TITLE 1.ADMINISTRATION

Part 10. DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES

Chapter 201. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES TECHNOLOGIES

1 TAC §201.5

The Department of Information Resources adopts an amendment to §201.5, concerning agency planning with no changes to the proposed text as published in the October 1, 1999 issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 8397). The amendment requires state agency information resources managers or agency heads to approve the submission of biennial operating plans (BOPs) to the department, and deletes the requirement that such BOPs must be "signed."

No comments were received in response to the proposed rule.

The amendment is adopted under Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which authorizes the department to adopt rules as necessary to carry out its responsibility under the Information Resources Management Act.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 14, 2000.

TRD-200001932

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 3, 2000

Proposal publication date: October 1, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.11

The Department of Information Resources adopts the amendment to §201.11, concerning procedures for adoption of information resources standards and policies, without changes to the version published in the November 5, 1999, issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 9731).

The amendment eliminates outdated requirements that rule comments must be submitted on paper.

The Department received no comments on the proposal.

The amendment is proposed under Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which authorizes the department to adopt rules as necessary to carry out its responsibility under the Information Resources Management Act.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 15, 2000.

TRD-200001948

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 4, 2000

Proposal publication date: November 5, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.12

The Department of Information Resources adopts §201.12 concerning state agency web sites, with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 12, 1999 issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 9909). The effect of the new rule is to require state agencies to implement certain standards pertaining to the accessibility of state web sites, common indexing of web pages, and the protection of citizen's privacy.

The department received nineteen (19) written comments regarding the proposed rule during the formal comment period. The department held a special meeting with agencies to discuss the proposed rule, and participated in other meetings with agencies to address issues and propose changes. A significant number of the comments addressed the implementation date requirements in paragraphs (b)(1), (2) and (3), and the impact on agencies' staff and resources. The department generally agrees with the concerns expressed, and accordingly has changed the effective date of the rule and narrowed its scope so that the requirements were limited to a subset of all state agency web pages. The department also added a provision that for "key public entry points," only new or changed pages would be subject to the requirements.

Several comments opposed the proposed load time simulation goal and proposed requirement for a menu options page. The department agrees, and has deleted these requirements from the adopted rule.

Several comments expressed concern that the proposed requirement for a text alternative to graphic images would effectively limit or prevent the use of image maps. The department agrees, and has revised the adopted rule to provide an exception for geographic information systems, requiring a text alternative only if the image map does not comply with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. In addition, several commenters expressed concern over the proposed accessibility requirements for document image files. The department agrees with the comments in some respects, and has revised the rule to provide for three exceptions from this requirement in addition to the exception for geographic information systems. The department notes that other document types that may be problematic under the rule should be addressed in the agency's Information Resources Strategic Plan, which must identify the agency's plan for receiving forms or payments electronically.

Several comments expressed the view that the requirement to update a text version of a frames based page is unnecessary. The department agrees and has removed the requirement from the rule.

Several comments opposed the requirements for a PICS rating as unnecessary and burdensome. The department agrees, and has removed the requirement from the rule as adopted.

One comment questioned the requirement for a link to a privacy policy. The department disagrees that a link to a privacy policy is unnecessary; however, specific requirements that appeared in the definitions section have been moved into the rule text, and the department will publish a detailed guideline to assist agencies in implementing privacy policies.

Several comments indicated that the proposed pixel width and color setting requirements were likely to become quickly outdated. The department agrees and has removed these requirements from the adopted rule.

Several comments addressed the requirement for incorporating TRAIL metadata on the top-level pages of all state web sites. The department agrees in part, and has revised the rule to require TRAIL metadata only on the agencies' home pages.

Several comments addressed the requirements for common links, and noted that the rule as proposed would have required links in some instances to the same page being viewed by the site visitor. The department agrees and has restructured the common links section to address this concern.

Three agencies raised concerns about the proposed requirement to encrypt certain information transmitted via the Internet to a state agency. The department agrees in part, since virtually any unencrypted information transmitted over the Internet is subject to interception. The department has therefore provided more specific guidance as to information that must be encrypted while in transit.

One commenter opposed adoption of the rule on the assumption that it would require a common look and feel for all state web sites. The department disagrees with this comment because the rule is not intended to impose a common look and feel on all state web sites.

To facilitate suggested changes and improve clarity of the rule, the department deleted certain definitions as no longer necessary, and revised or added others for clarification. New definitions were added for the following terms: historical document; home page; key public entry point; statewide search; and transaction payment information. Definitions were substantially revised for the following terms: agency contact information; document image files; generally accessible Internet site; privacy policy; and state web site.

Names of groups or associations making comments for and against the rule: For: Governor's Office; Lamar University; Tarleton State University; Teacher Retirement System; Texas Department of Health; Texas A&M University, Agriculture Extension Service; Texas A&M University at Galveston; Texas A&M University, Information Resources; Texas Department of Insurance; Texas Department of Transportation; Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission; Texas State Library and Archives Commission; Texas Tech University; University of North Texas; University of Texas at Austin.

Against: Texas A&M University; University of Texas, MD Anderson.

The rule is adopted in accordance with Texas Government Code §2054.051(b), which requires the department to publish information resources technologies standards, and Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which provides the department may adopt rules as necessary to implement its responsibilities.

§201.12.State Web Sites.

(a)

Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(1)

Agency contact information--a list of key personnel and/or position or program contacts, including public contact telephone numbers, general e-mail address, and other information deemed necessary by the agency for facilitating public access.

(2)

alt tag--Alternative tag; an HTML code option associated with an image file on a Web page that is used to give a text description of the image. This information will assist a person using a text browser to understand the page content and navigation directions.

(3)

Document image files--Files published in vendor-specific file formats (e.g., portable document format (pdf) files) that create an image of a document.

(4)

Frames--A coding technique used to present information on a Web page.

(5)

Generally accessible Internet site--A state Web site that:

(A)

complies with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines for persons with visual disabilities promulgated by the W3C;

(B)

contains no priority 1 errors; and

(C)

complies with HTML standards published by the W3C.

(6)

Historical document--either a document dated prior to 1991 for which the agency does not have the original document in electronic format, or a document dated prior to 1997 that contains a handwritten signature.

(7)

Home page--The initial page or entry point to a state Web site.

(8)

HTML--HyperText Markup Language.

(9)

IETF--the Internet Engineering Task Force.

(10)

Internet--the network of interconnected networks employing the TCP/IP standards as published by the IETF.

(11)

Key public entry point--A Web page that a state agency has specifically designed for members of the general public to access official information (e.g., the governing or authoritative documents) from the agency.

(12)

Meta tag--An HTML code option for identifying information about a Web page that facilitates locating specific information on Web pages by search engines.

(13)

P3P--Platform for Privacy Preferences; a technical specification published by the W3C that enables Web sites to identify their privacy practices in a manner that can be understood by commercially-available Web browsers.

(14)

Priority 1 error--An HTML coding error on a Web page that will cause persons with visual disabilities to be unable to access information on the page.

(15)

Priority 2 error--An HTML coding error on a Web page that may make it very difficult for persons with visual disabilities to access information on the page.

(16)

Privacy Policy--a statement about what information is collected by a Web site, how the information will be used, and under what conditions the information may be shared or released to another party. Privacy Policy guidelines are available at http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub11-privacy-policy.htm

(17)

Server log software and cookies--Particular methods employed for the purpose of tracking visitors to Web sites. The information collected for analysis can include where the request came from, time, pages visited, and identifiable information about the visitor.

(18)

State Web site--a state agency-owned, -operated, or -funded Web site connected to the Internet, including a state agency's home page and any key public entry points.

(19)

SSN--Social Security Number.

(20)

SSL--Secure Sockets Layer; The Internet security standard for point-to-point, encrypted connections between Web servers and client browsers.

(21)

Statewide Search--a link to the TRAIL Web site.

(22)

TCP/IP--Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol; a suite of protocols developed by the IETF and published as Request for Comments (RFCs).

(23)

Texas home page--http://www.state.tx.us/.

(24)

TRAIL--Texas Records and Information Locator or its successor. Additional information is available at http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/

(25)

Transaction payment information--bank account and routing number, credit, debit, or other forms of card-based payment systems.

(26)

Transaction Risk Assessment--An evaluation of the security and privacy required for an interactive Web session providing public access to government information and services. Additional information and guidelines are available at http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub11.htm

(27)

W3C--World Wide Web Consortium.

(b)

All state agencies will adhere to the following:

(1)

As of July 1, 2000, the home page of all state Web sites, and any new or changed key public entry points, shall meet the definition of a generally accessible Internet site and the following guidelines:

(A)

Every image on a state Web site shall use an alt tag with sufficient information describing the image, or a null for simple images (e.g., a dot or bullet), so that a person unable to see the image can understand the content and meaning for its use. Except for geographic information systems, if image maps are used that do not comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines for persons with visual impairments, a text alternative shall be provided.

(B)

A state agency implementing frames on a state Web site shall:

(i)

Not have any page that contains priority 1 or 2 accessibility errors.

(ii)

Drop the frame(s) when indexing or pointing to other non-agency Web sites.

(C)

A state agency posting document image files to a state Web site, for which the associated reader does not fully support accessibility, shall also make available an accessible version of the same information. The document image version will include a link to obtain a free copy of the associated reader, and accessibility instructions. Excluded from this provision are:

(i)

Historical documents.

(ii)

Documents for which the agency is not the original author.

(iii)

Document image files of forms that are not currently designed for electronic use, but for which the use depends on a structured layout. These forms shall be identified in the section of the agency's Information Resources Strategic Plan that describes the agency's plans for receiving forms or payments electronically.

(D)

A state agency shall publish a privacy policy for its Web site. The privacy policy shall address the following:

(i)

Use of server logs and/or cookies.

(ii)

Information collected by other technologies and processes.

(iii)

Information collected via e-mail and Web-based forms. A Web-based form shall post a link to the policy. The form may include a provision for the individual to opt-out of sharing the information with another party, or a warning that the information may be a public record and therefore subject to the Texas Public Information Act.

(E)

Web pages designed for children must comply with all applicable federal and state laws intended to protect minors.

(F)

State agencies shall plan on implementing P3P on the home page and key public entry points to a state agency Web site.

(G)

All Web pages, whether static or dynamic, must be accessible using generally available browser software, and be designed with consideration for the types of Internet connections available to the citizens of Texas. Standards Review and Recommendation Publication 11 (SRRPUB11) contains additional information that may assist agencies in the design of their Web sites. The guideline is available at http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub11.htm

(2)

As of July 1, 2000, all new or changed HTML documents on a state agency Web site that meet the criteria of a state publication as defined by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission shall include the following meta tags:

(A)

Title--page topic or subject;

(B)

Description--brief description of the subjects covered;

(C)

Keywords--specific to the page subject, and should not exceed 25 words; and

(D)

Author--State of Texas and state agency name.

(3)

As of July 1, 2000, the home page of a state Web site shall incorporate TRAIL metadata and shall:

(A)

Provide links to the following State of Texas resources:

(i)

Texas home page; and

(ii)

Statewide Search.

(B)

Provide links to the following agency information:

(i)

Privacy policy;

(ii)

Agency contact information; and

(iii)

Description of the agency's open records policy/procedures.

(4)

As of July 1, 2000, all key public entry points shall provide links to the following:

(A)

Agency contact information; and

(B)

Agency home page.

(5)

Prior to providing access to information or services on a state Web site that require user identification, each state agency shall conduct a transaction risk assessment, and implement appropriate security and privacy safeguards. At a minimum, state Web sites that require a citizen to enter the following information shall use an SSL session or equivalent technology to encrypt the data:

(A)

Both the individual's name and other personal information, such as an SSN;

(B)

Transaction payment information; or

(C)

An individual's identification code and password. Further guidance concerning server certificates and encryption key length are contained in SRRPUB11 at http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub11.htm

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 14, 2000.

TRD-200001931

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 3, 2000

Proposal publication date: November 12, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.13

The Department of Information Resources adopts amendments to §201.13(b)(9)(F), concerning information security breaches, with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 12, 1999 issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 9911). The effect of the amendment is to require state agencies to report information security breaches to the department. Specifically, the rule as adopted requires state agencies to report information security breaches on a monthly basis in summary form, rather than within 2 hours after learning of the breach; specifies in the rule text the type of information to be reported; and requires state agencies as well as the department to ensure that information thus reported would not constitute an additional security risk. The reporting provisions of this rule amendment will automatically expire on August 31, 2001.

The department received eight (8) written comments regarding the proposed amendments during the formal comment period. The Department subsequently held a special meeting with agencies to discuss the proposed rule, and participated in other meetings with agencies to address issues and propose changes.

The majority of comments received focused on the time when reports were due and the content of such reports. The department agrees that the 2-hour initial reporting requirement and the 10-day detailed reporting requirement may have been unnecessarily burdensome, and has therefore revised the rule accordingly.

Several commenters suggested that reporting "attempts" or "failed attempts" to gain unauthorized access to information was both unwarranted and unproductive. The department agrees with this comment and has eliminated such activity from the description of activities to be reported.

A number of commenters stated that efforts should concentrate on prevention of security breaches and that agencies should utilize established resources such as CERT, the SANS Institute, and the FBI. The department agrees with these comments, but disagrees that use of such resources or precautionary measures is inconsistent with the rule as adopted. The department views the rule as complementary to, and not a replacement for, preventive measures and the use of established resources.

One commenter noted a concern that reporting of detailed information regarding possible criminal activity could compromise law enforcement activities. The department agrees with this comment, and the adopted rule requires only summary information to be reported.

One commenter stated that the phrases "the state agency reasonably believes such violations may involve criminal activity" and "substantial likelihood" of propagation to other systems are too vague, and requested more guidance. The department disagrees with this comment because some discretion must be left to state agencies in determining the activities to be reported. The same commenter suggested moving the category of violations that could be propagated to other systems to a list of reportable activities. The department disagrees with this comment because the intent of this language is to apply to all reportable activity and thereby reduce the overall number of potential violations that must be reported.

One commenter indicated that the rule as proposed could be read more broadly than intended and thus require reporting of any changes to agency software configurations. The department agrees that the reporting of such changes, so long as they are made with the agency's effective consent and do not constitute criminal violations, is not required. The adopted rule has been amended in an attempt to make this clearer.

Names of groups or associations making comments for and against the rule: For: Texas Department of Transportation; Texas Health Care Information Council; Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission; University of Texas at Austin; University of Texas, Southwestern; University of Texas, San Antonio. Against: Department of Public Safety; Texas A&M University at Galveston; University of Houston.

The amendments are adopted pursuant to the provisions of Texas Government Code §2054.051(b), which permits the department to publish standards relating to information resources technologies, and Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which permits the department to adopt rules as necessary to implement its responsibilities.

§201.13.Information Resource Standards.

(a)

Geographic information systems standards.

(1)

Applicability.

(A)

All digital spatial data users and developers of new geographic information systems in state agencies and universities must comply with the technical standards specified in the Standards and Guidelines for Geographic Information Systems in the State of Texas.

(B)

An institution of higher education, as defined by the Education Code, §61.003, will be exempted from these standards when geographic information systems are acquired solely for instructional purposes.

(C)

Currently operating systems which are structurally unable to comply are not required to retrofit to these standards.

(2)

Waivers.

(A)

A waiver shall be granted to any state agency due to any order of a court of competent jurisdiction when the ordered period of compliance is less than 90 days; or any act of exemption by the Texas Legislature.

(B)

Letter applications for waivers will be made in writing to the department by the agency information resources manager (IRM). Within 10 days after initial receipt of the waiver request, the department will notify the submitting state agency of all supporting information the department requires to conduct its review. The date of receipt of the waiver application is either the initial date of arrival of the request, or the date that any supporting or other information if requested, is received. Review shall commence on the date of receipt. The department will conduct its review within 30 days after the date of its receipt, evaluate the applications, and grant or deny these waiver requests based on an analysis of the particular circumstances or environment. Consultation with the Geographic Information Systems Standards Committee will be included in the waiver process on an as needed basis, and the committee will review all waivers at their semiannual meetings.

(C)

The acquisition of software which cannot support these standards will not be grounds for a waiver.

(3)

Adoption by reference. The Standards and Guidelines for Geographic Information Systems in the State of Texas, herein adopted by reference, may be obtained from the Department of Information Resources, P.O. Box 13564, Austin, Texas 78711.

(4)

Submittal procedures. The agency Information Resource Manager (IRM) will certify that geographic information systems development in the agency adheres to the "Standards and Guidelines for Geographic Information Systems in the State of Texas."

(5)

Review procedures.

(A)

The certification will be reviewed by the department and the Geographic Information Systems Standards Committee to determine compliance and agency comprehension of the standards. Review procedures and any subsequent on-site assessment will be consistent with §7 of the Standards and Guidelines for Geographic Information Systems in the State of Texas.

(B)

The agencies may also request a peer review be performed at any time during the year. Upon receiving such a request, the department will schedule a review as soon as possible.

(b)

Information Security Standards.

(1)

Applicability. The following rule constitutes required minimum security standards for the protection of information resources for agencies of the State of Texas. All agencies are required to have an information resources security program consistent with these standards. Copies of this standard may be obtained from the Department of Information Resources, P.O. Box 13564, Austin, Texas 78711, or from the Department's Internet web page at http://www.dir.state.tx.us.

(2)

Definitions. The following words and terms, when used with this subsection, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(A)

Access--To approach, view, instruct, communicate with, store data in, retrieve data from, or otherwise make use of information resources.

(B)

Confidential Information--Information that is excepted from disclosure requirements under the provisions of the Texas Public Information Act or other applicable state or federal law.

(C)

Control--A protective action, device, policy, procedure, technique, or other measure that reduces exposure.

(D)

Custodian of an Information Resource--A person responsible for implementing owner-defined controls and access to an information resource.

(E)

Information Security Function--The elements, structure, objectives, and resources that establish an agency-level information resources security program.

(F)

Mission Critical Information--Information that is defined by the agency to be essential to the agency's function(s).

(G)

Owner of an Information Resource--A person responsible:

(i)

for a business function; and

(ii)

for determining controls and access to information resources supporting that business function.

(H)

Security Risk Analysis--The process of identifying and documenting vulnerabilities and applicable threats to information resources.

(I)

Security Risk Assessment--The process of evaluating the results of the risk analysis by projecting losses, assigning levels of risk, and recommending appropriate measures to protect information resources.

(J)

Security Risk Management--Decisions to accept exposures or to reduce vulnerabilities by either mitigating risks or applying cost effective controls.

(K)

Security Incident or Breach--An event which results in unauthorized access, loss, disclosure, modification, or destruction of information resources whether accidental or deliberate.

(L)

User of an Information Resource--An individual or automated application authorized to access an information resource in accordance with the owner-defined controls and access rules.

(3)

Policy. It is the policy of the State of Texas that:

(A)

Information resources residing in the various agencies of state government are strategic and vital assets belonging to the people of Texas. These assets must be available and protected commensurate with the value of the assets. Measures shall be taken to protect these assets against accidental or unauthorized access, disclosure, modification or destruction, as well as to assure the availability, integrity, utility, authenticity and confidentiality of information. Access to state information resources must be appropriately managed.

(B)

The agency head is responsible for the protection of information resources.

(C)

All individuals are accountable for their actions relating to information resources. Information resources shall be used only for intended purposes as defined by the agency and consistent with applicable laws.

(D)

Risks to information resources must be managed. The expense of security safeguards must be commensurate with the value of the assets being protected.

(E)

The integrity of data, its source, its destination, and processes applied to it must be assured. Changes to data must be made only in authorized and acceptable ways.

(F)

Information resources must be available when needed. Continuity of information resources supporting critical governmental services must be ensured in the event of a disaster or business disruption.

(G)

Security requirements shall be identified, documented and addressed in all phases of development or acquisition of information resources.

(H)

Agencies must ensure adequate controls and separation of duties for tasks that are susceptible to fraudulent or other unauthorized activity.

(4)

Classification of Information. Owners, with the agency head's concurrence, are responsible for classifying program information. Agencies are responsible for defining all information classification categories except the Confidential Information category, which is defined in paragraph (2) of this subsection, and establishing the appropriate controls for each.

(5)

Management and Staff Responsibilities. The agency head or his or her designated representative(s) shall review and approve ownership and the attendant responsibilities.

(A)

Owners, custodians, and users of information resources. Owners, custodians and users of information resources shall be identified, and their responsibilities defined and documented by the agency. In cases where information resources are used by more than one major program, the owners shall reach consensus and advise the information security function as to the designated primary owner. The following distinctions among owner, custodian, and user responsibilities should guide determination of these roles:

(i)

Owner Responsibilities. Owners are responsible and authorized to: approve access and formally assign custody of an asset; judge the asset's value; specify data control requirements and convey them to users and custodians; and ensure compliance with applicable controls. Owners must specify appropriate controls, based on risk assessment, to protect the state's information resources from unauthorized modification, deletion or disclosure. Controls extend to outsourced contracts. Owners must confirm that controls are in place to ensure the accuracy and completeness of data. Owners shall assign custody of assets and provide appropriate authority to implement security controls and procedures. Owners are the authority on appropriate level of controls and the timing of their implementation.

(ii)

Custodian responsibilities. Custodians of information resources, including entities providing outsourced services to state agencies must:

(I)

implement the controls specified by the owner(s);

(II)

provide physical and procedural safeguards for the information resources;

(III)

assist owners in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of controls and monitoring; and

(IV)

implement the monitoring techniques and procedures for detecting, reporting and investigating breaches in information security.

(iii)

User responsibilities. Users of information resources shall use the resource only for its defined purposes and comply with established controls.

(B)

The information security function. Each agency head or his or her designated representative shall institute an information security function to administer the agency information security program.

(i)

It shall be the duty and responsibility of this function to recommend policies and establish procedures and practices, in cooperation with owners and custodians, necessary to ensure the security of information assets against unauthorized or accidental modification, destruction or disclosure.

(ii)

The information security function shall document and maintain an up-to-date information security program. The security program shall include written descriptions of information resources security responsibilities, assigned personnel resources, policies, guidelines, data security classification schemes, standards and procedures for the protection of information resources. The information security program must be approved by the agency head.

(iii)

The security function is responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of defined controls for critical information.

(iv)

The security function shall report, at least biennially, to the agency head or his or her designated representative the status and effectiveness of information resources security controls.

(C)

A review of the agency's information security program for compliance with these standards will be performed at least biennially by individual(s) independent of the information security function and designated by the agency head or the information resources manager.

(6)

Managing Risks.

(A)

A security risk analysis shall be performed and documented. The security risk analysis shall be updated at least biennially. Security risk assessment results shall be presented to the agency head or his or her designated representative. The agency head shall make the final security risk management decisions to accept exposures. The agency head must approve the security risk management plan.

(B)

Each agency shall maintain a disaster recovery plan for information resources. The disaster recovery plan will:

(i)

contain measures which address the impact and magnitude of loss or harm that will result from an interruption;

(ii)

identify recovery resources and establish a source for each;

(iii)

contain step-by-step instructions for implementing the plan;

(iv)

be maintained to ensure currency; and

(v)

be tested at least annually.

(C)

Mission critical data shall be backed up on a scheduled basis and stored off site.

(7)

Personnel and Contractor Practices.

(A)

All agency personnel, and employees of independent contractors who may be deemed to be custodians or users, shall formally acknowledge that they will comply with the security policies and procedures of the agency. Information resource users who do not complete a formal acknowledgment shall not be granted access to information resources. The agency head or their designated representative will determine the method of acknowledgement and how often this acknowledgment must be renewed.

(B)

Agencies shall use non-disclosure agreements to document the acceptance by agency and contractor employees of special agency information security requirements.

(C)

Agencies shall provide an ongoing information resources security awareness education program for users whose duties bring them into contact with mission critical information resources. Scheduled training shall also be provided by the agency.

(D)

State agencies shall use new employee orientation to introduce information resource security awareness and inform new employees of information security policies and procedures. If an employee leaves or changes employment, security privileges shall be appropriately modified to protect information resources.

(8)

Physical Security.

(A)

Physical access to mission critical information resource facilities shall be managed and documented.

(B)

Reviews of physical security measures for compliance with these standards shall be conducted periodically by the agency head or designated representatives.

(C)

Information resources shall be protected from environmental hazards. Designated employees shall be trained to monitor environmental control procedures and equipment and shall be trained in desired response in case of emergencies or equipment problems.

(D)

Emergency procedures shall be developed and regularly tested.

(9)

Information Safeguards.

(A)

Access. Access shall be managed to ensure authorized use of information resources. Security risk assessment shall be the basis of decisions and policies regarding managed access to information resources.

(B)

Confidentiality of data and systems.

(i)

Confidential information shall be accessible only to authorized users. Information containing any confidential data shall be identified, documented, and protected in its entirety.

(ii)

Information resources assigned from one agency to another shall be protected in accordance with the conditions imposed by the providing agency.

(C)

Identification/Authentication.

(i)

Each user of information resources shall be assigned a unique personal identifier or user identification except for situations where risk analysis demonstrates no need for individual accountability of users. User identification shall be authenticated before the system may grant that user access.

(ii)

A user's access authorization shall be removed or appropriately modified when the user's employment or role status changes.

(iii)

Systems shall contain authentication functions that comply with documented security risk management decisions.

(iv)

Systems which use passwords shall be based on the existing federal standard on password usage.

(v)

For written electronic communications sent to a state agency where the identity of a sender or the contents of a message must be authenticated, the use of digital signatures is also encouraged. Agencies should refer to Texas Government Code, §2054.060, §201.14 of this title (relating to Digital Signatures), and guidelines issued by the Department for further information.

(D)

Encryption. Encryption techniques for storage and transmission of information shall be used based on documented agency security risk management decisions.

(E)

Ability to Audit.

(i)

Automated systems must provide the means whereby authorized personnel have the ability to audit and establish individual accountability for any action that can potentially cause access to, generation of, modification of, or effect the release of confidential information.

(ii)

Appropriate audit trails shall be maintained to provide accountability for updates to mission critical information, hardware and software and for all changes to automated security or access rules.

(iii)

Appropriate audit trails shall be maintained for all changes to automated security or access rules.

(iv)

Based on risk assessment, a sufficiently complete history of transactions shall be maintained to permit an audit of the system by tracing the activities of individuals through the system.

(F)

Security breaches.

(i)

Security breaches shall be investigated promptly and documented.

(ii)

If criminal action is suspected, the agency must contact the appropriate law enforcement and investigative authorities immediately.

(iii)

Each state agency shall provide summary reports to the department that contain information concerning violations of security policy of which the agency has become aware. A state agency shall not be required to report security violations unless the state agency reasonably believes such violations may involve criminal activity under Texas Penal Code Chapters 33 (Computer Crimes) or 33A (Telecommunications Crimes), and there is a substantial likelihood that such violations could be propagated to other systems beyond the control of the state agency. Reports should include:

(I)

Type of activity, including but not limited to:

(-a-)

Unwanted disruption or denial of service;

(-b-)

Unauthorized use of a system for the processing or storage of data; and

(-c-)

Changes made to system hardware, firmware, or software without the agency's effective consent.

(II)

Time elapsed between initial detection of incident and containment of the security breach or full restoration of adversely affected functions, whichever is later;

(III)

Description of the state agency's response to the incident; and

(IV)

Estimated total cost incurred by the state agency in containing the security breach or restoring adversely affected functions.

(iv)

Reports must be sent to the department on a monthly basis no later than the fifth (5th) working day after the end of the month. Upon request of the department, each state agency shall provide to the department any additional information regarding security violations. Information shall be reported in the form and manner specified by the department at the following address: http://www.dir.state.tx.us/IRAPC.

(v)

The Department shall establish internal security procedures regarding the receipt of and maintenance of information pertaining to security breaches. The Department shall instruct state agencies as to the manner in which they must report such information. The instructions will specify that reports must not contain any information which would itself compromise the security of the reporting agency. The instructions shall be made available via the world wide web at the following address: http://www.dir.state.tx.us/IRAPC

(vi)

The monthly reporting requirements established under this subparagraph will automatically expire on August 31, 2001.

(G)

Systems development and testing.

(i)

Test functions shall be kept either physically or logically separate from production functions. Copies of production data shall not be used for testing unless the data has been declassified or unless all state and contractor employees involved in testing are otherwise authorized access to the data.

(ii)

Appropriate information security and audit controls shall be incorporated into new systems. Each phase of systems acquisition shall incorporate and document corresponding development or assurances of security and auditable controls.

(iii)

All security-related information resource changes shall be approved by the owner through a quality assurance process before implementation.

(10)

Data Communication Systems.

(A)

Network resource controls shall be implemented commensurate with the security risk analysis.

(B)

System identification screens shall include warning statements unless documented security risk analysis indicates otherwise. Warning statements shall address the following topics:

(i)

unauthorized use is prohibited;

(ii)

usage may be subject to security testing and monitoring; and

(iii)

misuse is subject to criminal prosecution.

(c)

Use of TEX-AN Network.

(1)

Applicability.

(A)

All state agencies are to use the Texas Agency Network (TEX-AN) to the fullest extent possible.

(B)

Funds appropriated to state agencies as defined in Texas Civil Statutes, Article 601b, §1.02(2), shall not be expended for the acquisition of intercity telecommunications facilities or services until a determination has been made by the Telecommunications Services Division of the General Services Commission and the department (DIR) that the agency requirement for intercity telecommunications cannot be met by the TEX-AN network.

(C)

State agencies shall not enter into or renew contracts with carriers or other providers of intercity telecommunication facilities or services without obtaining waivers from the Telecommunications Services Division and the DIR certifying that the requested intercity telecommunications requirements cannot be provided at reasonable costs on TEX-AN network.

(2)

Waivers.

(A)

A waiver shall be granted to any state agency upon receipt of a written request and determination of the Telecommunications Services Division of the General Services Commission and the DIR that the action is most cost effective to the entire State of Texas.

(B)

Waivers will be granted for periods not to exceed one fiscal year from the effective date of the waiver.

(C)

Waivers will automatically expire upon the expiration date unless an extension is approved by the Telecommunications Services Division and the DIR.

(D)

Contracts for services obtained under waiver shall not extend beyond the expiration date of the waiver.

(3)

Review procedures.

(A)

The department and the Telecommunications Services Division of the General Services Commission will evaluate waiver requests for consistency with the General Appropriations Act, other legislation, and the priorities as described in the State Strategic Plan for Information Resources Management, and for cost-effectiveness to the entire State of Texas.

(B)

The department will grant or deny waiver requests in writing no later than 30 working days after receipt of the request.

(d)

Standard for data transport networks for computers.

(1)

Definitions.

(A)

For purposes of this section the word "network" will refer to all data transport networks used primarily to interconnect computers and networks of computers for the purpose of transporting data, allowing interoperation of computer applications on more than one computer system, and providing access to data.

(B)

For purposes of this section the phrase "substantial change" is defined to mean any change that requires the replacement of physical transport media, replacement of data transport protocol, or any change in the major computer systems on the network.

(C)

For purposes of this section "non-adjacent buildings" are defined as those that are physically separated by property not owned by the state and where there is no state owned right-of-way connecting the buildings.

(2)

Standard. All networks that span more than one non-adjacent building, or interconnect more than one agency must adhere to the following.

(A)

If the network is in existence at the time this rule is adopted, the network must become compliant with subparagraph (B) of this paragraph by August 31, 2001.

(B)

All new networks, all extensions to existing networks and all networks undergoing substantial change must adhere to the TCP/IP standards as listed in the most recent Request for Comments(RFC) as international standards promulgated by the Internet Society.

(C)

Agencies may not install new networks or extensions to existing networks where such installation or extension duplicates existing state owned network routing that complies with subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. Agencies must cooperate to share existing facilities; expanding them if necessary. Where this paragraph conflicts with current or future rules concerning telecommunications from the General Services Commission, the General Services Commission rule will prevail.

(e)

Date Standard. Because the Year 2000 could have an impact on virtually all computer systems due to the use of only the last two digits of a date field, all state agencies and institutions of higher education will adhere to the following standard, and will observe the Year 2000 readiness criteria and complete the Year 2000 risk assessment described in paragraphs (1)-(4) of this subsection.

(1)

Interchange Standard. Four-digit year elements will be used for the purposes of electronic data interchange in any recorded form among state agencies, institutions of higher education and the public. The year shall encompass a two-digit century that precedes, and is contiguous with, a two-digit year-of-century (e.g., 1999, 2000, etc.). Applications that require day and month information will be coded in the following format: CCYYMMDD. Additional representations for week, hour, minute, and second, if required, will comply with the international standard ISO 8601:1988, "Data elements and interchange formats--Information interchange--Representation of dates and times." If two or more state agencies or institutions of higher education agree to exchange month and day information based on ordinal dates, the ISO standard format of CCYYDDD will be used.

(2)

Year 2000 Readiness Criteria. Any data-processing asset must meet the following four criteria to be century-compliant:

(A)

General integrity: No value for current date will cause interruptions in desired operation--especially from 20th to 21st centuries.

(B)

Date integrity: All manipulations of time-related data (dates, durations, days of week, etc.) will produce desired results for all valid date values within the application domain.

(C)

Explicit century: Date elements in interfaces and data storage permit specifying century to eliminate date ambiguity.

(D)

Implicit century: For any date element represented without century, the correct century is unambiguous for all manipulations involving that element.

(3)

Implementation. State agencies and universities shall complete a Year 2000 risk assessment of all computer based systems, telecommunications equipment and data networks in 1996. Specific dates for completing conversion and reprogramming fixes will depend on each organization's risk assessment. All new systems acquired shall use four-digit year elements. Contracts for software and/or hardware shall include Year 2000 protection and warranty language.

(4)

As of January 1, 1997, all products and services purchased by state agencies shall meet the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection.

(f)

Communications Wiring Standards for State Facilities.

(1)

Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this subsection, shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(A)

ANSI--The American National Standards Institute.

(B)

EIA--The Electronics Industry Association.

(C)

TIA--The Telecommunications Industry Association.

(2)

All state agencies will adhere to the following standards when wiring or re-wiring state-owned or state-leased space:

(A)

ANSI/EIA/TIA-568-1995, Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard or its most recent successor document. This applies to the telecommunications wiring for buildings that are office-oriented and when ANSI/EIA/TIA-570-1991 is not selected. The term "commercial enterprises" is used in ANSI/EIA/TIA-568-1991 to differentiate between office buildings and buildings designed for industrial enterprises. ST-type fiber connectors shall be used for fiber optic terminations.

(B)

ANSI/EIA/TIA-570-1991, Residential and Light Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard or its most recent successor document, when planning and designing premises-wiring systems intended for connecting one to four exchange access lines to various types of customer-premises equipment when ANSI/EIA/TIA-568-1991 is not selected.

(C)

ANSI/EIA/TIA-569-1990, Commercial Building Telecommunications Pathways and Spaces or its most recent successor document, when planning and designing state-owned and state-leased space to accommodate telecommunications system wiring.

(D)

ANSI/EIA/TIA-606-1993, Administration Standard for the Telecommunications Infrastructure of Commercial Buildings or its most recent successor document, when documenting and administering telecommunications infrastructures in state-owned and state-leased space.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 14, 2000.

TRD-200001934

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 3, 2000

Proposal publication date: November 12, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.14

The Department of Information Resources adopts the amendment to §201.14, concerning digital signatures, with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 12, 1999, issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 9912).

The effect of the amendments is to add new definitions and permit the inclusion of public key infrastructure (PKI) service providers on an approved list on the basis of an independent review of security practices.

The department received two (2) comments regarding the proposed amendments. One commenter identified a typographical error in the references to Certification Authorities. The department agrees and has made the appropriate corrections in the adopted rule. The commenter also questioned the addition of "if any" to Subsection (e)(1)(E)(iii) related to a certification practice statement. The department disagrees that inclusion of this qualifier is unwarranted. It is the responsibility of the Policy Authority to identify the parties, scope of business, functional operations, and obligations between and among PKI Service Providers and End Entities who engage in electronic transactions in a Public Key Infrastructure. The Policy Authority would also identify, or accept, the practices, procedures, and controls employed by a Certification Authority. The department also notes that certain PKI Service Providers such as Registrars may not be directly involved in the issuance of certificates, and therefore should not be required to produce a certification practices statement.

The other comment suggested that the rule would require the use of PKI and would limit an agency's use of "Pretty Good Privacy" (PGP). The department disagrees that the rule requires the use of PKI; the rule expressly allows use of a specific biometric technology, signature dynamics, and allows interested parties to apply to the department for approval of other technologies. The department agrees that use of PGP would be limited by the rule, to the extent that PGP does not conform to ISO X.509 Version 3 standards. The message and certificate formats for PGP use simple binary encoding. This means that not only can users of one protocol not communicate with the users of the other, they also cannot share authentication certificates. The department will continue to monitor the work on OpenPGP in the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and will provide notice of when PGP complies with X.509 Version 3 certificate standards. No amendment to this rule will be required to add PGP to the list of acceptable technologies when PGP products support the required interoperability standards.

Names of groups or associations making comments for and against the rule:

For: Texas Department of Insurance, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission

Against: None

The amendments are adopted in accordance with Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which provides the department may adopt rules as necessary to implement its responsibilities, and Texas Government Code §2054.060(a), which permits the department to adopt rules pertaining to digital signatures.

§201.14. Digital Signatures.

(a)

General.

(1)

This section applies to all written electronic communications which are sent to a state agency over the Internet or other electronic network or by another means that is acceptable to the state agency, for which the identity of the sender or the contents of the message must be authenticated, and for which no prior agreement between the sender and the receiving state agency regarding message authentication existed as of the effective date of this section. This section does not apply to or supersede the use and expansion of existing systems:

(A)

for the receipt of electronically filed documents pursuant to the Texas Business and Commerce Code or other applicable statutory law where the purpose of the written electronic communication is to comply with statutory filing requirements and the receiving state agency or local government is not a party to the underlying transaction which is the subject of the communication; or

(B)

for the electronic approval of payment vouchers under rules adopted by the comptroller of public accounts pursuant to applicable law.

(2)

Prior to accepting a digital signature, a state agency shall ensure that the level of security used to identify the signer of a message and to transmit the signature is sufficient for the transaction being conducted. A state agency that accepts digital signatures may not effectively discourage the use of digital signatures by imposing unreasonable or burdensome requirements on persons wishing to use digital signatures to authenticate written electronic communications sent to the state agency.

(3)

A state agency that accepts digital signatures shall not be required to accept a digital signature that has been created by means of a particular acceptable technology described in subsection (e) of this section if the state agency:

(A)

determines that the expense that would necessarily be incurred by the state agency in accepting such a digital signature is excessive and unreasonable;

(B)

provides reasonable notice to all interested persons of the fact that such digital signatures will not be accepted, and of the basis for the determination that the cost of acceptance is excessive and unreasonable; and

(C)

files an electronic copy (in html format) of the notice with the department. The department shall make a copy of such notice available to the general public via the World Wide Web at the following location: http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub13.htm.

(4)

A state agency shall review and consider any applicable guidelines and recommendations that have been adopted by the department in determining whether and for what purposes the state agency shall accept a digital signature. A copy of such guidelines and recommendations may be obtained directly from the department, or may be obtained electronically via the World Wide Web at the following location: http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub13.htm.

(5)

A state agency shall ensure that all written electronic communications received by the state agency and authenticated by means of a digital signature in accordance with this section, as well as any information resources necessary to permit access to the written electronic communications, are retained by the state agency as necessary to comply with applicable law pertaining to audit and records retention requirements.

(b)

Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings unless the context expressly indicates otherwise:

(1)

Asymmetric cryptosystem - a computer-based system that employs two different but mathematically related keys with the following characteristics:

(A)

one key encrypts a given message;

(B)

one key decrypts a given message; and

(C)

the keys have the property that, knowing one key, it is computationally infeasible to discover the other key.

(2)

Certificate - a message which:

(A)

identifies the certification authority issuing it;

(B)

names or identifies its subscriber;

(C)

contains the subscriber's public key;

(D)

identifies its operational period;

(E)

is digitally signed by the certification authority issuing it, and

(F)

conforms to ISO X.509 Version 3 standards.

(3)

Certificate Manufacturer - A person that provides operational services for a Certification Authority or PKI Service Provider. The nature and scope of the obligations and functions of a Certificate Manufacturer depend on contractual arrangements between the Certification Authority or other PKI Service Provider and the Certificate Manufacturer.

(4)

Certificate Policy - A document prepared by a Policy Authority that describes the parties, scope of business, functional operations, and obligations between and among PKI Service Providers and End Entities who engage in electronic transactions in a Public Key Infrastructure.

(5)

Certification Authority - a person who issues a certificate.

(6)

Certification practice statement - Documentation of the practices, procedures, and controls employed by a Certification Authority.

(7)

Digital signature - an electronic identifier intended by the person using it to have the same force and effect as the use of a manual signature, and that complies with the requirements of this section.

(8)

Digitally-signed communication - a message that has been processed by a computer in such a manner that ties the message to the individual that signed the message.

(9)

End Entities - Subscribers or Signers and Relying Parties.

(10)

Escrow agent - a person who holds a copy of a private key at the request of the owner of the private key in a trustworthy manner.

(11)

Expert - a person with demonstrable skill and knowledge based on training and experience who would qualify as an expert under Rule 702 of the Texas Rules of Civil Evidence.

(12)

Handwriting measurements - the metrics of the shapes, speeds and/or other distinguishing features of a signature as the person writes it by hand with a pen or stylus on a flat surface.

(13)

Key pair - a private key and its corresponding public key in an

(14)

Local government - a county, municipality, special district, or other political subdivision of this state or a state that borders this state, or a combination of two or more of those entities, but excluding an agency in the judicial branch of local government.

(15)

Message - a digital representation of information.

(16)

Person - an individual, state agency, local government, corporation, partnership, association, organization, or any other legal entity.

(17)

PKI - Public Key Infrastructure.

(18)

PKI Service Provider - A Certification Authority, Certificate Manufacturer, Registrar, or any other person that performs services pertaining to the issuance or verification of certificates.

(19)

Policy Authority - A person with final authority and responsibility for specifying a Certificate Policy.

(20)

Private key - the key of a key pair used to create a digital signature.

(21)

Proof of Identification - the document or documents or other evidence presented to a Certification Authority to establish the identity of a subscriber.

(22)

Public key - the key of a key pair used to verify a digital signature.

(23)

Public Key Cryptography - a type of cryptographic technology that employs an asymmetric cryptosystem.

(24)

Registrar - A person that gathers evidence necessary to confirm the accuracy of information to be included in a Subscriber's certificate.

(25)

Relying Party - A state agency that has received an electronic message that has been signed with a digital signature and is in a position to rely on the message and signature.

(26)

Role-based key - a key pair issued to a person to use when acting in a particular business or organizational capacity.

(27)

Signature Digest - the resulting bit-string produced when a signature is tied to a document using Signature Dynamics.

(28)

Signature Dynamics - measuring the way an individual writes his or her signature by hand on a flat surface and binding the measurements to a message through the use of cryptographic techniques.

(29)

Signer - the person who signs a digitally signed communication with the use of an acceptable technology to uniquely link the message with the person sending it.

(30)

State agency - a department, commission, board, office, council, or other agency in the executive branch of state government that is created by the constitution or a statute of this state, including a university system or institution of higher education as defined by Section 61.003, Education Code.

(31)

Subscriber - a person who:

(A)

is the subject listed in a certificate;

(B)

accepts the certificate; and

(C)

holds a private key which corresponds to a public key listed in that certificate.

(32)

Technology - the computer hardware and/or software-based method or process used to create digital signatures.

(33)

Written electronic communication - A message that is sent by one person to another person.

(c)

Digital Signatures must be Created by an Acceptable Technology. For a digital signature to be valid for use by a state agency, it must be created by a technology that is accepted for use by the department pursuant to this section.

(d)

Criteria for Determining if a Digital Signature Technology is Acceptable. An acceptable technology must be capable of creating signatures that conform to requirements set forth in Government Code, §2054.060, and the requirements of this section.

(e)

List of Acceptable Technologies.

(1)

The technology known as Public Key Cryptography is an acceptable technology for use by state agencies, provided that the digital signature is created consistent with the following:

(A)

A public key-based digital signature must be unique to the person using it. Such a signature may be considered unique to the person using it if:

(i)

the private key used to create the signature on the message is known only to the signer or, in the case of a role-based key, known only to the signer and an escrow agent acceptable to the signer and the state agency; and

(ii)

the digital signature is created when a person runs a message through a one-way function, creating a message digest, then encrypting the resulting message digest using an asymmetric cryptosystem and the signer's private key; and

(iii)

although not all digitally signed communications will require the signer to obtain a certificate, the signer is capable of being issued a certificate to certify that he or she controls the key pair used to create the signature; and

(iv)

it is computationally infeasible to derive the private key from knowledge of the public key.

(B)

A public-key based digital signature must be capable of independent verification. Such a signature may be considered capable of independent verification if:

(i)

the relying party can verify the message was digitally signed by using the signer's public key to decrypt the message; and

(ii)

if a certificate is a required component of a transaction with a state agency, the issuing PKI Service Provider, either through a certification practice statement, certificate policy, or through the content of the certificate itself, has identified what, if any, proof of identification it required of the signer prior to issuing the certificate.

(C)

The private key of public-key based digital signature must remain under the sole control of the person using it, or in the case of a role-based key, that person and an escrow agent acceptable to that person and the state agency. Whether a signature is accompanied by a certificate or not, the person who holds the key pair, or the subscriber identified in the certificate, must exercise reasonable care to retain control of the private key and prevent its disclosure to any person not authorized to create the subscriber's digital signature.

(D)

The digital signature must be linked to the message of the document in such a way that it would be computationally infeasible to change the data in the message or the digital signature without invalidating the digital signature.

(E)

Acceptable PKI Service Providers.

(i)

The department shall maintain an "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" authorized to issue certificates for digitally signed communications sent to state agencies or otherwise provide services in connection with the issuance of certificates. The list may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, Certification Authorities, Certificate Manufacturers, Registrars, and/or other PKI Service Providers accepted and approved for use in connection with electronic messages transmitted to other state or federal governmental entities. A copy of such list may be obtained directly from the department, or may be obtained electronically via the World Wide Web at the following location: http://www.state.tx.us/Standards/srrpub13.htm.

(ii)

State agencies shall only accept certificates from PKI Service Providers that appear on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers."

(iii)

The department shall place a PKI Service Provider on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" after the PKI Service Provider provides the Department with a copy of its current certification practice statement, if any, and a copy of an unqualified performance audit performed in accordance with standards set in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Statement on Auditing Standards No. 70 (S.A.S. 70) to ensure that the PKI Service Provider's practices and policies are consistent with the requirements of the PKI Service Provider's certification practice statement, if any, and the requirements of this section.

(iv)

In order to be placed on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" a PKI Service Provider that has been in operation for one year or less shall undergo a SAS 70 Type One audit - A Report of Policies and Procedures Placed in Operation, receiving an unqualified opinion.

(v)

In order to be placed on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers " a PKI Service Provider that has been in operation for longer than one year shall undergo a SAS 70 Type Two audit - A Report of Policies and Procedures Placed in Operation and Test of Operating Effectiveness, receiving an unqualified opinion.

(vi)

In lieu of the audit requirements of (iv) and (v) above, a PKI Service Provider may be placed on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" upon providing the Department with documentation issued by a person independent of the PKI Service Provider that is indicative of the security policies and procedures actually employed by the PKI Service Provider and that is acceptable to the department in its sole discretion. The Department may request additional documentation relating to policies and practices employed by the PKI Service Provider indicating the trustworthiness of the technology employed and compliance with applicable guidelines published by the Department.

(vii)

To remain on the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" a Certification Authority must provide proof of compliance with the audit requirements or other acceptable documentation to the department every two years after initially being placed on the list. In addition, a Certification Authority must provide a copy of any changes to its certification practice statement to the department promptly following the adoption by the Certification Authority of such changes.

(viii)

If the department is informed that a PKI Service Provider has received a qualified or otherwise unacceptable opinion following a required audit or if the department obtains credible information that the technology employed by the PKI Service Provider can no longer reasonably be relied upon, or if the PKI Service Provider's certification practice statement is substantially amended in a manner that causes the PKI Service Provider to become no longer in compliance with the audit requirements of this section, the PKI Service Provider may be removed from the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" by the department. The effect of the removal of a PKI Service Provider from the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" shall be to prohibit state agencies from thereafter accepting digital signatures for which the PKI Service Provider issued a certificate or provided services in connection with such issuance for so long as the PKI Service Provider is removed from the list. The removal of a PKI Service Provider from the "Approved List of PKI Service Providers" shall not, in and of itself, invalidate a digital signature for which a PKI Service Provider issued the certificate prior to its removal from the list.

(2)

The technology known as "Signature Dynamics" is an acceptable technology for use by state agencies, provided that the signature is created consistent with the following provisions:

(A)

A digital signature produced by Signature Dynamics technology must be unique to the person using it. A signature digest produced by Signature Dynamics technology may be considered unique to the person using it if:

(i)

the signature digest records the handwriting measurements of the person signing the message using signature dynamics technology; and

(ii)

the signature digest is cryptographically bound to the handwriting measurements; and

(iii)

after the signature digest has been bound to the handwriting measurements, it is computationally infeasible to separate the handwriting measurements and bind them to a different signature digest.

(B)

A digital signature produced by Signature Dynamics technology must be capable of independent verification. A signature digest produced by Signature Dynamics technology may be considered capable of independent verification if:

(i)

the acceptor of the digitally signed message obtains the handwriting measurements for purposes of comparison; and

(ii)

if signature verification is a required component of a transaction with a state agency, the handwriting measurements can allow an expert handwriting and document examiner to assess the authenticity of a signature.

(C)

A digital signature produced by Signature Dynamics technology must remain under the sole control of the person using it. A signature digest produced by Signature Dynamics technology may be considered to be under the sole control of the person using it if:

(i)

the signature digest captures the handwriting measurements and cryptographically binds them to the message directed by the signer and to no other message; and

(ii)

the signature digest makes it computationally infeasible for the handwriting measurements to be bound to any other message.

(D)

The signature digest produced by signature dynamics technology must be linked to the message in such a way that it would be computationally infeasible to change the data in the message or the digital signature without invalidating the digital signature.

(f)

Provisions For Adding New Technologies to the List of Acceptable Technologies.

(1)

Any person may, by providing a written request that includes a full explanation of a proposed technology which meets the requirements of subsection (c) of this section, petition the department to review the technology. If the department determines that the technology is acceptable for use by state agencies, the department shall draft proposed administrative rules which would add the proposed technology to the list of acceptable technologies in subsection (e) of this section.

(2)

The department has 90 days from the date of the request to review the petition and either accept or deny it. If the Department does not approve the request within 90 days, the petitioner's request shall be considered denied. If the department denies the petition, it shall notify the petitioner in writing of the reasons for denial. The petitioner may appeal the department's denial of the petition at the next regularly scheduled board meeting.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 15, 2000.

TRD-200001947

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 4, 2000

Proposal publication date: November 12, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.16

The Department of Information Resources adopts an amendment to §201.16, concerning minimum standards for meetings held by videoconference call with no changes as published in the October 1, 1999 issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 8397). The amendment deletes the provision which caused the section to expire automatically on August 31, 1999 without further action of the board. The amendment is proposed in accordance with Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which provides the department with the authority to adopt rules as necessary to implement its responsibilities, and Texas Government Code §551.126(h), which requires the department to specify minimum standards for videoconference calls by administrative rule.

No comments were received in response to the proposed rule.

The amendment is adopted in accordance with Texas Government Code §2054.052(a), which authorizes the department to adopt rules as necessary to carry out its responsibility under the Information Resources Management Act.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 14, 2000.

TRD-200001933

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 3, 2000

Proposal publication date: October 1, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153


1 TAC §201.18

The Department of Information Resources adopts new §201.18 concerning purchases of commodity software items, with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 12, 1999 issue of the Texas Register (24 TexReg 9914). The effect of the new section is to require state agencies to purchase certain commodity software items through the department and prescribe a procedure for obtaining waivers from this requirement.

The department received seven written comments regarding the proposed rule. One commenter suggested that the department designate the title of and contact information for the officer with whom the waiver requests must be filed. Accordingly, subparagraph (c)(1) of this section was changed to specify, by title and division within the department, the officer to whom a written request for a waiver must be addressed and to provide alternative electronic and physical addresses where a waiver request must be submitted.

One commenter stated that the definition of "commodity software items" in the proposed rule severely limits an agency's ability to determine what software it may require to conduct its business and meet customer demands. The commenter recommended that the phrase "for which the department determines that a reasonable demand exists in state agencies" be struck from the definition. The department disagrees with this recommendation. The rule does not affect or limit a state agency's ability to purchase software items that are not contained on the list described in the rule.

One commenter stated that the definition of "purchase" may be read more broadly than may have been intended. The commenter recommended that the definition be revised to remove the phrase "or otherwise obtain any rights with respect to the use or ownership of" to distinguish between the purchase of commodity software items and the purchase of a service that includes software. The department disagrees with this recommendation. It is the department's intent that the acquisition of all commodity software items contained on the department's list be subject to the provisions of the rule. Under a narrower definition of the term "purchase," vendors or other interested parties might be tempted to evade the intent of House Bill 1895 by bundling commodity software items with hardware or services, with the possible result that the State would pay more than necessary for such items.

One commenter stated that the rule appears to apply only to contracts that provide for a one-time purchase of commodity software. The commenter recommended that existing contractual relationships be accommodated through a specific provision that exempts purchases of commodity software items made under contracts (and any renewal options documented within such contracts) entered into by agencies prior to the adoption of the rule. The department agrees with this recommendation. Subparagraph (c)(1) was therefore modified to expressly permit waivers for purchases under contracts that contemplate multiple purchases over a period of time. The revised rule extends to both a one-time purchase of commodity software items, or purchases of commodity software items under a written contract that permits multiple purchases at a specified price during the term of the contract and any renewal periods specified in the contract. Additionally, the required elements of a written request were moved from paragraph (c)(1) to paragraph (c)(2).

One commenter stated that the price factor should not be the sole consideration of the department when evaluating an agency's request for waiver and recommended that the rule be revised to allow a waiver to be granted when contractual terms and conditions other than price are more favorable under the agency's contract than the department's contract. The department agrees with this recommendation. Subparagraph (c)(2)(B) was modified to add a provision that the written request for waiver must include a certification either that the vendor's formal proposal or quote is more than five percent (5%) lower than the total purchase amount available through the department, or that the terms and conditions in the state agency's contract for the purchase of commodity software items are substantially more favorable than those contained in the department's existing contract for the same items.

One commenter stated that the rule does not sufficiently limit the information that the department may request of an agency when considering an agency's request for waiver. The commenter recommended that the rule be revised to include the term "reasonably." The department agrees with this recommendation, and revised subparagraph (c)(2)(D) to include this term.

One commenter stated that the time frame for DIR to issue a waiver is inconsistently stated between two successive paragraphs within the rule. The commenter recommended that both paragraphs should adhere to the ten working day time frame. The department agrees with this recommendation. Paragraph (c)(3) was revised to reflect a ten working day period following the date of the department's receipt of a waiver request, which is consistent with paragraph (c)(4).

One commenter recommended an addition to the rule that states that if the DIR vendor takes more than ten working days to fill and ship an order to a state agency, the agency may revoke its purchase form submitted to DIR for the purchase of that software and go elsewhere to purchase the items by another means. The department disagrees with this comment. Commodity software items identified by the department are widely available, and in most if not all cases, state agencies are permitted to make copies of software and begin using the software as soon as an order has been placed with the vendor. The department will assist any state agency in obtaining copies promptly if the state agency does not already have access to such software. Thus, delays in delivery are not expected.

One commenter recommended that the rule be revised to allow the department to grant an agency a blanket waiver, or a one-time waiver covering all commodity software item purchases made by the agency. The department disagrees with this recommendation as it is inconsistent with the objective of aggregating purchases of such software whenever possible. However, as noted above, the department agrees that waivers for purchases of such software items under term contracts for a stated period of time, including renewals, is appropriate and has amended the rule accordingly. The same commenter also recommended that the department grant the academic and administrative components of institutions of higher education an exemption for purchases of commodity software items from "auxiliary enterprises" such as campus bookstores and computer stores. The department agrees with this recommendation because it the department does not have legal authority to facilitate the sale of any sale items to the general public. However, the department does not believe that an express exception to the rule is necessary for such auxiliary enterprises.

One commenter recommended that an exemption for purchases of commodity software items that are less than $5,000 be provided for in the rule. The department disagrees with the commenter's recommendation and maintains that the majority of commodity software items would be excluded based upon such an exemption.

One commenter recommended that an appeal procedure be granted that provides for at least one (1) appeal of the department's initial decision. The department agrees in part with this comment but does not agree that such an appeal should be mandatory. Therefore, the department has amended paragraph (c)(5) to require the executive director to notify the board of any decisions denying the issuance of a waiver. The department believes that this requirement, together with the opportunity for public testimony at each open meeting of the board, provides sufficient oversight of the waiver process.

One commenter recommended that the rule be revised to either provide an automatic waiver of the commodity software items purchasing requirement for emergency purchases or to provide for a two-day expedited handling procedure for a waiver request submitted in connection with an emergency purchase. The department disagrees with this recommendation since copies of commodity software items are readily available and may already be obtained on an expedited basis.

One commenter stated that its agency's Board is charged with the administration of trust funds and that in order to achieve goals with its duty to the trust may feel it necessary to negotiate its own contract(s). The commenter recommended that the rule be revised to exclude constitutionally mandated statewide retirement systems from compliance with the commodity software items purchasing requirement. The department disagrees with this recommendation since it presumes a legal conclusion and may unnecessarily limit the state's ability to aggregate purchases of such software items. However, it should be noted that state agencies are not precluded under the rule from negotiating with software vendors for substantially better prices or terms and conditions, and if they are able to obtain such concessions, they may be entitled to a waiver under the rule.

One commenter recommended that the procedure for submitting a written request for waiver be removed from the rule and that the rule provide for an automatic waiver if an agency determines that it can either obtain the commodity software items at a lesser price or if the delivery date specified in the commodity software items contract is not adequate to meet the agency's requirements. The department disagrees with the commenter's recommendation. An automatic exemption process could deprive the department of the ability to obtain further price concessions from software vendors. The issue of delivery dates has been addressed above.

One commenter stated that "provisions of House Bill 1895 and Texas Government Code §2157.068 were sufficient to direct the licensing activities of DIR and that the proposed rule should not be adopted." The commenter expressed concern that the rule provides for "lowest price" and not "best value," and stated that that "under existing procurement rules, if a DIR-negotiated contract represents best value to an agency, the agency is compelled to choose the DIR contract." The department disagrees with the commenter's recommendation that the proposed rule not be adopted. However, the department has revised the rule to provide for waivers both for lower prices and for more favorable contractual terms and conditions.

Names of groups or associations making comments for and against the rule: For: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Teacher Retirement System. Against: University of Texas System, Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University-Galveston, Department of Public Safety.

The new section is adopted in accordance with House Bill 1895, 76th Legislature, and Texas Government Code §2157.068(e), which permits the department to adopt rules regarding purchases of commodity software items.

§201.18.Purchases of Commodity Software Items.

(a)

Definitions.

(1)

"Commodity software items" means commercial software for personal computers that is generally available to businesses or the public and for which the department determines that a reasonable demand exists in state agencies. The term includes commercial off-the-shelf programs, applications, database management systems, tools or utilities that operate on a personal computer, and also includes such programs, applications, database management systems, tools or utilities that operate on a server to the extent they may be required to operate or facilitate the operation of personal computer-based software.

(2)

"Purchase" means to acquire, obtain a license to use, or otherwise obtain any rights with respect to the use or ownership of, commodity software items and/or the media on which they may be contained or stored.

(3)

"Reasonable demand" means that the aggregate number of software licenses expected to be purchased by state agencies meets or exceeds the software publisher's minimum requirement for obtaining a volume discount.

(b)

Required Purchases.

(1)

Each state agency must purchase any commodity software items that are contained on the list described in paragraph (2) of this subsection in accordance with a contract developed by the department, unless the agency first obtains a waiver from this requirement under subsection (c) of this section.

(2)

The department shall compile and maintain a list of commodity software items available for purchase through the department that have a lower price than the prices for commodity software items otherwise available to state agencies. The department shall make the list available electronically via the world wide web at the following address: http://www.dir.state.tx.us/busops/dir_store/software.htm.

(c)

Waivers.

(1)

A state agency may submit a written request to the department for a waiver of the commodity software items purchasing requirement described in subsection (b) of this section. The written request must be submitted to the Director of Business Operations of the department via e-mail at BusOpsDir@dir.state.tx.us, or by mail or hand delivery at 300 W. 15th Street, Suite 1300, Austin, Texas 78701. A waiver may apply to

(A)

a one time purchase of commodity software items; or

(B)

purchases of commodity software items under a written contract that permits multiple purchases at a specified price during the term of the contract and any renewal periods specified in the contract.

(2)

A written request for a waiver must include the following:

(A)

the vendor's formal proposal or quote, including the software publisher's names of the commodity software items, the unit price of the item, the total number of units and the total dollar amount of the purchase;

(B)

a certification that

(i)

the total purchase amount on the vendor's formal proposal or quote is more than five percent (5%) lower than the total purchase amount available through the department, or

(ii)

the terms and conditions in the state agency's contract for the purchase of commodity software items are substantially more favorable than those contained in the department's existing contract for the same items;

(C)

a copy of contractual terms and conditions applicable to the proposed purchase; and

(D)

any other information reasonably requested by the department.

(3)

Upon receipt of a request for a waiver, the department shall promptly review the request to determine whether it contains the required information and the required certification regarding cost or, in the alternative, a certification regarding the state agency's contractual terms and conditions. If the request does contain such information and certification, the department will then review the request to verify the legitimacy and accuracy of the vendor's proposal or quote, and to determine whether the proposed purchase would be more cost effective or would contain more favorable terms and conditions than the department's existing contract. The department may request a vendor to lower its price or amend its terms and conditions under the department's existing contract prior to issuing a waiver to a state agency. If the department and the vendor cannot reach an agreement to amend the applicable contract within 10 working days following the date of the department's receipt of a waiver request, the department shall issue a written waiver of the commodity software purchasing requirement for the requesting state agency with respect to the contemplated purchase. The written waiver shall specify the software, the applicable unit price, and the total price for which or the period of time during which the software may be purchased without having to comply with the commodity software purchasing requirement described in subsection (b) of this section.

(4)

If the department has not issued a written denial of the waiver request within 10 working days following the date of its receipt of the request, the request for a waiver shall be deemed to have been approved for an amount equal to the total dollar amount of the proposed purchase or for the period of time described in the waiver request.

(5)

In accordance with §201.9 of this chapter, the executive director of the department will notify the board of each decision by the department denying the issuance of a waiver under this section.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 14, 2000.

TRD-200001930

C.J. Brandt, Jr.

General Counsel

Department of Information Resources

Effective date: April 3, 2000

Proposal publication date: November 12, 1999

For further information, please call: (512) 475-2153