Constructing vulnerabilty and protective measures indices for the enhanced critical infrastructure protection program.

Fisher, Ronald E.; Buehring, W.A.; Whitfield, R. G.; Bassett, G. W.; Dickinson, D. C.; Haffenden, R.A.; Klett, M. S.; Lawlor, Maria; Decision,

doi:10.2172/966343

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One example application that could be helpful to the biosecurity community is the IST, which DHS field personnel use to evaluate security and resilience at critical infrastructure facilities nationwide in partnership with infrastructure owners and operators. The IST includes an index—the Protective Measures Index (PMI)—that characterizes the protective measures posture of individual facilities based on their most vulnerable aspects (Fisher et al, 2009; Petit et al, 2011). The PMI aggregates data collected through a structured onsite assessment process into four levels of information (or subcomponents) across five major categories.…”

Section: Focusing On Vulnerabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Cyberbiosecurity Vulnerabilities and Infrastructure Resilience

Schabacker

Levy

Evans

et al. 2019

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The convergence of advances in biotechnology with laboratory automation, access to data, and computational biology has democratized biotechnology and accelerated the development of new therapeutics. However, increased access to biotechnology in the digital age has also introduced additional security concerns and ultimately, spawned the new discipline of cyberbiosecurity, which encompasses cybersecurity, cyber-physical security, and biosecurity considerations. With the emergence of this new discipline comes the need for a logical, repeatable, and shared approach for evaluating facility and system vulnerabilities to cyberbiosecurity threats. In this paper, we outline the foundation of an assessment framework for cyberbiosecurity, accounting for both security and resilience factors in the physical and cyber domains. This is a unique problem set, but despite the complexity of the cyberbiosecurity field in terms of operations and governance, previous experience developing and implementing physical and cyber assessments applicable to a wide spectrum of critical infrastructure sectors provides a validated point of departure for a cyberbiosecurity assessment framework. This approach proposes to integrate existing capabilities and proven methodologies from the infrastructure assessment realm (e.g., decision science, physical security, infrastructure resilience, cybersecurity) with new expertise and requirements in the cyberbiosecurity space (e.g., biotechnology, biomanufacturing, genomics) in order to forge a flexible and defensible approach to identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities. Determining where vulnerabilities reside within cyberbiosecurity business processes can help public and private sector partners create an assessment framework to identify mitigation options for consideration that are both economically and practically viable and ultimately, allow them to manage risk more effectively.

show abstract

Section: Focusing On Vulnerabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Cyberbiosecurity Vulnerabilities and Infrastructure Resilience

Schabacker

Levy

Evans

et al. 2019

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beyond providing its own benefits, the ESSCI also complements other indices that have been developed by Argonne to assess the protection, vulnerability, resilience, and criticality of facilities when combined with information about the susceptibility of assets to specific threat types (Fisher et al 2009(Fisher et al , 2010. By combining these indices with other programs used by DHS, along with other tools that more specifically assess the soft aspects of regional resilience, we can form more thorough representations of a specific area's resilience and of risk in general.…”

Section: Index Usementioning

confidence: 99%