Search Results

The flexible data rate capability in CAN (commonly called CAN FD) is implemented as a transport layer in order to allow for functional safety, cybersecurity, extended transport capability, and backward compatibility with SAE J1939DA.

The flexible data rate capability in CAN (commonly called CAN FD) is implemented as a transport layer in order to allow for functional safety, cybersecurity, extended transport capability, and backward compatibility with SAE J1939DA.

The flexible data rate capability in CAN (commonly called CAN FD) is implemented as a transport layer in order to allow for functional safety, cybersecurity, extended transport capability, and backward compatibility with SAE J1939DA.

The purpose of this document is to facilitate an understanding of aircraft information security and to develop aircraft information security operational concepts. This common understanding is important since a number of subcommittees and working groups within the aeronautical industry are considering aircraft information security. This document also provides an aircraft information security process framework relating to airline operational needs that, when implemented by an airline and its suppliers, will enable the safe and secure dispatch of the aircraft in a timely manner. This framework facilitates development of cost-effective aircraft information security and provides a common language for understanding security needs.

SMSOLUTIONS0123 represents the work of a team of policy and technical leaders from over a dozen forward-leaning organizations in the ground vehicle industry and government. When asked where Sustainable Mobility Solutions could best apply the capabilities SAE has developed over a century, the SMS group responded without hesitation: address EV charging system failure. The group determined to aggregate charging session data with the view to create a consistent data dictionary and analysis practice. Adopting agile work practices, it studied these data, vetting and iterating its solution with the objective of producing a technical report in approximately half the time required in normal standardization. The resulting document, EV Charging Infrastructure: Charging System Performance Reporting, is informing work by the U.S. Department of Energy and Departments of Energy and Transportation Joint Office, as well as OEMs and suppliers.

This recommended practice provides guidance on vehicle Cybersecurity and was created based off of, and expanded on from, existing practices which are being implemented or reported in industry, government and conference papers. ...Other proprietary Cybersecurity development processes and standards may have been established to support a specific manufacturer’s development processes, and may not be comprehensively represented in this document, however, information contained in this document may help refine existing in-house processes, methods, etc. ...This recommended practice establishes a set of high-level guiding principles for Cybersecurity as it relates to cyber-physical vehicle systems. This includes: Defining a complete lifecycle process framework that can be tailored and utilized within each organization’s development processes to incorporate Cybersecurity into cyber-physical vehicle systems from concept phase through production, operation, service, and decommissioning.

This recommended practice provides guidance on vehicle Cybersecurity and was created based off of, and expanded on from, existing practices which are being implemented or reported in industry, government and conference papers. ...Other proprietary Cybersecurity development processes and standards may have been established to support a specific manufacturer’s development processes, and may not be comprehensively represented in this document, however, information contained in this document may help refine existing in-house processes, methods, etc. ...This recommended practice establishes a set of high-level guiding principles for Cybersecurity as it relates to cyber-physical vehicle systems. This includes: Defining a complete lifecycle process framework that can be tailored and utilized within each organization’s development processes to incorporate Cybersecurity into cyber-physical vehicle systems from concept phase through production, operation, service, and decommissioning.

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.

The basic requirements of AS9100A apply with the following clarifications. This document supplements the requirements of AS9100A for deliverable software. This supplement contains Quality System requirements for suppliers of products that contain deliverable embedded or loadable airborne, spaceborne or ground support software components that are part of an aircraft Type Design, weapon system, missile or spacecraft operational software and/or support software that is used in the development and maintenance of deliverable software. This includes the host operating system software including assemblers, compilers, linkers, loaders, editors, code generators, analyzers, ground simulators and trainers, flight test data reduction, etc., that directly support creation, test and maintenance of the deliverable software.

This document describes some of the actions that should be taken to help ensure safe vehicle operation in the case that any such connected device (external test equipment, connected data collection device) has been compromised by a source external to the vehicle. In particular, this document describes those actions specifically related to SAE J1979, ISO 15765, and ISO 14229 standardized diagnostic services. Generally, the following forms of communication bus connection topologies are used in current vehicles: a Open access to communication buses b Communication buses isolated via a gateway c Hybrid combinations of a. and b.

This document describes a set of recommended actions to take to increase the likelihood of safe vehicle operation when a device (external test equipment, data collection device, etc.) whose normal operation has been compromised by a source external to the vehicle is connected to the vehicle’s diagnostic system. The term “diagnostic system” is intended to be a generic way to reference all the different ways that diagnostic commands might be injected into the system. The guidance in this document is intended to improve security without significantly impacting the ability for franchised dealer or independent aftermarket external test tools to perform legitimate diagnosis and maintenance functions. The goal is that intrusive services are only allowed to be performed when the vehicle is in a Safe State such that even if the intrusive service were to be initiated with adversarial intent the consequences of such a service would still be acceptable.

This SAE Recommended Practice establishes a uniform practice for protecting vehicle components from "unauthorized" access through a vehicle data link connector (DLC). The document defines a security system for motor vehicle and tool manufacturers. It will provide flexibility to tailor systems to the security needs of the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle modules addressed are those that are capable of having solid state memory contents accessed or altered through the data link connector. Improper memory content alteration could potentially damage the electronics or other vehicle modules; risk the vehicle compliance to government legislated requirements; or risk the vehicle manufacturer's security interests. This document does not imply that other security measures are not required nor possible.

This SAE Recommended Practice establishes a uniform practice for protecting vehicle components from "unauthorized" access through a vehicle data link connector (DLC). The document defines a security system for motor vehicle and tool manufacturers. It will provide flexibility to tailor systems to the security needs of the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle modules addressed are those that are capable of having solid state memory contents accessed or altered through the data link connector. Improper memory content alteration could potentially damage the electronics or other vehicle modules; risk the vehicle compliance to government legislated requirements; or risk the vehicle manufacturer's security interests. This document does not imply that other security measures are not required nor possible.

This SAE Recommended Practice establishes a uniform practice for protecting vehicle components from "unauthorized" access through a vehicle data link connector (DLC). The document defines a security system for motor vehicle and tool manufacturers. It will provide flexibility to tailor systems to the security needs of the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle modules addressed are those that are capable of having solid state memory contents accessed or altered through the data link connector. Improper memory content alteration could potentially damage the electronics or other vehicle modules; risk the vehicle compliance to government legislated requirements; or risk the vehicle manufacturer's security interests. This document does not imply that other security measures are not required nor possible.

This document provides background and detailed technical information on existing methods to secure loadable software parts.

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.

This document applies to the development of Plans for integrating and managing COTS assemblies in electronic equipment and Systems for the commercial, military, and space markets; as well as other ADHP markets that wish to use this document. For purposes of this document, COTS assemblies are viewed as electronic assemblies such as printed wiring assemblies, relays, disk drives, LCD matrices, VME circuit cards, servers, printers, laptop computers, etc. There are many ways to categorize COTS assemblies1, including the following spectrum: At one end of the spectrum are COTS assemblies whose design, internal parts2, materials, configuration control, traceability, reliability, and qualification methods are at least partially controlled, or influenced, by ADHP customers (either individually or collectively). An example at this end of the spectrum is a VME circuit card assembly.

This document outlines a standard practice for conducting system safety. In some cases, these principles may be captured in other standards that apply to specific commodities such as commercial aircraft and automobiles. For example, those manufacturers that produce commercial aircraft should use SAE ARP4754 or SAE ARP4761 (see Section 2 below) to meet FAA or other regulatory agency system safety-related requirements. The system safety practice as defined herein provides a consistent means of evaluating identified risks. Mishap risk should be identified, evaluated, and mitigated to a level as low as reasonably practicable. The mishap risk should be accepted by the appropriate authority and comply with federal (and state, where applicable) laws and regulations, executive orders, treaties, and agreements. Program trade studies associated with mitigating mishap risk should consider total life cycle cost in any decision.