Taxonomies for Reasoning About Cyber-physical Attacks in IoT-based Manufacturing Systems

Abstract

-The Internet of Things (IoT) has transformed many aspects of modern manufacturing, from design to production to quality inspection. In particular, IoT and digital manufacturing technol-ogies have substantially accelerated product developmentcycles and manufacturers can now create products of a complexity and precision not heretofore possible. However, new threats to supply chain security have arisen from connecting machines to the In-ternet and introducing complex IoT-based systems controlling manufacturing processes. By attacking these IoT-based manufacturing systems and tampering with digital files, attackers can manipulate physical characteristics of parts and change the dimensions, shapes, or mechanical properties of the parts, which can result in parts that fail in the field. These defects increase manufacturing costs and allow silent problems to occur only under certain loads that can threaten safety and/or lives. To understand potential dangers and protect manufacturing system integrity, this paper presents two taxonomies: one for classifying cyber-physical attacks against manufacturing processes and another for quality inspection measures for counteracting these attacks. We systematically identify and classify possible cyberphysical attacks and connect the attacks with variations in manufacturing processes and quality inspection measures. Our taxonomies also provide a scheme for linking emerging IoT-based manufacturing system vulnerabilities to possible attacks and quality inspection measures.

A Fuzzy Model for Knowledge Base IoT Information Security Evaluation

“…Sonar and Upadhyay [12] discuss different Distributed Deny of Service attack and its effect on IoT. Pan et al [13] identify and classify possible cyberphysical attacks and connect such attacks with variations in manufacturing processes and quality inspection measures.…”

IoT Information Security Evaluation for Developers and Users

“…Sonar and Upadhyay [14] discuss different Distributed Denial of Service attack and its effect on IoT. Pan et al [15] identify andclassify possible cyberphysical attacks and connect such attacks with variations in manufacturing processes and quality inspection measures. Their taxonomies also provide a scheme for linking emerging IoT-based manufacturing system vulnerabilities to possible attacks and quality inspectionmeasures.…”

“…Tables I to IV present the set of good practices and actions for each category under manufacturer/developer perspective. [6,9] Medium [10,14] High [15,18]…”

“…The user must be well informed about security issues and risks he is exposed to, so that this user consumes the technology consciously and reduce side effects. Tables V to VIII present the set of good practices evaluators and actions for each category under user's perspective. [5,7] Medium [8,12] High [13,15] [4,6] Medium [7,9] High [10,12] IV. EVALUATION TEST HISsection illustrates how the design concept of IoT security evaluation is feasible.…”

A Comprehensive Analysis on the Security Threats and their Countermeasures of IoT

“…This type of attack is implemented [11] on the hardware parts of the IoT network and the adversary needs to be close to the IoT systems. Table 1 analyzes briefly on physical layer attacks.…”