search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
FEATURE u Industry 4.0/IIoT Protecting IIoT networks


As IIoT networks become more pervasive so do their cyber threats. Sean Robinson, Novotek UK and Ireland, explains why


T


he Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) has taken hold over factories and manufacturing facilities worldwide. And as machines and equipment become laden with sensors and inter-connected, they also become more susceptible to cybersecurity issues. An annual report by Kaspersky Lab, ‘The State of Industrial Cybersecurity 2018’, revealed several interesting facts about how industrial cybersecurity is perceived by businesses and applied to industrial control systems (ICS). The survey of 230 worldwide professionals reveals disconnections between what business fear and what’s really happening. For instance, 66% of the surveyed businesses were most concerned about advanced persistent threats (APTs) such as data leaks and spying (59%), because of their perceived potential impact. In reality, APTs make up 16% of cybersecurity incidents. Actually, conventional malware and virus outbreaks are becoming the greater problem. These attacks are not overly sophisticated, and made up 64% of cybersecurity incidents last year.


Aside from misconceptions about the external threat landscape, disparities also exist within organisations. In relation to Kaspersky Lab’s survey, technology website tripwire.com cited a report by the SANS Institute, which found that among nearly three-quarters of firms that were confident in their ability to secure their IIoT networks and devices, internal perceptions were differing about their effectiveness. Whilst leaders and department managers were more likely to have a rosy outlook of their security, operational technology departments had a more pessimistic view.


Such misconceptions would be even


more of a concern within critical national infrastructures. Cyberattacks against water, energy or chemical supplies can have very real consequences for countries and their populations.


UPGRADING CONTROL SYSTEMS From a hardware and systems perspective, over 50% of the surveyed businesses identified integrating ICS with IT systems and Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystems as the most pronounced challenges. This places a wider challenge faced by plant managers into a whole new context: specifically, how best to achieve space- and cost-savings by reducing the size and complexity of plant equipment. Plant managers are turning to new systems to achieve greater levels of flexibility and profitability in their production. This coincides


24 July/August 2021 Irish Manufacturing


with older programmable automation controller (PAC) systems, like the trusted Series 90-30 controllers, reaching the end of their operational lifespans. In many cases, these 90-30 systems have been relied upon as integral to plant operations for upwards of 25 years. How can plant managers effectively upgrade their systems, whilst ensuring that cybersecurity measures keep up with the rate of technology adoption – and the external threats landscape? Fortunately, answers lie in smart hardware and its role in helping manufacturers enhance process flexibility and performance.


CENTRALISED SECURITY One solution lies in better control. For example, the RSTi-EP CPE100 is a compact controller for PAC systems – specifically, to control the RX3i CPU from Emerson that has emerged as a popular and effective upgrade for 90-30 systems. In effect, the RSTi-EP CPE100 leverages the power and flexibility of PAC systems in smaller applications. With the RSTi-EP CPE100, entire PAC systems can be programmed in standalone applications, or the system can be used as an auxiliary controller in larger process applications that use the RX3i. Not only does the system leverage the power and flexibility of PAC systems in smaller applications, there are also benefits in terms or cybersecurity – indeed, the RSTi CPE100 is secure by design. With the system, companies can apply optimised security right from the very start.


RSTi CPE100 incorporates technologies like Trusted Platform Modules and secure, trusted and measured bootup. It allows centralised configurations, so that encrypted firmware updates can be executed from a secure central location. Specifically, a suite of cybersecurity technologies can help prevent unauthorised updates. Meanwhile, built-in security protocols can protect against man-in-the-middle attack (MITM), where the attacker secretly inters with communications between two parties, and denial-of-service (DoS) attacks.


EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT Another important highlight from the Kaspersky Lab’s report is that, going forward, industrial companies must also pay more attention to employees’ understanding and awareness of cyber threats. Because the RSTi-EP CPE100 can streamline application development and integration, a further benefit of the system is that it simplifies training for operators and maintenance workers. While cyberattacks on ICS computers are misunderstood by many within industry, it’s necessary to overcome these misconceptions while keeping up with the best cybersecurity measures. Novotek recommends that managers should pay attention to system security from the very beginning of their integration. The more critical the application, the more important it is that ideas surrounding cyberattacks accurately pre-empt the realities.


Novotek www.novotek.com www.irish-manufacturing.com


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