Search Results

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.

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.

The results of this work is allowed to identify a number of cybersecurity threats of the automated security-critical automotive systems, which reduces the efficiency of operation, road safety and system safety. ...According to the evaluating criterion of board electronics, the presence of poorly-protected communication channels, the 75% of the researched modern vehicles do not meet the minimum requirements of cybersecurity due to the danger of external blocking of vital systems. The revealed vulnerabilities of the security-critical automotive systems lead to the necessity of developing methods for mechanical and electronic protection of the modern vehicle. ...The law of normal distribution of the mid-points of the expert evaluation of the cyber-security of a modern vehicle has been determined. Based on the system approach, ranking of the main cybersecurity treats is performed.

The SAE AS2C Standard AS5506C Architecture Analysis and Description Language (AADL) is a modeling language for predictive analysis of real-time software reliant, safety and cybersecurity critical systems that provides both the precision of formal modeling and the tool-agnostic freedom of a text-based representation. ...AADL supports multiple domains of architectural analysis such as timing, latency, resources, safety, scheduling, and cybersecurity. Adventium Labs conducted an exercise to determine the applicability of software engineering practices (e.g., continuous integration (CI), application programming interface (API) sharing, test driven development (TDD)) to the AADL-based Architecture Centric Virtual Integration Process (ACVIP).

Facial recognition software (FRS) is a form of biometric security that detects a face, analyzes it, converts it to data, and then matches it with images in a database. This technology is currently being used in vehicles for safety and convenience features, such as detecting driver fatigue, ensuring ride share drivers are wearing a face covering, or unlocking the vehicle. Public transportation hubs can also use FRS to identify missing persons, intercept domestic terrorism, deter theft, and achieve other security initiatives. However, biometric data is sensitive and there are numerous remaining questions about how to implement and regulate FRS in a way that maximizes its safety and security potential while simultaneously ensuring individual’s right to privacy, data security, and technology-based equality.

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.