FEAT RE FEA ATURE CY


COMMUN


COMMUNICICATIONS


ATIONS & NE


NETWORK NG ORKIING CYBER SECURITY


CYBER SECURITY: THREAT


AT TO INDUSTRY


Y: A CLEAR AND PRESENT RY 4.0 IMPLEMENTA


TAT


ATION?


it is essentially isolated fromthe information network.


Advanced functions to protect investment in, and the security of, machines are standard in the Sysmac Studio software. Preventing incorrect connections, unauthorised operation or theft of assets are protected by features such as confirmation of controller names and serial IDs, administrator access rights and controller write Meanwhile, authenti


cation of user protections.


T


not just ‘smart’ machines production system (CPS)


he smart factory – perhaps more accurately termed a cyber-physical – will comprise , but will


incorporate warehousing systems and all manner of discrete and process


production facilities. Industry 4.0 inspired implementations of the CPS will need end-to-end ICT based integration of production systems, from factory floor automation to the manufacturing


execution system; moreover, they will be subject to extensive web and third-party cloud-based exposure, so tackling the threat of attacks is of paramount importance The potential risks –


.


compromised intellectual property, brand damage, financial loss, customer grievances, the safety of production personnel and even the safety of


manufactured products (to name but a few) – go far beyond the perceived threats that we are all too aware of in our everyday personal computing and online banking.


Cyber security standards have been in force for decades to protect, for example, our medical records (HIPAA/SOC 1/2/3/), our credit and debit card dealings (PCI DSS Level 1) and the information that organisations, in general, hold about us (ISO27001). The industrial automation industry has not exactly been sitting on its hands either. The International Society of Automation’s ISA99


committee has been working to define security standards for ind automation and control s .


ystems since ustrial


2007 In 2010 these standards were aligned with the corresponding International Electrotechnical


,


Commission (IEC) standards to become the ISA/IEC 62443 series - currently the most comprehensive set of standards of industrial ystems.


control and automation s dedicated to the security


24 24 NOVEMBER 201 MBER 2016 | AU AUTOMA MAT ATION


It is fair to say, these standards have yet to be fully assimilated industry-wide; meanwhile, responsible automation


hardware/software suppliers have not been tardy in developing innovative solutions to the problems of cyber-physical production systemsecurity, and have addressed the issues in a variety of ways.


For a decade or more, it has been


By Barry Graham, automation product marketing manager at Omron


By Barry Graham, Omron


automation product marketing manager at


possible to connect remotely to a PLC via a serial bus for monitoring and diagnostic purposes. Today’s machine controllers (such as those within Omron’s Sysmac platform) are equipped with Ethernet ports that, for example, provide internet connection via the enterprise IT system to a remote, cloud-based SQL database in order to download stored recipe data. Any vulnerability in that connection, however, could potentially lead to compromised intellectual property relating to that recipe.


Omron’s approach to the problemis to provide basic security for its factory automation systems using http Port 80 – web server hine


– which protects Sysmacmac the default port number for a


controllers by allowing communication only fromwithin the Sysmac Studio configuration, programming, simulation, andmonitoring software environment. Communication between Sysmacmachine controllers and Sysmac Studio is not encrypted, instead, it is protected via digest authentication – amethod that enables a web server to check a user’s credentials, such as their username and/or password, with their web browser. The identity of a user can be confirmed before information is released to the network by applying a hash function to the username and password before transmission.


Moreover, Sysmac controllers cannot send service data obj


bject (SDO)messages to the EtherCat network (Omron’s default control network) fromexternal sources, so www


Omron Electronics www. du


T: 0870 752 0861 ww.industrial.omr mron.co.uk /AUTOMATION AT /AUTOMATION T: 0870 752 0861


programexecution and password protection for project files provide protection for the user’s intellectual property, which, among other things, might contain that aforementioned, commercially sensitive batch recipe data. Barriers that have traditionally existed between IT and OT departments will have to come down if a true Industry 4.0 implementation is to be realised. IT departments have, for many years, been fully aware of cyber threats and the potential damage that can ensue if systems are not adequately protected. Even today, the IT and OT functions remain generally independent of one another and it is nor department that has


oj


any control over the mally the IT


prevention of cyber attacks on the enterprise by restricting access to the enterprise networks. With the concepts of Industry 4.0, as outlined above, restricting access to the enterprise networks would be totally unacceptable, so it is important that IT and OT departments start to work together so that they are able - as one group with a common aim- to combat the greater risks posed by the open networks of Industry 4.0.


A productive collaboration between IT and OT departments would inevitably improve business efficiency as well as raise awareness of the cyber threat issues that must be addressed at all levels of the enterprise. Such a collaboration would also go a long way to improving the skills of those less familiar with cyber security and its relevance to their operations. Manufacturers embracing the Industry 4.0 paradigm need to up-skill their operational staff, assess the potential cyber threat risks and develop a security plan commensurate with their organisational structures. For most companies, this is likely to involve third parties, not least of which will be the automation systems supplier.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56