How secure is your Automation System architecture?

Stuxnet has given us a wakeup call and we now need to take a fresh approach to how data is transferred and managed within all industrial control systems,” says Chris Evans of Mitsubishi Electric.

Last year’s incident involving the Stuxnet malware has shown that a typical automation architecture has weak points and vulnerabilities when it comes to security and this is leading many companies to question the traditional methods used to move information around and from the plant/asset to the enterprise level. While Stuxnet was targeted at one particular plant, it has far wider implications.

The stuxnet virus changed the point of attack in the business from the seemingly very secure top end to the somewhat vulnerable middle ground. So, are we seeing the start of a revolution?

Certainly, when business managers understand the implications of “doing nothing” then it is inevitable that changes to system architectures will follow.

Stuxnet was a malicious and targeted attack, which is very difficult to protect against.

The structure of the virus is now in the public domain, so mutations of stuxnet remain a threat and it is realistic to assume that ‘copycat’ malware will appear in the coming years targeted at a whole range of plant and applications.

However most incidents are not as sophisticated as Stuxnet, but they can still have wide ranging consequences for the businesses under attack.

There are two fundamental factors to consider, “probability” and “risk” and it is the analysis of these two elements which should shape any organisation’s security strategy going forward.

It is generally accepted that “gateway PCs” found in many automation architectures, represent weak points and are vulnerable to potential malware attacks from “the outside” and also from CDs and USB sticks.

Many of these PCs are used as networked workstations and therefore often contain the software to change and program the PLCs beneath this layer. This makes them an attractive target for anyone wishing to disrupt operations. Couple to this is the fact that many of these PCs have in the past been poorly maintained in terms of security patches and often contain unsupported legacy versions of operating systems, raising the risk factor considerably.

These gateway PCs were originally included to provide visualisation/control (SCADA etc), data/alarm logging and the link between the plant/asset and the enterprise systems. Initially PLC technology was not capable of delivering these requirements in an acceptable way, in other words, there was no alternative to this architecture.

Clearly from an operational point of view, these requirements are still fundamental delivery points for any system architecture but there are now alternatives to the traditional methods.

Mitigation or Change?

Many IT security companies can provide products and services to mitigate against attacks on PC based systems. These solutions are fine and coupled with a good business security regime can help protect the perceived weak points in any architecture.

However it is important to understand that many of the recent cyber security offerings in the automation arena have concentrated on dealing with the problem rather than exploring how to minimise the problem happening in the first place!

A New Way Forward

Over the last few years the more innovative companies have been developing technology which challenges the traditional automation architecture, so that they can offer a robust environment whilst delivering the operational requirements needed.

The basis of the new approach is to develop a solution which offers direct connection from the plant/asset to the enterprise systems within a ruggedized industrial form factor.

These systems are non PC based and are therefore not susceptible to the same operating system legacy issues that are found in a traditional PC based system.

This is complemented by the simultaneous development of intelligent solutions to provide data and alarm logging to be carried out locally at the PLC.

This technology has created the possibility of removing the gateway PC from the topology altogether. “But what about visualisation and control?” I hear you ask.

Well this is a fair question and there is no crusade here to remove SCADA/visualisation from the system but there are other ways of achieving the same criteria.

If data and alarm logging is happening directly at the PLC, then visualisation and control could be achieved by intelligent HMIs. Significantly, these HMIs do not have to be running a Windows operating system.

If SCADA PC nodes simply must exist, then moving the critical data/alarm logging to the local PLC means that the SCADA node can be the control and visualisation element of the system, whilst protecting this vital information in a more robust PLC environment. This is a simple but effective change in architecture that offers a viable alternative to traditional methods.

Mitigation techniques can then be deployed to minimise the risk with respect to the PC based SCADA or visualisation system. By using these techniques and technology the link between plant/asset and the enterprise can be achieved directly from the PLC level, thus minimising the risk.

Best of Both Worlds

It would appear that, as is often the case, the best approach to this new generation of malware threat is a multithreaded combination of a good set of mitigation techniques and “best practices” with a willingness to look at new innovative architectures to achieve the operational requirements but also reduce the inherent risk. Perhaps more than ever, good advice from acknowledged experts, an open mind, and awareness of current and potent new issues are critical.

The essential hardware

Mitsubishi’s “C Controller” range of automation solutions offers a flexible, secure, ruggedized environment that can house multiple “apps” to perform complex and challenging tasks. The C Controller forms part of the integrated iQ Platform and provides a non-PC based system that is not susceptible to the same operating system legacy issues that are found in a traditional PC based system.

The C Controller platform has enabled a whole host of solutions to be developed including a distributed secure database application and various connection options from asset to enterprise level, interfacing to SAP, Oracle, DB2 and other business systems solutions. This coupled with intelligent solutions to provide data and alarm logging to be carried out locally at the PLC, means that Mitsubishi can offer a secure, alternative architecture to traditional automation system topologies

This article was submitted by Chris Evans of Mitsubishi Electric.

Advertisements

One Response

  1. Mitsubishi Electric is arguing that, in light of Stuxnet, PLC based connections between the plant/asset and the enterprise represent a more secure option than PC connections. However, because Stuxnet was the first virus to have a PLC rootkit, I think it proves quite the opposite. It demonstrates that, without protection, no system is safe, whether its PC or PLC based.

    Legend says that King Cnut sat at the shore of the sea and commanded the tide to halt and not wet his feet and robes. The sea continued unabated of course. Attempting to stem the tide of Windows based industrial computing is equally futile. As engineers, we chose Windows two decades ago. It’s much too late to change our minds now.

    The real task, as Mitsubishi astutely observes, is to protect those systems that already exist. As a provider of industrial IT solutions we are now implementing security devices specifically designed for industrial applications, effective in securing protocols such as Modbus TCP and OPC Classic. These devices can be installed without plant downtime, are easy to configure by control engineers and meet or exceed standards such as NERC CIP, ANSI.ISA-99 and IEC 62443. And there’s no need to replace your legacy PCs with specialist PLCs.

    Ultimately though, Mitsubishi is correct in arguing that the UK and Europe’s industrial computing infrastructure is horrifically exposed to attack. This is particularly true of those elements of it that are running on legacy IT and control systems. The lifespan of the existing installed base of industrial computing and automation solutions means that we will be dealing with this risk for years to come, providing we choose to do more than just stand on the shore and shout at the sea.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: