6. Critical Infrastructure Securitysearch areas. Moreover, the high complexity and the high deployment costs ofCPSs make scientific research very expensive, with a high access barrier. For instance,conducting experiments on security protection tools for power-grid ICSsin real-world conditions may be impossible. In contrast, obtaining samples ofadvanced malware families for experiments in the wild is straightforward. This,however, is changing, as some simulation platforms [191, 192, 290, 326, 359]—or,better, testbeds [31, 35, 36]—are being built by governments agencies (also inEurope [412]) to support research and (military) training. The main researchtargets that arise are to determine how accurately these systems can simulatethe true operations of CIs and, more importantly, to test countermeasuresunder realistic conditions.The causes of the threats against CIs are unknown or very uncertain.Apart from the many speculations, there is no strong evidence to confirmthat attackers are nation states, secret services or actual cybercriminals withmalicious purposes. The cause of this is twofold. Real-world attacks againstCIs found the organization unprepa<strong>red</strong>; thus, few or no data were collectedthat could be used to reconstruct the scenario. Even where data are available,attacks such as Stuxnet are extremely complex, such that they would requi<strong>red</strong>ata collected from a multitude of (distributed) sources and actors. Clearly,this was not possible. This lack of data impacts the research community,which is left with malware samples, many guesses, and little strong evidence.This raises the research question regarding how to collect and disseminatesuch data through scientific repositories such as those proposed by previousconsortia [62].6.7 Example ProblemsFrom the above analysis of the state of the art and research gaps, we canformulate the following research problems.Designing and deploying honeypot systems in real-world ICSs to collect evidence andcreate datasets for experiments. SCADA honeynets have been proposed inthe past [46], although the variety of SCADA implementations make itdifficult to decode the TCP-encapsulated protocols. In addition, collectingdata on the PLC layer is challenging. Many industries are admittedlyleaving this layer unmonito<strong>red</strong> because of the difficulties in data collection.After the answer to the first part of this research problem, whichconsists of the design and implementation of a honeypot for the majorvendors, the second part concerns the creation of a legal frameworkthat regulates their deployment, operation and use for data collectionpurposes.This research line has already drawn some attention. Indeed, someefforts have been made towards “finding out who is really attacking48
6.7. Example Problemsyour ICS infrastructure.” The most notable example is described ina recent industry research paper by Trendmicro [398], who deployeda SCADA/ICS honeypot system that included dummy web serversmimicking the control panel of a water pressure station as well as realPLC devices exposed on the Internet with default login c<strong>red</strong>entials, whichact as traps by imitating the activities of a real production system. Thirtynineattempts to access or alter unauthorized resources of the honeypotwere discove<strong>red</strong> during less than a month of observation. The reportmentions that “China accounted for the majority of the attack attemptsat 35%, followed by the United States at 19% and Lao at 12%.”Evaluating the accuracy of current modeling and simulation tools and, possibly,design better simulation tools. There are plenty of SCADA/ICS/CI simulationtools, created to fill the gap that many researchers face whenthey need real devices to test their security mechanisms. It is unclear,however, how accurate these systems are and how much they adhere tothe reality. Each study in this field has obviously justified the proposedapproach. What is missing is a systematization effort, toward the creationof a framework that can be used to evaluate existing and future simulators.This framework will have to take into account the characteristicsof real-world attacks: How well is a simulation tool able to emulate thebehavior of a real-world attack such as Stuxnet?Information correlation and attack scenario reconstruction. Intrusion detectionresearch is one of the main consumers of the data collected by honeypotsystems. In particular, as it happened in the past when intrusion detectionresearch was rampant, the correlation of various sources of information isone of the most challenging research problems. In ICS/SCADA systemsthis problem is more difficult, due to the inherent interdisciplinarityof the area and to the variety of protocols and vendors involved. Forinstance, one of the questions that need answering is to what extentattacks perpetrated (and detected) on the TCP side of a SCADA networkare visible also on the PLC side and, if that is the case, to what extentthese are correlated.49
- Page 1:
SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMETHERED B
- Page 4 and 5:
The Red Book. ©2013 The SysSec Con
- Page 7 and 8: PrefaceAfter the completion of its
- Page 9 and 10: Contents1 Executive Summary 32 Intr
- Page 11 and 12: 1 Executive SummaryBased on publish
- Page 13: 1.2. Grand Challenges4. will have t
- Page 16 and 17: 2. Introductionwho want to get at t
- Page 18 and 19: 2. Introduction• Although conside
- Page 20 and 21: 2. Introductionfuture, where each a
- Page 22 and 23: 2. Introductiondrones), such sensor
- Page 24 and 25: 2. Introductioncover our energy nee
- Page 27: Part I: Threats Identified
- Page 30 and 31: 3. In Search of Lost Anonymity3.2 W
- Page 32 and 33: 3. In Search of Lost Anonymityguide
- Page 35 and 36: 4 Software VulnerabilitiesExtending
- Page 37 and 38: 4.1. What Is the Problem?infrastruc
- Page 39 and 40: 4.5. State of the Artparts of criti
- Page 41: 4.7. Example Problemstem mitigation
- Page 44 and 45: 5. Social Networks5.1 Who Is Going
- Page 46 and 47: 5. Social Networksby such an applic
- Page 48 and 49: 5. Social Networksdisasters. This r
- Page 50 and 51: 6. Critical Infrastructure Security
- Page 52 and 53: 6. Critical Infrastructure Security
- Page 54 and 55: 6. Critical Infrastructure Security
- Page 59 and 60: 7 Authentication and AuthorizationH
- Page 61 and 62: 7.2. Who Is Going to Be Affected?so
- Page 63 and 64: 7.5. State of the ArtFinally, ident
- Page 65 and 66: 7.6. Research Gapshashes and evalua
- Page 67 and 68: 8 Security of Mobile DevicesIn an e
- Page 69 and 70: 8.3. What Is the Worst That Can Hap
- Page 71 and 72: 8.4. State of the ArtAll the other
- Page 73: 8.6. Example Problemserated anomaly
- Page 76 and 77: 9. Legacy Systemsthe execution of a
- Page 78 and 79: 9. Legacy Systemsparts of the progr
- Page 81 and 82: 10 Usable SecurityKeys, locks, and
- Page 83 and 84: 10.4. What Is the Worst That Can Ha
- Page 85 and 86: 10.6. Research Gaps10.6 Research Ga
- Page 87: 10.7. Example Problemsof value for
- Page 90 and 91: 11. The Botnet that Would not DieNu
- Page 92 and 93: 11. The Botnet that Would not Diefa
- Page 94 and 95: 11. The Botnet that Would not Dieti
- Page 96 and 97: 12. Malwarethan 128 million malware
- Page 98 and 99: 12. Malwareequipped with auto-updat
- Page 100 and 101: 12. Malwarethe introduction of App
- Page 102 and 103: 13. Social Engineering and Phishing
- Page 104 and 105: 13. Social Engineering and Phishing
- Page 106 and 107:
13. Social Engineering and Phishing
- Page 108 and 109:
13. Social Engineering and Phishing
- Page 111 and 112:
14 Grand ChallengesOne of the most
- Page 113:
Part II: Related Work
- Page 116 and 117:
15. A Crisis of Prioritization•
- Page 118 and 119:
16. Forwardare accessible from the
- Page 120 and 121:
16. ForwardRecommendation 4: “The
- Page 122 and 123:
17. Federal Plan for Cyber Security
- Page 124 and 125:
17. Federal Plan for Cyber Security
- Page 126 and 127:
18. EffectsPlus18.1 Roadmap Structu
- Page 128 and 129:
18. EffectsPlus18.6 Identified Prio
- Page 130 and 131:
19. Digital GovernmentThe roadmap o
- Page 132 and 133:
20. Horizon2020• “Making cyber
- Page 135 and 136:
21 Trust in the Information Society
- Page 137:
21.2. Recommendationsallows for the
- Page 140 and 141:
22. ENISA Threat Landscape2. Malwar
- Page 142 and 143:
22. ENISA Threat LandscapeSocial Te
- Page 144 and 145:
22. ENISA Threat Landscapewriters w
- Page 146 and 147:
23. Cyber Security Research Worksho
- Page 149 and 150:
24 Cyber Security Strategy of theEu
- Page 151 and 152:
24.2. Strategic PrioritiesProposed
- Page 153 and 154:
25 The Dutch National Cyber Securit
- Page 155 and 156:
25.1. ContextsInternet (e.g., smart
- Page 157 and 158:
25.1. Contextsdefensive approaches
- Page 159 and 160:
25.2. Research Themesand radio broa
- Page 161 and 162:
25.2. Research Themesconsists of se
- Page 163 and 164:
25.2. Research ThemesRisk managemen
- Page 165 and 166:
AMethodologiesIn this appendix we o
- Page 167 and 168:
BSysSec Threats Landscape Evolution
- Page 169 and 170:
B.4. SysSec 2013 Threats LandscapeT
- Page 171 and 172:
B.4. SysSec 2013 Threats LandscapeS
- Page 173 and 174:
Bibliography[1] 10 Questions for Ke
- Page 175 and 176:
Bibliography[45] SCADA & Security o
- Page 177 and 178:
Bibliography[88] A. Avizienis, J.-C
- Page 179 and 180:
Bibliography[130] G. Cluley. 600,00
- Page 181 and 182:
Bibliography[172] D. Evans. Top 25
- Page 183 and 184:
Bibliography[214] ICS-CERT. Monthly
- Page 185 and 186:
Bibliography[253] C. Lever, M. Anto
- Page 187 and 188:
Bibliography[291] Mozilla. Browseri
- Page 189 and 190:
Bibliography[329] F. Raja, K. Hawke
- Page 191 and 192:
Bibliography[370] T. Telegraph. Bog
- Page 193 and 194:
Bibliography[407] W. Yang, N. Li, Y