Showing posts with label Cyber Attacks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cyber Attacks. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Treasury Department Publishes TRIA Update NPRM to Include Cyber Insurance

Today the Treasury Department published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (85 FR 71588-71593) concerning “Updated Regulations in Light of  the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2019”. This rulemaking would implement technical changes to the TRIP mandated by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2019 which was included as Title V, Division I of PL 116-94 (the second of the FY 2020 spending bills, HR 1856).

Cyber Incident Coverage

PL116-94 did not specifically require the Treasury Department to cover cyber incidents under the TRIP. Rather §502(d) {133 STAT. 3027} required a study and report on cyber terrorism that included a requirement to make “recommendations on how Congress could amend the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note) to meet the next generation of cyber threats” {§502(d)(2)}. That report is not directly referenced in this rulemaking.

What the rulemaking would do is to incorporate into the regulations guidance that the Department issued in 2016 to address the application of TRIA and the Program regulations to certain cyber risk insurance policies. This is specifically addressed by adding the following language to the definition of ‘property and casualty insurance’ in 31 CFR 50.4(w)(1): “a stand-alone cyber liability policy falling within Line 17”.

The coverage under this program is still limited to ‘terrorist attacks’ certified by the Treasury Department and only apply to Federal guarantees to insurers. The TRIP is designed to insure that a major terrorist attack does not bankrupt insurance companies.

Public Comments

The Department is soliciting public comments on this NPRM. Comments may be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulations.gov; Docket # TREAS_FRDOC_0001-0380). Comments should be submitted by January 11th, 2021.

Friday, March 1, 2019

Bills Introduced – 03-01-19


Yesterday with the House and Senate preparing to leave for the weekend there were 135 bills introduced. Four of these bills may be receiving future attention in this blog:

HR 1420 To amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to promote energy efficiency via information and computing technologies, and for other purposes. Rep. Eshoo, Anna G. [D-CA-18]

HR 1437 To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Under Secretary for Management of the Department of Homeland Security to achieve security of sensitive assets among the components of the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes. Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46]

S 592 A bill to amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to promote transparency in the oversight of cybersecurity risks at publicly traded companies. Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]

S 602 A bill to address state-sponsored cyber activities against the United States, and for other purposes. Sen. Gardner, Cory [R-CO] 

All of these cybersecurity bills will be watched to see if they contain specific language addressing industrial control systems. Okay, two of these bills may not actually be cybersecurity related (HR 1420 and HR 1437), so I will be watching to see if they actually address cybersecurity issues.

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Bills Introduced – 04-18-18


With both the House and Senate in session yesterday there were 58 bills introduced. Of those, one may be of specific interest to readers of this blog:

HR 5576 To address state-sponsored cyber activities against the United States, and for other purposes. Rep. Yoho, Ted S. [R-FL-3]

Two separate things that may draw my further attention to this bill. First, and most obvious to long time readers, I will watch the definitions used in the bill to see if this bill will specifically address ‘activities’ targeted at control systems. Even if control systems are not covered, how the bill intends to ‘address’ the ‘cyber activities’ may still cause me to expand (slightly) my coverage of cybersecurity issues.

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

Cyber Weapon Testing

As the use of cyber tools to attack infrastructure is apparently starting to be used as a means of effecting nation state political goals it is necessary to examine how those tools can be honed, improved and tested without risking conventional warfare. While in the early days of cyber weapon development (ala Stuxnet) subterfuge or obfuscation was adequate to prevent retaliation, strides in the technologies for isolation, identification and attribution of cyber weapons are making real world testing of these weapons more difficult.

Artificial testbeds and weapons ranges will certainly have their place in cyber weapon development and evaluation, but a cautious adversary would be wary of relying on new strategic weapons in a full scale attack without having tested both their capability and their target’s potential responses to such an assault.

Proxy Targets

A time honored tradition in conventional weapon development has been the use of new weapon systems against proxy targets. Lesser third party nations that had limited retaliatory capability were attacked with new weapons to see how well the weapons actually fared in combat conditions. If the proxy target had some of the defensive armament used by the primary opponent, the test would provide important data to the developers of weapons and tactics as to how best employ the new weapons in future conflicts.

There have been people that have suggested that the recent cyber-attacks on the electric grid in the Ukraine was just this type of attack. While the Russians certainly have local interests vis a vis the Ukraine that might cause them to execute this type of attack, the use of a new cyber-attack methodology in actual field conditions could certainly be used to refine and improve such methods.

Mini Attacks

Limited attacks with conventional kinetic weapons against one’s primary adversary are very hard to hide. That may not be the case with cyber weapons. If one were to employ portions of the attack tools against an adversary during events when the target was already being stressed, the target might not notice the small cyber effects.

For example, if during a winter storm when a certain amount of electric distribution and transmission failures are to be expected, an adversary were to us new cyber weapons in very limited application the failures related to those attacks might not be investigated in sufficient detail to identify them as a cyber-attack.

An adversary that had already gained access to an electrical distribution network, for instance, could cause an automated breaker to open and carefully watch how that opening affected the remainder of the network. If the breaker controller had been doctored to not show that particular directed opening it is unlikely that the utility would take particular note of that breaker opening in the grand scheme of responding to the weather related problems.

Camouflaged Attacks

In a posting on the SANS ICS Blog last summer I described how isolated changes could be made to the controls of chemical reactions in a chemical manufacturing plant and make them seem like operator errors. Such attacks could be used to map control system responses at such a facility. Lacking detailed process knowledge, an attacker could use such response mapping over time as a method for developing an effective attack that could shut down or even damage the facility.

Preparedness

The last two weapon testing methodologies should be of increasing concern to control system owners as it becomes more obvious that there are nation states (and possibly non-state organizations) that are actively developing technology to attack industrial control systems as a tool of cyber warfare.


While few organizations are going to have the internal resources to complete prevent the possibility of such an attack, the ability to identify unauthorized intrusions into control system networks is a key to limiting the effectiveness of such attacks if they do occur. Such identification should allow for the emergency isolation/shutdown of the affected systems in a way that minimizes the potential damage. 
 
/* Use this with templates/template-twocol.html */