There is an interesting adverticle
(my blog, I can makeup words) over on ChemicalProcessing.com that advertises a
wireless control system device with what is described as ‘plug-and-play
technology’. This is hardly a new concept as the Windows® environment has been
using this type of device linkage to make home (and business) computers much
easier to expand. It also lowered the computer skill level necessary to operate
these more complex computer systems.
Now I don’t know anything about the device described in this
article so I can’t make any statements about this particular implementation of
the ‘plug-and-play’ concept in industrial control systems. It does raise an
interesting question, however; do we really want to lower the skill level
required to implement an expansion of an industrial control system? Won’t this
just aggravate the existing control system security problem?
We already have a situation where there are not enough control
system engineers available to ensure that there is someone on-site at critical
infrastructure facilities to make reasonable decisions about security issues
with control systems, to test and validate patches, or to monitor systems for
potential attacks. With plug-and-play expansions of the control system
technology we will be allowing the expansion of already complex systems without
the necessary technical oversight to ensure that such expansions don’t make
existing security and safety problems more common.
Emerson is certainly a respected control system manufacturer
and has only had a few security issues identified by ICS-CERT (here, here, here and here) so I
would like to assume that they have created a module here that is free from any
readily identifiable security concerns. But if they do discover a subsequent
problem, will a plug-and-play facility have the expertise to identify the need
to patch the device firmware, be able to test the patch to ensure that it does
not create more problems than it solves, or even be able to implement the
patching process.
And, of course, if plug-and-play becomes the next ICS
have-to-have sales gimmick (and management will have to love this for reducing
engineering overhead) then we will have to contend with the problems associated
with other vendors that do not have Emerson’s level of security design and
implementation expertise.
I know that I am a voice crying in the wilderness here, but
until we get the industrial control system security situation under control, we
really don’t need to be making it easier to deploy or expand such systems
without adequate in-house control system expertise.
1 comment:
Can't we have simple systems with high security?
Do these contracdict?
They do not have to.
ICS security is not nesseseraly about complexity in the ICS. A secure system can be simple with smart mechanism that would enfoce complex and smart security means.
Post a Comment