Method and framework for security risks analysis guided by safety criteria

Abstract

As previously discussed [19], the challenges to achieve a consistent intertwining between safety and security are rather diverse and complex. Recent advances in safety and security suggest that risks analyses provide guidance for achieving a comprehensive alignment. However, for many domains, like in aeronautics, security is rather a recent concern whereas aircraft development has been mostly guided by safety criteria for several decades. The referred disparity along with the fact that security is, in many respects, a discipline still in evolution, imposes restrictions for specifying and applying methods to conduct safety and security co-engineering as a unified process. In this paper, we present the progress in the development of a model-based method, a framework and a tool useful to conduct a security risks analysis guided by safety criteria and goals. Among others, the approach relies on know-how found in the state of the art, in standards like ED202, ED203 (EUROCAE) 1 , as well as in open knowledge bases like CAPEC and CWE (MITRE) 2. These sources are integrated which allows the instantiation of patterns of attacks, vulnerabilities, and architectures, which are crucial elements to semi-automate the analysis. A rule-based algorithm for exploring potential attack paths across an architecture is proposed and implemented. The approach is finally demonstrated by analyzing a combined attack-failure path in a Flight Control System which can undermine the safety of a modern aircraft. The framework and tool support seek safety-security by design and aim to facilitate the reuse of case studies and to settle a basis for repeatability and results comparison. CCS CONCEPTS • Applied computing → Computer-aided design; • Security and privacy → Distributed systems security; • Computing methodologies → Model development and analysis; • Software and its engineering → Integrated and visual development environments.

Model‐driven engineering of safety and security software systems: A systematic mapping study and future research directions

“…Fifteen studies 23–37 out of those 51 were focusing exclusively on requirements modeling of such systems. Thirty‐one studies 38–68 were focusing on both requirements modeling and analysis. A few studies were either focusing solely on requirements analysis 69–72 or requirements traceability 73 …”

“…Unified Modeling Language (UML) and its variants, that is, Systems Modeling Language (SysML) and SysML‐Sec, are also relatively popular in this domain and found in 12 studies. The use of UML is mentioned in previous studies 44,66,67,82 . The use of SysML has been mentioned in previous studies 30,39,64 .…”

“…A framework, in this context, means a platform providing a foundation for developing safety and security systems. These frameworks were based on either formal approaches, 27,45,49,109 SysML, 30 or other various methods and tools 19,20,22,67,69,75,81,103,104,107,151,153,154 …”

“…After control systems, avionic/aviation systems were most attractive for researchers of this topic. This domain was used as a test bed in 11 studies 47,52,67,79,87,106,109,112,133,135,136 …”

“…These frameworks were based on either formal approaches, 27,45,49,109 SysML, 30 or other various methods and tools. 19,20,22,67,69,75,81,103,104,107,151,153,154 Thirteen out of 143 studies presented a model. The model could either be related to the collaborative modeling of safety and security properties, 147 a life-cycle model, 18,25,124,155 a process model, 24,37,44,60 a reference model, 55 or a business process model 42,43,83 for the development of safety and security systems.…”