Search Results

The purpose of this SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) is to provide guidance for aircraft engine and propeller systems (hereafter referred to as propulsion systems) certification for cybersecurity. Compliance for cybersecurity requires that the engine control, propeller control, monitoring system, and all auxiliary equipment systems and networks associated with the propulsion system (such as nacelle systems, overspeed governors, and thrust reversers) be protected from intentional unauthorized electronic interactions (IUEI) that may result in an adverse effect on the safety of the propulsion system or the airplane.

Strategies designed to deal with these challenges differ in the way in which added duties are assigned and cybersecurity topics are integrated into the already existing process steps. Cybersecurity requirements often clash with existing system requirements or established development methods, leading to low acceptance among developers, and introducing the need to have clear policies on how friction between cybersecurity and other fields is handled. ...Cybersecurity requirements often clash with existing system requirements or established development methods, leading to low acceptance among developers, and introducing the need to have clear policies on how friction between cybersecurity and other fields is handled. A cybersecurity development approach is frequently perceived as introducing impediments, that bear the risk of cybersecurity measures receiving a lower priority to reduce inconvenience. ...For an established development process and a team accustomed to this process, adding cybersecurity features to the product initially means inconvenience and reduced productivity without perceivable benefits.

This over view of the subject analyzes automotive cybersecurity threats that are gaining attention worldwide and the apparent ways industries are responding to them.

Its extensive application of data networks, including enhanced external digital communication, forced the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), for the first time, to set “Special Conditions” for cybersecurity. In the 15 years that ensued, airworthiness regulation followed suit, and all key rule-, regulation-, and standard-making organizations weighed in to establish a new airworthiness cybersecurity superset of legislation, regulation, and standardization. ...In the 15 years that ensued, airworthiness regulation followed suit, and all key rule-, regulation-, and standard-making organizations weighed in to establish a new airworthiness cybersecurity superset of legislation, regulation, and standardization. The resulting International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) resolutions, US and European Union (EU) legislations, FAA and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) regulations, and the DO-326/ED-202 set of standards are already the de-facto, and soon becoming the official, standards for legislation, regulation, and best practices, with the FAA already mandating it to a constantly growing extent for a few years now—and EASA adopting the set in its entirety in July 2020.

This course will introduce participants to industry best practices for real-world aviation cyber-security risk-assessment, development & assurance. Participants will learn the information necessary to help minimize DO-326/ED-202-set compliance risks and costs, while also optimizing cyber-security levels for the development, deployment and in-service phases Topics such as aircraft security aspects of safety, systems-approach to security, security planning, the airworthiness security process, and security effectiveness assurance will be covered.

To build secure systems of road vehicles, the cybersecurity engineering standard ISO21434[11] suggests the evaluation of vulnerabilities throughout engineering process, such as attack path analysis, system requirement stage, software architecture, design, and implementation and testing phases. ...With my analysis and practices, it is appropriate to include the common vulnerabilities that ought to be an integral part of the automotive cybersecurity engineering process. In this paper, the author would like to provide a list of vulnerabilities that might be a suggestion for threat analysis and risk assessment and propose two solutions that may be adopted directly in the V-model for security-relevant software development.

Abstract Automotive cybersecurity is steadily becoming a key factor in the worldwide adoption of connected and self-driving vehicles.

Additional complicating factors, such as cybersecurity concerns combined with a first responder’s legal authority, may pose challenges for traditional data collection.

V2X signals are looking up

This document addresses the development of security material for application specifications in SAE V2X Technical Committees. The assumption in this document is that two groups with distinct missions contribute to the development of each standard: the “Application Specification Team is in charge of specifying the application functionality and the “Security Specification Team” is in charge of specifying the security. The two teams may, of course, have a significant overlap of members.

SAE is developing a number of standards, including the SAE J2945/x and SAE J3161/x series, that specify a set of applications using message sets from the SAE J2735 data dictionary. (“Application” is used here to mean “a collection of activities including interactions between different entities in the service of a collection of related goals and associated with a given IEEE Provider Service Identifier (PSID)”). Authenticity and integrity of the communications for these applications are ensured using digital signatures and IEEE 1609.2 digital certificates, which also indicate the permissions of the senders using Provider Service Identifiers (PSIDs) and Service Specific Permissions (SSPs). The PSID is a globally unique identifier associated with an application specification that unambiguously describes how to build interoperable instances of that application.

This course provides an overview of state-of-the-art intelligent vehicles, presents a systematic framework for intelligent technologies and vehicle-level architecture, and introduces testing methodologies to evaluate individual and integrated intelligent functions. Considering the increasing demand for vehicle intelligence, it is critical to gain an understanding of the growing variety of intelligent vehicle technologies and how they must function together effectively as a system.

Abstract Connected vehicle technology consisting of Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) communication falls under the umbrella of V2X, or Vehicle-to-Everything, communication. This enables vehicles and infrastructure to exchange safety-related information to enable smarter, safer roads. If driver alerts are raised or automated action is taken as a result of these messages, it is critical that messages are trustworthy and reliable. To this end, the Security Credential Management System (SCMS) and Cooperative Intelligent Transportation Systems (C-ITS) Credential Management System (CCMS) have been proposed to enable authentication and authorization of V2X messages without compromising individual user privacy. This is accomplished by issuing each vehicle a large set of “pseudonyms,” unrelated to any real-world identity. During operation, the vehicle periodically switches pseudonyms, thereby changing its identity to others in the network.

The automotive industry is set for a rapid transformation in the next few years in terms of communication. The kind of growth the automotive industry is poised for in fields of connected cars is both fascinating and alarming at the same time. The communication devices equipped to the cars and the data exchanges done between vehicles to vehicles are prone to a lot of cyber-related attacks. The signals that are sent using Vehicular Adhoc Network (VANET) between vehicles can be eavesdropped by the attackers and it may be used for various attacks such as the man in the middle attack, DOS attack, Sybil attack, etc. These attacks can be prevented using the Blockchain technology, where each transaction is logged in a decentralized immutable Blockchain ledger. This provides authenticity and integrity to the signals. But the use of Blockchain Platforms such as Ethereum has various drawbacks like scalability which makes it infeasible for connected car system.

Abstract Letter from the Co-editors

As a promising strategic industry group that is rapidly evolving around the world, autonomous vehicle is entering a critical phase of commercialization from demonstration to end markets. The global automotive industry and governments are facing new common topics and challenges brought by autonomous vehicle, such as how to test, assess, and administrate the autonomous vehicle to ensure their safe running in real traffic situations and proper interactions with other road users. Starting from the facts that the way to autonomous driving is the process of a robot or a machine taking over driving tasks from a human. This paper summarizes the main characteristics of autonomous vehicle which are different from traditional one, then demonstrates the limitations of the existing certification mechanism and related testing methods when applied to autonomous vehicle.

Access mechanisms to system data and/or control is a primary use case of the hardware protected security environment (hardware protected security environment) during different uses and stages of the system. The hardware protected security environment acts as a gatekeeper for these use cases and not necessarily as the executor of the function. This section is a generalization of such use cases in an attempt to extract common requirements for the hardware protected security environment that enable it to be a gatekeeper. Examples are: Creating a new key fob Re-flashing ECU firmware Reading/exporting PII out of the ECU Using a subscription-based feature Performing some service on an ECU Transferring ownership of the vehicle Some of these examples are discussed later in this section and some have detailed sections of their own. This list is by no means comprehensive.

Connected vehicles can provide data from multiple sensors that monitor both the vehicle and the environment through which the vehicle is passing. The data, when shared, can be used to enhance and optimize transportation operations and management—specifically, traffic flow and infrastructure maintenance. This document describes an interface between vehicle and infrastructure for collecting vehicle/probe data. That data may represent a single point in time or may be accumulated over defined periods of time or distance, or may be triggered based on circumstance. The purpose of this document is to define an interoperable means of collecting the vehicle/probe data in support of the use cases defined herein. There are many additional use cases that may be realized based on the interface defined in this document. Note that vehicle diagnostics are not included within the scope of this document, but diagnostics-related features may be added to probe data in a future supplemental document.

In recent years, with increase in external connectivity (V2X, telematics, mobile projection, BYOD) the automobile is becoming a target of cyberattacks and intrusions. Any such intrusion reduces customer trust in connected cars and negatively impacts brand image (like the recent Jeep Cherokee hack). To protect against intrusion, several mechanisms are available. These range from a simple secure CAN to a specialized symbiote defense software. A few systems (e.g. V2X) implement detection of an intrusion (defined as a misbehaving entity). However, most of the mechanisms require a system-wide change which adds to the cost and negatively impacts the performance. In this paper, we are proposing a practical and scalable approach to intrusion detection. Some benefits of our approach include use of existing security mechanisms such as TrustZone® and watermarking with little or no impact on cost and performance. In addition, our approach is scalable and does not require any system-wide changes.

Automotive safety is always the focus of consumers, the selling point of products, the focus of technology. In order to achieve automatic driving, interconnection with the outside world, human-automatic system interaction, the security connotation of intelligent and connected vehicles (ICV) changes: information security is the basis of its security. Functional safety ensures that the system is operating properly. Behavioral safety guarantees a secure interaction between people and vehicles. Passive security should not be weakened, but should be strengthened based on new constraints. In terms of information safety, the threshold for attacking cloud, pipe, and vehicle information should be raised to ensure that ICV system does not fail due to malicious attacks. The cloud is divided into three cloud platforms according to functions: ICVs private cloud, TSP cloud, public cloud.