enter a fax number to receive automatic fax back of a
pre-defined document.
Record Block
Route callers straight from the Call Tree to voicemail. Great for taking
sales orders via the Call Tree or after-hours voicemail messages.

Call Tree (continued)
Daily Schedule
Establish a separate Call Tree for calls received outside of normal business
hours. Flexible scheduling allows for a different schedule by day of the
week.
Holiday Schedule
Group administrators can designate business holidays or closures and set
auto attendant greetings for those scheduled dates.
Music on Hold
Upload an audio file (.wav) to broadcast to parties on hold.
Record Greetings Remotely
Enables group administrators to record greetings remotely if changes arise
or the office closes due to inclement issues such as weather.
Directory User Names
Users can record their name, which will play as part of the dial-by-name
lookup feature.
Multiple Call Trees (add-on)
Have completely separate call trees with unique inbound numbers, greetings,
and menu options that route to a shared pool of users. Great if you have
multiple businesses being supported by a shared staff.

Department Queues
Call Queuing
The system places incoming calls into a queue in the order received until an
agent is available to answer the call.
Multiple Call Distribution Policies
Calls distributed to agents that have not been answered in a specific number
of rings are redirected to the next available agent. After all agents have
been visited once, the call can either be forwarded to an external number or
placed back in the queue.
Agent Log In / Log Out
Allow agents to log in and out of the call center queue.
Monitor & Record
Listen in to live calls or record calls for training and quality assurance.
Recording is an extra add-on service.
Queue Escape
Queue escape offers callers an option to exit the call queue.
No Answer Policy and Overflow
If the call is not answered in the specified time, calls can be routed to
voicemail, back to the Call Tree, to another extension, or to an outside
phone number.
Reports
Reporting helps you manage your team, ensuring you are efficiently serving
your prospects and customers. Reports include: All Calls, Calls Answered /
Missed, Average Wait Times, Calls per Agent / per Day / per Month.

Fax
Receive Fax
Set up one or multiple fax numbers. Faxes can route to individual users or
departments.
Fax to Email
Forwards your incoming faxes to one or more email accounts.
Send Faxes
Send faxes quickly through the online interface.
Web Access to Faxes
Retrieve your faxes from any internet device.
Online Fax Storage
Store faxes online or download them to your desktop.
Fax List
Send faxes to a predefined list of contacts.

Conferencing
Push Conferencing
Set up conferences with a single click. Schedule anything from team meetings
to prospect presentations.
On Demand Audio Conferencing
Create inbound conference bridges.
About CIT123
CIT123 has been helping businesses communicate more efficiently and
effectively since 1998. We understand that managing your internal and
external communications are important parts of your business, so we created
CIT123 for Business - an award winning product that unifies the process.
If you have a broadband connection, you can have an advanced,
enterprise-grade phone system. We offer our feature-rich service at a
fraction of the price that phone companies charge.
Get CIT123 for Business today and you:
Never miss a call, wherever you are>>
Have multiple locations and still appear under one roof>>
Seamlessly integrate mobile phones with full PBX functionality>>
Keep your current numbers or choose new ones>>
Control all communications as easily as checking e-mail>>
Radically slash calling costs>>
CIT123. How Business Answers the Call.
[p] 9546157905 [e] sales@CIT123.com [w] www.CIT123.com

Microsoft Windows Technology Consulting Reference Blog

Brought to you by:

 

David Cochrane

Senior Network Specialist

D&K Enterprise

Bridging the gap between humans and technology.

100 N. Federal Highway, Suite 840

Fort Lauderdale, Fl 33301

Phone  (954) 615-7905

Fax      (831) 306-3715

cid:380593916@25012006-306B

 

 

Goodrich Design

Award Winning Web/Graphic/Multimedia Design

 

 

 

 


 

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for specific individuals and purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message.
Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. [v.E.1.2]

 

 

d&kpostcard

 

IT Outsourcing for Microsoft Windows Networks

Brought to you by:

 

David Cochrane

Senior Network Specialist

D&K Enterprise

Bridging the gap between humans and technology.

100 N. Federal Highway, Suite 840

Fort Lauderdale, Fl 33301

Phone  (954) 615-7905

Fax      (831) 306-3715

cid:380593916@25012006-306B

 

 

Goodrich Design

Award Winning Web/Graphic/Multimedia Design

 

 

 

 

 

d&kpostcard

 

Rus's Cooya Blue company info.

~Personalized Build Process ~

First Step - Discovery Phase – Collaborate with client on desired "feel" and "presence" of site. Document all functionality required, i.e. product showcase, newsletter, online ordering, administrative abilities, etc. 1 week

Second Step - Planning Phase – Develop individual page layout, content and sitemap, all sourced from Discovery Phase objectives.

2 weeks

Third Step - Coding Phase – Write system code for web application.

4 weeks

Fourth Step - Testing Phase – Launch beta version of site. Cooya Blue and client will perform live testing. Site then updated based on beta feedback.

2 Weeks

Fifth Step - Launch Phase – Launch public version of site and train client in best utilization practices.

1 Week

Friday, October 19, 2007

Microsoft Launches Next Wave of Business Communications Software: We're already Certified!

Microsoft Launches Next Wave of Business Communications Software
Customers report savings of 25 percent to 30 percent from VoIP, conferencing
software; more than 50 partners announce new products and services.
Related Links
Webcast

SAN FRANCISCO - Oct. 16, 2007 - Today, Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft
Corp., and Jeff Raikes, president of the Microsoft Business Division,
announced the worldwide availability of Microsoft's unified communications
software, taking the first step toward streamlining workplace communications
and helping reduce the cost of the average corporate voice over Internet
protocol (VoIP) system by half.

"In the next decade, sweeping technology innovations driven by the power of
software will transform communications," Gates said. "Working with partners,
we're making rapid advances that will enable fundamental advances in the way
people communicate and collaborate at work."

Joined by customers and partners, the Microsoft executives launched unified
communications and VoIP software that includes the following:

. MicrosoftR Office Communications Server 2007. Software that delivers VoIP,
video, instant messaging, conferencing and presence within the applications
people already know and use such as Microsoft Office system applications and
upcoming versions of Microsoft DynamicsT ERP products and the Microsoft CRM
release due later this year

. Microsoft Office Communicator 2007. Client software for phone, instant
messaging and video communications that works across the PC, mobile phone
and Web browser

. Microsoft Office Live Meeting. The next version of Microsoft's advanced
conferencing service that enables workers to conduct meetings, share
documents, utilize video and record discussions from virtually any computer

. Microsoft RoundTableT. A conferencing phone with a 360-degree camera that
captures a panoramic view of meeting participants, tracks the speaker and
can record meetings

. Service pack update of Microsoft Exchange Server 2007. The industry's
leading e-mail, voice mail, calendaring and unified messaging platform

"Unified communications software will transform business communications as
fundamentally as e-mail did in the 1990s," Raikes said. "Today, Microsoft is
in the VoIP game, and our customers and partners are already winning with
better economics and new business opportunities."

Dramatic Business Results for Customers

Gates and Raikes were joined today by hundreds of customers
(http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies) reporting dramatic time savings due
to more efficient communications and cost savings of 25 percent to 30
percent over traditional communications technologies. Gibson Guitar Corp.,
Global Crossing, L'Occitane, Quanta Computer USA Inc., Sanofi-Aventis, The
Shaw Group Inc., Virgin Megastores and Volvo Group were among the customers
that joined the event to discuss the positive impact of Microsoft technology
on their business.

"We are deploying Office Communications Server 2007 globally, and already
people are seeing substantial time savings and productivity gains," said
Etienne de Verdelhan, chief information officer with L'Occitane, a leading
global retailer of natural ingredient cosmetics with more than 900 stores in
over 60 countries. "Not only are we able to launch new business
communications with just one click, but user setup and administration is
extremely simple, which is critical for a company growing at our rapid
pace."

Supporting these findings, Forrester Consulting found in a study
commissioned by Microsoft that organizations may achieve significant
productivity improvements and cost savings with unified communications. The
Forrester study,1 created from the results of 15 in-depth interviews of
Microsoft unified communications customers, found that these customers can
achieve more than 500 percent return on investment (ROI) over three years by
deploying Office Communications Server 2007.

Partner Support

More than 50 partners joined Microsoft to announce new products and services
built on Microsoft's unified communications platform. These partners include
the following:

. Systems integrators. Seven hundred ninety-three partners have achieved
Microsoft's UC Specialization in less than four months since Microsoft
opened the program. These partners are trained to help customers deploy
Microsoft unified communications software.

. Telephony providers. Three global telephony leaders are announcing their
road maps to build next-generation software applications on Microsoft's
voice platform:

. Nortel Networks confirmed pending availability of five software-based
solutions and applications to enhance Office Communications Server as part
of the Innovative Communications Alliance
(http://www.innovativecommunicationsalliance.com). Nortel also confirmed it
is on track to more than double the number of Office Communications Server
certified engineers in the UC Systems Integration practice.

. Ericsson announced the Ericsson Enterprise Mobility Gateway, which will be
built on VoIP call management in Office Communications Server to bring
office communications to any mobile device, reducing mobile costs and
maximizing existing investments.

. Mitel Networks Corp. announced plans to develop a software-based solution
that leverages Office Communications Server's VoIP call management
capabilities to meet the specialized telephony needs of small and
medium-sized businesses in vertical markets.


. Independent software vendors. Independent software vendors announced plans
to incorporate presence and click-to-communicate features from Microsoft's
unified communications platform into their software applications. In
addition, SAP AG plans to integrate Office Communications Server with Duet
software, which is jointly developed with Microsoft and provides access to
SAP processes and data through Microsoft Office applications. This will
enable business users to see presence and to click to communicate while
working within Duet.

. Phone and device manufacturers. Seven manufacturers announced global
availability of 15 new Microsoft UC-qualified phones and devices today,
increasing choices for customers. Microsoft is working closely with more
than 15 strategic partners to develop new UC-enabled endpoints including
handsets, wireless phones, webcams and laptops. Conferencing leader Tandberg
also announced its plans to build a video and webconferencing solution
incorporating Microsoft unified communications software to ensure that
customers can maximize their investment in existing infrastructure.

Continued Commitment to Interoperability

Microsoft also unveiled Unified Communications Open Interoperability, a
telephony system qualification program, to give customers the assurance that
Microsoft unified communications software works with their telephony
systems. A list of qualified products, including eight products from five
companies that have already received the qualification, is available at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=87482.


To view the keynote address, learn more about Microsoft's unified
communications software or download evaluation copies, customers can visit
http://www.microsoft.com/uc.

Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq "MSFT") is the worldwide leader in
software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize
their full potential.

Note to editors: If you are interested in viewing additional information on
Microsoft, please visit the Microsoft Web page at
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass on Microsoft's corporate information
pages. Web links, telephone numbers and titles were correct at time of
publication, but may since have changed. For additional assistance,
journalists and analysts may contact Microsoft's Rapid Response Team or
other appropriate contacts listed at
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/contactpr.mspx.

David Cochrane
Senior Network Specialist
D&K Enterprise
Bridging the gap between humans and technology.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Free Tech Support

Here's how some technology consulting companies do tech support.

No Joke:

You call them, say you are setting up a company, need computers etc. The
give you a proposal worth whatever it's worth with discounts and all. You
say you're not ready but will use them soon. Then you wait a few days,
maybe a week, call them and remind them you are going to choose them. Then
before you end the call you subtly ask if they know anything about Outlook.
Of course they're going to say yes, and then you ask them any questions you
have about it. Then you wait and when they get done helping you with that,
you ask them any other questions that you might have which are technology
related. Then before you end the conversation just reassure them that
you'll contact them as soon as you need to get started with the project.

This happened when I went over to a friend's company and I couldn't believe
it. Needless to say, that company wasn't going to last. Obviously I care a
great deal about them and wanted them to succeed so I helped them with two
things which completely turned around their business. 1. Confidence on the
phone, 2. Closing ability with a conversation.

How can you turn IT investments into business assets?

Maximize Your Business Opportunities
How can you turn your IT investments into strategic assets that will help
improve performance and maximize business opportunities?
You can provide the foundation for people, processes, and technologies to
work as one with an integrated application platform from Microsoft. Research
has found that companies with optimized IT platforms and infrastructure grow
3.5% faster and have far more productive employees than those without
optimization.2 The Microsoft Application Platform Optimization model
aggregates industry-leading technologies with real-world customer scenarios
to help your organization gain insight into how to achieve greater business
efficiencies, maintain stronger customer connections, and make more informed
business decisions.
We recognize that there is no "one size fits all" plan for effective
IT-every company operates differently, and every business has different
needs. So, with the help of key analysts and our partners, Microsoft created
an Application Platform Optimization model to help you understand where and
how to:
. Deliver scalable, integrated technologies across your enterprise
. Develop and deploy solutions faster, with a lower total cost of ownership
(TCO)
. Create custom solutions that support the way you do business

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

I Love Forefront

Frequently Asked Questions about Forefront Security for Exchange Server
Published: July 24, 2006 | Updated: August 14, 2007

Get the answers you need about Microsoft Forefront Security for Exchange
Server.
________________________________________

View all answers
Forefront Security for Exchange Server
Q.
What is Forefront Security for Exchange Server?
A.
Microsoft Forefront Security for Exchange Server includes multiple scan
engines from industry-leading security firms integrated into a single
solution to help businesses protect their Exchange messaging environments
from viruses, worms, and spam. It ships with and integrates multiple
industry-leading antivirus engines to provide comprehensive, layered
protection against the latest threats. Through deep integration with
Exchange Server, scanning innovations and performance controls, Forefront
Security for Exchange Server helps protect messaging environments while
maintaining uptime and optimizing server performance. Forefront Security for
Exchange Server enables administrators to easily manage server configuration
and operation, and automated scan engine signature updates and reporting, at
the server and enterprise level.
Q.
What's new in Forefront Security for Exchange Server?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server supports Exchange Server 2007 and
will provide the option for comprehensive multiple-engine protection for
Exchange Server 2007 Edge, Hub, and Mailbox servers. New features include
support for the Exchange Server 2007 antivirus (AV) transport stamp, and
incremental background scanning to optimize performance and reduce overhead
on Mailbox servers.
Customers who purchase Forefront Security for Exchange Server will also
receive a license to use Exchange Server 2007 premium anti-spam features
that will enable:
.
Microsoft IP reputation filter service -an IP block list that is offered
exclusively to Exchange 2007 customers. Premium spam protection also
includes automated updates for this filter.
.
Automated content filtering updates for Microsoft Smartscreen spam
heuristics, phishing Web sites, and other Intelligent Message Filter (IMF)
updates.
.
Targeted spam signature data and automatic updates to identify the latest
spam campaigns.
.
Automated anti-spam updates for Exchange Server 2007 reputation filter.
These features ensure that organizations have the most up-to-date protection
against the latest spam attacks.
Finally, Forefront Security for Exchange Server is localized into 11
languages, including English, German, French, Japanese, Italian, Spanish,
Korean, Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), Portuguese (Brazil),
and Russian.
Q.
Where can I find Forefront Security for Exchange Server product
documentation?
A.
The User Guide for Forefront Security for Exchange Server can be found here.

Q.
Will Forefront Security for Exchange Server be part of the Exchange
Enterprise Client Access License (CAL)?
A.
Yes. Forefront Security for Exchange Server will be included in the Exchange
Enterprise CAL.
Q.
How is Forefront Security for Exchange Server licensed?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server is licensed through the Microsoft
Online Services program on a per-user subscription model. This license
includes all antivirus and anti-spam engine updates, signatures, and product
upgrades during the license period. Customers will be able to license
Forefront Security for Exchange Server through the following Microsoft
volume licensing programs:
.
Enterprise Agreement
.
Enterprise Agreement Subscription
.
Select
.
Academic Select
.
Government Select
.
Open Value
.
Open Value Subscription
.
Server Provider License Agreement
.
High Volume Messaging Services
.
Campus and School Agreement
.
Enterprise Agreement
.
Enterprise Agreement Subscription
.
Select
.
Academic Select
.
Government Select
.
Open Value
.
Open Value Subscription
.
Server Provider License Agreement
.
High Volume Messaging Services
.
Campus and School Agreement

Q.
How can I get pricing for Forefront Security for Exchange Server?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server pricing is available through your
Microsoft account representative or your authorized reseller.
Q.
Which anti-virus scan engines are included with Forefront Security for
Exchange Server?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server includes industry-leading anti-virus
engines from global security firms including AhnLab, Authentium, CA,
Kaspersky Labs, Norman Data Defense, Microsoft, Sophos, and VirusBuster.
Businesses can run up to five scan engines at once, and in different
combinations across the server system. This provides rapid response to new
threats, regardless of where the threat originates. Forefront Security for
Exchange Server automatically downloads the latest signatures and selects
the optimal combination of engines to use, helping ensure a high level of
protection and reducing the window of exposure to any given threat.
Diversity of anti-virus engines across messaging servers and client devices
helps protect against a single point of failure in the IT environment.
Q.
What versions of Exchange Server does Forefront Security for Exchange Server
support?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server supports Exchange Server 2007.
For customers with Exchange Server 2003 or Exchange 2000 Server, purchasing
Forefront Security for Exchange Server will provide downgrade rights to
Antigen for Exchange, which supports these earlier versions of Exchange
Server.
Q.
How do I manage Forefront Security for Exchange Server?
A.
Microsoft Forefront Server Security Management Console provides central
configuration, deployment, updating, and reporting for all Forefront Server
Security products, including Forefront Security for Exchange Server. This
product is currently in beta and will be generally available later in 2007.
Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 customers can use the Forefront Security
for Exchange Server Management Pack for MOM to supply critical events and
alerts on virus and worm activity to Microsoft Operations Manager 2005, and
manage the health and availability of Forefront Security for Exchange
Server. Download the Forefront Security for Exchange Server Management Pack
for MOM .
Q.
Will Forefront Security for Exchange Server be part of Exchange Server 2007?
A.
No. Microsoft intends to continue to provide this technology in a standalone
set of security products.
Q.
A.

Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1 Beta 2
Q.
What feature enhancements are included in Forefront Security for Exchange
Server SP1?
A.
The Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1 includes:
.
Support for Exchange Server 2007 SP1
.
Support for Windows 2008
.
Support for IPv6
.
New scanning or automatic blocking options for high compression zip and RAR
archives
.
New health monitoring logs and alerts
.
Roll-up of software fixes

Q.
How do customers access the beta 2 build of Forefront Security for Exchange
Server SP1?
A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1 Beta 2 can be downloaded at:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=D181C088-2529-4021-
B2E5-4DAE6F46DE44&displaylang=en
Q.
When will Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1 be generally available?

A.
Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1 is scheduled to ship in Q4 2007.
Q.
Why should I upgrade to Forefront Security for Exchange Server SP1?
A.
Customers should upgrade to SP1 if they are upgrading to Exchange Server
2007 SP1, upgrading their Exchange server operating system to Windows 2008,
or are running an IPv6 environment. Customers can also upgrade to take
advantage of new localized content filtering key word lists, new health
monitoring logs and alerts, and a roll-up of all software fixes.

Friday, October 12, 2007

Computer Network Consulting Blog Fort Lauderdale] Exchange 2003 and RPC over...

So I'm in the process of moving some mailboxes from an SBS 2003 server to
Exchange 2003 on a Windows 2003 Server installation (need more than the 75
licenses that SBS offers). All went really well, except I couldn't get RPC
over HTTP to work on the new install. I was up all night Sunday trying it,
and it just wouldn't take. Worst yet is that I then had to switch everything
back because it was getting close to the time people would start using the
system.
I've since managed to get things working again, but it was a multi-step
process.
The first thing that seemed to cause issues was the certificate. It appears
that the self-issued certificate from SBS 2003 works a bit differently than
a self-issued certificate from a Windows Certificate Authority, and I just
could not get the connection made. The problem with RPC over HTTP is that
you don't get much in the way of error messages.
That's when I stumbled across this tip that talks about testing a
connection. Outlook has a command-line option (/rpcdiag) that lets you watch
the connection process, and then tells you if you are connected. I can't say
that this actually helped troubleshoot, but it was nice to see that the
connection was working.
So I went back to the certificate, and played some more. I found RapidSSL,
who offers a free 30-day trial certificate. Sweet! This way I wouldn't have
to worry with the self-issued certificate at all. Except... it still didn't
work. And that's when it came down to the names I was using.
If you've set up this sort of configuration, you know there are two places
to specify the server name. One is on the initial page, where you specify
your server name in the Microsoft Exchange Server, and your name below it. I
found through testing that this name must match the internal name of your
server. Furthermore, though they say it can be just a netbios name, I never
got that to work. I had to use the fully qualified domain name (FQDN).
The second place to put the server name is when you're setting up the
Exchange proxy settings. This server name can match the other name, if
you're on the the same server, but more specifically, this must match the
name on the certificate. So wherever or however you publish your secure RPC
directory, the server name on the certificate should be in this field.

--
Posted By Microsoft Tech Support and Consulting to Computer Network
Consulting Blog Fort Lauderdale at 10/12/2007 03:11:00 PM

Deploying Office Live Communications Server 2005 and Office Communicator 2005 at Microsoft


Executive Summary

Increasingly, companies regard real-time presence and communications—such as instant messaging (IM), audio/video conferencing, data collaboration, whiteboarding, application sharing, remote assistance, and file transfer—as key services for connecting employees and improving their productivity.

Situation

Previously, Microsoft IT upgraded its real-time presence and instant messaging solution to Live Communications Server 2005 to provide support for a high-availability configuration with improved manageability, scalability, and improved multiple forest support. Subsequently, Microsoft IT wanted to update this infrastructure, as well as provide support for new real-time presence and communications features in Live Communications Server 2005 Service Pack 1 and Office Communicator 2005.

Solution

To provide increased service levels and manageability of its instant messaging and presence solution, Microsoft IT used Windows Server 2003 and SQL Server 2000 to deploy Live Communications Server 2005 using a pooled front-end server and clustered back-end database server configuration. Subsequently, Microsoft IT upgraded to Live Communications Server 2005 Service Pack 1 and Office Communicator 2005.

Benefits

·   Increased service levels by deploying a more available, more scalable, and higher-performance two-tier server farm configuration

·   More secure internal and remote access that is easier to set up and manage

·   Less complex (and less costly) deployment and management of multi-forest network environment

·   Enhanced real-time presence and communications services for employees

Products & Technologies

·   Microsoft Office Live Communications Server 2005 Service Pack 1

·   Microsoft Office Communicator 2005

·   Windows XP Professional SP2

·   SQL Server 2000

·   Windows Server 2003 with Active Directory directory services

·   Microsoft Operations Manager 2005

·   Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003 for cross-forest directory synchronization

 

 
Today, Microsoft employees are more mobile than ever. To increase their personal productivity, they frequently work from remote or home office locations, with little face-to-face contact with fellow employees, and collaborate with people they have never met in person. Microsoft® Office Live Communications Server enables Microsoft information workers to take advantage of real-time communications and presence to increase productivity without compromising security and manageability.

Previously, Microsoft had deployed Microsoft Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services to support employee needs for basic presence information and instant messaging.

In the spring of 2003, Microsoft Information Technology (Microsoft IT) deployed Live Communications Server 2003 to replace the original deployment of Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services. Designed for tighter presence integration into Microsoft Office System applications, and built using the industry-standard Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), Live Communications Server 2003 was the replacement for Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services.

In the summer of 2004, Microsoft began deploying early releases of Live Communications Server 2005 to test the product in a large, worldwide enterprise environment. When fully deployed, five front-end servers and a two-node database cluster will support more than 80,000 enabled instant messaging accounts at Microsoft.

Subsequently, Microsoft IT deployed Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1 (SP1) to update its existing Live Communications Server 2005 infrastructure to support enhanced federation; public IM connectivity (PIC) and enhanced security and Spam over IM (SPIM) control; as well as support for Microsoft Office Communicator 2005 (Communicator). Communicator, in addition to supporting a significant new user interface and enhanced presence information, extends real-time communications to include the management of incoming and outgoing telephone calls over private branch exchange (PBX) networks, public switched telephone (PSTN) and voice-over-IP (VoIP) networks. Multi-party telephone calls and conference-calling capabilities are also supported using the services provided by the corporate PBX and third party conference-call services providers, respectively.

The focus of this paper is the experiences of the Microsoft IT Communications Operations team in planning, deploying, and operating its upgraded, protected, real-time, person-to-person communications solution based on Live Communications Server 2005 and the subsequent upgrade of this infrastructure to support Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 and Communicator.

This paper was specifically written for enterprise business and technical decision-makers, IT architects, and operations managers who are considering an upgrade (or initial deployment) of a real-time presence and communication infrastructure.

Introduction

Customers frequently ask Microsoft IT about the methods employed and lessons learned when Microsoft products and technologies are deployed internally. In 1999, Microsoft IT deployed Microsoft Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services to support its employees’ needs for basic presence information and instant messaging. In the spring of 2003, Microsoft IT deployed Live Communications Server 2003 to improve the ability of Microsoft employees to find and communicate with each other in real time.

Subsequently, in the summer of 2004, Microsoft IT worked together with the Live Communications Server product development group to plan and deploy Live Communications Server 2005. Microsoft IT identified six business needs related to real-time communication:

·         Internet access without a virtual private network (VPN) connection

·         Federation of real-time communications services with external organizations

·         High-availability deployment

·         Improved reporting

·         Support for Microsoft SQL Server™ 2000 in addition to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Data Engine (MSDE)

·         Multiple forest management

In addition to running the global IT service internally, Microsoft IT is also committed to testing Microsoft enterprise products in production before releasing them to customers to ensure that they will scale to meet the business challenges of other large enterprises. In the spring of 2005, Microsoft IT and the Live Communications Server product group developed a strategy for deploying Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 and Communicator that enabled:

·         In-place upgrade of the Microsoft IT production Live Communications Server server pool, director, access proxy server, and back-end database infrastructure

·         Changes necessary to support the new Enhanced Federation features in Live Communications Server including federated support for the Microsoft IT third-party conference-calling services provider and retirement of its federated clearinghouse

·         Support for managed connectivity with public IM Internet service providers such as MSN®, AOL® and Yahoo!®.

·         Enhanced security and SPIM controls

·         Back-end integration of the Live Communications Server infrastructure to support integration with the Microsoft IT telephone PBX and PSTN networks within the Puget Sound, WA area.

Because every organization is unique, each IT organization must develop its own plan for deploying Live Communication Server 2005. There were tasks in the Microsoft deployment plan that other organizations may never encounter, or that may need to be completed at different times in the process. For example, at the same time that Live Communications Server 2005 was originally deployed, Microsoft IT was also implementing network domain isolation based on Internet Protocol Security (IPSec), and deploying Microsoft Windows® XP Professional Service Pack 2. This affected the overall timing of the migration from Live Communications Server 2003 to Live Communications Server 2005.

Although this paper is not intended to serve as a step-by-step guide for deploying Live Communications Server, Microsoft is sharing this information to assist its customers in deploying this product in their own environments. Additional information about Live Communications Server is available at http://www.microsoft.com/office/livecomm.

Note: For security reasons, the names of forests, domains, and other internal resources do not represent real names used within Microsoft and are for illustration purposes only.

Situation

In 2003, Microsoft deployed Live Communications Server 2003 to provide a more secure, standards-based, real-time presence and instant messaging solution for its employees. The original Live Communications Server 2003 configuration deployed by Microsoft IT is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1-MS IT 2003 Physical7-FINAL

Figure 1. Previous Live Communications Server 2003 Architecture

Nine Live Communications Server 2003 Standard Edition home servers were required, primarily because each forest was required to have one or more home servers to host the users in that forest. Live Communications Server 2003 Standard Edition was not designed for the high-availability requirements of large organizations like Microsoft. In addition, it was difficult to configure and support external Internet access for Microsoft employees to access their home servers without establishing a VPN connection. Lastly, configuring and enabling the federation of real-time presence and communications services at Microsoft with those of selected organizations and customers was not supported by Live Communications Server 2003.

Note: In Live Communications Server 2003, the servers that hosted the real-time communications services were called home servers. Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition is based on a similar design where the MSDE is used to store user data on each local server.

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition introduces a highly scalable, high-availability deployment model based on the concept of server pools. Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition supports multiple front-end servers per server pool and the use of clustered back-end SQL Server 2000 database servers. A large enterprise deployment can mix multiple Standard Edition servers and Enterprise Edition server pools.

Microsoft Office Live Communications Server 2005 System Components

In its simplest terms, three components need to be deployed to create a protected, real-time, person-to-person communications solution:

·         Real-time presence and communications-enabled client application

·         Real-time communications server

·         Operating system and networking infrastructure.

Real-Time Communications Clients

Previously, Microsoft IT had deployed and supported Windows Messenger 5.1 as the standard client application for real-time communications. The latest real-time communications client from Microsoft is Microsoft Office Communicator 2005 which, when used with Live Communications Server, provides significantly enhanced presence and telephony integration in addition to improved instant messaging.

Microsoft Office Communicator 2005

While Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 supports Microsoft Windows Messenger 5.1 for basic presence and IM scenarios, it also delivers additional support for Communicator. New client features supported by Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 include:

·         The ability to easily search for contacts using the Live Communications Server 2005 Address Book Service. This allows users to search for contacts from their corporate global address list (GAL), as well as local address information on their computer. This removes the need for a user to add a contact to their contact list before starting an instant messaging session.

·         Integration with Microsoft Office Outlook® and Microsoft Exchange Server. This lets users view free/busy information for contacts based on their Exchange Server calendar information, and displays their 'Out of Office' messages directly in Communicator.

·         Extended presence, including the ability to allow users to set “custom notes.” This provides richer information to other contacts, enabling them to make more-informed decisions on how to interact. This information is displayed whether or not a user is online, using the offline presence capabilities of Live Communications Server.

·         The ability to control enterprise phones directly from a personal computer. With the appropriate PBX or PSTN gateway infrastructure in place, Communicator provides integration with enterprise telephony systems, allowing the user to initiate and even divert calls to a remote location when they are not at their desk.

·         The ability to initiate conference calls with service providers and multi-party PBX-based PSTN telephone calls directly from Communicator, making it easier for information workers to communicate with others.

With Live Communications Server and third-party solutions for telephony integration, Microsoft Communicator supports enterprise telephony integration, including call control, call intercept, and presence-enabled call forwarding, as well as easy-to-initiate PSTN conference calling and Microsoft Office Live Meeting sessions.

A key new feature of Communicator used by many Microsoft employees is the ability to right-click on a contact group name and initiate an instant messaging session with all of the members of that contact group (for example, a support team for a specific product or the feature team in a development group). To provide each employee with an initial list of contacts and make them more immediately productive, each person’s contact list was pre-populated by Microsoft IT with four groups of contacts:

·         Their direct reports (if the person is a manager)

·         Their manager

·         Their manager’s direct reports (their peers in their department)

·         All the people in the organization of their manager’s manager.

Administration assistants found this particularly useful when they needed to know if a particular person in their organization is online and available to be contacted by telephone or instant messaging.

Windows Messenger 5.1

Windows Messenger differs from Communicator with its simultaneous support for three real-time communications protocol stacks:

·         Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to support Live Communications Server

·         Rendezvous Protocol (RVP) for backward compatibility with Microsoft Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services

·         Mobile Status Notification Protocol (MSNP) supported by .NET Messenger Server public instant messaging service and used by the MSN Messenger consumer instant messaging client

The deployment of Windows Messenger, with its triple-protocol stack ("triple-stack"), enabled Microsoft employees to more easily make the transition from using Microsoft Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services to Live Communications Server while also providing access to the MSN public IM service.

However, Microsoft IT and Microsoft customers found that it was difficult to manage and control employees’ access to public IM services including MSN, AOL, and Yahoo!. The solution is Communicator that supports a single protocol stack (SIP) to connect to the corporate real-time presence and communications infrastructure based on Live Communications Server. Live Communications Server, in turn, includes features for managing and controlling public IM connectivity (PIC) using a centralized set of server-based capabilities.

Withdrawing Microsoft IT Internal Support for Windows Messenger

Currently, Microsoft employees are encouraged to upgrade to Communicator based on the new telephony call control and enhanced real-time presence features. Over time, Microsoft IT will restrict the use of other instant messaging clients by using the administrative controls in Live Communications Server to restrict the protocol versions supported by Microsoft IT.

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is designed for large-scale deployments supporting over 100,000 users. This includes support for high scalability and availability with a load-balanced Microsoft Windows Server™ 2003 front-end server pool and a SQL Server 2000 SP3a back-end database server that can be clustered for high availability.

Live Communications Server 2005 is dependent on the following Windows Server 2003 services:

·         Transport Layer Security (TLS) for client/server encrypted communications

·         Mutual Transport Layer Security (MTLS) for server-to-server encrypted communications

·         Active Directory® directory services for user authentication (including Kerberos and NTLM authentication)

·         Directory forest and domain management

·         Live Communications Server management console (with Microsoft Management Console)

·         Domain Name Service (DNS) support for SRV (service) records enabling automatic configuration of connections between Communicator and Windows Messenger 5.1 (or 5.0) with Live Communications Server 2005.

Network and Active Directory Structures

Microsoft IT deployed an Active Directory design based on a primary forest as the container of user accounts, groups, and resources in the corporate domains controlled by Microsoft IT.

Active Directory Forests and Domains

When the first Active Directory server is created in an organization, the installation process creates the first (primary) domain in the first (primary) forest.

A forest consists of one or more domains that share a common schema, site and replication configuration, and global catalog. Domains within the same forest are automatically linked with two-way, transitive trust relationships. For one forest to trust another forest, an explicit trust relationship must be created.

A domain is a collection of computer, user, and group directory objects that share a common directory database, security policies, and security relationships with other domains. A domain is identified by a Domain Name System (DNS) domain name, and each domain requires one or more domain controllers. If an organization requires more than one domain, multiple domains can be created in the primary forest (or a secondary forest).

 

 
Domains within the primary corporate forest have multiple external trusts to child domains in the product development and test secondary forests. The child domains and secondary forests are used, for example, for developing and testing updated versions of Active Directory and Exchange Server in a production environment.

All of the forests are based on Windows Server 2003 except for one forest that is used for testing backward-compatibility with Microsoft Windows 2000 Active Directory services. Because of this backward-compatibility requirement, the trust relationship between the domains in this forest and domains in the primary corporate forest must be configured on a domain-by-domain basis. Kerberos transitive trusts exist between the primary corporate forest and the other Windows Server 2003 secondary forests.

The multiple-forest design allows Microsoft IT to centrally manage the network users and resources in the corporate, development, and testing forests; while at the same time isolate each environment from Active Directory schema changes being made in the other forests.

Because of the mixed forest environment and the Microsoft IT decision to deploy Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition using a high-availability configuration in a central forest, Microsoft IT needed to configure the new Live Communications Server 2005 director servers to use NTLM authentication.

Background

To better appreciate how Live Communications Server 2005 was deployed at Microsoft, it is useful to understand the background information that drove the planning, design, and deployment decisions.

Microsoft Information Technology

Microsoft IT is responsible for driving global operations and delivering information technology services to the entire Microsoft organization. The IT group directs all activities related to running and maintaining Microsoft information systems worldwide: technology infrastructure and corporate and marketing information systems including production, distribution, and other key internal systems. Microsoft IT works to provide a world-class utility and excellence in business operations through its leadership in the design and integration of company strategies, processes, and architecture.

Microsoft IT provides a full range of services including server and end-user support, telecommunications management, network operations, and information security. They are responsible for managing connectivity for more than 300,000 devices worldwide. Microsoft IT also ensures that more than 60,000 employees and 20,000 contractors and vendors in over 400 Microsoft locations are able to access corporate network services and resources 24 hours a day, seven days a week, from around the world.

Because the primary business of Microsoft is software design, Microsoft IT has an additional responsibility that is unique among global providers. In addition to operating the company’s IT utility, Microsoft IT is an early adopter of Microsoft technologies. They are responsible for testing and deploying Microsoft products such as Windows Server 2003, Microsoft Exchange Server 2003, and Microsoft SharePoint® Products and Technologies before these products are released to customers. This process is known by those within Microsoft as “eating our own dog food” or simply “dog-fooding.”

Previous Experiences in Deploying Live Communications Server 2003

The Microsoft IT experience in deploying and managing Live Communications Server 2003 greatly influenced how it chose to deploy Live Communications Server 2005.

With Live Communications Server 2003, users were statically assigned to a single home server, and user profile and presence information was stored in the MSDE database on each home server. When a home server was unavailable, users assigned to that server needed to wait for the server to come online before the service was restored.

In addition, the recommended maximum number of users supported per server needed to scale beyond the limit of 10,000 to enable large deployments. Reducing the number of servers is a key factor in reducing overall hardware, software, and operating costs.

Lastly, employees, external organizations, and customers were looking for improved Internet access to the real-time person-to-person communications solution that Microsoft IT operated inside the Microsoft corporate firewall. Real-time presence provides its greatest value when it is easily available all of the time, regardless of whether an employee is connected to the Internet or the corporate network.

The Live Communications Server 2003 setup process also made it difficult for the Active Directory management team to independently plan and deploy the schema extensions required by Live Communications Server. The Live Communications Server 2005 setup program solves this by separating the Live Communications Server 2005 schema extension, installation, and activation tasks into distinct, installer-controlled steps.

Microsoft uses multiple forests to separately manage the product divisions, sales and marketing, and product support teams. Implementing multi-forest scenarios with Live Communications Server 2003 was a tedious process requiring schema changes in all forests, and custom identity synchronization solutions to be built using Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003 (MIIS). More information on the Microsoft IT deployment of MIIS can be found in the IT Showcase white paper Enabling Cross-Forest Identity Management with Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003 available at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/msit/deploy/cfimwiis.mspx.

Benefits of Deploying Live Communications Server 2005

Microsoft IT was able to address the above issues by deploying the Enterprise Edition of Live Communications Server 2005. The following Enterprise Edition features were key to the successful deployment of a new large-scale, high-availability real-time communications solution at Microsoft.

High Availability Deployment Scenarios

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition provides a new option of configuring multiple front-end servers into a server pool with load balancing and fail-over. Server pools also enable server software upgrades to be implemented on a server-by-server basis without interrupting end-user services.

Support for SQL Server in Addition to MSDE

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition uses SQL Server-based databases to maintain user-profile information, including a person’s contact list and blocked users list. In the 2003 release of the product, database server support was limited to MSDE, which was not scalable, could not be clustered, could not be administered remotely, and was more tedious to backup and restore. Live Communications Server 2003 automatically installed MSDE, and SQL Server was unavailable as a database server option.

Microsoft IT wanted the option of deploying either SQL Server or MSDE. Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition provides this option by including support for clustered, highly available database servers.

Multiple Forest Management

Deployment of Live Communications Server 2003 in a multi-forest environment like the one at Microsoft presented a number of challenges, including the inability to manage multiple forests from a single administrator logon, and difficulties in moving users from one forest to another.

The 2005 release of Live Communications Server was specifically designed to remove the cross-forest deployment and management barriers found in the earlier version of Live Communications Server through its support of a central forest model for large-scale deployments.

External Internet Access without needing a Virtual Private Network Connection

Another lesson learned from the Microsoft IT experience with Microsoft Exchange Server is the need to support remote access to selected messaging services without requiring a user to first establish and log on to a VPN connection.

In Microsoft Exchange Server 2003, this feature is referred to as “RPC over HTTP” (“Remote Procedure Call over HTTP"). In Live Communications Server 2005, this is referred to as the “remote user” scenario.

Reduced use of VPN services reduces hardware, software, and operating costs. More importantly, accessing real-time presence information without requiring a VPN provides true real-time indication of availability of the people on a user’s contact list.

Project Goals

Microsoft employees are active instant messaging users. They provide a model environment for the Live Communications Server product group to test updated releases of Live Communications Server in a large, worldwide, enterprise setting. A partial list of goals for the deployment of Live Communications Server included:

·         Product stability and availability, as measured by days without a priority one failure, and actual versus planned server uptime.

·         Usage as measured by number of enabled users, number of concurrent logged-on users, number of concurrent active users, and number of servers deployed or upgraded.

·         Manageability, which includes the ability to migrate user information using in-the-box tools and Microsoft Operations Manager (MOM) support.

In addition, a matrix of tracking metrics is maintained that includes, for example, the total message traffic categorized by the number of messages and data volume, the number of help desk calls, and the number of product group software updates.

A detailed description of the Microsoft IT deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 is provided in the Solution section of this white paper. For readers unfamiliar with the new features found in Live Communications Server 2005, they are described in the next section, Understanding Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1.

 

Understanding Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1

To understand how Microsoft IT deployed its protected, real-time communications solution, it is important to understand the new deployment and management features in Live Communications Server 2005; and the new and updated features in Live Communications Server.

Readers already familiar with these features may choose to skip to the Solution section, which specifically addresses the Microsoft IT deployment of Live Communications Server 2005. Additional information can also be found on the Live Communications Server 2005 Web site at http://www.microsoft.com/office/livecomm.

The original 2003 release of Live Communications Server focused on five key attributes:

·         Increase individual productivity using presence, IM, and real-time communication capabilities

·         Familiar tools for managing users, client software, servers, and network settings

·         Extensible, real-time communications platform for custom client- and server-side solution development

·         Standards-based signaling and communications protocols based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE) protocols

·         Integration with the Microsoft Office System.

Live Communications Server 2005 builds on these key capabilities to provide new connectivity features and high-availability and scalability options to support large enterprise deployments.

Live Communications Server 2005 is designed to improve business efficiencies by enabling information workers to find and communicate with their colleagues in real time with a security enhanced enterprise-grade environment that is integrated with the Microsoft Office System.

Live Communications Server 2005 is available in two product configurations: Standard Edition and Enterprise Edition. Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition is installed as a single-server configuration using MSDE as the local database server; Enterprise Edition offers high-availability and scalability options using multiple front-end servers and SQL Server 2000 as the back-end database server, optionally clustered for high database server availability.

Availability and Scalability

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition provides the following enterprise deployment and scalability options:

·         Distributed, two-tier architecture for fault tolerance

·         Ability to use clustered or unclustered SQL Server 2000 back-end database servers

·         Resilient client connectivity that enables clients to automatically reconnect to a different front-end server should the original server become unavailable due to planned or unplanned outages

·         Third-party backup and restore support

·         Scale-out support from a single server supporting 15,000 users, to server pools supporting more than 100,000 simultaneously active users

·         Bandwidth-optimized protocol support

·         Storage Area Network (SAN) interoperability.

Figure 2 is representative of a typical high-availability Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition solution that is capable of supporting over 100,000 simultaneously active users. There are two roles for the primary servers in an Enterprise Edition server pool: front-end servers, and database servers. Additionally, to support external Internet access and inter-organization federation of real-time communications services, one or more Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy servers may be deployed in the perimeter network. Live Communications Server 2005 director servers may be required in situations where specialized SIP message routing is required (for example, when additional Live Communications Server 2005 application servers are deployed outside of the enterprise server pool).

Fig

Figure 2. Live Communications Server 2005 high-availability server pool example

Director Servers

SIP and SIMPLE

Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE) are the core protocols used by Microsoft Office Live Communications Server, Communicator and Windows Messenger for exchanging presence information, initiating real-time audio, video, text, and telephony-based communications sessions; and for exchanging instant messages. SIP and SIMPLE are emerging standards defined by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).

 

 
In the high-availability server pool example depicted in Figure 2, the director servers are the first servers to receive SIP message streams from Communicator or Windows Messenger intranet users or, via a Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server, remote users. For intranet requests, the director server redirects users to the server pool. For Internet requests, the director server forwards the SIP message to the appropriate server because Internet users do not have a direct connection to servers in the intranet. During migration to Live Communications Server 2005, director servers enable users to communicate with a mixed Live Communications Server 2003 and Live Communications Server 2005 environment without changing their client configuration.

Front-End Servers and Server Pools

A server pool is a group of front-end servers that appear as a single virtual IP address resource. This is achieved with a hardware network load balancer. When a director server directs a user to a server pool, it directs the user to the virtual IP address of the network load balancer; which in turn selects the available front-end servers to handle the user connection.

Additional front-end servers can be added to a server pool as required during a phased deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 (or as an organization grows). In addition, the hardware network load balancer enables selected front-end servers–usually one at a time–to be temporarily taken out of service for maintenance or replacement without affecting service levels. Often an additional front-end server is added to the server pool to provide additional capacity to support fail-over in the event of planned or unplanned server outages.

Database Servers

With Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition, the database is a local MSDE database service running on each home server. With Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, in a typical enterprise configuration, the database server is a SQL Server 2000 server that is both logically and physically separated from the front-end servers. In a high-availability scenario, the database server is configured as a two-node active-passive clustered SQL Server database server connected to a shared storage device; typically, a storage-area network (SAN). The latter scenario is depicted in Figure 2.

Access Proxy Servers

Similar in function to Live Communications Server 2003 forwarding proxy servers, the role of an access proxy server in a Live Communications Server 2005 configuration is to act as a secure connection point for remote users as well as users from other selected organizations who have been configured for federated access. A single proxy server can be deployed, or, for a more scalable and highly available remote access solution, multiple access proxy servers can be placed behind a network load balancer.

Access proxy servers check that the inbound message headers are valid (including the destination domain) and mark each message as originating from outside the firewall. Messages from an access proxy server are sent to a director server. Messages are then forwarded to a Live Communications Server Standard Edition server or Enterprise Edition server pool. This deployment model can support very large traffic volumes more easily and provides for authentication on the access proxy server.

Archiving Agent and Database Servers

Microsoft IT configured one archive agent server and one archive database server as part of its production Live Communications Server 2005 environment. The archiving database server uses the SAN environment to store statistics collected by the archiving service. Microsoft IT chooses not to archive message content.

Microsoft IT uses the data to analyze the Live Communications Server 2005 environment. The archived data is not stored for long-term retrieval. In addition, deployment of the archiving infrastructure was an important part of the Live Communications Server testing effort.

In addition, Microsoft enabled the flat-file logging feature in Live Communications Server 2005. Live Communications Server 2005 flat-file logging logs only the session header information, not the message content. While the SQL Server archive logs are easier to analyze, Microsoft also enabled flat- file logs because they contain more detailed information about audio/video sessions, PC-to-phone sessions, etc. than is available by using SQL Server archiving logs alone.

Internet Access and Federation Between Organizations

Many enterprise users also use public instant messaging services to communicate with fellow employees, customers, friends, family members, and other associates. Live Communications Server 2005 helps IT departments manage these diverse needs by supporting:

·         More secure, inter-enterprise federation of real-time presence and communications

·         Managed access to public instant messaging services

Federation enables a trust to be established between two organizations that allow presence and instant messages to be freely but more securely exchanged between the Live Communications Server 2005 infrastructures running in each organization. Access proxy servers run in the perimeter network to verify each incoming request. Depending on whether a server pool or individual home server approach is used to deploy Live Communications Server 2005, the incoming request will be directed to a director server or front-end server.

Performance and Capacity Planning

Microsoft IT found that Live Communications Server 2003 was able to support a maximum of 10,000 active users on a single home server using MSDE. The Microsoft IT goal was to support 15,000 active users per server using the front-end server pool and clustered back-end database deployment model available in Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition.

Using Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, a single server running with a separate SQL Server back-end database server can be expected to support approximately 15,000 to 20,000 active users; or over 100,000 simultaneously active users in a server pool consisting of five front-end servers and a separate clustered SQL Server back-end database server. Product group testing has found CPU utilization is typically much lower with Live Communications Server 2005 and user logons execute much faster because of protocol optimizations that reduce the number of round trips to the server.

In addition, the support for real-time communication services that is built into Microsoft Office 2003, Windows SharePoint Services, and SharePoint Portal Server 2003 must also be considered. After the deployment of Live Communications Server, Microsoft Office System users are able to see presence information for other enterprise users and can send an instant message from within an Office application such as Microsoft Outlook and Microsoft Word, and from within Web sites created through Windows SharePoint Services. This causes additional load on the front-end servers and needs to be taken into account during capacity planning (the 15,000 active users per Enterprise Edition server accounts for this additional load).

New Capabilities Enabled with Live Communications Server 2005 Service Pack 1

Live Communications Server enables the following new and enhanced capabilities in addition to its support for Communicator:

·         Public IM connectivity (PIC)

·         Enhanced federation

·         Enhanced security and SPIM control.

Public IM Connectivity

Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 delivers the tools necessary to connect customers to PIC Internet service providers, including MSN, AOL, and Yahoo!. Live Communications Server users who are licensed for PIC are able to use Communicator to add contacts, send instant messages, and share presence information with users of MSN Messenger, AOL Instant Messenger, and Yahoo! Messenger.

Live Communications Server provides administrators with controls for enabling PIC on a per-user basis. A user is enabled for either all configured public instant messaging services or none. Where appropriate, administrators can also choose to log messages sent to and from the public IM Internet service providers. As with any types of Live Communications Server federated access, individual public IM Internet service providers can be blocked on a domain-by-domain basis by configuring the appropriate access proxy server.

Public IM connectivity is available only with Live Communications Server 2005 SP1. It requires the acquisition of PIC-specific service licenses. For more information on the provisioning process, refer to https://main.livemeeting.com/LCSVL/.

Enhanced Federation

Federation is the ability to establish trusted relationships between your organization and one or more external organizations that allow users to initiate and share IM sessions and subscribe to user presence across network boundaries.

Enhanced federation simplifies the deployment model for the federation in Live Communications Server 2005 by supporting dynamic discovery of external Live Communications Server environments, which reduces the need for static direct federation configurations. Live Communications Server also gives network administrators the ability to control enhanced federation access to their organizations by being explicitly able to designate external domains that can or cannot access the organization’s access proxy server(s).

The enhanced federation of Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 uses Domain Name System Service Location (DNS SRV) resolution to locate a federated organization’s Live Communications Server access proxy server. This enhancement therefore eliminates the need to specify the access proxy server of each and every federated organization, and provides the Full Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) of your organization's access proxy server to these organizations. While simplifying the process, Live Communications Server uses mutual Transport Layer Security (TLS) to secure the federated connections.

By using enhanced federation (and decommissioning its federated clearinghouse infrastructure), Microsoft IT was able to deploy a simpler solution which required less administration and lower operations overhead, and which provided more direct control, making it more secure.

From a security perspective, Microsoft IT deployed enhanced federation using a restricted access model where the domain of each external organization is specifically added to the access proxy server configured to support federation.

Enhanced Security and Spam over IM Control

Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 introduces two new filters to help protect your organization, and each enterprise-to-enterprise federated connection, from malicious attacks.

The first is an optional spam over IM (SPIM) filter that reduces unauthorized or unsolicited messages and is configurable to suit the needs of your organization. Instant messaging and sharing presence information with users connected to public IM Internet service providers, MSN, AOL, and Yahoo!, are restricted to names explicitly specified in each user’s Allow or Block list. This restriction provides additional control of SPIM.

Live Communications Server also introduces a new IM filter application that blocks messages containing URLs or file transfer requests. This filter application can be enabled when your organization is under threat of a virus being propagated through these methods. The Microsoft IT deployment of Live Communications Server blocks all file transfer requests as well as URLs that appear in instant messages.

Additional Improvements

The following additional improvements are also included with Live Communications Server 2005 SP1:

·         Support for multiple-tree forest topologies previously documented in Knowledge Base article KB#889327. An Active Directory forest with multiple trees does not appear as expected in the Live Communications Server 2005 Microsoft Management Console (MMC) snap-in.

·         Improved server API performance can handle approximately three times more messages with a significantly lower CPU utilization on the server.

·         The improved in-place upgrade process from Live Communications Server 2005 to Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 means the manual exporting and importing of existing databases is no longer necessary, as it was previously with a migration from Live Communications Server 2003 to Live Communications Server 2005.

 

Solution

The original planning and deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 to create a security enhanced, real-time, person-to-person communications solution occurred in six stages. In addition to the project goals discussed earlier, Microsoft IT defined the following four objectives for this project:

·         Deploying Live Communications Server 2005 using a central forest deployment model

·         Ensuring that previous versions of Live Communications Server can co-exist and interoperate with Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition servers and Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition server pools. This objective is important for many Microsoft customer upgrade and co-existence scenarios and is a specific requirement for upgrading the Microsoft IT Live Communications Server 2003 deployment

·         Giving users the ability to retain their individual contacts list and a blocked users list after migrating from the 2003 to the 2005 release of Live Communications Server

·         Reusing existing server hardware that continued to meet the Live Communications Server 2005 prerequisites.

The six major stages that Microsoft IT used to plan its deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 were based on the work that needed to be accomplished, and the effect that the work would have on the groups of users targeted by each stage. As exit criteria, each stage needed to be executed completely and successfully before the project could advance to the next stage. The following is a brief description of each of the six stages that Microsoft IT used for the deployment phase of this project:

1.     Preparation. The basic components of the Live Communications Server 2005 environment were put in place. These included: deploying a central forest to host the Live Communications Server 2005 server pool; deploying the 2005 Active directory schema extensions; installing and configuring the SQL Server database server cluster (including a dedicated SAN); and installing a single Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition front-end server. Selected users from Microsoft IT were enabled for this environment so they could test each of the 2003 and 2005 interoperability scenarios.

2.     Server Pool Deployment. Extend the server deployment to add Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition servers in the server pool as users were migrated from Live Communications Server 2003 infrastructure. Users from three of the smaller Active Directory forests were migrated to the Live Communications Server 2005 central forest during this stage.

3.     User Mass Migration. Having tested and verified the interoperability between the 2003 and 2005 releases of Live Communications Server, the migration of the remaining large forests was undertaken.

4.     Live Communications Server 2003 Cleanup. This stage involved: removal of the remaining Live Communications Server 2003 environment; updating of the performance log data monitoring and gathering processes; and updating the installation, disaster recovery, and troubleshooting and operations guides for the new Live Communications Server 2005 environment.

5.     Test Server Deployment. In preparation for production testing of the ongoing deployment of product updates, a Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition server was deployed. Selected users from Microsoft IT and the Live Communications Server product group were migrated from the Enterprise Edition server pool to the new Standard Edition production test server.

6.     External Internet Access. An external director server dedicated to the access proxy server was deployed to provide remote access for employees and selected external customers and contacts, without having to go through a VPN.

Overall, the strategy consisted of a side-by-side installation and configuration of Live Communications Server 2005 with the predecessor release followed by the migration of successive groups of users to the new platform.

The deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 was facilitated by the enhanced in-place upgrade process that did not require the manual exporting and importing of existing databases that was required when Microsoft IT migrated from Live Communications Server 2003 to Live Communications Server 2005. The following sections describe The Microsoft IT original experience upgrading to Live Communications Server 2005. The description of the Live Communications Server upgrade process at Microsoft follows these sections.

Planning

To provide continuous instant messaging service during the deployment of Live Communications Server 2005, and to accommodate the new two-tier, server-pool deployment model, Microsoft IT was required to deploy the Live Communications Server 2005 server pool and then migrate the 2003 users. When no longer needed, the 2003 servers would then be erased, rebuilt, and redeployed within one of the data centers at Microsoft.

Active Directory Planning

Live Communications Server requires that Active Directory provide optimal security and manageability of servers and clients. Live Communications Server supports Active Directory on either Windows 2000 Service Pack 3 (SP3) or Windows Server 2003. However, for multiple-forest organizations, all forests must be pure Windows Server 2003 forests to provide cross-forest Kerberos authentication.

If an organization does not have all Windows Server 2003 domain controllers in a forest, the initial authentication from a Communicator or Windows Messenger client may fail. The solution is to configure Live Communications Server to use NTLM authentication on director servers. In this scenario, after the client is authenticated as an end user through NTLM, the internal director server directs the client to the appropriate server pool server.

The Live Communications Server database minimizes the impact on domain controllers. The only cases in which Live Communications Server communicates with a domain controller are as follows:

·         Full Active Directory synchronization during initial server start-up

·         Incremental synchronization when Active Directory is updated. Active Directory is checked approximately every five minutes and has little impact on domain controllers after the initial server start-up

·         When a user is provisioned for real-time communications services

·         When the Live Communications Server service starts up.

With Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, Microsoft IT was able to deploy its internal real-time communications service as a high-availability solution in the central corporate forest. This implied that Microsoft IT was able to limit the deployment of the Live Communications Server 2005 Active Directory schema extensions to the central corporate forest (and not deploy the schema extensions across the secondary product development and test forests).

Domain Name Service Planning

Microsoft IT used automatic, rather than manual, configuration of Communicator and Windows Messenger clients. Microsoft IT set up automatic configuration at the time each client was installed, and then configured the Domain Name Service (DNS) service to support the use of automatic configuration for the Live Communications Server namespace.

When an organization uses automatic configuration of the client, the client looks up a DNS service location (SRV) record for the Live Communications Server service. The DNS SRV record has the effect of mapping the namespace of the Live Communications Server service to a specific server name and TCP/IP port number.

When Communicator or Windows Messenger starts, it performs a DNS SRV record lookup based on the namespace in the user's SIP communications server account. For example, for a user logging into the contoso.com namespace, Communicator (and Windows Messenger) uses the following convention to look up the name of the Live Communications Server DNS SRV record:

_sip._tls.contoso.com

The DNS SRV record lookup returns the DNS name of the server, server pool, or director server that the user is to connect to as well as the TCP/IP port to be used (typically, port 5061 for encrypted TLS connections and port 5060 if unencrypted TCP/IP connections are used).

If the DNS SRV record is not available, the client performs a conventional DNS lookup for a server name comprising "sip." followed by the namespace of the user's account. Using the above example, the DNS "A" record would be named:

sip.contoso.com

Once the DNS name and port have been resolved, Communicator (or Windows Messenger) is then able to connect to the Live Communications Server 2005 services.

Automatic configuration gives greater flexibility in managing the servers to meet the needs of the users and the environment while decreasing client management and operations costs.

Configuring DNS for Remote User and Federated Access

To support federated access via a Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server, a conventional DNS "A" record for the access proxy server needs to be configured in the organization's external DNS server. Typically, the name of the DNS record is same as the internal name (for example, sip.contoso.com). TLS (and MTLS) encrypted connections are established using the default port 5061.

To support remote user connections to the central forest server pool at Microsoft, Microsoft IT chose a slightly different approach. Microsoft employees are often mobile users working from customer offices and home offices. In these environments, port 5061 is often blocked by the local firewall while port 443, the default port used for Secure HTTP (HTTPS) access, is left open. To address this situation, Microsoft IT configured the Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server (and the corresponding external DNS SRV record) to use port 443 rather than the default port 5061. TLS is used to encrypt these remote user connections.

Support for remote access over port 443 has proved extremely valuable for Microsoft Consulting Services consultants needing to communicate with each other; as well as product developers and support engineers working inside the firewall at Microsoft.

Certificate Services

To ensure that TLS can be used as the transport protocol by Live Communications Server 2005, an organization must have a public key infrastructure (PKI) available. Certificates are used to initiate a TLS connection between the server and the client. Because Microsoft already deployed an internal PKI based on Windows Server 2003 certificate services, Microsoft IT used the automatic enrollment features of Microsoft Windows to obtain certificates for the servers running Live Communications Server. Automatic enrollment allows each server to automatically request and receive its certificate from the enterprise certificate authority (CA) as soon as the server joins the domain.

Because every server and every client at Microsoft is automatically enrolled and receives a certificate when it joins a Microsoft IT-controlled domain, no additional work was required for certificates. That is, Live Communications Server does not require the explicit creation of special certificates. Live Communications Server uses certificates that meet the following requirements:

·         The certificate must enable client and server authentication.

·         The certificate must contain the fully qualified domain name (FQDN) of the server.

In the Live Communications Server architecture, the underlying operating system caches certificate information for the clients and servers.

Network Capacity Planning

Live Communications Server consumes, on average, 1.6 kilobits per second (Kbps) of network bandwidth per user over an eight-hour period for presence and instant messaging traffic. Microsoft IT arrived at this value based on previous Live Communications Server product group testing. This value was sufficient to convince Microsoft IT that it was able to centralize the deployment of its Live Communications Server servers, because the high-bandwidth connections between the Redmond data center and the regional data centers had sufficient capacity to handle the traffic across wide area network (WAN) links. Network data compression helped reduce the bandwidth used by the real-time communications services.

Microsoft IT recognized that a centralized model would increase overall logon time when a user logged on to a server. However, the measured increase in logon time was a fraction of a second and was not noticeable to users. The centralized model offered more tangible cost savings benefits through simplified management.

Security Planning

Microsoft IT increased the security of the Live Communications Server service by deploying Communicator with high-security mode enabled, and by disabling all transport modes except for TLS.

With the preceding settings and high-security mode on the client, behavior in the Microsoft environment is as follows:

·         TLS encrypts information between servers and clients across TCP/IP ports. The default communications protocol in Live Communications Server is unencrypted TCP.

Note: On the server side, Microsoft IT configured mutual TLS (MTLS) to encrypt information that travels between servers.

·         Live Communications Server requires Kerberos or NTLM authentication. Kerberos is the default authentication method for Live Communications Server. For backward compatibility with Windows 2000–based computers maintained by Microsoft test and product support teams, Microsoft IT uses NTLM for authentication on front-end servers. If only Kerberos were used on the front-end servers, security would be improved but users in a Windows 2000 forest would not be authenticated.

·         Universal Plug and Play for network translation tables, which is dependent on unauthenticated HTTP protocols, is disabled on the client.

·         Peer-to-peer connections are disabled for all IM sessions. This forces all communications, including audio/video and data collaboration session invitations, to be routed through Live Communications Server. Allowing instant messages to go directly from one client to another creates a security risk because instant messages cannot be archived and cannot be scanned for inappropriate uses.

·         Audio/video conferencing and data collaboration sessions themselves still use peer-to-peer connections after the initial invitation has been accepted.

High-security mode contains optional features, such as disabling connectivity to the MSN .NET Messenger Service and Exchange IM. However, Microsoft IT did not disable the MSN .NET Messenger Service on the client pending the selection of alternative means for providing Microsoft employees with access to family members on public instant messaging networks.

In addition to the preceding security considerations, an organization can use Group Policy to require audio and video encryption. Microsoft IT did not use this configuration because audio and video encryption increases the time needed to set up a conference. In this case, Microsoft IT was more concerned about the user experience than the security of the connection. Because the data traverses only the internal network, there is little risk of someone being able to reconstruct individual network packets for an audio or video communication.

This is in addition to the Microsoft IT deployment of IPSec to support network domain isolation. For more information on the enterprise-wide deployment of IPSec at Microsoft, refer to the Microsoft IT Showcase white paper Improving Security with Domain Isolation: Microsoft IT Implements IP Security (IPSec) available at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/msit/security/ipsecdomisolwp.mspx.

Communications Plan

All Microsoft IT employee communications regarding the ongoing software deployments are coordinated by and originate from a dedicated client services team in Microsoft IT. This ensures that employees receive e-mail messages from Microsoft IT that are of a consistent quality, and are properly timed and coordinated with other Microsoft IT projects that also need to communicate their plans and needs to Microsoft employees.

For the original Live Communications Server 2005 migration and subsequent upgrade to Live Communications Server 2005 SP1, e-mail notifications were used to advise employees when the migration would affect them individually, the location of the end user support help page, and how to contact Helpdesk if they have any further questions or issues.

Microsoft IT creates an end-user support Web page for each product it supports (including Communicator, Windows Messenger and services provided by the deployment of Live Communications Server 2005). This Web page includes a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs), additional self-help and troubleshooting information, and a link to the internal software distribution servers where Microsoft employees can download and install the latest real-time communications client.

Architecture

Microsoft IT took advantage of a key enterprise deployment feature in the release of Live Communication Server 2005: the ability to deploy a high-availability server pool using a central forest deployment model.

Central Forest Deployment Model

From an Active Directory perspective, the Live Communications Server 2005 server pool was deployed into a central forest (the Microsoft corporate forest). This is where the greatest number of user objects had been created. Microsoft IT enabled Live Communications Server features for every user object that was enabled for e-mail. If the e-mail enabled user object was already in the central forest, the central forest user object was enabled for real-time communications services.

If an e-mail enabled user object is in one of the secondary forests, Live Communications Server 2005 supports using an Active Directory contact object in the central forest as a user principal. Microsoft IT used Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003 (MIIS) to automate the creation and synchronization of the central forest contact objects with the user objects in the secondary forests.

Previously known as Microsoft Metadirectory Services (MMS), MIIS is a centralized service that stores and integrates identity information for organizations with multiple directories. The goal of MIIS is to provide organizations with a unified view of all known information identifying users, applications, and network resources. MIIS helps improve productivity, reduce security risk, and reduce the total cost of ownership associated with managing and integrating identity information across the enterprise.

The process flow for exporting secondary forest/child domain user objects and the creation of the corresponding central forest contact objects is illustrated in Figure 3. MIIS selects the user-object information from the secondary forests and creates the contact objects in the central forest. One-way trusts must be created from the central forest to each of the secondary forests if they do not already exist.

Figure 3-MS IT MIIS2

Figure 3. Microsoft IT cross-forest topology

Server Pool Architecture

The original Live Communications Server 2005 server pool architecture deployed by Microsoft IT is illustrated in Figure 4. Having all Microsoft employees and contractors configured in the central forest as either local user objects or imported contact objects is sufficient for Live Communications Server 2005 to provide protected, real-time presence and communications services to all users regardless of their home domain. This centralized, highly scalable design eliminated the need to deploy separate Live Communications Server servers into each secondary forest or child domain.

Fig

Figure 4. Original Live Communications Server 2005 corporate central forest architecture

The Live Communications Server 2005 applications server included in Figure 4 hosts custom server-side code that allows applications to intercept and reroute IM messages intended for application agents (rather than conventional, real-time communications client users). Microsoft IT developers use the Standard Edition applications server to test and support new applications.

Deployment

This section describes the Microsoft IT experience deploying the original Live Communications Server 2005 server pool architecture depicted in Figure 4; and migrating from the previous deployment of Live Communications Server 2003 to Live Communications Server 2005.

The key steps that Microsoft IT included in its original deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 can be summarized as follows:

·         Select the forest to be used as the central forest, and extend the Active Directory schema using the Live Communications Server 2005 setup wizard

·         Set up the Live Communications Server 2005 front-end server pool, initially with one front-end server, and the clustered SQL Server back-end database server and SAN

·         Configure MIIS Live Communications Server synchronization

·         Export users’ Live Communications Server 2003 data from secondary forests

·         Import users’ data into central forest contact objects

·         Re-home contacts in central forest

·         Disable Live Communications Server 2003 user object in secondary forests

·         Decommission and recycle existing Live Communications Server 2003 servers

·         Clean up Active Directory contact objects and Live Communications Server 2003 attributes from secondary forest user objects.

Server Hardware

Microsoft IT used server hardware configurations that were based on the Microsoft IT standard configurations that most closely matched the hardware requirements for Live Communications Server 2005.

Table 1. Microsoft IT Deployed Server Hardware

Server Role

Configuration

Access Proxy Server

Dual Intel Xeon 3.06 GHz, 1 MB Cache, 533 MHz FSB

2 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

2 x 18 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI), 2 GB Network Interface Card (NIC)

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1

Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1 (Access proxy server setup option)

Director Server

Dual Intel Xeon 3.06 GHz, 1 MB Cache, 533 MHz FSB

2 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

6 x 18 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI)

100 MB Network Interface Card (NIC)

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1

Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition with Service Pack 1

Pooled Front-End Server

Dual Intel Xeon 3.06 GHz 1 MB Cache 533 MHz FSB

2 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

4 x 18 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI), 100 MB NIC

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with Service Pack 1

Back-end Database Server Node

Quad Intel Xeon 2.3 GHz 1 MB Cache 533 MHz FSB

5 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

2 x 34 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI), 1 GB NIC

Windows Server 2003 Server Pack 1

SQL Server 2000 Server Pack Service Pack 3a

Archiving Database Server

Quad Intel Xeon 2.3 GHz 1 MB Cache 533 MHz FSB

5 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

2 x 34 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI), 1 GB NIC

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1

SQL Server 2000 Service Pack Service Pack 3a

(connected to SAN for storage)

Archiving Agent Server

Dual Intel Xeon 3.06 GHz 1 MB Cache 533 MHz FSB

2 GB DDR 266 MHz RAM

2 x 18 GB HDD (15,000 RPM SCSI), 2 GB NIC

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1

Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Services

Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1 (Archiving agent server setup option)

Central Forest Active Directory Synchronization

The following table is the list of Live Communications Server 2005 directory attributes that required synchronization between the secondary forests and the central forest.

Table 2. Live Communications Server 2005 Active Directory Attributes

Active Directory Attribute

Description

msRTCSIP-UserEnabled

User is enabled for live communications services

msRTCSIP-FederationEnabled

User is enabled to communicate with users in other organizations that have established a Live Communications Server federated trust

msRTCSIP-InternetAccessEnabled

User is enabled for Internet access (without a VPN connection)

msRTCSIP-PrimaryHomeServer

Domain name of server and service for this user: single server (Standard Edition) or server pool (Enterprise Edition)

msRTCSIP-PrimaryUserAddress

SIP URI (SIP universal resource identifier)

msRTCSIP-OriginatorSid

NTLM authoritative object security identifier SID (maps contact or disabled user account in central forest to the authoritative user principal account)

Proxyaddresses

Proxy addresses

 

Microsoft IT used MIIS to perform the synchronization of user objects in the secondary forests with the MIIS database and subsequently, from the MIIS database to the Active Directory contact objects in the central forest.

Operations

The Communications Operations group performs routine tasks for maintaining Live Communications Server. For example, Communications Operations collects daily counters that monitor key functions of servers to determine the load on those servers. Other routine maintenance tasks include backing up the servers and examining available disk space, memory usage, and processor performance. These tasks are similar to the operations of other IT services deployed at Microsoft.

Support Structure

When a problem with a server running Live Communications Server is identified at Microsoft, the problem is escalated through the Microsoft organization as follows:

·         Tier 1 Helpdesk. Most issues are discovered through the MOM infrastructure. However, if the server owner or a user identifies the problem, he or she contacts Helpdesk.

·         Tier 2 Support Services and Client Services. Support Services uses MOM alerts proactively to monitor servers for problems so that it may identify a problem before Helpdesk is notified. However, if the server owner or a user identifies server or client problem and contacts Helpdesk, Helpdesk then contacts client services for further action. A service request can then be opened and managed through to resolution.

·         Tier 3 Communications Operations. Communications Operations receives server and client issues that are not covered by the support materials used by Tier 2. In addition, Communications Operations resolves problems and closes service requests for issues that are covered by—but cannot be resolved by—Tier 2.

·         Tier 4 Infrastructure Engineering. Communications Operations can contact Infrastructure Engineering if resolving the problem involves modifying the IT architecture, or hardware or software standards. If necessary, Infrastructure Engineering can in turn contact the product development group to discuss possible improvements to the product.

Microsoft has four service level agreement (SLA) response times in place to resolve issues for any service. These response times, shown in the following table, apply across all tiers of support.

Table 3: SLA response times for resolving service issues at Microsoft

Priority

Definition

Time to resolve

Immediate

Meets one or both of the following criteria:

Any unplanned outage that affects 50 percent or more of a site, IT service, or non-redundant critical IT device.

Any unplanned outage that affects 50 or more clients/customers.

4 hours

High

Meets one or more of the following criteria:

Any unplanned outage that affects less than 50 percent of a site, IT service, or non-redundant critical IT device, but is not a single user issue.

Any unplanned outage that reduces the redundancy of an IT service or server/device by 50 percent or more.

Any unplanned outage that affects fewer than 50 clients or customers but is not a single user issue.

12 hours

Normal

Meets one or both of the following criteria:

Any unplanned outage that reduces the redundancy of an IT service or server/device by less than 50 percent.

Any unplanned outage that affects a single client or customer.

72 hours

Low

A task and/or preventive maintenance that can be completed as time permits because user impact may not exist. Examples include requests for information, scheduled work, and preventive maintenance that is invisible to the customer.

No limit

Training of Client Support Personnel

During the early-adopter deployment of Live Communications Server at Microsoft—before training material for client support personnel was released to the public—Communications Operations held training sessions with the client services team for the issues unique to Tier 2 of the escalation hierarchy. In general, client services deals with account problems (such as issues in Active Directory) that prevent a user from using services such as Live Communications Server.

To ensure that Helpdesk personnel were prepared to handle user issues related to Communicator and Windows Messenger, the Communications Operations group held a separate training session with Helpdesk subject matter experts (SMEs). The SMEs then trained their own staff to support the real-time communications client applications.

Communications Operations created a troubleshooting guide for Tier 1 and Tier 2 Helpdesk staff to use in handling client-side issues.

Operations Support

Once fully deployed, the Live Communications Server central forest consisted of seven servers and supported approximately 80,000 enabled accounts at Microsoft. The solution is monitored and maintained by a senior operations analyst on the Microsoft IT Communications Operations team. The senior operations analyst relies on the Microsoft IT data center infrastructure for server backup services, first- and second-level Helpdesk services, and basic server monitoring.

The senior operations analyst uses the Live Communications Server 2005 Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 (MOM) management pack to configure a MOM console for monitoring and tracking key operational metrics. All third-level support problems and solutions are documented on an internal Microsoft IT site available to Tier 1 and Tier 2 Helpdesk personnel.

Server Monitoring

At Microsoft, MOM is used to manage the server tier of a computer infrastructure, including core services such as Active Directory, DNS, and dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP). MOM collects, in a central SQL Server database, predefined events from event logs on thousands of servers. MOM also runs health-monitoring scripts on many servers. In response to the most important events, MOM creates alerts that are routed to central consoles. In addition, MOM collects performance data from all managed servers and raises alerts for performance threshold exceptions.

Live Communications Server 2005 includes a MOM management pack that allows the service to be centrally monitored in a similar manner through the MOM application. MOM provides useful operations manageability information. For example, it provides alerts when a server goes offline and can show the number of users logged on to the Live Communications Server service at a given time.

Note: To obtain the MOM management pack for Live Communications Server, an organization must license both MOM and Live Communications Server. The management pack is then available from the download area of the MOM Web site: http://www.microsoft.com/mom/downloads/default.asp.

Most of the time, MOM catches potential problems and sends alerts to the server support team; the server support team escalates issues to Communications Operations when the Tier 1 and Tier 2 support documentation doesn’t list a resolution for a particular issue.

Public views provide a graphical representation of the health of home servers, which affects how the service functions. The MOM management pack for Live Communications Server contains three public views:

·         Logged-On End Points. This view is represented by one counter, which shows the number of users currently logged on to the service.

·         Machine Health. This view is represented by two counters, which provide processor data and paging data. The processor data indicates how much load the processor is handling, which can help MOM operators determine whether more users can be added to the server. The paging data indicates whether the server has sufficient RAM.

·         Connection Health. This view is represented by three counters: Flow-Controlled Connections, Queue Depth, and Average Holding Time for Incoming Messages. Flow-Controlled Connections is the number of client connections for which the server is restricting messages, which (if it ever exceeds zero) can indicate the need to reduce the number of users assigned to that server. Queue Depth indicates whether the server is queuing requests, which can cause delays in the service and is an area of concern if the value is greater than zero for an extended period (in general, more than 30 seconds). Average Holding Time for Incoming Messages shows the average number of seconds that each incoming message spends in the server until it is handled, which can indicate delays in the clients and the need to reduce the number of users assigned to that server.

Communications Operations also works with teams that support and manage elements of the Microsoft environment that are not usually directly related to Live Communications Server, but that can be in certain situations. For example, when the network group receives a MOM alert for a major network outage between two data centers, it notifies Communications Operations about that alert because the Live Communications Server service may be affected.

Similarly, if the infrastructure support team encounters an issue in which replication of information in Active Directory is taking longer than the SLA requires, it sends that alert to the Communications Operations team. Even though the Active Directory issue may not affect Live Communications Server service immediately, this kind of communication can prepare Communications Operations for service requests that may appear in the near future, when people who were enabled for the service are unable to log on. Proactive communication throughout an organization helps maintain the services that employees use regularly.

The MOM management pack for Live Communications Server does not provide server statistics such as the number of text messages, audio messages, video messages, or short- and long-distance communications at a given time. As part of Microsoft IT 's role of testing and troubleshooting Microsoft products, Microsoft IT uses alternative methods such as Windows Performance Monitor and the Live Communications Server archive logs to collect and analyze performance and operation data from services that are being tested. Product development groups, such as the one for Live Communications Server, use this data to improve their products.

Backup, Restore and Recovery

Performing regular backups is an important part of Live Communications Server daily operations and is the first step in the preparation for a disaster recovery scenario. An organization must also plan for, and practice, restoring and recovering those backups. The following sections represent the backup, restore, and recovery procedures in place for the components of the Live Communications Server 2005 architecture at Microsoft.

Live Communications Server 2005 Access Proxy Servers

Access proxy servers do not maintain any application state or user data. Backup procedures are limited to backing up the machine system state. Outside access from the Internet to the internal IM environment is not considered a mission-critical service. In a worst case scenario, recovering an access proxy server involves Microsoft IT re-imaging a replacement Windows Server 2003 server, re-installing Live Communications Server 2005 using the access proxy server setup option, and then restoring the machine system state. This approach assumes that the replacement server has the same server machine name as the previous server.

Live Communications Server 2005 Director Servers

Director servers maintain a database of user information to enable user authentication of new user sessions. No additional application or session data is maintained on the server. During a recovery scenario, the director server automatically rebuilds this database when it is installed and configured into the existing environment. Microsoft IT only backs up the machine system state on its director servers.

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition Server Pools and Database Servers

All Live Communications Server 2005 application state and user information is maintained by the clustered SQL Server database servers, and the SQL Server database file resides in the dedicated partition on the server pool SAN.

Microsoft IT uses SQL Server 2000 to schedule a snapshot daily backup of the individual Live Communications Server 2005 databases. The backup files are written to another partition on the server pool SAN where they are subsequently backed up from disk to tape by the standard Microsoft IT backup service.

A front-end server running Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition in the central forest pool can be recovered by simply replacing it with a newly installed front-end server and configuring it into the hardware load balancer and the central forest server pool. As mentioned earlier, Microsoft IT included an additional front-end server in the central forest server pool (beyond what was indicated from a capacity planning perspective) to provide additional capacity for planned and unplanned outages (including rolling upgrades of the individual front-end servers).

In addition, a custom script is scheduled to run each morning and each evening that uses the Live Communications Server 2005 DBImpExp utility to back up each user's contact list to an XML file. This enables a single user's contact list to be quickly restored without having to do a full database restore from tape.

Live Communications Server 2005 Archiving Agent and Database Servers

The role of the archiving agent and database servers is primarily for metrics gathering and are not considered mission-critical by Microsoft IT Communications Operations. Except for the machine system state, no other data is backed up on the archiving servers.

Upgrading to Live Communications Server 2005 with Service Pack 1

Microsoft IT upgraded several software components of its original Live Communications Server 2005 infrastructure as part of the project to upgrade the Live Communications Server servers with Live Communications Server. The new or upgraded components included:

·         Application of Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 to the front-end servers in the server pool (tightly coordinated with corresponding in-place updates to the SQL Server schemas to support Communicator and the Microsoft Office Live Communications Server 2005 Address Book Service (Live Communications Server address book service)).

·         Installation of the Live Communications Server gateway, Computer Telephony Integration-PBX (CTI-PBX), and PSTN gateways servers to support single-party, and multi-party call initiation and control using Communicator.

·         Installation of a second access proxy server to separate the SIP traffic from employees using Internet access from the SIP traffic generated by external organizations connecting through direct federation, clearinghouse federation, or enhanced federation. The types of organizations include public IM Internet service providers (MSN, AOL and Yahoo!), third-party conference-calling services providers, and others using federation for inter-organization instant messaging.

The post-Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 updated architecture for the Redmond corporate resource forest deployment is illustrated in Figure 5.

Fig

Figure 5. Updated Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 central forest and PBX architecture

Upgrading the Front-End Server Pool

Although Microsoft as an organization continues to rely heavily on e-mail and Windows SharePoint Services for non-real-time communication and collaboration, the real-time presence and communications features of Live Communications Server have become a staple for most Microsoft employees. As a result, long service interruptions are not tolerated. Hence, the most important phase of the upgrade project was applying the Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 upgrade of the software on the Live Communications Server 2005 servers in such a way that minimized service disruptions to end users and external organizations.

Microsoft IT started the upgrade process on a Friday evening with the goal of providing continuous service with one front-end server while the other four of the five front-end servers in the server pool were being upgraded. Following by a short interruption while the fifth server and SQL Server back-end databases were upgraded, all five front-end servers were returned to service. The goal of this approach was to have a minimal impact on Microsoft employees using the real-time communications services.

Microsoft IT used the following detailed steps to apply Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 to the front-end server pool:

·         Apply the Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 schema updates to Active Directory. The primary purpose of these updates is to enable the new support in Live Communications Server for Communicator

·         Apply Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 forest prep

·         Apply Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 domain prep

·         Take the first four front-end servers in the server pool offline, leaving the fifth server to handle low weekend traffic.

·         Apply Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 as an in-place upgrade to the four offline front-end servers.

·         Take the fifth front-end server in the server pool offline and apply Live Communications Server 2005 SP1. The first four front-end servers remain offline during this upgrade.

·         While all five front-end servers are offline, back up and apply the SP1 changes to the SQL Server back-end databases.

·         Return the fifth front-end server into service as soon as possible. Determine that there are no issues with either the software upgrade to the fifth front-end server or the schema update to the SQL Server back-end databases.

·         Return the remaining four front-end servers into service.

·         Update the remaining non-server pool servers - the director servers and access proxy servers.

No hardware upgrades were required or planned. Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 was installed in-place on the existing pool of front-end server hardware used for the original deployment of Live Communications Server 2005. This was enabled in part by the increased front-end server pool performance that raised the total number of supported users from 100,000 to 125,000 per server pool (using five front-end servers).

Related Live Communications Server Infrastructure Changes

Second Archiving Agent Server

As part of the overall upgrade project, a second archiving agent server was deployed by Microsoft IT to:

·         Separate the archiving functions from the front-end server pool from the non-pool servers such as the Live Communications Server application, pre-production server, and telephony gateway servers.

·         Conform to the product group recommendations for configuring up to five front-end servers per archiving agent.

The overall mission of the archiving solution deployed by Microsoft IT remains unchanged: to capture basic session initiation and status information (and no message content) for historical service-level analysis and reporting purposes.

Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 Management Pack for Live Communications Server 2005 SP1

Microsoft IT continues to use Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 (MOM) as the key server event- and service- monitoring and management tool for the updated Live Communications Server environment.

Backup and Restore

No changes in the Microsoft IT backup and restore processes were required as a result of the upgrade to Live Communications Server. dbexport continued to be used to back up the contact information stored in the SQL Server back-end database every 12 hours. dbimport was used as needed to restore an individual user’s contact list, or the contact lists for all of the servers on a particular front-end server.

Remote User Access and Federation Between Organizations

To support the communication of presence information and instant messages between Microsoft employees working inside the Microsoft firewall and employees and other contacts working outside the firewall, Microsoft originally deployed the Live Communications Server 2005 remote user and federated access architecture depicted in Figure 6. The updated version of the architecture following the Microsoft IT deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 is illustrated in Figure 7.

Fig

Figure 6. Original Live Communications Server 2005 remote user and federated access architecture

This environment supported three types of external communications:

·         External Internet access by Microsoft employees working at customer and other business locations and home offices using a conventional personal computer.

·         Direct federation enabling the deployments of Live Communications Server 2005 in selected Microsoft customer and other external organizations to exchange presence information and instant messages directly with the Microsoft IT Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server. Microsoft IT configures direct federation with specific organizations based on business needs.

·         Clearinghouse federation enabled through the deployment of a Live Communications Server 2005 clearinghouse on the Internet. Microsoft piloted a clearinghouse for organizations running pre-release versions. Ultimately, third-party service providers may choose to provide instant message and presence services based on the clearinghouse federation model.

Remote User Access

Remote access by Microsoft employees is enabled using direct TLS access to the Microsoft IT Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server. The access proxy server forwards presence information and instant messages generated by Communicator and Windows Messenger to the external director server. The external director server then forwards these messages between the access proxy server and the server pool load balancer.

Direct Federation

With direct federation, the Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy servers from two different organizations are configured to use a trusted MTLS connection to connect their internal deployments of Live Communications Server 2005.

To simplify configuration of the Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy servers in each organization, Microsoft used server certificates from a public certificate authority (CA) to configure the MTLS connections. In addition, Microsoft IT ensured that the access proxy server and external director servers were configured as follows:

·         The Windows Server 2003 servers were installed as "workgroup" servers (and not members of a domain) to avoid any issues that might result from auto-enrollment.

·         For security reasons, port 5061 (the port that Live Communications Server uses for exchange SIP messages) and port 443 were the only TCP/IP ports enabled on the access proxy server network interface cards.

Clearinghouse Federation

When several organizations want to federate their Live Communications Server 2005 environments, the pair-wise configuration of each MTLS connection between the access proxy servers in each organization can be tedious to set up and manage. Clearinghouse federation is an alternative strategy for Live Communications Server 2005 deployment that simplifies the configuration and maintenance tasks when several organizations want to exchange real-time presence information and instant messages.

A Live Communications Server 2005 clearinghouse is an external Live Communications Server 2005 deployment that is directly connected to the Internet. A clearinghouse consisting of one Live Communications Server 2005 Standard Edition server, one access proxy server, and one Microsoft Internet Security and Acceleration 2004 server was originally deployed as part of the upgrade from the 2003 to the 2005 release of Live Communications Server.

As part of the upgrade to Live Communications Server, the clearinghouse was decommissioned in favor of supporting the more easily managed enhanced federation capabilities supported in the new server pack. For more details, see the next section Updated Remote Access and Federated Access Architecture.

Controlling Federated Access

Control over whether a particular organization is allowed to access a Microsoft IT Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server is established when the federated connection is created by Microsoft IT. After an external organization is configured for direct federation with the Microsoft IT Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server, each user in the organization's namespace that is enabled for federated access is allowed to add Microsoft employees to their contact lists, exchange presence information, and send instant messages to each other. External contacts must know the SIP address of the Microsoft employee they want to contact; they are not permitted to search the internal directory of Microsoft employees.

It is also possible to configure a Live Communications Server 2005 access proxy server to block specific namespaces (Internet domains) from connecting through their local access proxy server.

Updated Remote Access and Federated Access Architecture

As part of the Microsoft IT architecture strategy for providing external e-mail and Web server access, employee remote access to internal resources is separated from business partner and Internet access to public resources such as the Microsoft public Web site. To support Live Communications Server remote access and federation, a similar approach was used as part of the upgrade to Live Communications Server: one access proxy server for remote employee access and a second access proxy server to support federation with external organizations and third-party conference-calling services providers, as well as public IM connectivity (PIC) with external instant messaging Internet service providers such as MSN, AOL and Yahoo!. The new upgraded Live Communications Server remote and federated access architecture appears in Figure 7.

To support the new Enhanced Federation capabilities in Live Communications Server, an organization needs to publish a DNS SRV record for enhanced federation that has the following format:

_sipfederationtls._tcp.contoso.com

This SRV record is defined so that it will resolve to the external fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) and port of the access proxy server for federation purposes (or the externally facing access proxy server load balancer if multiple access proxy servers are used for federation). The way that the enhanced federation DNS SRV record is used by Live Communications Server is analogous to the way an e-mail server uses DNS MX (mail exchange) records to locate and connect to another organization’s corporate e-mail service.

Enhanced federation in Live Communications Server is an improvement over the existing direct and clearinghouse federation models. It enables external organizations running Live Communications Server to federate more easily their real-time presence and instant messaging services with other organizations. The external organization can simply configure their access proxy servers to federate with your organization by enabling enhanced federation on their access proxy servers and publishing the appropriate SRV records in their DNS servers. To provide control over which external organizations can use enhanced federation to connect with your organization, Live Communications Server 2005 provides secure management of enhanced federation connections by allowing each company to specify which organizations are allowed to federate with their access proxy server infrastructure. In addition, it is also possible to specify which organizations are to be blocked from a federation perspective. Both filters are based on the federating organization’s Internet domain namespaces.

Fig

Figure 7. Updated Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 remote user and federated access architecture

Upgrading the Access Proxy Servers

The access proxy servers at Microsoft were upgraded to Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 to provide the functionality needed to support PIC and enhanced federation; and to significantly improve messaging processing performance.

Providing Support for Communicator Integration with PBX and PSTN Networks

While Figure 7 illustrates how the external telephony components of the Microsoft IT real-time presence and communications solution is architected, Figure 5 illustrates how employees using Communicator access the corporate telephony infrastructure over the updated Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 infrastructure using SIP and European Computer Manufacturers Association (ECMA) 323/SIP protocols.

Communicator can use this infrastructure and these protocols to initiate several different types of telephone conversations:

·         PC-to-phone single-call initiation

·         PC-to-PC single-call initiation

·         Multi-party PBX-based call initiation

·         Conference calls hosted by a third-party conference-calling services provider.

All of these call types are initiated by Communicator using SIP session initiation messages and EMCA-323/SIP call control messages that are exchanged with the bridgehead server used to connect the Live Communications Server environment with back-end telephony/PBX infrastructure used by Microsoft employees in the Puget Sound area.

Multi-party calls are hosted on the corporate PBX and support up to eight people in a single call using the remote call control (RCC) functionality of the PBX infrastructure. Conference calls that include external employees, customers, or more than eight internal employees are hosted by a third-party conference-calling services provider.

In addition to basic multi-party and conference-call control features, Communicator and Live Communications Server provide for remote PC-based call control of a person’s desktop telephone including automatic notifications of incoming calls, dynamic routing of the call to another telephone or mobile phone, and forwarding to any telephone number associated with the user. Calls can be initiated by simply right-clicking on a person’s name anywhere it appears in Communicator, any of the Microsoft Office 2003 applications include Word and Outlook, or in a Windows SharePoint Services Web site.

Using the PC-to-phone capability and the dial plan configured in to the PBX infrastructure at Microsoft, employees are able to call any Microsoft office number in the Puget Sound area as well as any local telephone number in the USA.

Bridgehead, CTI-enabled PBX Gateway and PSTN Gateway Servers

Microsoft IT needed to add updated and new server components to its real-time presence and communications solution to support the new telephony features supported by Communicator with Live Communications Server 2005 SP1. These included:

·         A bridgehead server, running Live Communications Server Standard Edition with no users homed (assigned) to it, is used to interconnect the front-end server pool with the back-end PBX infrastructure that serves the Puget Sound facilities at Microsoft.

·         CTI-enabled PBX gateways. Each of the third-party devices used by Microsoft supports up to 10,000 telephone extensions (DIRNs). As a result, Microsoft IT needed five gateways to support a total of 50,000 direct-dial telephone numbers across the five telephone prefixes used by Microsoft in the Puget Sound area.

Third-party Conference-calling Services

Integration with third-party conference-calling services providers is based on the same Live Communications Server 2005 infrastructure and protocols used inside Microsoft. Live Communications Server direct federation is used to set up and exchange messages with the Microsoft IT conference-calling services providers. SIP and ECMA-232/SIP are used to set up and tear down conference-call sessions – the same protocols used for exchanging presence, starting instant messaging sessions, and PBX-based single-party and multi-party calls inside Microsoft.

Deploying Microsoft Office Live Communications Server 2005 Address Book Service

To support rapid local searching of instant messaging contacts and caller ID-based lookups, the Communicator includes a server-side component called the Live Communications Server address book service. The service is installed on one of the servers updated to use Live Communications Server. At Microsoft, the Live Communications Server address book service is installed on one of the internal director servers.

The Live Communications Server address book service provides “in-band provisioning”, or downloading, of contact information from the Live Communications Server environment to the local user’s computer using the HTTP protocol.

All searches for contact information in Communicator (“find” operations) are executed as queries against the local downloaded copy of the Live Communications Server address book. A local copy of the Live Communications Server address book is needed to support:

·         Fast searches for new contacts

·         Rapid look-ups (as the user types the first three characters of the name or e-mail address)

·         Offline availability of Live Communications Server address book information when a user is not signed into Communicator and the front-end server pool.

Microsoft IT has scheduled a full rebuild of the Live Communications Server address book once a week as well as daily incremental builds.

Deploying Public IM Connectivity

Public IM Connectivity (PIC) is key feature of Live Communications Server 2005 SP1. When used with Communicator, it enables support for all internal and public presence and instant messaging over a single, centrally managed, server-based infrastructure. From a corporate perspective, this centralized approach will increase corporate compliance, decrease Internet security vulnerabilities (through message encryption) as well as reduce overall complexity and systems administration costs.

Once deployed, PIC and federation can be independently enabled by the access proxy server in one of three ways:

1.     Allow all communications from the other service or organization.

2.     Allow communications only from users verified by the other service or organization.

3.     Allow communications only from users on the recipient’s contact list.

At Microsoft, all employee accounts are enabled in Active Directory for both PIC and federation.

Note: When Microsoft (or any Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 customer) deploys PIC, the organization’s Internet domain name (for example, microsoft.com) becomes a reserved domain name on Microsoft Passport, the Internet authentication service used by the MSN instant messaging service, Hotmail, and the other MSN Internet services. If there are existing or former Microsoft employees who were using their Microsoft e-mail addresses for their personal Passport accounts, the domain of these existing accounts is automatically changed to messengeruser.com to insure that a particular organization’s Internet domain name is only used by internal Communicator and Live Communications Server 2005 SP1 users.

Instant Messaging Security

In addition to the server-side ability to block an external organization from federating with the Microsoft IT access proxy servers, Communicator includes a group policy-controlled registry setting for determining whether a hypertext link in an instant message is “clickable” or not. In addition, a server-side setting can be used to filter out all hypertext links from the body of an instant message.

Microsoft IT takes advantage of Live Communication Server 2005 SP1 to encrypt the following types of messages.

·         Messages between all employees using Communicator or Windows Messenger, including those connecting remotely from outside the corporate firewall

·         Messages between servers running Live Communications Server 2005

·         Messages from federated clients to employees using Communicator or Windows Messenger

·         Messages from PIC clients to employees using Communicator or Windows Messenger

Note: Requiring encryption on the access proxy server assures that messages from another service are encrypted, but not that those messages traveling within the other service are encrypted.

Conclusion

The Microsoft IT deployment of a protected, real-time, person-to-person communications solution based on Live Communications Server 2005, Windows Server 2003, Active Directory, and Microsoft Identity Integration Server has provided Microsoft employees, Microsoft IT, and the Live Communications Server 2005 product group with specific benefits listed in the next section.

Benefits

The deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition at Microsoft resulted in the following benefits.

Increased service levels by deploying a more available, more scalable, and higher-performance real-time communications solution

The most significant change between Live Communications Server 2003 and Live Communications Server 2005 is the Enterprise Edition support for higher-availability and large-scale deployments. This comes from an architecture based on a two-tier, load-balanced pool of front-end servers and a clustered SQL Server back-end database server. With moderate increases in hardware and installation costs, Microsoft IT was able to provide Microsoft employees with increased service availability at equal or reduced management and operations costs.

Microsoft IT now has a real-time presence and instant messaging solution that can scale up on the fly, and that allows for removal of a single server machine for applying updates, service packs, or product upgrades – with minimal interruption of service. Further, there is a single point of control for managing all Live Communications Server 2005 users and servers. Lastly, with the centralized, clustered database server solution, there is one set of storage volumes that need to be backed up on a nightly basis (instead of the individual instances of Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Data Engine (MSDE) that previously ran on each Live Communications Server 2003 home server in the Redmond data center).

Internal and remote access that is more secure and easier to set up, manage, and track

Remote User Access from the Internet with No VPN Connections

Many Microsoft employees are mobile users traveling from building to building for meetings or working from remote locations and home offices. Access to real-time presence information without a VPN connection makes service seamless whether a user is connected to the Internet or the Microsoft corporate network by wire or by wireless.

Encrypted Communications

The ability to encrypt content within an enterprise is an important security consideration. When using Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services and the public instant messaging networks, all communications are transmitted in clear text. Clear text communications through a firewall to public IM clients can provide an entry point for viruses and other attacks, and make it possible for someone to eavesdrop on an instant messaging conversation.

Live Communications Server 2005 includes enhanced security features, such as encryption across network hops using the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, and full authentication using Active Directory. The ability to encrypt and decrypt traffic between the clients and servers helps prevent attempts to capture and read communications that are traversing the network.

All communications between Live Communications Server 2005, Communicator and Windows Messenger (as well as all server-to-server communications) are encrypted through the enforcement of high-security mode on the client and the configuration of TLS and MTLS protocols on the server. The benefit is substantial, especially for Microsoft employees accessing the service from the Internet.

Less complex (and less costly) deployment and management options for multi-forest network environments

Restricting Active Directory Schema Extensions to a Single Forest

Using the central forest deployment model, the Active Directory schema extensions for Live Communications Server 2005 no longer needed to be applied to every forest that needs to participate in enterprise instant messaging. Only the forest selected as the central forest needs to have its Active Directory schema extended, simplifying the initial deployment, replication, and maintenance of the schema changes.

User Account Lifecycle Management

With MIIS, managing contact object creation or deletion when employees are hired or leave the company is automated. This allows for more efficient use of IT resources and lower ongoing management costs.

Single Namespace Across Forests

With Live Communications Server 2005, an organization must deploy a live communications service in each forest that contains users who want to use the service.

As long as directories between forests are synchronized, Live Communications Server uses a single namespace across forests to help provide more secure cross-forest communications. For example, at Microsoft, the SIP address of users in any forest consists of an alias combined with the "microsoft.com" namespace. A user can search by first name, last name, or account name in Communicator and Windows Messenger and easily find someone in a secondary forest.

In addition, rather than putting all users in a parent domain to support users in two child domains, an organization can host all the Live Communications Server users in one of the child domains. This ability reduces the number of servers that Microsoft administrators need to manage, because they can use the infrastructure set up in one child domain to support users in the other child domain. Although the Microsoft environment consists of multiple forests and domains, Microsoft IT did not need to place servers in every forest and domain.

Lessons Learned and Best Practices

During the planning and deployment of Live Communications Server 2005, Microsoft IT encountered and addressed a number of new situations resulting in the following lessons learned and best practices.

Use High-Security Mode

Use the registry setting that enables high-security mode client connections. The high-security mode implies the following changes: enabling TLS and MTLS to encrypt information between servers and clients, requiring Kerberos and NTLM authentication, disabling Universal Plug and Play, and disabling peer-to-peer connections for all instant messages and for invitations to other features of Communicator or Windows Messenger. High-security mode provides increased levels of security in key parts of the service through a single setting.

The key benefit is the end-to-end encryption of all client/server and inter-server communications including logon credentials, text of instant messages, and presence information. For other features such as audio and video conferencing and file transfer, Communicator and Windows Messenger establishes direct network connections between each user. These features use peer-to-peer protocols once the audio/video conferencing or file transfer session has been established between the users.

Be Aware of Seemingly Unrelated Infrastructure Changes

Overlapping with the deployment of Live Communications Server 2005, Microsoft IT was also completing or starting several projects that could potentially affect the deployment of Live Communications Server. Examples of these projects include the deployment of Windows XP Service Pack 2, network domain isolation based on IPSec, upgrading the wireless networking infrastructure, testing of new server operating system service packs, and the deployment of alternative load-balancing solutions.

During the deployment of Live Communications Server 2005, the Microsoft IT Communications Operations team worked to resolve minor issues involving each of the above technologies. This was facilitated by broad, open, electronic communication across the Microsoft IT service organizations.

Deployment Planning

When planning a deployment of Live Communications Server, an organization should be aware that the phases of deployment, and the number and configuration of servers running Live Communications Server, depend on a number of factors such as:

·         Size of the organization, including the number of forests, locations of data centers, number of expected users, and number of expected messages per user per session.

·         Behavior of users, including frequency of sessions, number of contacts, and proportion of text message traffic to audio, video, and data collaboration traffic.

·         Whether the deployment consists of a migration from an existing solution (such as Live Communications Server 2003 or Exchange 2000 Server instant messaging services) or whether Live Communications Server 2005 is the first real-time communications solution being deployed by the organization.

Additional information on planning for the deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 can be found at http://www.microsoft.com/office/livecomm.

Educate Users

Answer common questions in advance through e-mail and through an internal Web site that contains a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) and pointers to other sources of information.

Centralize the Live Communications Server Architecture

If you install servers allocated for Live Communications Server 2005 in a central location and if your organization has multiple forests, you can create one DNS entry and replicate that entry among all the corporate forests. A centralized model simplifies the management and maintenance of DNS records required for the service. However, if data centers are widely dispersed—for example, on different continents—you must ensure that there is sufficient bandwidth (at least 1.6 Kbps per user over an eight-hour period) in the connections between data centers to support a centralized model.

A centralized model may increase the time needed for users to log on to the service. You can determine the impact by measuring the current network delay. As a basic example of how to measure the network delay, you can use the PING protocol to send 100 1-kilobyte packets between the server and a computer in the target location. For Microsoft, the delay was approximately 107 milliseconds. This small delay was not sufficient for Microsoft IT to consider a distributed server deployment strategy. Other network environments that experience significantly longer delays may choose to distribute one or more of their home servers.

The updated deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 with SP1 resulted in the following lessons learned and best practices.

Normalization of Telephone Number Formats in Active Directory

Communicator includes strict enforcement of the E-164 international standard for encoding country or region codes, area codes, and telephone numbers. Active Directory does not enforce a particular telephone number format. This may require the telephone numbers in Active Directory, and subsequently the Live Communications Server database and the Live Communications Server address book service, be normalized to follow the E-164 standard. A critical factor for a successful telephone number normalization project is determining the authoritative source for each telephone number (office, home office, mobile, and personal). Frequently, there may be different authoritative sources for each telephone number (for example, a human resources system, Active Directory, corporate PBX databases, or other user-profile management systems).

Increased Number of Contacts in the Average User’s Contact List

Microsoft IT found they needed to increase the maximum number of contacts per user from 150 to 200. The major reason for the increase is that employees were now consolidating their previous MSN Messenger and Windows Messenger external contact lists into one list in Communicator. Microsoft IT recommends that large organizations use a cautious approach to increasing the maximum number of contacts, because the downloading of the initial contact information and the dynamic updating of presence information requires additional server resources and can affect performance.

Value of Federation, Public IM Connectivity, and Remote Access

Microsoft conducts business with a large number of external organizations. Microsoft employees have made extensive use of the initial deployment of enhanced federation, PIC, and remote connectivity to provide support that is more responsive and interactive using a single, centrally managed server-based infrastructure. This includes internal employees connecting with external businesses and customers; and remote Microsoft employees connecting and communicating with clients as well as colleagues inside the Microsoft firewall.

Value of Extended Presence in Communicator

At Microsoft, there is an established culture where each person relies heavily on meetings being scheduled and managed through their Outlook calendar as well as setting an out-of-office notification message when they expect to be physically or electronically unavailable.

The extended presence features in Communicator have improved employees’ productivity by allowing a user’s current meeting status and descriptive information as well as their out-of-office message to be available to everyone who has that user on their contact list.

Making Server Availability Information Readily Available in Communicator

Similar to Windows Messenger, the Communicator user interface (UI) can be extended using “tabs”. Tabs enable alternative Web-based content or applications to be hosted in the main body of the Communicator UI. Microsoft IT uses this capability to display the availability of e-mail servers, key line-of-business applications, web services, and other server applications; as well as a small (mobile) version of Microsoft Web, the primary employee portal at Microsoft.

Summary

The Microsoft IT deployment of Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition served a dual purpose: testing of the product in a large, real-life enterprise environment with more than 80,000 accounts; and providing Microsoft employees with real-time communication features such as presence and instant messaging.

Live Communications Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is a complete enterprise solution because it offers:

·         Improved security through TLS encryption, Windows authentication, and message archiving.

·         Increased end-user productivity and reductions in the time needed to make decisions using real-time presence and more secure instant messaging.

·         Manageability by being easy to deploy and administer through existing enterprise infrastructure assets that reside on the customer's premises and that do not rely on non-secure or possibly unreliable public services.

·         Extensibility through application program interfaces (APIs) that enable the creation of innovative applications and customized solutions.

Deploying Live Communications Server 2005 can decrease costs in an organization by helping users communicate more efficiently and more securely—thereby increasing worker productivity—while minimizing the complexity of managing an instant messaging service. Live Communications Server 2005 also provides long-term value as a platform for applications and solutions (such as custom real-time communications, Voice over IP (VoIP) telephony applications and the Microsoft Office System) that use SIP to extend communications beyond instant messaging.

 

For More Information

Microsoft Office Live Communications Server

·         Microsoft Office Live Communications Server Web site, http://www.microsoft.com/office/livecomm.

·         Microsoft Office Live Communications Server Development Center, http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/livecomm/default.aspx.

Related Microsoft IT Showcase White Papers

·         Improving Security with Domain Isolation: Microsoft IT Implements IP Security (IPSec), http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/msit/security/ipsecdomisolwp.mspx.

·         Enabling Cross-Forest Identity Management with Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003, http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/msit/deploy/cfimwiis.mspx.

Other Related Information

·         Microsoft Operations Manager Web site, http://www.microsoft.com/mom.

·         Microsoft Identity Integration Server Web site, http://www.microsoft.com/miis.

Microsoft Sales Information Center

For more information about Microsoft products or services, call the Microsoft Sales Information Center at (800) 426-9400. In Canada, call the Microsoft Canada information Centre at (800) 563-9048. Outside the 50 United States and Canada, please contact your local Microsoft subsidiary. To access information via the World Wide Web, go to:
http://www.microsoft.com
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itshowcase

The information contained in this document represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation on the issues discussed as of the date of publication. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information presented after the date of publication.

This White Paper is for informational purposes only. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT.

Complying with all applicable copyright laws is the responsibility of the user. Microsoft grants you the right to reproduce this White Paper, in whole or in part, specifically and solely for the purpose of personal education.

Microsoft may have patents, patent applications, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property rights covering subject matter in this document. Except as expressly provided in any written license agreement from Microsoft, the furnishing of this document does not give you any license to these patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property.

Unless otherwise noted, the example companies, organizations, products, domain names, e-mail addresses, logos, people, places and events depicted herein are fictitious, and no association with any real company, organization, product, domain name, e-mail address, logo, person, place, or event is intended or should be inferred.

© 2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Microsoft, Active Directory, MSN, Outlook, SharePoint, Windows and Windows Server are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.

 

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Firebox webblocker settings

If you have a Firebox X, the key is obtained from the WatchGuard website after you register it for a certain Firebox.  The key given to you has your Firebox serial number embedded in it as it will only work on your Firebox (the key in the diagram above will only work for the Firebox X with serial number 808200578ECC5). 

If you just enter the Webblocker key without registering it on the WatchGuard website and obtaining a feature key, it will not function.  You will be able to enter it into policy manager and it will accept it, but after saving to the Firebox the key will be rejected and Webblocker will not function.

If your key is not installed, is incorrectly installed, or you are not using the latest software, the Webblocker tab will not be displayed in the HTTP proxy properties section

 

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Point v5.4 vs. v.6.0

Recently one of the users that we support had an issue editing a file in Calyx Point v5.4. This occurred when she was trying to edit the loan rate fields. The rates would default to approx. 11.44% and we wanted to change it to 12.0%. So first we tried to edit the test field in the loan where the 11.44 was showing up, we could delete the 11.44 and enter in the 12.0 however when we tried to save or print the file that field would change back to the 11.44%. After trying a few thing in an attempt to lock in the rates I had to get Point support involved. With some trouble shooting involving myself and the loan officer it was determined that Point v5.4 did not support the kind of change that we were trying to do. It was recommended that we upgrade to version 6.0, that change should enable us to make the necessary changes to the interest rate field of the loan.

Monday, October 1, 2007

IT Governance

DISCUSSION DOCUMENT
THE IMPORTANCE OF IT
IN THE DESIGN, IMPLEMENTATION
AND SUSTAINABILITY OF INTERNAL
CONTROL OVER DISCLOSURE AND
FINANCIAL REPORTING
IT CONTROL OBJECTIVES
FOR SARBANES-OXLEY
ii IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
IT Governance InstituteR
The IT Governance Institute (ITGI) strives to assist enterprise leaders in
their responsibility to
make IT successful in supporting the enterprise's mission and goals. Its
goals are to raise
awareness and understanding among and provide guidance and tools to boards
of directors,
executive management and chief information officers (CIOs) such that they
are able to ensure
within their enterprises that IT meets and exceeds expectations, and its
risks are mitigated.
Information Systems Audit and Control AssociationR
The Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACAR) is an
international
professional, technical and educational organization dedicated to being a
recognized global
leader in IT governance, control and assurance. With members in more than
100 countries,
ISACA is uniquely positioned to fulfill the role of a central, harmonizing
source of IT control
practice standards the world over. Its strategic alliances with other
organizations in the
financial, accounting, auditing and IT professions ensure an unparalleled
level of integration
and commitment by business process owners.
Disclaimer
The IT Governance Institute, Information Systems Audit and Control
Association and the
authors of IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley have designed this
publication primarily
as an educational resource for control professionals. The IT Governance
Institute, Information
Systems Audit and Control Association, authors and expert reviewers ("the
Development
Team") make no claim that use of this product will assure a successful
outcome. This
publication should not be considered inclusive of any proper procedures and
tests or exclusive
of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the
same results. In
determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the controls
professional should
apply his/her own professional judgment to the specific control
circumstances presented by
the particular systems or information technology environment.
Readers should note that this document has not received endorsement from the
Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(PCAOB).
Accordingly, the Development Team makes no representation or warranties and
provides no
assurances that an organization's disclosure controls and procedures and the
internal controls
and procedures for financial reporting are compliant with the certification
requirement and
internal control reporting requirement of Sarbanes-Oxley, nor that an
organization's plans are
sufficient to address and correct any shortcomings that would prohibit the
organization from
making the required certification or reporting under Sarbanes-Oxley.
Additional
considerations are provided in the Preface of this publication.
Internal controls, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide
only reasonable
assurance of achieving an entity's control objectives. The likelihood of
achievement is
affected by limitations inherent to internal control. These include the
realities that human
judgment in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns in internal
control can occur
because of human failures such as simple errors or mistakes. Additionally,
controls, whether
manual or automated, can be circumvented by the collusion of two or more
people or
inappropriate management override of internal controls.
Disclosure
CopyrightC 2003 by the IT Governance Institute. Reproduction of selections
of this
publication for academic use is permitted and must include full attribution
of the material's
source. Reproduction or storage in any form for commercial purpose is not
permitted without
ITGI's prior written permission. No other right or permission is granted
with respect to this
work.
IT Governance Institute
3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 1010
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 USA
Phone: +1.847.590.7491
Fax: +1.847.253.1443
E-mail: research@isaca.org
Web site: www.itgi.org and www.isaca.org
ISBN: 1-893209-67-9
Printed in the United States of America
Acknowledgements iii
Acknowledgements
The IT Governance Institute wishes to recognize:
The authors, for their thought leadership
Christopher Fox, CA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Paul A. Zonneveld, CISA, CISSP, CA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
The expert reviewers, whose comments helped shape the final document
Neil Anderson, CISA, CA, MBA, Electrolux AB, USA
Sean Ballington, CISA, CA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Don Caniglia, CISA, Crowe Chizek LLP, USA
Sally Chan, CMA, PAdm, ACIS, RBC Financial Group, Canada
Tom Church, Deloitte & Touche LLP, USA
Pamela A. Fredericks, CISM, CISSP, Forsythe Solutions, USA
John Gimpert, CPA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, USA
Gary Hardy, CISA, IT Winners Ltd., UK
Edward L. Hill, Protiviti Inc, USA
Audrey Katcher, CISA, CPA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Pierre Lapointe, CA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
Jennifer Laudermilch, CISA, CPA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Elsa Lee, CISA, MA, CSQA, Crowe Chizek LLP, USA
William Levant, Deloitte & Touche LLP, USA
William Malik, CISA, Waveset Technologies, USA
Tiffany McCann, Financial Executives Institute-Research Foundation (FERF),
USA
Todd McGowan, CISA, CPA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, USA
Therese E. Michael, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Robert G. Parker, CISA, FCA, CMC, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
Hugh Parkes, CISA, FCA, The Q Alliance, Australia
Al Passori, META Group Inc., USA
Brian Reinke, FCA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
Robert S. Roussey, CPA, Leventhal School of Accounting, University of
Southern California, USA
Michael Schirmbrand, Ph.D., CISA, CISM, CPA, KPMG LLP, Austria
Lily M. Shue, CISA, CCP, CITC, LMS Associates, USA
Hayward Walls, EnCana Corporation, Canada
Graham D. Ward, CISA, CA, ABCP, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
The ITGI Board of Trustees, for its support of the project
Marios Damianides, CISA, CISM, CA, CPA, Ernst & Young LLP, USA,
International President
Abdul Hamid Bin Abdullah, CISA, CPA, Auditor General's Office, Singapore,
Vice President
Ricardo J. Bria, CISA, Argentina, Vice President
Everett C. Johnson, Jr., CPA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, USA, Vice President
Dean R.E. Kingsley, CISA, CISM, CA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Australia, Vice
President
Ronald Saull, CSP, Great-West Life Assurance Company, Canada, Vice President
Eddy Schuermans, CISA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Belgium, Vice President
Robert S. Roussey, CPA, Leventhal School of Accounting, University of
Southern California, USA, Past
International President
Paul A. Williams, FCA, MBCS, Paul Williams Consulting, UK, Past
International President
Emil G. D'Angelo, CISA, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, USA, Trustee
Erik Guldentops, CISA , Advisor, IT Governance Institute.
The ITGI Research Board, for overseeing and guiding the project
Chairperson, Lily M. Shue, CISA, CCP, CITC, LMS Associates, USA
Jayant Ahuja, CISA, CPA, CMA, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, USA
Candi Carrera, CF 6 Luxembourg, Luxembourg
John Ho Chi, CFE, Ernst & Young LLP, Singapore
Avinash W. Kadam, CISA, CISSP, CBCP, GSEC, CQA, MIEL E-Security Pvt. Ltd.,
India
Elsa Lee, CISA, MA, CSQA, Crowe Chizek LLP, USA
Robert G. Parker, CISA, FCA, CMC, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
Michael Schirmbrand, Ph.D., CISA, CISM, CPA, KPMG LLP, Austria
Johann Tello Meryk, CISA, Banco del Istmo, Panama
Frank Vander Zwagg, CISA, Air New Zealand, New Zealand
Paul A. Zonneveld, CISA, CISSP, CA, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Canada
iv Table of Contents
Table of Contents
PREFACE.....................................................................
...............................v
A FOCUS ON INTERNAL
CONTROL...................................................1
SARBANES-OXLEY-ENHANCING CORPORATE
ACCOUNTABILITY
............................................................................
1
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF SARBANES-OXLEY ...................2
SECTION
302.........................................................................
..............3
AUDITOR EVALUATION RESPONSIBILITIES ...............................3
SECTION
404.........................................................................
..............4
AUDITOR ATTESTATION
..................................................................4
AUDIT
COMMITTEE...................................................................
.......5
FRAUD CONSIDERATIONS IN AN AUDIT OF INTERNAL
CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING......................................6
THE FOUNDATION FOR RELIABLE FINANCIAL
REPORTING...................................................................
......................6
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONTROLS-
A UNIQUE
CHALLENGE...................................................................
8
TURNING COMPLIANCE INTO COMPETITIVE
ADVANTAGE
............................................................................
...........9
INTERNATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS..........................................10
SETTING THE GROUND
RULES.........................................................11
COSO DEFINED
............................................................................
....11
ADOPTING A CONTROL FRAMEWORK......................................11
ASSESSING THE READINESS OF IT.............................................16
ESTABLISHING IT CONTROL GUIDELINES
FOR
SARBANES-OXLEY..............................................................
...17
CLOSING THE
GAP.........................................................................
......19
ROAD MAP FOR COMPLIANCE
....................................................19
HOW COMPLIANCE SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED....................28
LESSONS
LEARNED.....................................................................
...28
APPENDIX-IT CONTROL OBJECTIVES FOR
SARBANES-OXLEY..............................................................
..................31
1. GENERAL CONTROLS-PLAN AND ORGANIZE...................33
2. GENERAL CONTROLS-ACQUIRE AND IMPLEMENT.........39
3. GENERAL CONTROLS-DELIVER AND SUPPORT ...............42
4. GENERAL CONTROLS-MONITOR AND EVALUATE...........49
5. APPLICATION CONTROLS-BUSINESS CYCLES..................51
REFERENCES
............................................................................
.............57
Preface v
Preface
Despite all the publicity surrounding the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
relatively little attention has focused specifically on the role of
information
technology (IT) in the financial reporting process. This is unfortunate,
given
that the accuracy and timeliness of financial reporting is, at most
companies,
heavily dependent on a well-controlled IT environment.
IT organizations need to become involved in Sarbanes-Oxley attestation
activities quickly. While the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
has extended the dates for compliance with Section 404 of the Act, this move
was only an acknowledgement that the original time frame was unrealistic
and more time was needed for companies to comply. It was not an invitation
to delay readiness and implementation work.
Accordingly, there is an urgent need for guidance material that specifically
addresses the information technology control environment. This document is
intended to help meet that need.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides the foundation for new corporate
governance rules, regulations and standards issued by the SEC.
On 7 October 2003, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(PCAOB) issued both a briefing paper and a proposed auditing standard,
release no. 2003-17-"An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting Performed in Conjunction with an Audit of Financial Statements."
While this guidance has provided further clarification on the nature and
extent of the work required to provide an audit opinion, there are
significant
rules and standards that have yet to be issued. Among others, these might
include detailed guidance on documentation requirements and further
clarification on the requirements for real-time disclosure. The issuance of
rules, standards and guidelines will be an ongoing process that will
continually adapt to the results of regulatory examinations and the changing
business and accounting environments. It is likely that there will never be
a
time when the rules for Sarbanes-Oxley will be "black and white"; many
areas will still require professional judgment and interpretation. The
development of industry standards and practices and the public debate over
what could be considered to be good practice should facilitate this process.
vi IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Unlike previous event-driven control activities (e.g., Y2K), Sarbanes-Oxley
activity will continue as a routine part of doing business. This document
focuses on the aspects of Sarbanes-Oxley that will have the greatest impact
on an organization in the short to medium term, that is, compliance with
Section 302 and 404 of the act. The document deliberately does not focus
on operational and efficiency issues, as the first priority should be
demonstrating that strong IT controls over financial reporting are in place.
However, it is inevitable (and desirable) that operational and efficiency
issues
will be addressed over time and built into the structures and processes that
are developed. Once the ongoing cost of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance is
assessed, there will be pressure to replace existing manual controls and
processes with automated processes. In addition, there are other aspects of
Sarbanes-Oxley that may have considerable impact on IT, e.g., the potential
impact of real-time disclosure.
Readers may find the material in the appendix-IT Control Objectives for
Sarbanes-Oxley-particularly useful. COSO-Internal Control-Integrated
Framework was used as the overall framework upon which the
supplementary IT guidance was based. Control Objectives for Information
and related Technology (COBITR), established by the IT Governance Institute,
was used as the initial IT controls baseline to develop a control objective
template. While COBIT addresses control objectives that relate to
operational
and compliance issues, only those related to financial reporting have been
used to develop this document.
COBIT is a very rich and robust framework, comprising four domains, 34 IT
processes and 318 detailed control objectives. It is a comprehensive
approach for managing risk and control of information technology. As such,
the control objectives and considerations set forth in this document may
exceed, or be deficient in, what is necessary for organizations seeking to
comply with the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley. The suggested internal
control framework (COSO) to be used for compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley,
as supported by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), addresses
the topic of IT general controls, but does not dictate requirements for such
control objectives and related control activities. Similarly, the audit
standards
issued by the PCAOB on 7 October 2003 highlight the importance of IT
general controls, but do not specify which in particular must be included.
Such decisions remain the responsibility of an organization's management
and independent auditors for their respective purposes. Accordingly,
companies should assess the nature and extent of information technology
controls necessary to support their internal control program on a
case-bycase
basis. Additional considerations are provided in the disclaimer section
of this publication.
In developing this publication, the approach that was taken started with
reviewing the detailed COBIT control objectives, reconciling the objectives
to COSO, determining if the objectives related to financial reporting
objectives, extracting the IT general control objectives and rewriting
objectives, as appropriate, so that they focus on financial reporting
objectives-the requirement of Sarbanes-Oxley. The resulting general
control objectives framework has four domains, 27 IT processes and 136
detailed control objectives.
However, a "one size fits all" approach is not the way to proceed. Each
organization may want to tailor the control objective template to fit its
specific circumstances, e.g., if systems development is considered to be of
low risk, an organization may choose to amend or delete some of the
suggested detailed control objectives. It is further suggested that each
organization consult with its external auditors to ensure that all
attestationcritical
control objectives are addressed. An organization may then choose to
incorporate additional aspects of COBIT.
IT Governance Institute vii
viii IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
This page intentionally left blank.
A Focus on Internal Control 1
A Focus on Internal Control
Recent events have ushered in a new era in the history of business,
characterized by a firm resolve to increase corporate responsibility. The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was created to restore investor confidence in
US public markets, which were devastated by business scandals and lapses in
corporate governance. Although it has literally rewritten the rules for
accountability, disclosure and reporting, the Act's myriad pages of legalese
support a simple premise: good corporate governance and ethical business
practices are no longer optional niceties-they are the law.
With the future of the capital markets-a pillar of the economy-at stake,
the need to link sound corporate governance with effective internal control
has never been greater. Forward-thinking companies and executives will
seize the opportunity. Those who fail to act may pay a heavy price.
Sarbanes-Oxley-Enhancing Corporate Accountability
Some observers have described Sarbanes-Oxley as the most significant piece
of business legislation in the last half-century. Sarbanes-Oxley
fundamentally
changes the business and regulatory environment, and public companies
cannot afford to underestimate the task ahead. The clock is ticking on
compliance, and any delays in dealing with the issue may have serious
consequences. Immediate and decisive action is required.
Sarbanes-Oxley aims to enhance corporate governance through measures
that will strengthen internal checks and balances and, ultimately,
strengthen
corporate accountability. However, it is important to emphasize that Section
404 does not merely require companies to establish and maintain an
adequate internal control structure, but also to assess its effectiveness on
an
annual basis. This distinction is significant.
For those organizations that have begun the compliance process, it has
quickly become apparent that information technology plays a vital role in
internal control-supporting the systems, data and infrastructure components
that are critical to the financial reporting process. On 7 October 2003, the
PCAOB issued a proposed auditing standard that discusses the importance of
information technology in the context of internal control. In particular
it states:
70. The nature and characteristics of a company's use of information
technology in its information system affect the company's internal control
over financial reporting.
2 ITControl Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
To this end, IT professionals, especially those in executive positions, need
to
be well-versed in internal control theory and practice to meet the
requirements of the Act. CIOs must now take on the challenges of (1)
enhancing their knowledge of internal control, (2) understanding their
company's overall Sarbanes-Oxley compliance plan, (3) developing a
compliance plan to specifically address IT controls, and (4) integrating
this
plan into the overall Sarbanes-Oxley compliance plan.
Accordingly, the goal of this publication is to offer guidance to those
responsible for corporate IT systems on the following:
A. Assessing the current state of their IT control environment
B. Designing control improvements necessary to meet the directives of
Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404
C. Closing the gap between A and B
Specific Requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley
Much of the discussion surrounding Sarbanes-Oxley has focused on Sections
302 and 404. A brief primer can be found in figure 1.
302 404
Who Corporate management, Corporate management,
executives and financial officer executives and financial officer
What 1. Evaluate effectiveness of 1. Evaluate design and operating
disclosure controls (with effectiveness of internal
focus on changes since the controls over financial
most recent evaluation)* reporting
2. Evaluate changes in internal 2. Disclose all known controls,
control over financial significant deficiencies
reporting and material weaknesses
3. Disclose all known control 3. Disclose acts of fraud
deficiencies and weaknesses
4. Disclose acts of fraud
When Already in effect as of July 2002 Year-ends beginning on or after
June 2004**
How Quarterly assessment by Annual assessment by
often management management and independent
auditors
*Annual for foreign private issuers **Nonaccelerated filers (<US $75M) can
defer to 2005
Figure 1-Sarbanes-Oxley Requirements Primer
A Focus on Internal Control 3
Section 302
Under Section 302, the company's principal executive officer
and financial officer must personally certify-quarterly and
annually-that they:
. Are responsible for disclosure controls and procedures
. Have designed (or supervised the design of) disclosure
controls to ensure that material information is made known
to them
. Have evaluated the effectiveness of disclosure controls and
procedures and material changes in internal control over
financial reporting
. Have presented their conclusions regarding the effectiveness
of disclosure controls
. Have disclosed to their audit committee and the independent
auditors any significant control deficiencies, material
weaknesses and acts of fraud that involve management or
other employees who have a significant role in the company's
internal control
. Have indicated in the filing any significant changes to
disclosure controls
. Have disclosed in their quarterly reports any change that has
(or is likely to) materially affect internal control over
financial reporting
Auditor Evaluation Responsibilities
The draft audit standard issued by the PCAOB on 7 October
2003 discusses the external auditors responsibilities in regards
to Section 302 in paragraphs 185 through 189. In particular
it states:
185. The auditor's responsibility as it relates to
management's quarterly certifications on internal control
over financial reporting is different from the auditor's
responsibility as it relates to management's annual
assessment of internal control over financial reporting.
. The auditor should perform limited procedures quarterly to
provide a basis for determining whether he or she has
become aware of any material modifications that, in the
auditor's judgment, should be made to the disclosures
about changes in internal control over financial reporting
in order for the certifications to be accurate and to comply
with the requirements of Section 302.
Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
Disclosure controls and
procedures refer to the
processes in place designed
to ensure that all material
information is disclosed by an
organization in the reports it
files or submits to the SEC.
These controls also require
that disclosures are complete
and accurate and are
recorded, processed,
summarized and reported
within the time periods
specified in the SEC's rules
and forms. Deficiencies in
controls, as well as any
significant changes to
controls, must be
communicated to the
organization's audit
committee and auditors in a
timely manner. An
organization's principal
executive officer and financial
officer must certify the
existence of these controls on
a quarterly basis.
4 ITControl Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
186. To fulfill this responsibility, the auditor should perform,
on a quarterly basis, the following procedures:
. Inquire of management about significant changes in the
design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting as it relates to the preparation of annual as well
as interim financial information that could have occurred
subsequent to the preceding annual audit or prior review of
interim financial information, and
. Determine, through a combination of observation and
inquiry, whether significant changes in internal control
over financial reporting may introduce significant
deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design of
internal control over financial reporting.
Section 404
The directives of Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 require that
management provide an annual report on its assessment of
internal control over financial reporting in the annual filing.
This assessment must contain the following elements:
. A statement that company management is responsible for
establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting
. A statement identifying the internal control framework (such
as COSO) used by management to evaluate the effectiveness
of the company's internal control over financial reporting
. An assessment of the design and effectiveness of the
company's internal control over financial reporting
. Disclosure of any material weaknesses in the company's
system of internal control over financial reporting
. The company's independent auditor's attestation report on
management's assessment of internal control over financial
reporting
Auditor Attestation
An added challenge is that Section 404 requires a company's
independent auditor to attest to management's assessment of its
internal control over financial reporting. Not only must
organizations ensure that appropriate controls (including IT
controls) are in place, they must also provide their independent
auditors with documentation supporting management's
assessment. This includes design documentation and the
documented results of testing procedures.
Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting
Internal control over financial
reporting is defined by the
SEC as:
"a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the
registrant's principal executive
and principal financial officers,
or persons performing similar
functions, and effected by the
registrant's board of directors,
management and other
personnel, to provide
reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the
preparation of financial
statements for external
purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting
principles and includes those
policies and procedures that:
(1) Pertain to the maintenance
of records that in
reasonable detail accurately
and fairly reflect the
transactions and
dispositions of the assets of
the registrant;
(2) Provide reasonable
assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary
to permit preparation of
financial statements in
accordance with generally
accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts
and expenditures of the
registrant are being made
only in accordance with
authorizations of
management and directors
of the registrant; and
(3) Provide reasonable
assurance regarding
prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use or
disposition of the
registrant's assets that
could have a material effect
on the financial
statements."
Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, standards for the auditor's attestation are
now
the responsibility of the PCAOB. While the 404 attestation is "as of " a
specific date the draft PCAOB standard issued on 7 October 2003
specifically addresses financial reporting controls that should be in place
for
a period before the attestation date and controls that may operate after the
attestation date. It states:
95. The auditor's testing of the operating effectiveness of such controls
should occur at the time the controls are operating. Controls "as of" a
specific date encompass controls that are relevant to the company's
internal control over financial reporting "as of" that specific date, even
though such controls might not operate until after that specific date.
151. Management might be able to accurately represent that internal
control over financial reporting, as of the end of the company's most
recent fiscal year, is effective even if one or more material weaknesses
existed during the period. To make this representation, management must
have changed the internal control over financial reporting to eliminate the
material weaknesses sufficiently in advance of the "as of" date and have
satisfactorily tested the effectiveness over a period of time that is
adequate
for it to determine whether, as of the end of the fiscal year, the design
and
operation of internal control over financial reporting is effective.
Management should meet with their external auditors to determine the
period of time a control is required to be operating before the attestation
date.
Audit Committee
The draft audit standard of 7 October 2003 specifically addresses the
external auditor's evaluation of the audit committee in paragraphs 56
through
59. In particular it states:
56. Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Audit Committee's Oversight of the
Company's External Financial Reporting and Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting. The company's audit committee plays an important
role within the control environment and monitoring components of internal
control over financial reporting. Within the control environment, the
existence of an effective audit committee is essential to setting a positive
tone at the top. Within the monitoring component, an effective audit
committee is crucial to challenging the company's activities in the
financial arena.
As a result, it would be advisable if the audit committee is aware of any
significant activities impacting the IT environment as it relates to
financial
reporting.
A Focus on Internal Control 5
6 ITControl Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Fraud Considerations in an Audit of Internal Control
Over Financial Reporting
In the introduction to PCAOB draft audit standard of 7 October 2003, the
board makes specific reference to fraud considerations:
Strong internal controls provide better opportunities to detect and deter
fraud. For example, many frauds resulting in financial statement
restatement relied upon the ability of management to exploit weaknesses in
internal control. To the extent that the internal control reporting required
by Section 404 can help restore investor confidence by improving the
effectiveness of internal controls (and reducing the incidence of fraud),
the
auditing standard on performing the audit of internal control over
financial reporting should emphasize controls that prevent or detect errors
as well as fraud. For this reason, the proposed standard specifically
addresses and emphasizes the importance of controls over possible fraud
and requires the auditor to test controls specifically intended to prevent
or
detect fraud that is reasonably likely to result in material misstatement of
the financial statements.
Paragraphs 24 through 26 of the draft audit standard of 7 October 2003
address fraud considerations. In particular paragraph 25 states:
Part of management's responsibility when designing a company's internal
control over financial reporting is to design and implement programs and
controls to prevent, deter, and detect fraud.
The Foundation for Reliable Financial Reporting
Information technology professionals understand the critical role that IT
plays in the operations of a company. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a
successful company existing in the 21st century without some level of
reliance on IT systems.
In today's environment, financial reporting processes are driven by IT
systems. Such systems, whether ERP or otherwise, are deeply integrated in
the initiation, recording, processing and reporting of financial
transactions.
As such, they are inextricably linked to the overall financial reporting
process and need to be assessed, along with other important processes, for
compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley.
To emphasize this point, the PCAOB draft audit standard of 7 October 2003
discusses the relationship of information technology and its importance in
testing the design and operational effectiveness of internal control. In
particular paragraph 41 states:
.controls should be tested, including controls over relevant assertions
related to all significant accounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. Generally, such controls include [among others]:
. Controls, including information technology general controls, on which
other controls are dependent.
Enterprise
Management
IT Services
OS/Data/Telecom/Continuity/Networks
Business Process
Finance
Business Process
Manufacturing
Business Process
Logistics
Business Process
Etc.
Application
Controls
Controls embedded in business
process applications, designed
to achieve completeness,
accuracy, validity and
recording assertions, are
commonly referred to as
application controls.
Examples include:
. Authorizations
. Approvals
. Tolerance levels
. Reconciliations
. Input edits
General Controls
Controls embedded in shared
services form general controls.
Examples include:
. Systems maintenance
. Disaster recovery
. Physical and logical security
. Data management
. Incident response
Company-
Level
Controls
Company-level
controls set
the tone for the
organization.
Examples include:
. Systems
planning
. Operating style
. Enterprise
policies
. Governance
. Collaboration
. Information
sharing
. Codes of
conduct
. Fraud
prevention
A Focus on Internal Control 7
The draft audit standard continues in paragraph 67 by describing the process
that auditors should follow in determining the appropriate assertions or
objectives to support management's assessment:
To identify relevant assertions, the auditor should determine the source of
likely potential misstatements in each significant account. In determining
whether a particular assertion is relevant to a significant account balance
or disclosure, the auditor should evaluate[among others]:
. The nature and complexity of the systems, including the use of
information technology by which the company processes and controls
information supporting the assertion.
At least three common elements exist within all organizations-enterprise
management, business process and shared services.
Enterprise Management Business Process Shared Services
Enterprise management is the
manner in which strategy is
established and incorporated
into business activities. At
the company level, business
objectives are set, policies are
established, and decisions are
made on how to deploy and
manage the resources of the
organization. From an IT
perspective, policies and
other enterprisewide
guidelines are set and
communicated throughout
the organization.
Business processes are the
organization's mechanism of
creating and delivering value
to its stakeholders. Inputs,
processing and outputs are
functions of strategic
business processes.
Increasingly, business
processes are being
automated and integrated
with complex and highly
efficient IT systems.
Shared services are those that
are required by more than one
department or process and
are often delivered as a
common service. From an IT
perspective, services such as
security, telecommunications
and storage are necessary
services for any department or
business unit, and are often
managed by a central
IT function.
Figure 2-Common Elements of Organizations
8 ITControl Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 2 demonstrates how IT controls are embedded within each element
of business. For instance, consider the following areas where IT enables the
controls sought for reliable financial reporting:
. Information management and data classification
. Role-based user management (authentication, initiation and authorization
of transactions)
. Real-time reporting
. Transaction thresholds and tolerance levels
. Data processing integrity and validation
More and more, IT systems are automating business process activities and
providing functionality that enables as much or as little control as
necessary.
As such, compliance programs need to include system-based controls to
keep up-to-date with contemporary financial systems.
Information Technology Controls-A Unique Challenge
Sarbanes-Oxley makes corporate executives explicitly responsible for
establishing, evaluating and monitoring the effectiveness of internal
control
over financial reporting. For most organizations, the role of information
technology will be crucial to achieving this objective. Whether through a
unified enterprise resource planning system or a disparate collection of
operational and financial management software applications, IT is the
foundation of an effective system of internal control over financial
reporting.
Yet, this situation creates a unique challenge: many of the IT professionals
being held accountable for the quality and integrity of information
generated
by their IT systems are not well versed in the intricacies of internal
control.
This is not to suggest that risk is not being managed by IT, but rather that
it
may not be formalized or structured in a way required by an organization's
management or its auditors.
Organizations will need representation from IT on their Sarbanes-Oxley
teams to ensure that IT general controls and application controls exist and
support the objectives of the compliance effort. Some of the key areas of
responsibility for IT will include:
. Understanding the organization's internal control program and its
financial
reporting process
. Mapping the IT systems that support internal control and the financial
reporting process to the financial statements
. Identifying risks related to these IT systems
. Designing and implementing controls designed to mitigate the identified
risks, and monitoring them for continued effectiveness
. Documenting and testing IT controls
. Ensuring that IT controls are updated and changed, as necessary, to
correspond with changes in internal control or financial reporting processes
. Monitoring IT controls for effective operation over time
The SEC regulations that affect Sarbanes-Oxley are undeniably complicated,
and implementation will be both time-consuming and costly. In proceeding
with an IT control program, there are two important considerations that
should be taken into account:
1. There is no need to reinvent the wheel; virtually all public companies
have
some semblance of IT control. While they may be informal and lacking
sufficient documentation, IT controls generally exist in areas such as
security and availability.
2. Many companies will be able to tailor existing IT control processes to
comply with the provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley. Frequently, it is the
consistency and quality of control documentation and evidential matter
that is lacking, but the general process is often in place, only requiring
some modification.
Performing a thorough review of IT control processes and documenting them
as the enterprise moves forward will be a time-consuming task. Without
appropriate knowledge and guidance, organizations will run the risk of doing
too much or too little. This risk is amplified when those responsible are
not
experienced in the design and assessment of IT controls or lack the
necessary skill or management structure to identify and focus on the areas
of
most significant risk.
While some industries, such as financial services, are familiar with
stringent
regulatory and compliance requirements of public market environments,
most are not. To meet the demands of Sarbanes-Oxley, most organizations
will require a change in culture. More likely than not, enhancements to IT
systems and processes will be required, most notably in the design,
documentation and evaluation of IT controls. Because the cost of
noncompliance can be devastating to an organization, it is crucial to adopt
a
proactive approach and take on the challenge early.
Turning Compliance into Competitive Advantage
There is no such thing as a risk-free environment, and compliance with
Sarbanes-Oxley does not create such an environment. However, the process
that most organizations will follow to enhance their system of internal
control to conform to the Act will undoubtedly provide lasting benefits. In
particular, IT organizations can seize this opportunity to turn compliance
into competitive advantage.
The work required to meet the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley should not
be regarded as a compliance process, but rather as an opportunity to
establish strong governance models designed to ensure accountability and
responsiveness to business requirements. Building a strong internal control
program within IT can help to:
. Enhance overall IT governance
. Enhance the understanding of IT among executives
A Focus on Internal Control 9
10 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
. Make better business decisions with higher-quality, more timely
information
. Align project initiatives with business requirements
. Prevent loss of intellectual assets and the possibility of system breach
. Contribute to the compliance of other regulatory requirements, such
as privacy
. Gain competitive advantage through more efficient and effective operations
. Optimize operations with an integrated approach to security, availability
and processing integrity
. Enhance risk management competencies and prioritization of initiatives
International Considerations
Among the many factors that must be considered in complying with Sarbanes-
Oxley, there are some that will uniquely impact international organizations.
Specifically, global organizations, or non-US-based companies that are
required to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley, need to examine their IT operations
and determine if they are significant to the organization as a whole.
Significant business units can include financial business units or IT
business
units. The assessment of whether an IT business unit is significant can be
impacted by the materiality of transactions processed by the IT business
unit,
the potential impact on financial reporting if an IT business unit fails and
other qualitative risk factors. The issue is that there are financial
materiality
and significant risk considerations, quantitative and qualitative, and both
aspects provide focus.
Examples of international IT assessment considerations include:
. Where the financial business units within a country are not significant
individually, but IT processing occurs in a central location, then the IT
business unit may be significant, e.g., a US multinational's British
financial
business units that are not individually significant (although they would be
significant on a consolidated basis) and most financial reporting IT
processing performed by a single IT business unit
. Where the financial business unit is not significant in a particular
country,
but the local IT business unit is responsible for regional IT processing,
e.g.
an IT business unit in Singapore that is responsible for IT processing
throughout Asia and the Pacific
. Where there is no financial business unit in a particular country, but
USbased
IT responsibilities have been outsourced to that country, e.g., a US
insurance company that outsources IT processing and maintenance to an IT
business unit based in India
Setting the Ground Rules
Until recently, assertions on control by an organization were mostly
voluntary and based on a wide variety of internal control frameworks. To
improve consistency and quality, the SEC has mandated the use of a
recognized internal control framework that is established by a body or group
that has followed due-process procedures, including the broad distribution
of
the framework for public comment. In its final rules, specific reference is
made to the recommendations of the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission, otherwise known as COSO.1
COSO Defined
COSO is a voluntary, private sector organization dedicated to improving the
quality of financial reporting through business ethics, effective internal
control and corporate governance. It was originally formed in 1985 to
sponsor the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, an
independent private sector organization often referred to as the Treadway
Commission. The sponsoring organizations include the AICPA, American
Accounting Association (AAA), Financial Executives International
(FEI), Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) and Institute of Management
Accountants (IMA).
The sections that follow provide further insight into COSO as well as its
implications for IT.
Adopting a Control Framework
For years, IT has played an important role in the operation of strategic and
managerial information systems. Today, these systems are inseparable from
an organization's ability to meet the demands of customers, suppliers and
other important stakeholders. With widespread reliance on IT for financial
and operational management systems, controls have long been recognized as
necessary, particularly for significant information systems.
In the draft audit standard of 7 October 2003, the PCAOB states:
Because of the frequency with which management of public companies is
expected to use COSO as the framework for the assessment, the directions
in the proposed standard are based on the COSO framework. Other
suitable frameworks have been published in other countries and likely will
be published in the future. Although different frameworks may not contain
exactly the same elements as COSO, they should have elements that
encompass all of COSO's general themes.
It will be important to demonstrate how IT controls support the COSO
integrated framework. An organization should have IT control competency
in all COSO components.
Setting the Ground Rules 11
1 www.coso.org
12 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
COSO identifies five essential components of effective internal control.
The following is a description of each component and its relationship to IT.
Detailed IT control objectives have been included at the end of this
document to provide considerations for Sarbanes-Oxley compliance.
1. Control Environment
Control environment creates the foundation for effective internal control,
establishes the "tone at the top," and represents the apex of the corporate
governance structure. The issues raised in the control environment
component apply throughout an organization.
The control environment primarily addresses the company level.
However, IT frequently has characteristics that may require additional
emphasis on business alignment, roles and responsibilities, policies and
procedures, and technical competence. The following list describes some
considerations related to the control environment and IT:
. IT is often mistakenly regarded as a separate organization of the business
and thus a separate control environment.
. IT is complex, not only with regard to its technical components but also
as
to how those components integrate into the company's overall system of
internal control.
. IT can introduce additional or increased risks that require new or
enhanced
control activities to mitigate successfully.
. IT requires specialized skills that may be in short supply.
. IT may require reliance on third parties where significant processes or IT
components are outsourced.
. The ownership of IT controls may be unclear.
2. Risk Assessment
Risk assessment involves the identification and analysis by management of
relevant risks to achieve predetermined objectives, which form the basis for
determining control activities. It is likely that internal control risks
could be
more pervasive in the IT organization than in other areas of the company.
Risk assessment may occur at the company level (for the overall
organization) or at the activity level (for a specific process or business
unit).
At the company level, the following may be expected:
. An IT planning subcommittee of the company's overall Sarbanes-Oxley
steering committee. Its responsibilities may include the following:
- Oversight of the development of the IT internal control strategic plan,
its
effective and timely execution/implementation, and its integration with
the overall Sarbanes-Oxley compliance plan
- Assessment of IT risks, e.g., data security, availability and performance
analysis
At the activity level, the following may be expected:
. Formal risk assessments built throughout the systems development
methodology
. Risk assessments built into the infrastructure operation and change
process
. Risk assessments built into the program change process
3. Control Activities
Control activities are the policies, procedures and practices that are put
into
place to ensure that business objectives are achieved and risk mitigation
strategies are carried out. Control activities are developed to specifically
address each control objective to mitigate the risks identified.
Control activities primarily address the activity level.
Without reliable information systems and effective IT control activities,
public companies would not be able to generate accurate financial reports.
COSO recognizes this relationship and identifies two broad groupings of
information system control activities: general controls and application
controls.
General controls, which are designed to ensure that the financial
information
generated from a company's application systems can be relied upon, include
the following types:
. Data center operation controls-Controls such as job setup and scheduling,
operator actions, backup and recovery procedures, and contingency or
disaster recovery planning
. System software controls-Controls over the effective acquisition,
implementation and maintenance of system software, database
management, telecommunications software, security software and utilities
. Access security controls-Controls that prevent inappropriate and
unauthorized use of the system
. Application system development and maintenance controls-Controls over
the development methodology, which include system design and
implementation, outlining specific phases, documentation requirements,
approvals, and checkpoints to control the development or maintenance of
the project
The draft audit standard of 7 October 2003 from the PCAOB specifically
precludes the external auditor from using the results of certain information
technology general controls testing performed by management and others as
well as any work related to companywide antifraud programs. The previously
mentioned controls are those on which the operating effectiveness of other
controls depend.
Setting the Ground Rules 13
14 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Application controls are embedded within software programs to prevent or
detect unauthorized transactions. When combined with other controls, as
necessary, application controls ensure the completeness, accuracy,
authorization and validity of processing transactions. Some examples of
application controls include:
. Balancing control activities-These controls detect data entry errors by
reconciling amounts captured either manually or automatically to a control
total. For example, a company automatically balances the total number of
transactions processed and passed from its online order entry system to the
number of transactions received in its billing system.
. Check digits-Calculations to validate data. A company's part numbers
contain a check digit to detect and correct inaccurate ordering from its
suppliers. Universal product codes include a check digit to verify the
product and the vendor.
. Predefined data listings-Provide the user with predefined lists of
acceptable data. For example, a company's intranet site might include
dropdown
lists of products available for purchase.
. Data reasonableness tests-Compare data captured to a present or learned
pattern of reasonableness. For example, an order to a supplier by a home
renovation retail store for an unusually large number of board feet of
lumber may trigger a review.
. Logic tests-Include the use of range limits or value/alphanumeric tests.
For example, credit card numbers have a predefined format.
General controls are needed to support the functioning of application
controls, and both are needed to ensure accurate information processing and
the integrity of the resulting information used to manage, govern and report
on the organization. As application controls increasingly replace manual
controls, general controls are becoming more important.
4. Information and Communication
COSO states that information is needed at all levels of an organization to
run
the business and achieve the entity's control objectives. However, the
identification, management and communication of relevant information
represents an ever-increasing challenge to the IT department. The
determination of which information is required to achieve control
objectives,
and the communication of this information in a form and time frame that
allows people to carry out their duties, supports the other four components
of the COSO framework.
The IT organization processes most financial reporting information. However,
its scope is usually much broader. For example, the IT department may also
assist in implementing mechanisms to identify and communicate significant
events, such as e-mail systems or executive decision support systems.
COSO also notes that the quality of information includes ascertaining
whether the information is:
. Appropriate-Is it the right information?
. Timely-Is it available when required and reported in the right period
of time?
. Current-Is it the latest available?
. Accurate-Are the data correct?
. Accessible-Can authorized individuals gain access to it as necessary?
At the company level, the following may be expected:
. Development and communication of corporate policies
. Development and communication of reporting requirements, including
deadlines, reconciliations, and the format and content of monthly, quarterly
and annual management reports
. Consolidation and communication of financial information
At the activity level, the following may be expected:
. Development and communication of standards to achieve corporate
policy objectives
. Identification and timely communication of information to assist in
achieving business objectives
. Identification and timely reporting of security violations
5. Monitoring
Monitoring, which covers the oversight of internal control by management
through continuous and point-in-time assessment processes, is becoming
increasingly important to IT management. There are two types of monitoring
activities: continuous monitoring and separate evaluations.
IT performance and effectiveness are increasingly monitored using
performance measures that indicate if an underlying control is operating
effectively. Consider the following examples:
. Defect identification and management-Establishing metrics and analyzing
the trends of actual results against metrics can provide a basis for
understanding the underlying reasons for processing failures. Correcting
these causes can improve system accuracy, completeness of processing and
system availability.
. Security monitoring-Building an effective IT security infrastructure
reduces the risk of unauthorized access. Improving security can reduce the
risk of processing unauthorized transactions and generating inaccurate
reports, and can ensure a reduction of the availability of key systems if
applications and IT infrastructure components have been compromised.
An IT organization also has many different types of separate
evaluations, including:
. Internal audits
. External audits
Setting the Ground Rules 15
16 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
. Regulatory examinations
. Attack and penetration studies
. Independent performance and capacity analyses
. IT effectiveness reviews
. Control self-assessments
. Independent security reviews
. Project implementation reviews
At the company level, the following may be expected:
. Centralized continuous monitoring of computer operations
. Centralized monitoring of security
. IT internal audit reviews (While the audit may occur at the activity
level,
the reporting of audit results to the audit committee will be at the company
level.)
At the activity level, the following may be expected:
. Defect identification and management
. Local monitoring of computer operations or security
. Supervision of local IT personnel
Assessing the Readiness of IT
Sarbanes-Oxley now requires all qualifying SEC-registered organizations to
document, evaluate, monitor and report on internal control over financial
reporting and disclosure controls and procedures, which include IT controls.
The first step in this process will be to assess the overall strength of IT
control in the organization by considering the questions illustrated in
figure 3.
Figure 3-Sarbanes-Oxley IT Diagnostic Questions
1. Does the Sarbanes-Oxley steering committee understand the risks inherent
in IT
systems and their impact on compliance with Section 404?
2. Does IT management understand the financial reporting process and its
supporting systems?
3. Does the CIO have an advanced knowledge of the types of IT controls
necessary
to support reliable financial processing?
4. Are policies governing security, availability and processing integrity
established,
documented and communicated to all members of the IT organization?
5. Are the IT department's roles and responsibilities related to Section 404
documented and understood by all members of the department?
6. Do members of the IT department understand their roles, do they possess
the
requisite skills to perform their job responsibilities relating to internal
control, and
are they supported with appropriate skill development?
7. Is the IT department's risk assessment process integrated with the
company's
overall risk assessment process for financial reporting?
8. Does the IT department document, evaluate and remediate IT controls
related to
financial reporting on an annual basis?
9. Does the IT department have a formal process in place to identify and
respond to
IT control deficiencies?
10. Is the effectiveness of IT controls monitored and followed up on a
regular basis?
The responses to these questions will help determine (1) if the IT
department
is integrated with the overall Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 implementation
plan, (2) if the IT department has documented and evaluated IT controls and
(3) if executive management, including the CIO, appreciates the impact that
the IT department has on Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 compliance.
Establishing IT Control Guidelines for Sarbanes-Oxley
While the importance of IT controls is embedded in the COSO internal
control framework, IT management requires more examples to help identify,
document and evaluate IT controls.
Several IT internal control frameworks exist. However, the IT control
objectives known as COBIT are considered particularly useful, and are an
open
framework, which aligns with the spirit of the Sarbanes-Oxley requirement
that any framework used be open and generally acceptable. COBIT is an IT
governance model that provides both company-level and activity-level
objectives along with associated controls. Using the COBIT framework, a
company can design a system of IT controls to comply with Section 404.
Before deciding to use COBIT as the basis for developing the IT control
objectives considered in this research, consideration was also given to
other
IT control guidelines-including ISO17799, the Information Technology
Infrastructure Library (ITIL) and the Common Criteria-to ensure that
important general and application controls necessary to satisfy Sarbanes-
Oxley were addressed.
In the development of this IT control template, each control objective was
challenged to ensure its relevance and importance to the requirements of
Sarbanes-Oxley. This process of evaluation resulted in some COBIT control
objectives being excluded or combined into a single objective, for
simplicity
purposes. Furthermore, each IT control objective has been reconciled to
COSO, to support alignment with an organization's overall Sarbanes-Oxley
program.
While COSO identifies five components of internal control (as illustrated in
figure 4) that need to be in place and integrated to achieve financial
reporting and disclosure objectives, COBIT provides similar guidance for IT.
The five components of COSO-beginning with identifying the control
environment and culminating in the monitoring of internal controls-can be
visualized as the horizontal layers of a three-dimensional cube with the
COBIT objective domains-from Plan/Organize through Monitor/Evaluate-
applying to each individually and in aggregate.
Setting the Ground Rules 17
18 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
COSO Components
COBIT Objectives
Plan and
Organize
Seeccttiioonn 330022
Seeccttiioonn 440044
Deliver and
Support
Monitor and
Evaluate
Acquire and
Implement
IT controls should consider the overall governance framework
to support the quality and integrity of information.
Competency in all five layers of COSO's framework are
necessary to achieve an integrated control program.
Controls in IT are relevant to both financial reporting
and disclosure requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley.
Risk Assessment
Monitoring
Information and Communication
Control Activities
Control Environment
Figure 4-Internal Control Components
Closing the Gap
The following section provides a compliance road map that is tailored to the
specific objectives and responsibilities of IT departments.
Road Map for Compliance
Understanding how Sarbanes-Oxley applies to a company-based on its
business characteristics-can aid in the development of the internal control
program. Many factors come into play, and larger companies will face
challenges distinct from those of smaller enterprises. Also, the extent to
which a strong internal control framework is already in place will have
significant bearing on activities.
The compliance road map, illustrated in figure 5, provides direction for IT
professionals on meeting the challenges of Sarbanes-Oxley.
1. Plan and Scope
Scoping the project is, without question, one of the most important
activities
in the entire program. While it is true that general controls cut across
geographies and business processes, not all IT processes are relevant.
In this project initiating phase, organizations should form an IT control
subcommittee that is integrated into and reports to the overall Sarbanes-
Oxley steering committee. Smaller organizations may be able to redeploy, on
a part-time basis, existing staff; however, larger organizations may need
dedicated full-time personnel.
Closing the Gap 19
Business Value
Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance
1. Plan
and
Scope
. Financial
reporting
process
. Supporting
systems
8. Document
Results
. Coordination with auditors
. Internal sign-off (302, 404)
. Independent
sign-off (404)
9. Build
Sustainability
. Internal evaluation
. External evaluation
7. Determine
Material
Weaknesses
. Significant deficiency
. Material weakness
. Remediation
6. Evaluate
Operational
Effectiveness
. Internal audit
. Technical testing
. Self assessment
. Inquiry
. All locations and controls
(annual)
5. Evaluate
Control
Design
. Mitigate control
risk to an
acceptable level
. Understood by
users
3. Identify
Significant
Accounts/Controls
. Application controls
over initiating,
recording, processing
and reporting
. IT general controls
2. Perform
Risk
Assessment
. Probability and
impact to
business
. Size/complexity
4. Document Control Design
. Policy manuals
. Procedures
. Narratives
. Flowcharts
. Configurations
. Assessment questionnaires
Figure 5-Compliance Road Map
20 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
As a critical first step, organizations must understand how the financial
reporting process works and identify where technology is critical in the
support of this process. This will identify key systems and subsystems that
need to be included in the scope of the project. Typically, systems will be
considered in scope, if they participate in the initiation, recording,
processing
and reporting of financial information.
As defined in paragraph 43 of the draft audit standard of 7 October 2003
from the PCAOB, processes and controls to be included in the scope of the
program generally include:
. Controls over initiating, recording, processing, and reporting significant
accounts and disclosures and related assertions embodied in the financial
statements.
. Controls over the selection and application of accounting policies that
are
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
. Antifraud programs and controls.
. Controls, including information technology general controls, on which
other controls are dependent.
. Controls over significant nonroutine and nonsystematic transactions, such
as accounts involving judgments and estimates.
. Controls over the period-end financial reporting process, including
controls over procedures used to enter transaction totals into the general
ledger; to initiate, record, and process journal entries in the general
ledger;
and to record recurring and nonrecurring adjustments to the financial
statements (e.g., consolidating adjustments, report combinations, and
reclassifications).
2. Perform Risk Assessment
Risk assessment enables organizations to understand how events can inhibit
the achievement of business objectives. Risk assessment requires two
perspectives: likelihood and impact. Likelihood reflects the potential for
events to occur, while impact reflects the effect of such events.
In the context of the IT compliance program, a risk assessment must be
performed for systems supporting the financial reporting process. Examples
of risks that could undermine financial reporting include failures of:
. The quality and integrity of information managed by IT systems
. Access controls over IT systems and related applications
. Authorizations designed and automated into application systems
. The availability and timeliness of information
. The confidentiality of information disclosure
. Recoverability controls designed to support continued reporting
Consideration must also be given to the relative financial and operational
significance of various IT processing locations or business units. In some
cases, the outsourcing or centralization of general IT controls may be
significant to the business. In this way, compliance teams should understand
the probability and impact of failures at each significant location and
their
potential impact to the overall organization.
Although a location or business unit may not be significant from a financial
standpoint, it may still be an important location. For example, a business
unit
could be responsible for critical online processing, and from an IT
perspective, be dependent on local systems for continuous operation. The
nature of these operations could have a material impact on the organization
and potentially expose it to a risk of material misstatement, even though
the
relative financial significance is not great. In such an event,
consideration of
IT controls at this location would be appropriate.
When determining which locations or business units to include in the scope
of the Sarbanes-Oxley program, organizations should consider the following:
. The extent of dependence on IT at the various locations or business units
. The degree of consistency in process and procedures with other locations
or business units. Where processes and procedures are unique,
organizations may need to consider these locations separately and ensure
that overall control objectives are met.
. The organization's assessment of risk related to the location or business
unit
3. Identify Significant Accounts/Controls
COSO identifies two broad groupings of information system control
activities:
. Application controls, which apply to the business processes they support,
and are designed within the application to prevent/detect unauthorized
transactions. When combined with manual controls, as necessary,
application controls ensure completeness, accuracy, authorization and
validity of processing transactions.
. General controls, which apply to all information systems and support
secure and continuous operation
For application controls, organizations should first identify significant
accounts that could have a material impact on the financial reporting and
disclosure process. Once the significant accounts have been identified,
application controls relevant to such accounts should be identified and
documented.
For information technology general controls, organizations should assess
those controls that support the quality and integrity of information, and
that
are designed to mitigate the identified risks.
Closing the Gap 21
22 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
The appendix of IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley, provides details
on the specific control objectives that should be considered for both
general
and application controls. Since company-level controls are primarily related
to the control environment and risk assessment components of COSO, and
their existence sets the tone for the effectiveness of all other controls,
assessing company-level controls is a key objective for this phase. It
includes
such elements as:
. Tone from the top
. Integrity, ethical values and competence
. IT management's philosophy and operating style
. Delegation of authority and responsibility for IT management
. IT policies and procedures
. The quality and skill of people involved with the organization
. The direction provided by senior management
4. Document Control Design
Documentation is a unique aspect to the Sarbanes-Oxley compliance process
that will likely pose a significant challenge for organizations. While most
companies have controls in place, few have documentation to provide
sufficient evidence of their design and operation.
While the PCAOB has not given detailed guidance on documentation
requirements, it states in the draft standard that documentation should be
sufficient for the external auditor to review the design and test the
effectiveness of a control.
The draft standard addresses documentation in paragraphs 43 through 47. In
addition to stating that documentation should include the five components of
internal control over financial reporting, the draft standard states:
44. Documentation might take many forms of presentation and can include
a variety of information, including policy manuals, process models,
flowcharts, job descriptions, documents, and forms. No one form of
documentation is required, and the extent of documentation will vary
depending on the size, nature, and complexity of the company.
45. Documentation of the design of controls over relevant assertions
related to significant accounts and disclosures is evidence that controls
related to management's assessment about the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting, including changes to those controls, have
been identified, are capable of being communicated to those responsible
for their performance, and are capable of being monitored by the
company. Such documentation also provides the foundation for
appropriate communication concerning responsibilities for performing
controls and for the company's evaluation of and monitoring of the
effective operation of controls.
46. Inadequate documentation of the design of controls over relevant
assertions related to significant accounts and disclosures is a deficiency
in
the company's internal control over financial reporting.
Management should discuss the proposed extent and detail of their control
documentation with their external auditors early in the process to reduce
the
risk that the external auditor will consider their control documentation
deficient.
Understanding control theory and the concepts that define "IT control
design" will be an important competency of IT organizations in the future.
Put simply, IT control design defines the approach an organization follows
to
reduce IT risk-the risk that IT prevents the business from achieving
its objectives-to an acceptable level. Once the control is properly
designed,
its implementation and continued effectiveness become the focus. The
existence of controls and their effectiveness are discussed in subsequent
phases.
Equally important in this phase is the documentation that supports an
organization's control program. Documentation should be prepared-both at
the company level as well as the activity level-of the objectives that the
controls are designed to achieve to support the organization's internal
control
over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures.
It is advisable that an organization document its approach to IT control,
including the assignment of authority and responsibility for IT controls as
well as their design and operation.
5. Evaluate Control Design
In this phase, an IT organization must step back and evaluate the ability of
its control program to reduce IT risk to an acceptable level and to ensure
it is
understood by users. The PCAOB draft audit standard of 7 October 2003
discusses the factors that might contribute to controls not operating
effectively. In particular paragraph 74 states:
Factors that affect whether the control might not be operating effectively
include the following:
. The degree to which the control relies on the effectiveness of other
controls (for example, the control environment or information technology
general controls)
To help in this process, consider the IT control design and effectiveness
model in figure 6. Depending on how the organization measures up, it may
be necessary to spend some time enhancing the design and effectiveness of
the control program.
Closing the Gap 23
24 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 6 demonstrates the stages of control reliability that may exist
within
organizations. For the purposes of establishing internal control, some
organizations may be willing to accept IT controls that fall somewhere short
of stage 3. However, given the Act's requirements for independent
attestation
of controls by external audit, controls will more than likely require the
attributes and characteristics of stage 3 or higher for key control
activities.
The table presented in figure 7 provides insight into the various
characteristics of each stage as well as the related implications. IT
organizations must realize that there is little definition or guidance
regarding
the attributes or characteristics necessary to comply with the Act. The SEC
has indicated that no particular form of documentation is approved or
required, and the extent of documentation may vary, depending upon the size
and complexity of the organization.
6. Evaluate Operational Effectiveness
Once control design has been assessed, as appropriate, its implementation
and continuing effectiveness must be confirmed. During this stage, initial
and ongoing tests-conducted by individuals responsible for the controls and
the internal control program management team-should be performed to
check on the operating effectiveness of the control activities.
Design and Operating Effectiveness
Extent of Documentation, Awareness and Monitoring
Stage 0
Non-existent
Stage 1
Initial/Ad Hoc
Stage 2
Repeatable but Intuitive
Stage 3
Defined Process
Stage 4
Managed and Measurable
Stage 5
Optimized
Figure 6-Stages of Control Reliability
Closing the Gap 25
Figure 7-Control Quality
At this level, there
is a complete lack
of any recognizable
control process or
the existence of
any related
procedures. The
organization has
not even
acknowledged
there is an issue to
be addressed and
therefore no
communication
about the issue is
generated.
There is some
evidence the
organization
recognizes that
controls and
related procedures
are important and
that they need to
be addressed.
However, controls
and related
policies and
procedures are
not in place and
documented.
An event and
disclosure process
does not exist.
Employees are not
aware of their
responsibility for
control activities.
The operating
effectiveness of
control activities is
not evaluated on a
regular basis.
Control
deficiencies are
not identified.
Controls and
related policies
and procedures
are in place but
not always fully
documented.
An event and
disclosure
process is in place
but not
documented.
Employees may
not be aware of
their responsibility
for control
activities.
The operating
effectiveness of
control activities
is not adequately
evaluated on a
regular basis and
the process is not
documented.
Control
deficiencies may
be identified but
are not remedied
in a timely
manner.
Controls and
related policies
and procedures
are in place and
adequately
documented.
An event and
disclosure process
is in place and
adequately
documented.
Employees are
aware of their
responsibility for
control activities.
The operating
effectiveness of
control activities is
evaluated on a
periodic basis
(e.g., quarterly),
however the
process is not
fully documented.
Control
deficiencies are
identified and
remedied in a
timely manner.
Controls and
related policies
and procedures
are in place,
adequately
documented, and
employees are
aware of their
responsibility for
control activities.
An event and
disclosure process
is in place,
adequately
documented and
monitored, but not
always reevaluated
to reflect
major process or
organizational
changes.
The operating
effectiveness of
control activities is
evaluated on a
periodic basis
(e.g., weekly) and
the process is
adequately
documented.
There is limited,
primarily tactical,
use of technology
to document
processes, control
objectives and
activities.
Stage 5 meets all
of the
characteristics of
stage 4.
An enterprisewide
control and risk
management
program exists
such that controls
and procedures
are well
documented and
continuously
reevaluated to
reflect major
process or
organizational
changes.
A self-assessment
process is used to
evaluate the design
and effectiveness
of controls.
Technology is
leveraged to its
fullest extent to
document
processes, control
objectives and
activities, identify
gaps, and evaluate
the effectiveness
of controls.
The organization
has a total
inability to be in
compliance at
even the minimum
level.
Insufficient
controls, policies,
procedures and
documentation
exist to even
support
management's
assertion.
The level of effort
to document, test
and remedy
controls is very
significant.
Although controls,
policies and
procedures are in
place, insufficient
documentation
exists to support
management's
certification and
assertion.
The level of effort
to document, test
and remedy
controls is
significant.
Sufficient
documentation
exists to support
management's
certification and
assertion.
The level of effort
to document, test
and remedy
controls may be
significant
depending on the
organization's
circumstances.
Sufficient
documentation
exists to support
management's
certification and
assertion.
The level of effort
to document, test
and remedy
controls may be
less significant
depending on the
organization's
circumstances
Implications of
stage 4 remain.
Improved
decision-making is
enabled because of
high-quality, timely
information.
Internal resources
are used effectively
and efficiently.
Information is
timely and reliable.
Implications Characteristics
Stage 0-
Non-existent
Stage 1-
Initial/Ad Hoc
Stage 2-
Repeatable but
Intuitive
Stage 3-
Defined
Process
Stage 4-
Managed and
Measurable
Stage 5-
Optimized
26 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Ordinarily, organizations should test more extensively and with higher
frequency those controls on which other significant controls depend (for
example, general controls as opposed to application controls). In making a
judgment about the extent of testing that is appropriate, organizations
should consider how the IT control impacts financial and disclosure
reporting processes.
The PCAOB draft audit standard of 7 October 2003 specifically addresses
service auditor's reports in paragraphs B29 through B34. In particular:
There are a number of areas in which the auditor should not use the
results of testing performed by management and others, including [among
others]:
. Controls that have a pervasive effect on the financial statements, such as
certain information technology general controls on which the operating
effectiveness of other controls depend.
Some organizations use external service organizations to perform outsourced
services. These services are still part of an organization's overall
operations
and responsibility and, consequently, need to be considered in the overall
IT
internal control program.
Furthermore, the PCAOB draft audit standard of 7 October 2003 states:
B25. The use of a service organization does not reduce management's
responsibility to maintain effective internal control over financial
reporting. Rather, management should evaluate controls at the service
organization, as well as related controls at the company, when making its
assessment about internal control over financial reporting.
In such circumstances, organizations should review the activities of the
service organization in arriving at a conclusion on the reliability of its
internal control. Documentation of service organization control activities
will
be required for the attestation activities of the independent auditor, so an
assessment is required of the service organization to determine the
sufficiency and appropriateness of evidence supporting these controls.
Traditionally, audit opinions commonly known as SAS70 reports (Section
5900 in Canada) have been performed for service organizations. If these
audit reports do not include tests of controls, results of the tests and the
service auditor's opinion on operating effectiveness, they may not be deemed
sufficient for purposes of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. In such cases,
organizations may wish to consult with their external auditors and
understand the specific requirements.
7. Determine Material Weaknesses
Deficiencies in an entity's internal control range from
inconsequential shortcomings to material weaknesses
(see sidebar, What Is the Difference Between a
Deficiency and a Weakness?). Determining whether a
deficiency is significant or material requires professional
judgment and the consideration of various factors.
In making the judgment as to which IT control
deficiencies are significant, independent auditors will
consider various factors such as the size of operations,
complexity and diversity of activities, organizational
structure, and the likelihood that the IT control
deficiency could result in a misstatement of the
organization's financial records.
To prepare, IT organizations should engage individuals
with experience performing IT control audits to identify
the weaknesses in IT internal control programs. Once a
reliable control state has been reached, a sustainability
model should be implemented to ensure its operating
effectiveness over time.
8. Document Results
During the evaluation phase, results of tests performed
should be recorded, as they will form the basis for
management assertion and auditor attestation. Again,
there is no prescribed format; the goal is to provide a
comprehensive, easily understood summary of control
effectiveness that is inclusive of all testing activities
performed. This documentation should culminate in a
management report that can be shared with senior
executives and demonstrates the overall reliability,
quality and integrity of IT systems. Doing so will help
facilitate the CEO's and CFO's enterprisewide
certifications of control.
9. Build Sustainability
The final phase ensures that internal controls are
sustainable. At this point, IT management should be in
a position to sign off on the IT internal control program
effectiveness and the effectiveness may then be
approved through an external evaluation. Control
assessment and management competencies must
become part of the IT department's organization and
culture, and sustain themselves over the long term.
Control is not an event; it is a process that requires
continuous support and evaluation to stay current.
Closing the Gap 27
What Is the Difference Between a Deficiency
and a Weakness?
An internal control deficiency may consist
of a design or operating deficiency. A design
deficiency exists when a necessary control is
missing or an existing control is not properly
designed, so that even when the control is
operating as designed the control objective is
not always met. An operating deficiency exists
when a properly designed control either is not
operating as designed or the person
performing a control does not possess the
necessary authority or qualifications to
perform the control effectively. Internal control
deficiencies relevant to internal control over
financial reporting could adversely affect the
entity's ability to initiate, record, process and
report financial data consistent with the
assertions of management in the financial
statements. Internal control deficiencies
relevant to financial reporting range from
inconsequential internal control deficiencies to
material weaknesses in internal control.
A significant deficiency is an internal control
deficiency in a significant control or an
aggregation of such deficiencies that could
result in a misstatement of the financial
statements that is more than inconsequential.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency
or an aggregation of significant deficiencies
that precludes the entity's internal control
from providing reasonable assurance that
material misstatements in the financial
statements will be prevented or detected on a
timely basis by employees in the normal
course of performing their assigned functions.
The inability to provide such reasonable
assurance results from one or more significant
deficiencies. The design or operation of one or
more of the internal control components does
not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that
misstatements caused by errors or fraud in
amounts that would be material in relation to
the financial statements may occur and may
not be detected within a timely period by
employees in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions. Therefore, the
existence of a material weakness precludes
the responsible party from concluding that
internal control is effective and the practitioner
from issuing an unqualified opinion that
internal control is effective.
Note that management is not permitted to
conclude that the company's internal control
over financial reporting is effective, if there are
one or more material weaknesses in the
company's internal control over financial
reporting.
28 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
How Compliance Should Be Documented
To date, most organizations have struggled with the question of how much
documentation is necessary to support their internal control program, and in
what form it should be retained. In responding to this query, it is
important
to consider the communications from the SEC and the PCAOB as well as
those that will likely guide independent auditors in their certification
efforts.
Documentation may take various forms, including entity policy manuals, IT
policy and procedures, narratives, flowcharts, decision tables, procedural
write-ups or completed questionnaires. No single particular form of
documentation is mandated by Sarbanes-Oxley, and the extent of
documentation may vary, depending upon the size and complexity of the
organization.
For most organizations, documentation should be, at a minimum, prepared
for the following:
. Company level
- Statement of control and approach to confirming its existence and
continued effectiveness over time
. Activity level
- Description of the processes and related subprocesses (may be in
narrative form; however, it may be more effective to illustrate as
a flowchart)
- Description of the risk associated with the process or subprocess,
including an analysis of its impact and probability of occurrence.
Consideration should be given to the size and complexity of the
process or subprocess and its impact on the organization's financial
reporting process.
- Statement of the control objective designed to reduce the risk of the
process or subprocess to an acceptable level and a description of its
alignment to the COSO framework
- Description of the control activity(ies) designed and performed to satisfy
the control objective related to the process or subprocess
- Description of the approach followed to confirm (test) the existence and
operational effectiveness of the control activities
- Conclusions reached about the effectiveness of controls, as a result
of testing
Lessons Learned
Parallels can be drawn between the affect of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
on public companies and the impact of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (FDICIA) on the banking industry.
Closing the Gap 29
Both statutes introduced regulations to remedy perceived market failures,
and each enacted significant new reporting requirements. There are several
lessons public companies can learn from the FDICIA example:
. Accept that the environment has changed profoundly. Companies must
recognize that they operate in a new environment-one that demands more
effort and accountability.
. Promote understanding of internal control within the organization.
Companies may be tempted to show superficial compliance with Sarbanes-
Oxley, but such an approach may backfire if controls fail because form was
stressed over substance.
. Factor into the business model the cost of developing an internal control
program. Good internal control is not a one-time expense; rather, it
fundamentally changes the cost of doing business.
Past events ushered in a new era in the history of business, characterized
by
a firm resolve to increase corporate responsibility. Sarbanes-Oxley was
created to restore investor confidence in public markets, which have been
devastated by business scandals and lapses in corporate governance.
Although it has literally rewritten the rules for accountability, disclosure
and
reporting, good corporate governance and ethical business practices are no
longer optional niceties-they are the law.
To this end, IT professionals, especially those in executive positions, need
to
be well versed in internal control theory and practice to meet the
requirements of the Act. CIOs must now take on the challenges of (1)
enhancing their knowledge of internal control, (2) understanding their
company's overall Sarbanes-Oxley compliance plan, (3) developing a
compliance plan to specifically address IT controls and (4) integrating this
plan into the overall Sarbanes-Oxley compliance plan. Unlike previous
event-driven control activities (e.g., Y2K), Sarbanes-Oxley activity will
continue as a routine part of doing business. IT is very important to
internal
control over financial reporting. Management's assessment as required by
Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley is a complex and time-consuming project.
Organizations need to develop an ongoing process to monitor compliance, as
the full impact of Sarbanes-Oxley will not be known for several years.
30 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Having set the stage for the importance of IT in preparing for Sarbanes-
Oxley compliance, the specific control objectives that will form the basis
of
the IT control program must be addressed.
The table in figure 8 illustrates the segments of COBIT and maps their
relationship to the appropriate COSO component. In reviewing this material,
readers may notice that not all COBIT control objectives are mapped to the
COSO framework; for instance, "identify automated solutions." In such
cases, the COBIT objective has not been mapped since it has more to do with
operational efficiencies than financial reporting or disclosure controls. It
is
immediately evident that many COBIT segment elements have relationships
with more than one COSO component. This is expected, given the nature of
general IT controls, as they form the basis for achieving reliable
information
systems. This multirelationship attribute further demonstrates why IT
controls are the basis for all others and are essential for a reliable
internal
control program.
COBIT is a very rich and robust framework, comprising four domains,
34 IT processes and 318 detailed control objectives. It is a comprehensive
approach for managing risk and control of information technology. As such,
the control objectives and considerations set forth in this document may
exceed, or be deficient in, what is necessary for organizations seeking to
comply with the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley. The suggested internal
control framework (COSO) to be used for compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley,
as supported by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), addresses
the topic of IT general controls, but does not dictate requirements for such
control objectives and related control activities. Similarly, the audit
standards
issued by the PCAOB on 7 October 2003 highlight the importance of IT
general controls, but do not specify which in particular must be included.
Such decisions remain the responsibility of an organization's management
and independent auditors for their respective purposes. Accordingly,
companies should assess the nature and extent of information technology
controls necessary to support their internal control program on a
case-bycase
basis. Additional considerations are provided in the disclaimer section
of this publication.
The reader may find the following materials particularly useful. Preparing
this guide is not to suggest a "one size fits all" approach; instead it
recommends that each organization tailor the control objective template
to fit its specific circumstances. For example, if systems development is
considered to be of low risk, an organization may choose to amend or delete
some of the suggested detailed control objectives. An organization may also
consult with its external auditors to ensure that all attestation-critical
control
objectives are addressed.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 31
32 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
COSO Component
COBIT Control Objectives
Control
Environment
Risk
Assessment
Control
Activities
Information and
Communication
Monitoring
Define a strategic IT plan.
Define the information architecture.
Determine technological direction.
Define the IT organization and relationships.
Manage the IT investment.
Communicate management aims and direction.
Manage human resources.
Ensure compliance with external requirements.
Assess risks.
Manage projects.
Manage quality.
Acquire and Implement
Identify automated solutions.
Acquire and maintain application software.
Acquire and maintain technology infrastructure.
Develop and maintain procedures.
Install and accredit systems.
Manage changes.
Plan and Organize
. .
.. .
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
. .
...
.
.
. .
...
.
. .
.
..
.
..
..
.
...
Deliver and Support
Define and manage service levels.
Manage third-party services.
Manage performance and capacity.
Ensure continuous service.
Ensure systems security.
Identify and allocate costs.
Educate and train users.
Assist and advise customers.
Manage the configuration.
Manage problems and incidents.
Manage data.
Manage facilities.
Manage operations.
Monitor and Evaluate
Monitor the processes.
Assess internal control adequacy.
Obtain independent assurance.
Provide for independent audit.
Figure 8-COBIT Relationship to COSO
An important objective of this publication is to provide IT professionals
with
guidance on the specific control objectives that should be considered for
compliance with COSO and, ultimately, Sarbanes-Oxley. Accordingly, the
following section provides this information as well as a perspective on the
importance of the control segment and how it relates to COSO and financial
and disclosure controls.
The control objectives that follow are based on the guidance provided in
COBIT. Those familiar with COBIT will recognize that the control objectives
in this publication are not presented exactly as they are in COBIT. The end
result is a series of IT controls, designed specifically for COSO and
Sarbanes-Oxley.
As always, IT organizations should consider the nature and extent of their
operations in determining which, if not all, of the control objectives need
to
be included in their internal control program.
1. General Controls-Plan and Organize
This domain addresses strategy and tactics, and focuses on identifying the
way IT can best contribute to the achievement of the business objectives.
Furthermore, the realization of the strategic vision needs to be planned,
communicated and managed for different perspectives.
COBIT control processes that should be considered for COSO internal
control models include:
. Define a strategic plan.
. Define the information architecture.
. Define the IT organization and relationships.
. Communicate management aims and direction.
. Manage human resources.
. Ensure compliance with external requirements.
. Assess risks.
. Manage quality.
Each of these control processes is outlined in figures 9 through 16.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 33
34 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 10-Define the Information Architecture
Control Objective COSO Component
Information should be identified, captured and communicated in a form and
time frame that
enables the business to carry out its responsibilities effectively and on a
timely basis. As
processing deadlines become tighter and availability requirements become
more important, an
organization will place increasing reliance on automated, rather than
manual, systems and related
controls. Accordingly, the increasing demands on systems require appropriate
planning and
design to support these business requirements. Activities performed in this
area align with the
control activities and information and communication components of COSO. If
information
architecture is not defined or consistently applied, there is increased risk
that the information
required to prepare financial statements will not be available in a timely
manner.
IT management has defined information capture, processing Information and
and reporting controls-including completeness, accuracy, communication
validity and authorization-to support the quality and integrity
of information used for financial and disclosure purposes.
IT management has defined information classification Control activities
standards in accordance with corporate security and privacy
policies.
IT management has defined, implemented and maintained Control activities
security levels for each of the data classifications. These
security levels represent the appropriate (minimum) set of
security and control measures for each of the classifications
and are reevaluated periodically and modified accordingly.
Figure 9-Define a Strategic IT Plan
Control Objective COSO Component
The strategic planning process is a fundamental control for IT because it
provides the direction
and mandate for helping the business achieve its objectives. The plan
identifies what IT must do
to support the business, the related risks that need to be considered by the
business, the
investments required to meet these objectives and sustain them over time, as
well as senior
management's support of the overall IT mandate. Activities performed in this
area align with the
risk assessment, information and communication, and monitoring components of
COSO.
Without appropriate IT planning, over time, the business will struggle to
achieve its objectives
and, the risk of noncompliance with financial reporting and disclosure
requirements will increase.
Management prepares strategic plans for IT that align Risk assessment
business objectives with IT strategies. The planning approach
includes mechanisms to solicit input from relevant internal
and external stakeholders impacted by the IT strategic plans.
Management obtains feedback from business process owners Risk assessment
and users regarding the quality and usefulness of its IT plans
for use in the ongoing risk assessment process.
An IT planning or steering committee exists to oversee the IT Risk
assessment
function and its activities. Committee membership includes
representatives from senior management, user management
and the IT function.
The IT organization ensures that IT plans are communicated to Information
and
business process owners and other relevant parties across communication
the organization.
IT management communicates its activities, challenges and Information and
risks on a regular basis with the CEO and CFO. This communication
information is also shared with the board of directors.
The IT organization monitors its progress against the strategic Monitoring
plan and reacts accordingly to meet established objectives.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 35
Figure 11-Define the IT Organization and Relationships
Control Objective COSO Component
The IT organization is responsible for managing all aspects of the system
environment. Ensuring
the employment of appropriate people with the necessary skills to meet the
mandate of IT, and
ultimately the business, is critical to its overall effectiveness.
Furthermore, the definition of roles
and responsibilities is necessary to establish accountability over systems
and data. Activities in
this area align to the control environment and information and communication
components of
COSO. Without appropriate skills and the definition of roles and
responsibilities, there is
increased risk that systems and data will not be reliable and will, thereby,
compromise the
business' ability to comply with legal and regulatory requirements.
IT managers have adequate knowledge and experience to fulfill Control
environment
their responsibilities.
Key systems and data have been inventoried and their owners Control
environment
identified.
Roles and responsibilities of the IT organization are defined, Control
environment
documented and understood.
IT personnel have sufficient authority to exercise the role and Control
environment
responsibility assigned to them.
The IT organizational structure is sufficient to provide for Control
environment
necessary information flow to manage its activities.
IT management has implemented a division of roles and Control environment
responsibilities (segregation of duties) that reasonably
prevents a single individual from subverting a critical process.
IT management has ensured that personnel are performing Control environment
only those duties stipulated in their respective jobs and
position descriptions.
IT staff evaluations are performed regularly (e.g., to ensure Control
environment
that the IT function has a sufficient number of competent IT
staff necessary to achieve their objectives).
Contracted staff and other contract personnel are subject to Control
environment
policies and procedures, created to control their activities by
the IT function, to assure the protection of the organization's
information assets.
IT staff understand and accept their responsibility regarding Control
environment
internal control.
IT strategies and ongoing operations are formally defined and Information
and
communicated to senior management and the board of communication
directors, e.g., through periodic meetings of an IT steering
committee.
Significant IT events or failures, e.g., security breaches, major
Information and
system failures or regulatory failures, are reported to senior communication
management or the board.
36 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 13-Manage Human Resources
Control Objective COSO Component
Education and training of IT staff address how an organization supports its
people to perform
their job responsibilities in a reliable and controlled manner. Actions
performed in this area align
with the control environment and information and communication components of
COSO. The
ability, or lack thereof, to cross-train, learn and continually enhance
skill levels will directly
impact the enterprise's ability to meet new challenges and demands of the
business.
Controls are in place to support appropriate and timely Control environment
responses to job changes and job terminations so that
internal controls and security are not impaired by such
occurrences.
The IT organization subscribes to a philosophy of continuous Information and
learning, providing necessary training and skill development communication
to its members.
The IT organization adopts and promotes the entity's culture Control
environment
of integrity management, including ethics, business practices
and human resource evaluations, to ensure compliance.
Figure 12-Communicate Management Aims and Direction
Control Objective COSO Component
Establishing a reliable system requires participation from all members of
the IT organization. To
accomplish this, members of the IT organization should be informed and
committed to the
direction of IT and its ability to meet the objectives outlined in the
strategic plan. Activities in this
area align to the control environment and information and communications,
and monitoring
components of COSO. Without communicating its direction, IT organizations
may be unable to
obtain the commitment of their members and, ultimately, achieve their goals.
IT management has formulated, developed and documented Control environment
policies and procedures governing the IT organization's
activities.
IT management has communicated policies and procedures Information and
governing the IT organization's activities. communication
IT management periodically reviews its policies, procedures Monitoring
and standards to reflect changing business conditions.
IT management has processes in place to investigate Monitoring
compliance deviations and introduce remedial action.
IT management has a process in place to assess compliance Monitoring
with its policies, procedures and standards.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 37
Figure 14-Ensure Compliance with External Requirements
Control Objective COSO Component
The organization should establish and maintain procedures to ensure
compliance with
Sarbanes-Oxley, the SEC and other external regulatory requirements. The
compliance function
should identify and communicate requirements that could potentially impact
the IT organization.
The IT organization should establish a framework of control to ensure that
external requirements
are understood and managed. If external requirements that could impact
financial reporting are
not addressed, then this could jeopardize accurate reporting of financial
results. Activities in this
area are aligned with the control activities, information and communication,
and monitoring
components of COSO.
The organization monitors changes in external requirements Monitoring
for legal, regulatory or other external requirements related to
IT practices and controls.
Control activities are in place and followed to ensure Control activities
compliance with external requirements, such as regulatory
and legal rules.
Internal events are considered in a timely manner to support Information and
continuous compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. communication
Figure 15-Assess Risks
Control Objective COSO Component
Risk assessment is defined as "the identification and analysis of relevant
risks to achievement of
the objectives." Risk assessment is usually pervasive in the IT
organization. Activities in this area
align with the risk assessment component of COSO. Without adequate risk
assessments, there is
an increased risk that an appropriate framework of internal controls will
not be implemented. An
inadequate framework of internal control would jeopardize the Section 302
and 404 management
assertions.
The IT organization has an entity- and activity-level risk Risk assessment
assessment framework, which is used periodically to assess
information risk to achieving business objectives.
Management's risk assessment framework focuses on the Risk assessment
examination of the essential elements of risk and the cause/
effect relationship among them, including risks related to
achieving business objectives, regulatory compliance, legal
compliance, technology reliability, information integrity and
human resources.
A risk assessment framework exists and considers the Risk assessment
probability and likelihood of threats.
The IT organization's risk assessment framework measures Risk assessment
the impact of risks according to qualitative and quantitative
criteria, using inputs from different areas including, but not
limited to, management brainstorming, strategic planning,
past audits and other assessments.
The IT organization's risk assessment framework is designed Risk assessment
to support cost-effective controls to mitigate exposure to risks
on a continuing basis, including risk avoidance, mitigation
or acceptance.
A comprehensive security assessment is performed for critical Risk
assessment
systems and locations based on their relative priority and
importance to the organization.
38 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 16-Manage Quality
Control Objective COSO Component
Quality programs address both general and project-specific quality assurance
activities and
should prescribe the type(s) of quality assurance activities (such as
reviews, audits, inspections,
etc.) to be performed to achieve the objectives of the general quality plan.
Activities in this area
align with all components of the COSO framework. Without quality assurance,
the organization
may not be able to rely on its systems of control, and thereby, management's
302 and 404
assertions may be jeopardized.
Documentation is created and maintained for all significant IT Control
environment
processes and activities.
A plan exists to maintain the overall quality assurance of IT Control
environment
activities based on the organizational and IT plans.
Documentation standards are in place, have been Control environment
communicated to all IT staff and are supported with training.
A quality plan exists for significant IT functions (e.g., system Control
environment
development and deployment) and provides a consistent
approach to address both general and project-specific quality
assurance activities.
The quality plan prescribes the type(s) of quality assurance Control
environment
activities (such as reviews, audits, inspections, etc.) to be
performed to achieve the objectives of the quality plan.
The quality assurance process includes a review of the Control environment
adherence to IT policies, procedures and standards.
Data integrity ownership and responsibilities have been Information and
communicated to the appropriate data owners and they communication
have accepted these responsibilities.
Figure 15-Assess Risks (cont.)
Control Objective COSO Component
Where risks are considered acceptable, there are formal Risk assessment
documentation and acceptance of residual risk with related
offsets, including adequate insurance coverage, contractually
negotiated liabilities and self-insurance.
The IT organization is committed to active and continuous risk Risk
assessment
assessment processes as an important tool in providing
information on the design and implementation of internal
controls, in the definition of the IT strategic plan, and in the
monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 39
2. General Controls-Acquire and Implement
This domain includes changes in and maintenance of existing systems to
make sure that the life cycle is continued for these systems. To realize the
IT
strategy, IT solutions need to be identified, developed or acquired, as well
as
implemented and integrated into the business process.
COBIT control processes that should be considered for COSO internal
control models include:
. Acquire and maintain application software.
. Acquire and maintain technology infrastructure.
. Develop and maintain procedures.
. Install and accredit systems.
. Manage changes.
Each of these control processes is outlined in figures 17 through 21.
Figure 17-Acquire and Maintain Application Software
Control Objective COSO Component
Acquiring and maintaining application software include the design,
acquisition/building and
deployment of systems that support the achievement of business objectives.
Actions performed
in this area align with the control activities component of COSO. This is
also where controls are
designed and implemented to support the initiating, recording, processing
and reporting of
financial information and disclosure. Deficiencies in this area may have a
significant impact on
financial reporting and disclosure. For instance, without sufficient
controls over application
interfaces, financial information may not be complete or accurate.
Activities in this area align
with the control activities component of COSO.
The organization has a system development life cycle Control activities
methodology that considers security, availability and
processing integrity requirements of the organization.
The system development life cycle methodology ensures Control activities
that information systems are designed to include application
controls that support complete, accurate, authorized and
valid transaction processing.
The organization has an acquisition and planning process Control activities
that aligns with its overall strategic direction.
The organization acquires software in accordance with its Control activities
acquisition and planning process.
Procedures exist to ensure that system software is installed Control
activities
and maintained in accordance with the organization's
requirements.
Procedures exist to ensure that system software changes Control activities
are controlled in line with the organization's change
management procedures.
40 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 19-Develop and Maintain Procedures
Control Objective COSO Component
Developing and maintaining procedures include the design and implementation
of service level
agreements, operational practices and training materials. Actions performed
in this area align
with the control activities and information and communication components of
COSO. Controls
designed and implemented in this area support an organization's ability to
perform business
process activities in a consistent and objective manner. For instance,
without controls to maintain
consistency in how application systems generate reports, the organization
may not be able to
reconcile financial information in a reliable manner.
The organization's system development life cycle methodology Control
activities
requires that user reference and support manuals (including
documentation of controls) be prepared as part of every
information system development or modification project.
The IT organization ensures that its systems and applications Information
and
are supported with documentation and processes to enable communication
long-term sustainability and maintainability.
Figure 18-Acquire and Maintain Technology Infrastructure
Control Objective COSO Component
Acquiring and maintaining technology infrastructure include the design,
acquisition/building and
deployment of systems that support applications and communications.
Infrastructure
components, including servers, networks and databases, are critical for
secure and reliable
information processing. Actions performed in this area align with the
control activities
component of COSO. Infrastructure controls support timely processing of
financial information
and also help ensure its confidentiality. Deficiencies in this area may have
a significant impact on
financial reporting and disclosure. For instance, without sufficient
controls over network
communications, financial information could be obtained and publicized
without authorization.
IT management ensures that the setup and implementation Control activities
of system software do not jeopardize the security of the data
and programs being stored on the system.
Procedures exist and are followed to ensure that infrastructure Control
activities
systems, including network devices and software, are installed
and maintained in accordance with the acquisition and
maintenance framework.
Procedures exist and are followed to ensure that infrastructure Control
activities
system changes are controlled in line with the organization's
change management procedures.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 41
Figure 20-Install and Accredit Systems
Control Objective COSO Component
Installation and accreditation relate to the migration of new systems into
production. Before such
systems are installed, appropriate testing and validation that systems are
operating as designed
must be performed. Activities in this area align with the control activities
component of COSO.
Without adequate testing, systems may not function as intended and may
provide invalid
information, which could result in unreliable financial information and
reports.
There exists a testing strategy for all significant changes in Control
activities
technology, which ensures that deployed systems operate
as intended.
Testing is performed at the unit, system, integration and user Control
activities
acceptance level and is included for all significant systems.
Load and stress testing is performed according to a test plan Control
activities
and established testing standards.
Interfaces with other systems are tested to confirm that data Control
activities
transmissions are complete, accurate and valid.
The conversion of data is tested between its origin and its Control
activities
destination to confirm that it is complete, accurate and valid.
Figure 21-Manage Changes
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing changes addresses how an organization modifies system functionality
to help the
business meet its objectives. Actions performed in this area align with the
control activities and
monitoring components of COSO. Deficiencies in this area could significantly
impact financial
reporting and disclosure of an entity. For instance, changes to the accounts
to which financial
data are allocated require appropriate controls to ensure classification and
reporting integrity.
Requests for changes, system maintenance and supplier Control activities
maintenance are standardized and are subject to formal
change management procedures.
Policies and procedures to manage emergency changes exist Control activities
and are followed.
IT management ensures that users are appropriately involved Control
activities
in the design of applications, selection of packaged software
and the testing thereof, to ensure a reliable environment.
Changes to systems and applications are performed in a Control activities
timely manner and adhere to the organization's overall change
management standards.
Changes to IT systems and applications are performed as Monitoring
designed and meet the expectations of users.
42 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 22-Define and Manage Service Levels
Control Objective COSO Component
Defining and managing service levels address how an organization meets the
functional and
operational expectations of its users and, ultimately, the objectives of the
business. Roles and
responsibilities are defined and an accountability and measurement model is
used to ensure
services are delivered, as required. Actions performed in this area align
with the control activities
and control environment components of COSO. Deficiencies in this area could
significantly
impact financial reporting and disclosure of an entity. For instance, if
systems are poorly
managed or system functionality is not delivered as required, financial
information may not be
processed as intended.
Selection of vendors for outsourced services is performed Control activities
in accordance with the organization's vendor management
policy.
A framework is defined to establish key performance Control environment
indicators to manage service level agreements, both
internally and externally.
3. General Controls-Deliver and Support
This domain deals with the actual delivery of required services, which range
from traditional operations over security and continuity aspects to
training.
To deliver services, the necessary support processes must be set up. This
domain includes the actual processing of data by application systems, often
classified under application controls.
COBIT control processes that should be considered for COSO internal
control models include:
. Define and manage service levels.
. Manage third-party service levels.
. Manage performance and capacity.
. Ensure continuous service.
. Ensure systems security.
. Educate and train users.
. Manage the configuration.
. Manage problems and incidents.
. Manage data.
. Manage facilities.
. Manage operations
Each of these control processes is outlined in figures 22 through 32.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 43
Figure 23-Manage Third-party Service Levels
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing third-party services includes the use of outsourced service
providers to support
financial applications and related systems. Actions performed in this area
align with the control
environment, monitoring, control activities and risk assessment components
of COSO.
Deficiencies in this area could significantly impact financial reporting and
disclosure of an entity.
For instance, insufficient controls over processing accuracy by a
third-party service provider may
result in inaccurate financial results.
IT management ensures that, before selection, potential third Control
environment
parties are properly qualified through an assessment of their
capability to deliver the required service and their financial
viability.
Third-party service contracts address the risks, security Control activities
controls and procedures for information systems and
networks in the contract between the parties.
Business continuity controls consider business risk related to Risk
assessment
third-party service providers in terms of continuity of service,
and escrow contracts exist where appropriate.
Procedures exist and are followed to ensure that a formal Control activities
contract is defined and agreed to for all third-party services
before work is initiated, including definition of internal control
requirements and acceptance of the organization's policies
and procedures.
A designated individual is responsible for regular monitoring Control
activities
and reporting on the achievement of the third-party service
level performance criteria.
A regular review of security, availability and processing Monitoring
integrity is performed for service level agreements and
related contracts with third-party service providers.
Figure 24-Manage Performance and Capacity
Control Objective COSO Component
Performance and capacity support an organization's efforts to maintain
complete and accurate
data. They also allow an organization to trace back transactions to source
information to support
their validity. Activities in this area align with the control activities
and monitoring components of
COSO. The lack of performance and capacity could result in the financial
reporting process not
meeting its reporting deadlines.
IT management monitors the performance and capacity Monitoring
levels of the systems.
IT management has a process in place to respond to Control activities
suboptimal performance and capacity measures in a timely
manner.
Performance and capacity planning is included in system Control activities
design and implementation activities.
44 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 26-Ensure Systems Security
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing systems security includes both physical and logical controls that
prevent unauthorized
access. These controls typically support authorization, authentication,
nonrepudiation, data
classification and security monitoring. Actions performed in this area align
with the control
activities, information and communication, and monitoring components of
COSO. Deficiencies
in this area could significantly impact financial reporting. For instance,
insufficient controls over
transaction authorization may result in unreliable financial reporting and
disclosure controls.
An IT security plan exists that is aligned with overall IT Control
activities
strategic plans.
The IT security plan is updated to reflect changes in the IT Control
activities
environment as well as security requirements of specific
systems.
Figure 25-Ensure Continuous Service
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing continuous service includes the ability to recover from a disaster.
Controls need to be
in place to manage various disaster scenarios, from backup and recovery to
full business
continuity. Actions performed in this area align with the control activities
and monitoring
components of COSO. Deficiencies in this area could significantly impact
financial reporting and
disclosure of an entity. For instance, the inability to recover from a
disaster after year-end could
prevent the organization from producing financial reports that are supported
with source
documentation and details of transactions that make up financial reporting
balances.
IT management, in cooperation with business process owners, Control
activities
has established a business continuity framework that defines
the roles, responsibilities, risk-based approach/methodology
to be adopted, and the approval procedures.
The business continuity plan identifies the critical application Control
activities
programs, third-party services, operating systems, personnel
and supplies, data files, and time frames needed for recovery.
The IT continuity plan is aligned with the overall business Control
activities
continuity plan to ensure consistency.
The IT organization's members responsible for disaster Control activities
continuity plans have been trained regarding the procedures
to be followed in case of an incident or disaster.
IT management has ensured that the continuity plan is Control activities
adequately tested, at least annually, and that any deficiencies
are addressed within a reasonable period of time.
Where new risks are identified, appropriate changes are Control activities
made to the business continuity and disaster recovery plans.
Offsite storage and recovery facilities are periodically Monitoring
assessed, at least annually, for viability, adequacy and
security mechanisms.
A business impact assessment has been performed that Control activities
considers the impact of systems failure on the financial
reporting and disclosure process.
Management has reviewed the impact assessment in Control activities
determining the nature and extent of system recovery
procedures necessary to support the timeliness of financial
reporting and disclosure processes.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 45
Figure 27-Educate and Train Users
Control Objective COSO Component
Educating and training users address how an organization supports its people
to perform their
job responsibilities in a reliable and controlled manner. Actions performed
in this area align with
the control environment component of COSO. Deficiencies in this area could
significantly impact
financial reporting and disclosure of an entity. For instance, personnel
unfamiliar with financial
reporting policies may share confidential financial information with
unauthorized parties, thereby
undermining disclosure controls.
The entity has established procedures for identifying and Control
environment
documenting the training needs of all personnel using
information services in support of the long-range plan.
IT management provides education and ongoing training Control environment
programs that include ethical conduct, system security
practices, confidentiality standards, integrity standards and
security responsibilities of all staff.
Figure 26-Ensure Systems Security (cont.)
Control Objective COSO Component
Procedures exist and are followed to ensure that all users are Control
activities
authenticated to the system to support the validity of
transactions.
Procedures exist and are followed to maintain the Control activities
effectiveness of authentication and access mechanisms
(e.g., regular password changes).
Procedures exist and are followed to ensure timely action Control activities
relating to requesting, establishing, issuing, suspending and
closing user accounts.
A formal approval process exists for granting access Control activities
privileges to systems and data.
A control process exists and is followed to periodically review Control
activities
and confirm access rights.
Where appropriate, controls exist to ensure that transactions Control
activities
cannot be denied by either party and that controls are
implemented to provide nonrepudiation of origin or receipt,
proof of submission and receipt of transactions.
Where network connectivity is used, appropriate controls, Control activities
including firewalls, intrusion detection and vulnerability
assessments, exist and are used to prevent unauthorized
access.
The IT security plan, and its related activities and priorities, Information
and
reflects results of recent security assessments. communication
The IT security administrator monitors and logs security Monitoring
activity, and identified security violations are reported to
senior management.
46 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 29-Manage Problems and Incidents
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing problems and incidents addresses how an organization identifies,
documents and
responds to events that fall outside of normal operations. Actions performed
in this area align
with the control activities and information and communication components of
COSO.
Deficiencies in this area could significantly impact financial reporting and
disclosure of an
entity. For instance, significant events such as breach of corporate
security or unauthorized
access to confidential information may result in a material weakness in
disclosure controls.
IT management has defined and implemented a problem Control activities
management system to ensure that all operational events
that are not part of the standard operation (incidents,
problems and errors) are recorded, analyzed and resolved in
a timely manner.
Emergency program changes are approved, tested, Control activities
documented and monitored.
Problem escalation procedures are defined and implemented Control activities
to ensure that problems are resolved in a timely manner.
The problem management system provides for adequate Information and
audit trail facilities, which allow tracing from incident to communication
underlying cause.
A security incident response process exists to support timely Control
activities
response and investigation of unauthorized activities.
Figure 28-Manage the Configuration
Control Objective COSO Component
Configuration management ensures that security, availability and processing
integrity controls
are set up in the system and maintained through its life cycle. Activities
in this area align with
the control activities and monitoring components of COSO. Insufficient
configuration controls
can lead to security and availability exposures that may permit unauthorized
access to systems
and data. This would negatively impact an organization's ability to meet the
internal control
provisions of Section 404.
Only authorized software is permitted for use by employees Control
activities
using company IT assets.
System infrastructure, including firewalls, routers, switches, Control
activities
network operating systems, servers and other related devices,
is properly configured to prevent unauthorized access.
Application software and data storage systems are properly Control
activities
configured to provision access based on the individual's
demonstrated need to view, add, change or delete data.
IT management has established procedures across the Control activities
organization to protect information systems and technology
from computer viruses.
Periodic testing and assessment is performed to confirm that Monitoring
software and network infrastructure is appropriately
configured.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 47
Figure 30-Manage Data
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing data includes the controls and procedures used to support
information integrity,
including its completeness, accuracy, authorization and validity. Controls
are designed to
support initiating, recording, processing and reporting financial
information. These controls
align with the control activities and information and communication
components of COSO.
Deficiencies in this area could significantly impact financial reporting and
disclosure of an entity.
For instance, without appropriate authorization controls over the initiation
of transactions,
resulting financial information may not be reliable.
Data processing controls, including processing totals, are Control
activities
used to support the completeness and accuracy of
transaction processing, authorization and validity.
Control procedures exist for maintaining the accuracy and Control activities
validity of data inputs, including edit checks, validity checks
and bound checks.
Procedures exist and are followed to manage errors in a Control activities
consistent and authorized manner.
Policies and procedures exist for the handling, distribution Control
activities
and retention of data and reporting output.
Management protects sensitive information, both logically Control activities
and physically, in storage and during transmission against
unauthorized access or modification.
Procedures are defined and implemented to prevent access Control activities
to sensitive information stored on offline physical media, e.g.,
laptop computers and offsite storage.
Retention periods and storage terms are defined for Control activities
documents, data, programs, reports and messages (incoming
and outgoing), as well as the data (keys, certificates) used for
their encryption and authentication.
Procedures exist to ensure that the contents of a media Control activities
library containing sensitive data are inventoried and that
discrepancies from physical inventory are remedied in a
timely manner.
Management has implemented a strategy for cyclical Control activities
backup of data and programs.
Procedures exist and are followed to periodically test the Control
activities
effectiveness of the restoration process and the quality of
backup media.
Policies and procedures exist and are followed to ensure that Control
activities
data retention practices meet business, legal and regulatory
requirements.
Policies and procedures exist and are followed to ensure that Control
activities
personally identifiable information is appropriately
safeguarded and meets regulatory requirements.
Changes to data structures are authorized, made in Control activities
accordance with design specifications and are implemented
in a timely manner.
Changes to data structures are assessed for their impact on Control
activities
financial reporting processes.
Procedures are in place to ensure that source documents are Information and
retained or are reproducible by the organization for an communication
adequate amount of time to facilitate retrieval or
reconstruction of data, and to satisfy legal requirements.
48 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 32-Manage Operations
Control Objective COSO Component
Managing operations addresses how an organization maintains reliable
application systems in
support of the business to initiate, record, process and report financial
information. Actions
performed in this area align with the control activities and information and
communication
components of COSO. Deficiencies in this area could significantly impact an
entity's financial
reporting. For instance, lapses in the continuity of application systems may
prevent an
organization from recording financial transactions and, thereby, undermine
its integrity.
Management has established and documented standard Control activities
procedures for IT operations, including managing, monitoring
and responding to security, availability and processing
integrity events.
Controls exist to maintain processing continuity during Control activities
operator shift changes by providing for the formal handover
of activity, status updates and reports on current operations.
IT management has established appropriate metrics to Control activities
effectively manage the day-to-day activities of the IT
department.
System event data are sufficiently retained to provide Information and
chronological information and logs to enable the communication
reconstruction, review and examination of the time sequences
of processing.
Figure 31-Manage Facilities
Control Objective COSO Component
Physical security and related controls help IT organizations maintain the
security and availability
of their systems. Activities performed in this area align with the control
activities component of
COSO. Without controls to protect physical access to systems and
infrastructure, there is an
increased risk of manipulation and destruction of data, which would
adversely impact an
organization's ability to accurately report its financial results.
Access to facilities is restricted to authorized personnel and Control
activities
requires appropriate identification and authentication.
Physical facilities are equipped with adequate environmental Control
activities
controls to maintain systems and data, including fire
suppression, uninterrupted power service (UPS) power
backup, air conditioning and elevated floors.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 49
4. General Controls-Monitor and Evaluate
This domain addresses management's oversight of the organization's control
process and independent assurance provided by internal and external audit or
obtained from alternative sources. All IT processes should be regularly
assessed over time for their quality and compliance with control
requirements.
Most recently, the COSO framework has been identified as meeting the
framework requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Under
these rules, management must disclose any material weakness and will be
unable to conclude that the company's internal control over financial
reporting is effective if there is one or more material weakness in such
control. Furthermore, the framework on which management's evaluation is
based will have to be a suitable, recognized control framework that is
established by a body or group that has followed due-process procedures,
including the broad distribution of the framework for public comment.
COBIT control processes that should be considered for COSO internal
control models include:
. Monitor the processes.
. Assess internal control adequacy.
. Obtain independent assurance.
Each of these control processes is outlined in figures 33 through 35.
Figure 33-Monitor the Processes
Control Objective COSO Component
The collection of information aligns with the information and communication
and monitoring
components of COSO. If insufficient information is collected, it could
impact the effectiveness of
internal control assessment.
Performance indicators (e.g., benchmarks) from both internal Information and
and external sources are defined, and data are collected and communication
reported regarding achievement of these benchmarks.
IT management monitors its delivery of services to identify Monitoring
shortfalls and responds with actionable plans to improve.
50 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 35-Obtain Independent Assurance
Control Objective COSO Component
Independent assurance over critical IT services and activities supports
management's ability to
deliver reliable systems. Activities in this area align with the monitoring
component of COSO.
Without independent assurance, IT systems may be at risk of unauthorized
access or failure.
Where appropriate, IT management should assess the frequency, priority and
focus of
independent assurance and promptly engage in a method to prevent unexpected
loss of
financial and operational systems.
IT management obtains independent reviews prior to Monitoring
implementing significant IT systems that are directly linked to
the organization's financial reporting environment.
IT management obtains independent internal control reviews Monitoring
of third-party service providers (e.g., by obtaining and
reviewing copies of SAS70, SysTrust or other independent
audit reports).
Figure 34-Assess Internal Control Adequacy
Control Objective COSO Component
The monitoring of internal control relates to the monitoring component of
COSO. It is a process
that assesses the quality of the system's performance over time. This can be
accomplished
through regular management and supervisory activities. The Sarbanes-Oxley
attestation process
could also be viewed as a separate evaluation of internal control. A
deficiency in this area could
significantly impact financial reporting and disclosure controls.
IT management monitors the effectiveness of internal controls Monitoring
in the normal course of operations through management and
supervisory activities, comparisons and benchmarks.
Serious deviations in the operation of internal control, Monitoring
including major security, availability and processing integrity
events, are reported to senior management.
Internal control assessments are performed periodically, using Monitoring
self-assessment or independent audit, to examine whether
internal controls are operating satisfactorily.
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 51
5. Application Controls-Business Cycles
Figures 36-41 refer to controls that extend into applications and business
processes that contribute to the completeness, accuracy, validity and
authorization controls. These application controls are provided as examples
of controls that are commonly enabled by financial and related IT systems.
These objectives should not be considered an exhaustive list, but rather an
example of controls that are commonly enabled by application systems.
Organizations will have to consider what additional control objectives are
required based on their particular industry and operating environment.
Figure 36-Application Control Objectives for the Sales Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Application controls apply to the business processes they support. They are
controls designed
within the application to prevent or detect unauthorized transactions. When
combined with
manual controls, as necessary, application controls ensure completeness,
accuracy,
authorization and validity of processing transactions.
For the most part, objectives presented in this section can be supported
with automated
application controls. They are most effective in integrated ERP
environments, such as SAP,
PeopleSoft, Oracle, JD Edwards and others. For nonintegrated environments,
these control
objectives may require a combination of manual and automated procedures.
Orders are processed only within approved customer Control activities
credit limits.
Orders are approved by management as to prices and terms Control activities
of sale.
Orders and cancellations of orders are input accurately. Control activities
Order entry data are transferred completely and accurately to Control
activities
the shipping and invoicing activities.
All orders received from customers are input and processed. Control
activities
Only valid orders are input and processed. Control activities
Invoices are generated using authorized terms and prices. Control activities
Invoices are accurately calculated and recorded. Control activities
Credit notes and adjustments to accounts receivable are Control activities
accurately calculated and recorded.
All goods shipped are invoiced. Control activities
Credit notes for all goods returned and adjustments to Control activities
accounts receivable are issued in accordance with
organization policy.
Invoices relate to valid shipments. Control activities
All credit notes relate to a return of goods or other valid Control
activities
adjustments.
All invoices issued are recorded. Control activities
All credit notes issued are recorded. Control activities
Invoices are recorded in the appropriate period. Control activities
Credit notes issued are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
Cash receipts are recorded in the period in which they Control activities
are received.
Cash receipts data are entered for processing accurately. Control activities
All cash receipts data are entered for processing. Control activities
52 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 36-Application Control Objectives for the Sales Cycle (cont.)
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Cash receipts data are valid and are entered for processing Control
activities
only once.
Cash discounts are accurately calculated and recorded. Control activities
Timely collection of accounts receivable is monitored. Control activities
The customer master file is maintained. Control activities
Only valid changes are made to the customer master file. Control activities
All valid changes to the customer master file are input Control activities
and processed.
Changes to the customer master file are accurate. Control activities
Changes to the customer master file are processed in a Control activities
timely manner.
Customer master file data remain up-to-date. Control activities
Figure 37-Application Control Objectives for the Purchasing Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Purchase orders are placed only for approved requisitions. Control
activities
Purchase orders are accurately entered. Control activities
All purchase orders issued are input and processed. Control activities
Amounts posted to accounts payable represent goods received. Control
activities
Amounts posted to accounts payable represent Control activities
services received.
Accounts payable amounts are accurately calculated and Control activities
recorded.
All amounts for goods received are input and processed to Control activities
accounts payable.
All amounts for services received are input and processed to Control
activities
accounts payable.
Amounts for goods or services received are recorded in the Control
activities
appropriate period.
Accounts payable are adjusted only for valid reasons. Control activities
Credit notes and other adjustments are accurately calculated Control
activities
and recorded.
All valid credit notes and other adjustments related to Control activities
accounts payable are input and processed.
Credit notes and other adjustments are recorded in the Control activities
appropriate period.
Disbursements are only made for goods and services received. Control
activities
Disbursements are distributed to the appropriate suppliers. Control
activities
Disbursements are accurately calculated and recorded. Control activities
All disbursements are recorded. Control activities
Disbursements are recorded in the period in which they Control activities
are issued.
Only valid changes are made to the supplier master file. Control activities
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 53
Figure 37-Application Control Objectives for the Purchasing Cycle (cont.)
Application Control Objective COSO Component
All valid changes to the supplier master file are input Control activities
and processed.
Changes to the supplier master file are accurate. Control activities
Changes to the supplier master file are processed in a Control activities
timely manner.
Supplier master file data remain up-to-date. Control activities
Figure 38-Application Control Objectives for the Monetary Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Borrowings are accurately recorded as to amounts and terms. Control
activities
All borrowings are recorded. Control activities
Borrowings are recorded in the appropriate period. Control activities
All interest is accurately calculated and recorded in the Control activities
appropriate period.
Recorded loan repayments are valid. Control activities
Loan repayments are accurately recorded. Control activities
All loan repayments are recorded. Control activities
Loan repayments are recorded in the appropriate period. Control activities
Investment purchases, sales and maturities are Control activities
accurately recorded.
All investment transactions are recorded. Control activities
Investment transactions are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
All investment income is accurately calculated and recorded Control
activities
in the appropriate period.
Derivative transactions are accurately recorded. Control activities
Derivative transactions are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
Figure 39-Application Control Objectives for the Inventory Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
All adjustments to inventory prices or quantities are recorded. Control
activities
Adjustments to inventory prices or quantities are recorded Control
activities
promptly and in the appropriate period.
Adjustments to inventory prices or quantities are Control activities
accurately recorded.
All credits to inventory related to billed sales are approved by Control
activities
management and such approval is documented.
Raw materials are received and accepted only if they have Control activities
valid purchase orders.
Raw materials received are accurately recorded. Control activities
All raw materials received are recorded. Control activities
Receipts of raw materials are recorded promptly and in the Control
activities
appropriate period.
54 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 39-Application Control Objectives for the Inventory Cycle (cont.)
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Defective raw materials are promptly returned to suppliers. Control
activities
All transfers of raw materials to production are accurately Control
activities
recorded and in the appropriate period.
All recorded production costs are consistent with actual direct Control
activities
and indirect expenses associated with production.
All direct and indirect expenses associated with production Control
activities
are recorded as production costs.
All direct and indirect expenses associated with production Control
activities
are recorded accurately and in the appropriate period.
All transfers of completed units of production to finished Control
activities
goods inventory are recorded completely and accurately in
the appropriate period.
Finished goods returned by customers are recorded Control activities
completely and accurately in the appropriate period.
Finished goods received from production are recorded Control activities
completely and accurately in the appropriate period.
Goods received from production or returned by customers are Control
activities
accepted only in accordance with the organization's policies.
All shipments are recorded. Control activities
Shipments are accurately recorded. Control activities
Shipments are recorded promptly and in the appropriate period. Control
activities
Inventory is relieved only when goods are shipped with Control activities
approved customer orders.
Costs of shipped inventory are transferred from inventory to Control
activities
cost of sales.
Costs of shipped inventory are accurately recorded. Control activities
Amounts posted to cost of sales represent those associated Control
activities
with shipped inventory.
Costs of shipped inventory are transferred from inventory to Control
activities
cost of sales promptly and in the appropriate period.
Only valid changes are made to the inventory management Control activities
master file.
All valid changes to the inventory management master file are Control
activities
input and processed.
Changes to the inventory management master file are accurate. Control
activities
Changes to the inventory management master file are Control activities
promptly processed.
Inventory management master file data remain up-to-date. Control activities
Appendix-IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley 55
Figure 40-Application Control Objectives for the Asset Management Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Fixed asset acquisitions are accurately recorded. Control activities
Fixed asset acquisitions are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
All fixed asset acquisitions are recorded. Control activities
Depreciation charges are accurately calculated and recorded. Control
activities
All depreciation charges are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
All fixed asset disposals are recorded. Control activities
Fixed asset disposals are accurately calculated and recorded. Control
activities
Fixed asset disposals are recorded in the appropriate period. Control
activities
Records of fixed asset maintenance activity are accurately Control
activities
maintained.
Fixed asset maintenance activities records are updated in a Control
activities
timely manner.
Only valid changes are made to the fixed asset register and/or Control
activities
master file.
All valid changes to the fixed asset register and/or master file Control
activities
are input and processed.
Changes to the fixed asset register and/or master file are Control
activities
accurate.
Changes to the fixed asset register and/or master file are Control
activities
promptly processed.
Fixed asset register and/or master file data remain up-to-date. Control
activities
Figure 41-Application Control Objectives for the Human Resources Cycle
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Additions to the payroll master files represent valid employees. Control
activities
All new employees are added to the payroll master files. Control activities
Terminated employees are removed from the payroll Control activities
master files.
Employees are terminated only within statutory and Control activities
union requirements.
Deletions from the payroll master files represent Control activities
valid terminations.
Time and attendance data records reflect actual time worked Control
activities
and are authorized.
All time worked is input. Control activities
Time worked is accurately input and processed. Control activities
Time worked is processed in a timely manner. Control activities
Payroll is recorded in the appropriate period. Control activities
Payroll (including compensation and withholdings) is Control activities
accurately calculated and recorded.
Payroll disbursements and recorded payroll expenses relate Control
activities
to actual time worked.
56 IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Figure 41-Application Control Objectives for the
Human Resources Cycle (cont.)
Application Control Objective COSO Component
Payroll is disbursed to appropriate employees. Control activities
Only valid changes are made to the payroll master files. Control activities
All valid changes to the payroll master files are input and Control
activities
processed.
Changes to the payroll master files are accurate. Control activities
Changes to the payroll master files are processed in a timely Control
activities
manner.
Payroll master file data remain up-to-date. Control activities
Only valid changes are made to the payroll withholding tables. Control
activities
All valid changes to the payroll withholding tables are input Control
activities
and processed.
Changes to the payroll withholding tables are accurate. Control activities
Changes to the payroll withholding tables are Control activities
promptly processed.
Payroll withholding table data remain up-to-date. Control activities
Statutory withholding tables are consistent with statutory Control
activities
requirements.
References 57
References
COBIT 3rd EditionC, IT Governance Institute, Rolling Meadows, Illinois,
USA, July 2000
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO), www.coso.org
Common Criteria and Methodology for Information Technology Security
Evaluation, CSE (Canada), SCSSI (France), BSII (Germany), NLNCSA
(Netherlands), CESG (United Kingdom), NIST (USA) and NSA (USA),
1999
Exposure Draft Enterprise Risk Management Framework, Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), USA,
July 2003
"Final Rule: Management's Reports on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting and Certification of Disclosure in Exchange Act Periodic
Reports," Release Nos. 33-8238; 34-47986; IC-26068; File Nos.
S7-40-02; S7-06-03, US Securities and Exchange Commission, USA,
June 2003, www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8238.htm
Internal Control-Integrated Framework, Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), AICPA, New York,
USA, 1992
ISO IEC 17799, Code of Practice for Information Security Management,
International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), Switzerland, 2000
IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL), British Office of Government Commerce
(OCG), Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (CCTA),
London, UK, 1989
Moving Forward-A Guide to Improving Corporate Governance Through
Effective Internal Control, Deloitte & Touche LLP, 2003
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Proposed Auditing Standard:
"An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Performed in
Conjunction with an Audit of Financial Statements," Release No.
2003-17, Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 008, USA, 7 October 2003
"Taking Control, A Guide to Compliance with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002," Deloitte & Touche LLP, 2003
"The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Strategies for Meeting New Internal
Control Reporting Challenges," PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2003
"The Standard of Good Practice for Information Security," Information
Security Forum, 2003
"Understanding the Independent Auditor's Role in Building Trust,"
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2003