Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Aircraft Aircraft Control Cockpit Network VPN Level A SW Level A SW Crew 1 Network Manager Encapsulation Gateway High-Assurance LAN Air- to - Ground Comms Firewall High-Assurance LAN Packet Filter Non-Cockpit Noncockpit Crew Crew Network Network Passenger Network High-Assurance LAN High-Assurance LAN Crew 1 Crew N Passenger 1 Passenger 2 Passenger N SW = Software Figure 35. Sample Airborne Network Management If the entities within a VPN are to be managed, then they need to be managed by a network management station that also resides within that same VPN. However, if this is done, then the airplane will have multiple network manager systems, one for the unencapsulated network and one for each managed VPN. This would create a fragmented management view of the total network, which would greatly increase the difficulty of effectively managing that airplane. Because of this, this study recommends that the VPN encapsulation be established by means of an encapsulation gateway middlebox, rather than the traditional dual PE and CE router approach (see figure 34), so that the aeronautical community would have the alternative of optionally building integrated VPN management capabilities into the encapsulation gateway itself. As figure 33 shows, the encapsulation gateways have two faces: one to the unencapsulated airborne network and one to the encapsulated VPN community that they serve. In traditional VPN practice, there is no mechanism for these two networks to be linked, which is why VPN technology qualifies as being a viable ARP 4754 partition design for networked systems. However, if the aeronautical community decides to implement the IPsec VPN [99] technology by means of encapsulation gateway middleboxes recommended by this study, then the aeronautical community needs to determine if and how VPN management adjunct capabilities are defined within the encapsulation gateway design. Such a design needs to carefully preserve the safety and security integrity protections that are provided by VPN technologies while simultaneously meeting the actual network management requirements. This is a very serious issue. The following discussion is a sample of the type of 120
design decisions that need to be determined if encapsulation gateways are to effectively support VPN network management. This study has stated that high-assurance devices cannot be misconfigured. For this reason, devices in Levels A and B VPNs may have comparatively diminished management requirements than other airborne devices. The stakeholders need to determine what that actually means. Does it mean that the primary management requirement of these devices will be to report their current status, explicitly including the results of the current (Tripwire-like) software integrity reports? Will different variants of encapsulation gateways be defined, with some variants supporting extensive configuration and management functions (e.g., for lower-software assurance VPNs) and others primarily supporting status reports (for higher-assurance VPNs)? Will the encapsulating gateways solely function to forward (pass through) traditional SNMP management communications between network managers and management agents that reside on the devices within the VPNs? Alternatively, will the management agent actually be located within the encapsulating gateway itself such that the agent within the gateway translates SNMP communications to and from standard network managers into actual management tasks performed upon the devices located within the VPN that it supports? Many other management approaches are possible, but it is desirable to find a consistent approach that is supported by the aeronautical community in which the interfaces and management schemas supported by the VPN encapsulation gateways are common and consistent worldwide. From a security perspective, it is important that the encapsulation gateway be configured to drop all packets addressed to itself that do not use IPsec’s ESP in transport mode. Thus, the network manager will send management queries (or commands) to a specific encapsulation gateway and the encapsulation gateway will eventually report back to the network manager, with all communications occurring via ESP in transport mode. Both the encapsulation gateway and the network manager must authenticate each others’ communications. Approaches to authorize network managers also need to be carefully considered, with separation of duties with least privilege being recommended by this study. The encapsulation gateways will need to be certified as high-assurance security items (i.e., EAL 5 or higher). Because network managers located on unencapsulated networks natively do not know about VPN entities, it is possible to preconfigure a network manager with information associating VPN devices with a specific encapsulation gateway. Alternatively, the encapsulation gateway could be queried—or pass through such queries directly to the VPN devices—concerning entities within that VPN, possibly providing information about their software identity, current software version, current status, and configuration (if appropriate). Network management also contains software development implications. If software items are to be managed, then the management schemas by which the software is managed need to be devised in accordance with the network management system used on that aircraft. This requires coordination and advanced knowledge of the specific management protocol that will be used, the mechanisms by which that protocol will be secured, the desired format for the management schema, and a common approach for schema definition. 121
Page 1 and 2:
DOT/FAA/AR-08/31 Air Traffic Organi
Page 3 and 4:
1. Report No. DOT/FAA/AR-08/31 4. T
Page 5 and 6:
5.4.2 Aircraft as a Node (MIP and M
Page 7 and 8:
11.1 Findings and Recommendations 1
Page 9 and 10:
22 Customer’s L3VPN Protocol Stac
Page 11 and 12:
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Page 13 and 14:
PBN PC PE PEP PFS PIB PIM-DM PIM-SM
Page 15 and 16:
This report states that the primary
Page 17 and 18:
1. INTRODUCTION. This is the final
Page 19 and 20:
protocol (IP)-based communications.
Page 21 and 22:
of linking aircraft-resident system
Page 23 and 24:
Industry and governments are extrem
Page 25 and 26:
2.1 NOTIONAL NETWORKED AIRCRAFT ARC
Page 27 and 28:
Other Control Sites Controller ATC
Page 29 and 30:
• The security viability of curre
Page 31 and 32:
alternative requires that parallel
Page 33 and 34:
Aircraft network security is a syst
Page 35 and 36:
4. NETWORK RISKS. This section spec
Page 37 and 38:
General Threat Identifiers FAILURE
Page 39 and 40:
esources so that the required real-
Page 41 and 42:
“With the rise of client-side att
Page 43 and 44:
• During an 11-month period (Apri
Page 45 and 46:
attempt the theft of passwords. Non
Page 47 and 48:
IP networks are organized in terms
Page 49 and 50:
either the user or the trusted soft
Page 51 and 52:
However, the previous paragraph beg
Page 53 and 54:
Table 1. Internet Engineering Task
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
• Lightweight directory access pr
Page 61 and 62:
mechanism to overcome the key distr
Page 63 and 64:
Deployments that need to support mu
Page 65 and 66:
Today’s Reality: Islands of Commu
Page 67 and 68:
Simultaneously, IP addresses are al
Page 69 and 70:
in-depth manner. Defense-in-depth m
Page 71 and 72:
Protection Detection Reaction / Neu
Page 73 and 74:
encrypted and then encapsulated wit
Page 75 and 76:
Internet (grouping of autonomous sy
Page 77 and 78:
via that same IP address. Specifica
Page 79 and 80:
deployments. Regional flights that
Page 81 and 82:
neighbor as a next hop after “Hol
Page 83 and 84:
Interface Interface Customer Site S
Page 85 and 86: Interface Customer’s Application
Page 87 and 88: Although the vast majority of PBN s
Page 89 and 90: 6. RELATING SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR
Page 91 and 92: 6.1.1 Integrity. As section 4.3 ind
Page 93 and 94: As mentioned in section 4.4, the hi
Page 95 and 96: 6.1.4 Confidentiality. Confidential
Page 97 and 98: their own classification level nor
Page 99 and 100: integrity is not permitted to obser
Page 101 and 102: software has been confirmed as leve
Page 103 and 104: • Both safety and security are co
Page 105 and 106: Device at Safety level X Device at
Page 107 and 108: in a Biba Integrity Model environme
Page 109 and 110: Common Criteria Classes ACM—Confi
Page 111 and 112: (see section 9.10). A secure mechan
Page 113 and 114: employed in security-critical appli
Page 115 and 116: concept, which is needed to create
Page 117 and 118: 4. Learn from past mistakes. Poor d
Page 119 and 120: exemplar airborne network architect
Page 121 and 122: • Requirement 8: Biba Integrity M
Page 123 and 124: Figure 31 shows how the recommended
Page 125 and 126: to-live (TTL) field in the IP heade
Page 127 and 128: using the traditional dual router i
Page 129 and 130: mechanism relies upon the controlle
Page 131 and 132: HAGs are high-assurance devices tha
Page 133 and 134: 8.3.5 Firewall. The firewall needs
Page 135: (AJ) or low probability of intercep
Page 139 and 140: 9.2 INTEGRATED MODULAR AVIONICS IMP
Page 141 and 142: 9.3 USING PUBLIC IPs. The model and
Page 143 and 144: alerted the pilots because the fail
Page 145 and 146: environments. If the certification
Page 147 and 148: DSS (FIPS 186 [81]). Code signing i
Page 149 and 150: elationship with other equipment in
Page 151 and 152: approach is to keep the log informa
Page 153 and 154: 11. SUMMARY. Current civilian aircr
Page 155 and 156: environments should be extended to
Page 157 and 158: 12. COTS computer systems cannot be
Page 159 and 160: 14. NAS and airborne network archit
Page 161 and 162: 22. If SWAP considerations permit,
Page 163 and 164: 11.2 TOPICS NEEDING FURTHER STUDY.
Page 165 and 166: 9. Lee, Y., Rachlin, E., and Scandu
Page 167 and 168: 32. Loscocco, P., Smalley, S., Muck
Page 169 and 170: 59. Raisinghani, V. and Sridhar, I.
Page 171 and 172: the following is a pointer to a rel
Page 173 and 174: Department of Defense Instruction N
Page 175 and 176: Information Assurance—The Departm
Page 177 and 178: Threat source—Either (1) intent a
Page 179 and 180: information found within these data
Page 181 and 182: (HTTP) traffic (port 80), port scan
Page 183 and 184: The simple network management proto
Page 185 and 186: opportunities to crack the hosting
Page 187 and 188:
authorized to perform. 13 However,
Page 189 and 190:
sniffers, log-cleaning scripts, and
Page 191 and 192:
A.3.1 DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACKS. Th
Page 193 and 194:
• Disclosure: Disclosure of routi
Page 195 and 196:
affected by the signal intermittenc
Page 197 and 198:
A-15. Barbir, A., Murphy, S., and Y
Page 199 and 200:
Survey Question What is the primary
Page 201 and 202:
Survey Question What is the primary
Page 203 and 204:
should be emphasized that there is
show all

Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?