Search Results

Seeking to establish regulatory stability to a rapidly-advancing technology landscape, the U.S. DOT releases new and more-specific voluntary guidelines for safety-focused automated-vehicle development.

Upon their arrival, Unmanned Autonomous Systems (UAS) brought with them many benefits for those involved in a military campaign. They can use such systems to reconnoiter dangerous areas, provide 24-hr aerial security surveillance for force protection purposes or even attack enemy targets all the while avoiding friendly human losses in the process. Unfortunately, these platforms also carry the inherent risk of being built on innately vulnerable cybernetic systems. From software which can be tampered with to either steal data, damage or even outright steal the aircraft, to the data networks used for communications which can be jammed or even eavesdropped on to gain access to sensible information. All this has the potential to turn the benefits of UAS into liabilities and although the last decade has seen great advances in the development of protection and countermeasures against the described threats and beyond the risk still endures.

Legacy electronic control units are, nowadays, required to implement cybersecurity measures, but they often do not have all the elements that are necessary to realize industry-standard cybersecurity controls. ...Legacy electronic control units are, nowadays, required to implement cybersecurity measures, but they often do not have all the elements that are necessary to realize industry-standard cybersecurity controls. For example, they may not have hardware cryptographic accelerators, segregated areas of memory for storing keys, or one-time programmable memory areas. ...While the UDS service $27 (Security Access) has a reputation for poor cybersecurity, there is nothing inherent in the way it operates which prevents a secure access-control from being implemented.

This document is the Architecture Description (AD) for the SAE Unmanned Systems (UxS) Control Segment (UCS) Architecture Library Revision A or, simply, the UCS Architecture. The architecture is expressed by a library of SAE publications as referenced herein. The other publications in the UCS Architecture Library Revision A are: AS6513A, AS6518A, AS6522A, and AS6969A.

This Technical Governance is part of the SAE UCS Architecture Library and is primarily concerned with the UCS Architecture Model (AS6518) starting at Revision A and its user extensions. Users of the Model may extend it in accordance with AS6513 to meet the needs of their UCS Products. UCS Products include software components, software configurations and systems that provide or consume UCS services. For further information, refer to AS6513 Revision A or later. Technical Governance is part of the UCS Architecture Framework. This framework governs the UCS views expressed as Packages and Diagrams in the UCS Architecture Model.

This brief User Guide recaps the content of the AS6518B UCS Architectural Model. The purpose of the UCS Architecture Model is to provide the authoritative source for other models and products within the UCS Architecture as shown in the AS6512B UCS Architecture: Architecture Description.

Unsettled Issues Regarding Autonomous Vehicles and Open-source Software introduces the impact of software in advanced automotive applications, the role of open-source communities in accelerating innovation, and the important topic of safety and cybersecurity. As electronic functionality is captured in software and a bigger percentage of that software is open-source code, some critical challenges arise concerning security and validation.

On-road vehicles equipped with driving automation features—where a human might not be needed for operation on-board—are entering the mainstream public space. However, questions like “How safe is safe enough?” and “What to do if the system fails?” persist. This is where remote operation comes in, which is an additional layer to the automated driving system where a human remotely assists the so-called “driverless” vehicle in certain situations. Such remote-operation solutions introduce additional challenges and potential risks as the entire vehicle-network-human now needs to work together safely, effectively, and practically. Unsettled Issues in Remote Operation for On-road Driving Automation highlights technical questions (e.g., network latency, bandwidth, cyber security) and human aspects (e.g., workload, attentiveness, situational awareness) of remote operation and introduces evolving solutions.

Modern automobiles collect around 25 gigabytes of data per hour and autonomous vehicles are expected to generate more than 100 times that number. In comparison, the Apollo Guidance Computer assisting in the moon launches had only a 32-kilobtye hard disk. Without question, the breadth of in-vehicle data has opened new possibilities and challenges. The potential for accessing this data has led many entrepreneurs to claim that data is more valuable than even the vehicle itself. These intrepid data-miners seek to explore business opportunities in predictive maintenance, pay-as-you-drive features, and infrastructure services. Yet, the use of data comes with inherent challenges: accessibility, ownership, security, and privacy. Unsettled Legal Issues Facing Data in Autonomous, Connected, Electric, and Shared Vehicles examines some of the pressing questions on the minds of both industry and consumers. Who owns the data and how can it be used?

Their associated information technology and cyber physical systems—along with an exponentially resultant number of interconnections—present a massive cybersecurity challenge. Unlike the physical security challenge, which was treated in earnest throughout the last decades, cyber-attacks on airports keep coming, but most airport lack essential means to confront such cyber-attacks. ...These missing means are not technical tools, but rather holistic regulatory directives, technical and process standards, guides, and best practices for airports cybersecurity—even airport cybersecurity concepts and basic definitions are missing in certain cases. Unsettled Topics Concerning Airport Cybersecurity Standards and Regulation offers a deeper analysis of these issues and their causes, focusing on the unique characteristics of airports in general, specific cybersecurity challenges, missing definitions, and conceptual infrastructure for the standardization and regulation of airports cybersecurity. ...Unsettled Topics Concerning Airport Cybersecurity Standards and Regulation offers a deeper analysis of these issues and their causes, focusing on the unique characteristics of airports in general, specific cybersecurity challenges, missing definitions, and conceptual infrastructure for the standardization and regulation of airports cybersecurity.

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. ...Click here to access The Mobility Frontier: Cybersecurity on the Air & Ground Click here to access the full SAE EDGETM Research Report portfolio.

What standardization is needed to ensure that quantum technologies do not pose an unacceptable risk from an automotive cybersecurity perspective? Click here to access the full SAE EDGETM Research Report portfolio.

We describe how we apply the SAE AS 5506 Architecture and Analysis Design Language (AADL) [4] to reason about contextual and architectural concerns for cyber security. A system’s cyber security certification requires verification that the system’s cyber security mechanisms are correct, non-bypassable, and tamper-resistant. We can verify correctness by examining the mechanism itself, but verifying the other qualities requires us to examine the context in which that mechanism resides. Understanding that context and validating the system’s evolving design against that context is an objective for the Architecture Centric Virtual Integration Process (ACVIP), an AADL-based approach to model and detect system design defects before they become too costly to fix. We describe our work to apply AADL to assess non-bypassability and tamper-resistance. The results of our research - tool plugins for cyber security architectural validation - support system developers today in their ACVIP activities.

Day by day, airports adopt more IoT devices. However, airports are not exempt from possible failures due to malware’s proliferation that can abuse vulnerabilities. Computer criminals can access, corrupt, and extract information from individuals or companies. This paper explains the development of a propagation model, which started with a Delphi process. We discuss the preliminary implications for airports of the simulation model built from the Delphi recommendations.

Using a wireless medium for tractor-trailer communication will bring new cybersecurity challenges and requirements which requires new development and lifecycle considerations.

Abstract This work introduces the concept of a dual-layer specification structure for standards that separate interoperability functions, such as backward compatibility, localization, and deployment, from those essential to reliability, security, and functionality. The latter group of features, which constitute the actual standard, make up the baseline layer for instructions, while all the elements required for interoperability are specified in a second layer, known as a Protocols, Operations, Usage, and Formats (POUF) document. We applied this technique in the development of a standard for Uptane [1], a security framework for over-the-air (OTA) software updates used in many automobiles. This standard is a good candidate for a dual-layer specification because it requires communication between entities, but does not require a specific format for this communication.

This standard provides a specification of a general misbehavior report format suitable for reporting misbehavior observed by a system running SAE V2X applications, and specific report contents for specific instances of misbehavior. It also provides an overview of the architecture of a system-wide misbehavior management service for the V2X system and positions the misbehavior reporting services within that architecture.

This set of Abstract Syntax Notation (ASN.1) modules contains the precise definitions of data structures used in the SAE J3287 standard. Using the ASN.1 specification, a compiler tool can produce libraries that enable software applications to use the data structures and produce corresponding encodings using the Octet Encoding Rules (OER). For further information see the body of SAE J3287. You may also be interested in: V2X Misbehavior Reporting™ the J3287 PDF. V2X Misbehavior Reporting™ J3287 ASN File that includes the ASN file (ZIP format) - download purchase only.

V2X signals are looking up

This interface document SAE J2286 revises the requirements for file formats as described in SAE J1924. This document describes Interface 1 (I/F 1) in SAE J2214. This document does not imply the use of a specific hardware interface, but may be used with other hardware interfaces such as SAE J1939. The requirements of SAE J2286 supersede the requirements defined by SAE J1924.