Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
software items. Is there a security model or theory that could be discovered to<br />
authoritatively address this issue so that highly assured software could be def<strong>in</strong>itively<br />
created with<strong>in</strong> networked environments?<br />
• Industry has experience creat<strong>in</strong>g Bell-LaPadula Confidentiality Model, HAGs. However,<br />
there is little or no experience creat<strong>in</strong>g Biba Integrity Model HAGs. Therefore, there is a<br />
need to study and articulate the controls needed with<strong>in</strong> Biba Integrity Model HAGs. This<br />
study should dist<strong>in</strong>guish the differences (if any) between Biba Integrity Model HAG<br />
technology and Bell-LaPadula Confidentiality Model HAG technology.<br />
• What are the mechanisms that will <strong>in</strong>tegrate DoD and <strong>FAA</strong> certification processes and<br />
procedures? Is it possible to create a common certification system that reliably addresses<br />
safety <strong>in</strong> <strong>FAA</strong> environments and security <strong>in</strong> DoD environments, and both safety and<br />
security <strong>in</strong> jo<strong>in</strong>t certification environments?<br />
• Should Level D software systems be treated as Requirement 1 systems and organized <strong>in</strong>to<br />
VPN enclaves as this study currently states (see section 8.2), or should they rather<br />
become Requirement 2 systems and not be enclaved <strong>in</strong>to network partitions (VPNs) such<br />
as Level E systems?<br />
12. REFERENCES.<br />
1. ARP 4754, “Certification Considerations for Highly-Integrated or Complex <strong>Aircraft</strong><br />
Systems,” 1996, SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-<br />
0001.<br />
2. ARP 4761, “Guidel<strong>in</strong>es and Methods for Conduct<strong>in</strong>g the Safety Assessment Process on<br />
Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment,” 1996, SAE International, 400 Commonwealth<br />
Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.<br />
3. 14 CFR 23.1309, Equipment, systems, and <strong>in</strong>stallations, Revised January 1, 2006.<br />
4. 14 CFR 25.1309, Equipment, systems, and <strong>in</strong>stallations, Revised January 1, 2006.<br />
5. RTCA/DO-178B, “Software Considerations <strong>in</strong> Airborne Systems and Equipment<br />
Certification,” December 1, 1992, Prepared by SC-167.<br />
6. RTCA/DO-254, “Design Assurance Guidance for Airborne Electronic Hardware,” April<br />
19, 2000, Prepared by SC-180.<br />
7. Knight, J., “Software Challenges <strong>in</strong> Aviation Systems,” NASA Grant number NAG-1-<br />
2290, 2002. http://dependability.cs.virg<strong>in</strong>ia.edu/publications/safecomp.2002.pdf<br />
8. <strong>FAA</strong> Advisory Circular 120-76A, “Guidel<strong>in</strong>es for the Certification, Airworth<strong>in</strong>ess, and<br />
Operational Approval of Electronic Flight Bag Comput<strong>in</strong>g Devices,” March 17, 2003.<br />
148