Difference between revisions of "EGI DataHub Availability and Continuity Plan"
(11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|- | |- | ||
! scope="row"| Risks assessment | ! scope="row"| Risks assessment | ||
| | | 2021-12 | ||
| | | 2022-12 | ||
|- | |- | ||
! scope="row"| Av/Co plan and test | ! scope="row"| Av/Co plan and test | ||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
= Availability requirements and performances = | = Availability requirements and performances = | ||
* Onezone is operated by 4 VMs, two for database redundancy, two for service redundancy | |||
In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis: | In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis: | ||
*Availability: | *Availability: 95% | ||
*Reliability: | *Reliability: 95% | ||
Other availability requirements: | |||
* the service is accessible through X509 certificate and | * the service is accessible through X509 certificate and federated identities | ||
* The service is accessible via | * The service is accessible via webUI (link to the probes that checks the authentication and the service in general) | ||
The service availability is regularly tested by nagios probes eu.egi.CertValidity, org.onedata.Onezone-Health, and org.onedata.Oneprovider-Health: | |||
* https://argo-mon.egi.eu/nagios/cgi-bin/status.cgi?servicegroup=SITE_EGI-DATAHUB_org.onedata.oneprovider&style=overview | |||
* https://argo-mon.egi.eu/nagios/cgi-bin/status.cgi?servicegroup=SITE_EGI-DATAHUB_org.onedata.onezone&style=overview | |||
The performances reports in terms of Availability and Reliability are produced by [ | The performances reports in terms of Availability and Reliability are produced by [https://argo.egi.eu/egi/OPS-MONITOR-Critical ARGO] on an almost real time basis and they are also periodically collected into the [https://documents.egi.eu/public/ShowDocument?docid=2324 Documentation Database]. | ||
Over the past years, the SERVICE NAME hadn't particular Av/Co issues highlighted by the performances that need to be further investigated. | |||
= Risks assessment and management = | = Risks assessment and management = | ||
For more details, please look at the (google spreadsheet link). We will report here a summary of the assessment. | For more details, please look at the (google spreadsheet link). We will report here a summary of the assessment. | ||
Line 67: | Line 66: | ||
Backup of config data and database during upgrades. | Backup of config data and database during upgrades. | ||
In case of hardware failure of a cloud node the VMs can be restored on another nodes. | In case of hardware failure of a cloud node the VMs can be restored on another nodes. | ||
| style="background: | | style="background: yellow"| Medium | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 75: | Line 74: | ||
| All | | All | ||
| Restoring the VM disks from the last backup, cleanup of the VM and/or restart of the service. | | Restoring the VM disks from the last backup, cleanup of the VM and/or restart of the service. | ||
| style="background: | | style="background: yellow"| Medium | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 84: | Line 83: | ||
| Restoring the VM disks from the last backup and restart of the service. | | Restoring the VM disks from the last backup and restart of the service. | ||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 92: | Line 91: | ||
| No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | | No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | ||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 100: | Line 99: | ||
| No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | | No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | ||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | 1 or more working days | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 106: | Line 105: | ||
| Not enough people for maintaining and operating the service | | Not enough people for maintaining and operating the service | ||
| All | | All | ||
| | | More personnel is capable of maintaing and operating the service. | ||
The main procedures are described in relevant documents. | |||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
| Major disruption in the data centre. Fire, flood or electric failure for example | | Major disruption in the data centre. Fire, flood or electric failure for example | ||
| All | | All | ||
| | | Cyfronet data center is protected from major power supply disruption by a backup electric power generator. | ||
The | The computing infrastructure is distributed in two distant locations. | ||
Both locations have fire protection infrastructure. | |||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | 1 or more working days | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 123: | Line 124: | ||
| Major security incident. The system is compromised by external attackers and needs to be reinstalled and restored. | | Major security incident. The system is compromised by external attackers and needs to be reinstalled and restored. | ||
| All | | All | ||
| | | The VMs can be restored from the last daily backup. | ||
An investigation is performed to identify the used attack vectors, and depending on them, the system's security is improved to avoid recurrent attacks (e.g. compromised password are changed, tokens are revoked, certificates are revoked and replaced, network configuration is adjusted, software vulnerabilities are mitigated with patches introduced in top priority system upgrades). | |||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | up to 4 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
| (D)DOS attack. The service is unavailable because of a coordinated DDOS. | | (D)DOS attack. The service is unavailable because of a coordinated DDOS. | ||
| Client applications - Web UI, Oneclient (FUSE), middleware using REST/CDMI APIs | | Client applications - Web UI, Oneclient (FUSE), middleware using REST/CDMI APIs | ||
| | | Firewall and anti-DDOS systems. | ||
| style="background: green"| Low | | style="background: green"| Low | ||
| | | up to 8 hours | ||
| the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 145: | Line 144: | ||
== Additional information == | == Additional information == | ||
* The provider has got procedures for the several countermeasures to invoke in case of risk occurrence | |||
* The Availability targets don't change in case the plan is invoked. | |||
The support unit | * Recovery requirements: | ||
** Maximum tolerable period of disruption (MTPoD) (the maximum amount of time that a service can be unavailable or undelivered after an event that causes disruption to operations, before its stakeholders perceive unacceptable consequences): 3 days | |||
** Recovery time objective (RTO) (the acceptable amount of time to restore the service in order to avoid unacceptable consequences associated with a break in continuity (this has to be less than MTPoD)): 1 day | |||
** Recovery point objective (RPO) (the acceptable latency of data that will not be recovered): 1 day | |||
* Approach for the return to normal working conditions as reported in the risk assessment. | |||
* The support unit DataHub shall be used to report any incident or service request | |||
* The providers can contact EGI Operations via ticket or email in case the continuity plan is invoked, or to discuss any change to it. | |||
= Availability and Continuity test = | = Availability and Continuity test = | ||
<pre style="color: blue"> | <pre style="color: blue"> | ||
Line 186: | Line 181: | ||
| 2021-10-28 | | 2021-10-28 | ||
| first draft | | first draft | ||
|- | |||
| <br> | |||
| Alessandro Paolini, Renato Santana | |||
| 2021-12-17 | |||
| added risk assessment and other information | |||
|- | |- | ||
| | | |
Latest revision as of 11:40, 17 December 2021
Main | EGI.eu operations services | Support | Documentation | Tools | Activities | Performance | Technology | Catch-all Services | Resource Allocation | Security |
Documentation menu: | Home • | Manuals • | Procedures • | Training • | Other • | Contact ► | For: | VO managers • | Administrators |
Back to main page: Services Availability Continuity Plans
Introduction
This page reports on the Availability and Continuity Plan for the EGI DataHub and it is the result of the risks assessment conducted for this service: a series of risks and treats has been identified and analysed, along with the correspondent countermeasures currently in place. Whenever a countermeasure is not considered satisfactory for either avoiding or reducing the likelihood of the occurrence of a risk, or its impact, it is agreed with the service provider a new treatment for improving the availability and continuity of the service. The process is concluded with an availability and continuity test.
Last | Next | |
---|---|---|
Risks assessment | 2021-12 | 2022-12 |
Av/Co plan and test |
previous plans are collected here: https://documents.egi.eu/document/3856
Availability requirements and performances
- Onezone is operated by 4 VMs, two for database redundancy, two for service redundancy
In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis:
- Availability: 95%
- Reliability: 95%
Other availability requirements:
- the service is accessible through X509 certificate and federated identities
- The service is accessible via webUI (link to the probes that checks the authentication and the service in general)
The service availability is regularly tested by nagios probes eu.egi.CertValidity, org.onedata.Onezone-Health, and org.onedata.Oneprovider-Health:
- https://argo-mon.egi.eu/nagios/cgi-bin/status.cgi?servicegroup=SITE_EGI-DATAHUB_org.onedata.oneprovider&style=overview
- https://argo-mon.egi.eu/nagios/cgi-bin/status.cgi?servicegroup=SITE_EGI-DATAHUB_org.onedata.onezone&style=overview
The performances reports in terms of Availability and Reliability are produced by ARGO on an almost real time basis and they are also periodically collected into the Documentation Database.
Over the past years, the SERVICE NAME hadn't particular Av/Co issues highlighted by the performances that need to be further investigated.
Risks assessment and management
For more details, please look at the (google spreadsheet link). We will report here a summary of the assessment.
Risks analysis
Risk id | Risk description | Affected components | Established measures | Risk level | Expected duration of downtime / time for recovery | Comment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Service unavailable / loss of data due to hardware failure | All | The datahub service is deployed on VMs running on the Cloud infrastructure in Cyfronet.
The VMs block devices are protected from data loss by the Cloud itself - data redunduncy on different disk drives and daily backups of the Cloud storage. Backup of config data and database during upgrades. In case of hardware failure of a cloud node the VMs can be restored on another nodes. |
Medium | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
2 | Service unavailable / loss of data due to software failure | All | Restoring the VM disks from the last backup, cleanup of the VM and/or restart of the service. | Medium | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
3 | service unavailable / loss of data due to human error | All | Restoring the VM disks from the last backup and restart of the service. | Low | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
4 | service unavailable for network failure (Network outage with causes within of the site) | Client applications - Web UI, Oneclient (FUSE), middleware using REST/CDMI APIs | No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | Low | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
5 | service unavailable for network failure (Network outage with causes external of the site) | Client applications - Web UI, Oneclient (FUSE), middleware using REST/CDMI APIs | No additional measures. The service itself becomes available with the end of the network outage. | Low | 1 or more working days | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
6 | Not enough people for maintaining and operating the service | All | More personnel is capable of maintaing and operating the service.
The main procedures are described in relevant documents. |
Low | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
7 | Major disruption in the data centre. Fire, flood or electric failure for example | All | Cyfronet data center is protected from major power supply disruption by a backup electric power generator.
The computing infrastructure is distributed in two distant locations. Both locations have fire protection infrastructure. |
Low | 1 or more working days | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
8 | Major security incident. The system is compromised by external attackers and needs to be reinstalled and restored. | All | The VMs can be restored from the last daily backup.
An investigation is performed to identify the used attack vectors, and depending on them, the system's security is improved to avoid recurrent attacks (e.g. compromised password are changed, tokens are revoked, certificates are revoked and replaced, network configuration is adjusted, software vulnerabilities are mitigated with patches introduced in top priority system upgrades). |
Low | up to 4 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
9 | (D)DOS attack. The service is unavailable because of a coordinated DDOS. | Client applications - Web UI, Oneclient (FUSE), middleware using REST/CDMI APIs | Firewall and anti-DDOS systems. | Low | up to 8 hours | the measures already in place are considered satisfactory and risk level is acceptable |
Outcome
for example:
The level of all the identified risks is acceptable and the countermeasures already adopted are considered satisfactory
Additional information
- The provider has got procedures for the several countermeasures to invoke in case of risk occurrence
- The Availability targets don't change in case the plan is invoked.
- Recovery requirements:
- Maximum tolerable period of disruption (MTPoD) (the maximum amount of time that a service can be unavailable or undelivered after an event that causes disruption to operations, before its stakeholders perceive unacceptable consequences): 3 days
- Recovery time objective (RTO) (the acceptable amount of time to restore the service in order to avoid unacceptable consequences associated with a break in continuity (this has to be less than MTPoD)): 1 day
- Recovery point objective (RPO) (the acceptable latency of data that will not be recovered): 1 day
- Approach for the return to normal working conditions as reported in the risk assessment.
- The support unit DataHub shall be used to report any incident or service request
- The providers can contact EGI Operations via ticket or email in case the continuity plan is invoked, or to discuss any change to it.
Availability and Continuity test
The proposed A/C test will focus on a recovery scenario: the service is supposed to have been disrupted and needs to be reinstalled from scratch. Typically this covers the risks 1,2, and 7. The last backup of the data will be used for restoring the service, verifying how much information will be lost, and the time spent will be measured. Performing this test will be useful to spot any issue in the recovery procedures of the service.
Test details
Test outcome
Revision History
Version | Authors | Date | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Renato Santana | 2021-10-28 | first draft | |
Alessandro Paolini, Renato Santana | 2021-12-17 | added risk assessment and other information | |