SQL query to export Policy scan results with Remediation, Rationale and Proof

Hi There ,

I have been trying to export the Policy scan result for each asset with remediation and rationale, I would like add that to the below query , Any help would be appreciated.

SELECT da.ip_address, da.host_name, fasp.scope, fasp.date_tested, fasp.compliant_rules, fasp.noncompliant_rules, fasp.not_applicable_rules, fasp.rule_compliance, dp.title, dp.total_rules, dp.benchmark_name, dp.category,

dpr.title, dpr.description, dpr.scope

FROM fact_asset_scan_policy fasp

JOIN dim_policy dp using (policy_id)

JOIN dim_policy_rule dpr using (policy_id)

JOIN dim_asset da using (asset_id)

order by da.ip_address

Thank you.
Manny

@manny_singh When exporting remediation and rationale for policy findings, you will need to use the dim_policy_rule table. The following query is an example of the type of information you could pull:

SELECT
  dp.policy_id, dp.title as policy_title, dpr.rule_id, dpr.title as policy_rule_title,
  dp.benchmark_name, da.ip_address, da.host_name, dpr.description, dp.category,
  fapr.date_tested, htmlToText(fapr.proof) as proof, fapr.compliance,
  dpr.severity, htmlToText(dpr.rationale) as rationale, htmlToText(dpr.remediation) as remediation
FROM fact_asset_policy_rule fapr
  JOIN dim_policy dp on dp.policy_id = fapr.policy_id
  JOIN dim_policy_rule dpr on dpr.policy_id = fapr.policy_id and fapr.rule_id = dpr.rule_id
  JOIN dim_asset da on da.asset_id = fapr.asset_id
WHERE fapr.compliance = false order by dp.title, dpr.title

This would result in report similar to:

policy_id policy_title rule_id policy_rule_title benchmark_name ip_address host_name description category date_tested proof compliance severity rationale remediation
115 CIS Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Server Benchmark Level One - Server v1.0.0 18615 1.1.1.1 Ensure mounting of cramfs filesystems is disabled xccdf_org.cisecurity.benchmarks_benchmark_1.0.0_CIS_Ubuntu_Linux_16.04_LTS_Benchmark 127.0.0.1 hostname-1 CIS 2018-04-18 07:31:54.021 This is a complex check. Operator = AND * oval-org.cisecurity.benchmarks.o_canonical_ubuntu_linux-def-1002: FAILBased on the following 1 results: * * At least one specified ShellCommand entry must match the given criteria. At least one evaluation must pass.FAIL false unknown <xhtml:p xmlns=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xccdf=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xhtml=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance”>Removing support for unneeded filesystem types reduces the local attack surface of the server. If this filesystem type is not needed, disable it.</xhtml:p> <xhtml:div xmlns=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xccdf=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xhtml=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance”>xhtml:pxhtml:pEdit or create the file <xhtml:span class=“inline_block”>/etc/modprobe.d/CIS.conf </xhtml:span>and add the following line:</xhtml:p><xhtml:code class=“code_block”>install cramfs /bin/true</xhtml:code>xhtml:p </xhtml:p> </xhtml:p> </xhtml:div>
115 CIS Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Server Benchmark Level One - Server v1.0.0 18615 1.1.1.1 Ensure mounting of cramfs filesystems is disabled xccdf_org.cisecurity.benchmarks_benchmark_1.0.0_CIS_Ubuntu_Linux_16.04_LTS_Benchmark 127.0.0.1 hostname-1 CIS 2018-04-18 07:31:22.962 This is a complex check. Operator = AND * oval-org.cisecurity.benchmarks.o_canonical_ubuntu_linux-def-1002: FAILBased on the following 1 results: * * At least one specified ShellCommand entry must match the given criteria. At least one evaluation must pass.FAIL false unknown <xhtml:p xmlns=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xccdf=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xhtml=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance”>Removing support for unneeded filesystem types reduces the local attack surface of the server. If this filesystem type is not needed, disable it.</xhtml:p> <xhtml:div xmlns=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xccdf=“http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2” xmlns:xhtml=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance”>xhtml:pxhtml:pEdit or create the file <xhtml:span class=“inline_block”>/etc/modprobe.d/CIS.conf </xhtml:span>and add the following line:</xhtml:p><xhtml:code class=“code_block”>install cramfs /bin/true</xhtml:code>xhtml:p </xhtml:p> </xhtml:p> </xhtml:div>
2 Likes

Continuing the discussion from SQL query to export Policy scan results with Remediation, Rationale and Proof:

Hi Zac ,

You are a hero , made our life easier by providing this query , we are trying to implement CIS control in our environment and need to better understand scan results and export them to CSV. One More question i have , if want we want to pull out what labeled as Checks in console in this query what would i need to add ?
You really made our Day , We have been trying to get this results out and was not able to.
Regards,
Manny

Glad to help @manny_singh!

For your follow up question, can you expand a bit more on what you meant by “if want we want to pull out what labeled as Checks in console in this query what would i need to add”.

1 Like

checks

Please find the attachment zac, the attachment has info about the checks, We would like to export these check and compare if we are compliance with these checks.

Thank you so much for Quick response one again.

Regards,
Manny

checks2

@zac_youtz
Hi Zac,
I looked at the dim_policy_rule table, I believe it is check_existence and
Check_results. Correct me if i am wrong? but cannot figure out how add to them to the query you gave us. I wanted to export the expected check value and the resulted value from policy scan.
Regards,

@zac_youtz
Please help , Thank you. :worried:
Regards
Manny

@manny_singh Still not sure I completely follow; however, on the fact_asset_policy_rule table there is a compliance column that indicates whether the asset is compliant for the particular rule.

This will return either true or false and the table is already being used in the query above as fapr.compliance. I did notice in the example query I provided you it is actually filtering by fapr.compliance = false so only rules that assets aren’t compliant for are being returned at the moment.

If instead you are looking for more details about the rule (description, rationale, remediation) then the dim_policy_rule table will have more of those details.

1 Like

@zac_youtz,
Yes , I agree you are right it is only resulting in rules that are not compliant however we wanted to export the checks that make the Nexpose decide if it is compliant or not , The checks have predefined values and Nexpose checks against those predefined values and if the check does not match the defined value , Nexpose result it as non-compliant.
But i don’t know if this is possible or there is a way we can export those defined checks values and the check values that nexpose discovered when scanning the asset ?
Regards,
Mannychecks checks2

@manny_singh Unfortunately I’m not aware of a way to get the values of the checks through SQL query reports. I’ll see if anyone else has any suggestions for you or maybe someone else in the community might be able to chime in.

1 Like

@zac_youtz Thanks for all your Help.

Regards,
Manny

@manny_singh - You will need to setup a Database Warehouse (external) to reference those values you are looking for. Instructions can be found here: Configure Data Warehouse

After that, you will need to construct the SQL query using the schema found here: Data Warehouse Schema

I think you will need to reference these tables in your SQL query to get the data you are looking for: fact_asset_policy_rule_check and fact_asset_policy_rule_test

1 Like

@aniket_menon
I looked at the database schema already , to me it looks like the table that needs to be referenced is dim_policy_rule_test , But i am totally confused how to construct this query.

I looked at the option of connecting to database using sql query editor tools. Can i not connect directly to the database ?

Regards,
Manny

@manny_singh - you can connect directly once you setup the Data Warehouse. It will have to be an external Postgres database. This will be a separate database from the one that comes with the Nexpose / InsightVM console.

1 Like

Manny, something that is important to remember is that for the reports within the ui you are essentially just working within a view. You can force access to the db directly through modifying authentication configurations but it’s likely not what you’re hoping for. If you are looking for full db query access the warehouse option that was mentioned by Aniket is one of your safest options and provides the _test tables you are trying to use. Otherwise using the reporting view you’ll be restricted to what is presented in the view’s datamodel which is different from what is available in the warehouse option. https://nexpose.help.rapid7.com/docs/understanding-the-reporting-data-model-dimensions for dimensions and https://nexpose.help.rapid7.com/docs/understanding-the-reporting-data-model-facts for facts.
The view can technically be modified on the console but it’s not something that I would recommend in most cases. It doesn’t look like the idea portal exists anymore but I would still suggest filing a feature request to have the information made available in the view for reports. https://kb.help.rapid7.com/docs/suggesting-a-feature-or-enhancement

2 Likes