Ferrell, Uma D., Anderegg, Alfred H. Andy.
2022.
Holistic Assurance Case for System-of-Systems. 2022 IEEE/AIAA 41st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC). :1–9.
Aviation is a highly sophisticated and complex System-of-Systems (SoSs) with equally complex safety oversight. As novel products with autonomous functions and interactions between component systems are adopted, the number of interdependencies within and among the SoS grows. These interactions may not always be obvious. Understanding how proposed products (component systems) fit into the context of a larger SoS is essential to promote the safe use of new as well as conventional technology.UL 4600, is a Standard for Safety for the Evaluation of Autonomous Products specifically written for completely autonomous Load vehicles. The goal-based, technology-neutral features of this standard make it adaptable to other industries and applications.This paper, using the philosophy of UL 4600, gives guidance for creating an assurance case for products in an SoS context. An assurance argument is a cogent structured argument concluding that an autonomous aircraft system possesses all applicable through-life performance and safety properties. The assurance case process can be repeated at each level in the SoS: aircraft, aircraft system, unmodified components, and modified components. The original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) develops the assurance case for the whole aircraft envisioned in the type certification process. Assurance cases are continuously validated by collecting and analyzing Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs). SPIs provide predictive safety information, thus offering an opportunity to improve safety by preventing incidents and accidents. Continuous validation is essential for risk-based approval of autonomously evolving (dynamic) systems, learning systems, and new technology. System variants, derivatives, and components are captured in a subordinate assurance case by their developer. These variants of the assurance case inherently reflect the evolution of the vehicle-level derivatives and options in the context of their specific target ecosystem. These subordinate assurance cases are nested under the argument put forward by the OEM of components and aircraft, for certification credit.It has become a common practice in aviation to address design hazards through operational mitigations. It is also common for hazards noted in an aircraft component system to be mitigated within another component system. Where a component system depends on risk mitigation in another component of the SoS, organizational responsibilities must be stated explicitly in the assurance case. However, current practices do not formalize accounting for these dependencies by the parties responsible for design; consequently, subsequent modifications are made without the benefit of critical safety-related information from the OEMs. The resulting assurance cases, including 3rd party vehicle modifications, must be scrutinized as part of the holistic validation process.When changes are made to a product represented within the assurance case, their impact must be analyzed and reflected in an updated assurance case. An OEM can facilitate this by integrating affected assurance cases across their customer’s supply chains to ensure their validity. The OEM is expected to exercise the sphere-of-control over their product even if it includes outsourced components. Any organization that modifies a product (with or without assurance argumentation information from other suppliers) is accountable for validating the conditions for any dependent mitigations. For example, the OEM may manage the assurance argumentation by identifying requirements and supporting SPI that must be applied in all component assurance cases. For their part, component assurance cases must accommodate all spheres-of-control that mitigate the risks they present in their respective contexts. The assurance case must express how interdependent mitigations will collectively assure the outcome. These considerations are much more than interface requirements and include explicit hazard mitigation dependencies between SoS components. A properly integrated SoS assurance case reflects a set of interdependent systems that could be independently developed..Even in this extremely interconnected environment, stakeholders must make accommodations for the independent evolution of products in a manner that protects proprietary information, domain knowledge, and safety data. The collective safety outcome for the SoS is based on the interdependence of mitigations by each constituent component and could not be accomplished by any single component. This dependency must be explicit in the assurance case and should include operational mitigations predicated on people and processes.Assurance cases could be used to gain regulatory approval of conventional and new technology. They can also serve to demonstrate consistency with a desired level of safety, especially in SoSs whose existing standards may not be adequate. This paper also provides guidelines for preserving alignment between component assurance cases along a product supply chain, and the respective SoSs that they support. It shows how assurance is a continuous process that spans product evolution through the monitoring of interdependent requirements and SPI. The interdependency necessary for a successful assurance case encourages stakeholders to identify and formally accept critical interconnections between related organizations. The resulting coordination promotes accountability for safety through increased awareness and the cultivation of a positive safety culture.
ISSN: 2155-7209
Sun, Zuntao.
2022.
Hierarchical and Complex Parallel Network Security Threat Situation Quantitative Assessment Method. 2022 6th International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC). :276–279.
Network security is a problem that is of great concern to all countries at this stage. How to ensure that the network provides effective services to people without being exposed to potential security threats has become a major concern for network security researchers. In order to better understand the network security situation, researchers have studied a variety of quantitative assessment methods, and the most scientific and effective one is the hierarchical quantitative assessment method of the network security threat situation. This method allows the staff to have a very clear understanding of the security of the network system and make correct judgments. This article mainly analyzes the quantitative assessment of the hierarchical network security threat situation from the current situation and methods, which is only for reference.
Hutto, Kevin, Grijalva, Santiago, Mooney, Vincent.
2022.
Hardware-Based Randomized Encoding for Sensor Authentication in Power Grid SCADA Systems. 2022 IEEE Texas Power and Energy Conference (TPEC). :1–6.
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems are utilized extensively in critical power grid infrastructures. Modern SCADA systems have been proven to be susceptible to cyber-security attacks and require improved security primitives in order to prevent unwanted influence from an adversarial party. One section of weakness in the SCADA system is the integrity of field level sensors providing essential data for control decisions at a master station. In this paper we propose a lightweight hardware scheme providing inferred authentication for SCADA sensors by combining an analog to digital converter and a permutation generator as a single integrated circuit. Through this method we encode critical sensor data at the time of sensing, so that unencoded data is never stored in memory, increasing the difficulty of software attacks. We show through experimentation how our design stops both software and hardware false data injection attacks occurring at the field level of SCADA systems.
Shi, Jiameng, Guan, Le, Li, Wenqiang, Zhang, Dayou, Chen, Ping, Zhang, Ning.
2022.
HARM: Hardware-Assisted Continuous Re-randomization for Microcontrollers. 2022 IEEE 7th European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P). :520–536.
Microcontroller-based embedded systems have become ubiquitous with the emergence of IoT technology. Given its critical roles in many applications, its security is becoming increasingly important. Unfortunately, MCU devices are especially vulnerable. Code reuse attacks are particularly noteworthy since the memory address of firmware code is static. This work seeks to combat code reuse attacks, including ROP and more advanced JIT-ROP via continuous randomization. Previous proposals are geared towards full-fledged OSs with rich runtime environments, and therefore cannot be applied to MCUs. We propose the first solution for ARM-based MCUs. Our system, named HARM, comprises a secure runtime and a binary analysis tool with rewriting module. The secure runtime, protected inside the secure world, proactively triggers and performs non-bypassable randomization to the firmware running in a sandbox in the normal world. Our system does not rely on any firmware feature, and therefore is generally applicable to both bare-metal and RTOS-powered firmware. We have implemented a prototype on a development board. Our evaluation results indicate that HARM can effectively thaw code reuse attacks while keeping the performance and energy overhead low.
Esterwood, Connor, Robert, Lionel P..
2022.
Having the Right Attitude: How Attitude Impacts Trust Repair in Human—Robot Interaction. 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). :332–341.
Robot co-workers, like human co-workers, make mistakes that undermine trust. Yet, trust is just as important in promoting human-robot collaboration as it is in promoting human-human collaboration. In addition, individuals can signif-icantly differ in their attitudes toward robots, which can also impact or hinder their trust in robots. To better understand how individual attitude can influence trust repair strategies, we propose a theoretical model that draws from the theory of cognitive dissonance. To empirically verify this model, we conducted a between-subjects experiment with 100 participants assigned to one of four repair strategies (apologies, denials, explanations, or promises) over three trust violations. Individual attitudes did moderate the efficacy of repair strategies and this effect differed over successive trust violations. Specifically, repair strategies were most effective relative to individual attitude during the second of the three trust violations, and promises were the trust repair strategy most impacted by an individual's attitude.