Cybersecurity and Privacy Risk Management - Revision history

Pinfold at 00:01, January 20, 2023

2023-01-20T00:01:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, January 19, 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Chapter		{{Chapter
	\| image = CybersecurityChapter.jpg		\|image=CybersecurityChapter.jpg
	\| ~~blueprint~~ = ~~Buildings~~		\|poc=Colin Dunn
	~~\| sectors = Buildings, Cybersecurity and Privacy~~		\|authors=Colin Dunn, François Bégin
	\| authors = Colin Dunn, François Bégin		\|blueprint=Cybersecurity and Privacy
	\| ~~poc~~ = ~~Colin Dunn~~		\|sectors=Cybersecurity and Privacy
	\| ~~email~~ = ~~colin@fend.tech~~		\|summary=“The rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the declining costs of sensors and cloud computing are disrupting the building industry as more organizations retrofit or build out new smart buildings. There are numerous benefits of smart building technology ranging from occupant comfort and safety to improved efficiency and sustainability. However, the proliferation of smart building technology increases the risk of a cyberattack on vulnerable endpoints that need to be protected. In most cases security has not been built in when it comes to deploying smart building point solutions, thus expanding the risk exposure. Organizations must take a security-first approach to deploying smart building technology and migrate to a security fabric architecture to improve the organization’s security posture”. ''(IDC InfoBrief sponsored by Fortinet)''
	~~\| document = 2020-SBSC-blueprint.pdf~~		\|email=colin@fend.tech
	~~\| chapter = 1004~~		\|document=2020-SBSC-blueprint.pdf
	\| summary = “The rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the declining costs of sensors and cloud computing are disrupting the building industry as more organizations retrofit or build out new smart buildings. There are numerous benefits of smart building technology ranging from occupant comfort and safety to improved efficiency and sustainability. However, the proliferation of smart building technology increases the risk of a cyberattack on vulnerable endpoints that need to be protected. In most cases security has not been built in when it comes to deploying smart building point solutions, thus expanding the risk exposure. Organizations must take a security-first approach to deploying smart building technology and migrate to a security fabric architecture to improve the organization’s security posture”. ''(IDC InfoBrief sponsored by Fortinet)''		\|chapter=1004
	}}		}}
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__

Pinfold at 17:20, March 14, 2022

2022-03-14T17:20:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:20, March 14, 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Chapter		{{Chapter
			\| image = CybersecurityChapter.jpg
	\| blueprint = Buildings		\| blueprint = Buildings
	\| sectors = Buildings, Cybersecurity and Privacy		\| sectors = Buildings, Cybersecurity and Privacy
Line 7:		Line 8:
	\| document = 2020-SBSC-blueprint.pdf		\| document = 2020-SBSC-blueprint.pdf
	\| chapter = 1004		\| chapter = 1004
			\| summary = “The rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the declining costs of sensors and cloud computing are disrupting the building industry as more organizations retrofit or build out new smart buildings. There are numerous benefits of smart building technology ranging from occupant comfort and safety to improved efficiency and sustainability. However, the proliferation of smart building technology increases the risk of a cyberattack on vulnerable endpoints that need to be protected. In most cases security has not been built in when it comes to deploying smart building point solutions, thus expanding the risk exposure. Organizations must take a security-first approach to deploying smart building technology and migrate to a security fabric architecture to improve the organization’s security posture”. ''(IDC InfoBrief sponsored by Fortinet)''
	}}		}}
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__
	= Overview of Cybersecurity Risks Associated with Smart Buildings =		= Overview of Cybersecurity Risks Associated with Smart Buildings =
	''“The rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the declining costs of sensors and cloud computing are disrupting the building industry as more organizations retrofit or build out new smart buildings. There are numerous benefits of smart building technology ranging from occupant comfort and safety to improved efficiency and sustainability. However, the proliferation of smart building technology increases the risk of a cyberattack on vulnerable endpoints that need to be protected. In most cases security has not been built in when it comes to deploying smart building point solutions, thus expanding the risk exposure. Organizations must take a security-first approach to deploying smart building technology and migrate to a security fabric architecture to improve the organization’s security posture”. (IDC InfoBrief sponsored by Fortinet)''

	The big push to adopt IoT and remote connectivity has resulted in many connected buildings with insecure remote access. Building automation systems can be a vector for cyber-attacks where potential attackers gain entry to corporate networks through HVAC systems, elevator operations, lighting, water supply, alarm systems, security devices, access systems, power supply and the list goes on. Criminals gained access to Target’s corporate information systems through inappropriate credentialing to an HVAC contractor. Russia took down the Ukrainian power grid and has infiltrated much of the US energy infrastructure. Each system and device, including its multiple versions and iterations, has its own level of cybersecurity risk. The gradual elimination of human intervention in the IoT world implies a machine-to-machine (M2M) environment where all physical systems that can interconnect and intercommunicate through an IP network can be the entry point of, or victim to, a cyber breach.		The big push to adopt IoT and remote connectivity has resulted in many connected buildings with insecure remote access. Building automation systems can be a vector for cyber-attacks where potential attackers gain entry to corporate networks through HVAC systems, elevator operations, lighting, water supply, alarm systems, security devices, access systems, power supply and the list goes on. Criminals gained access to Target’s corporate information systems through inappropriate credentialing to an HVAC contractor. Russia took down the Ukrainian power grid and has infiltrated much of the US energy infrastructure. Each system and device, including its multiple versions and iterations, has its own level of cybersecurity risk. The gradual elimination of human intervention in the IoT world implies a machine-to-machine (M2M) environment where all physical systems that can interconnect and intercommunicate through an IP network can be the entry point of, or victim to, a cyber breach.

Pinfold at 06:30, December 22, 2021

2021-12-22T06:30:53Z

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 | chapter           = 1004
 }}
-__TOC__
+__NOTOC__
 =  Overview of Cybersecurity Risks Associated with Smart Buildings  =
 ''“The rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the declining costs of sensors and cloud computing are disrupting the building industry as more organizations retrofit or build out new smart buildings. There are numerous benefits of smart building technology ranging from occupant comfort and safety to improved efficiency and sustainability. However, the proliferation of smart building technology increases the risk of a cyberattack on vulnerable endpoints that need to be protected. In most cases security has not been built in when it comes to deploying smart building point solutions, thus expanding the risk exposure. Organizations must take a security-first approach to deploying smart building technology and migrate to a security fabric architecture to improve the organization’s security posture”. (IDC InfoBrief sponsored by Fortinet)''
@@ Line 52: / Line 18: @@
 Many OT systems are experiencing cyberattacks similar to IT networks. IBM Managed Security Services (MSS) data shows a 110% increase in attacks on industrial control systems since 2016—a threat landscape predicted to grow at a phenomenal rate to 2020 and beyond. Kaspersky, a Russia-based Cybersecurity firm has issued an official warning that every 4 out of 10 automated buildings are vulnerable to cyber-attacks since the computer systems which are controlling them are affected by malware<ref name="ftn1">[https://usa.kaspersky.com/about/press-releases/2019_smart-buildings-threat-landscape Nearly Four in Ten Smart Buildings Targeted by Malicious Attacks in H1 2019]</ref>. Frost Sullivan’s Building Automation System table below, illustrates some of the more common vulnerabilities.
-<span style="width: 80%">[[Image:Fig1Chap4.png]]</span>
+[[File:Fig1Chap4.png|800px|Center]]
 As stated by Larry O’Brien, VP of Research at ARC Advisory Group, ''“there is a drive to deploy more lower cost sensors, both wired and wireless, to gather as much data as possible. At the same time, the industry has a considerable installed base of legacy building automation systems, applications, devices, and networks that must be managed, maintained, and gradually modernized.”''
 =  Review of Practical Options =
 <div style="text-align:center;margin-left:0.6in;margin-right:0.6in;"><span style="color:#404040;">''Pervasiveness of technology, ubiquitous connectivity, and an increasingly evolving machine-to-machine (M2M) environment will continue to impact and influence how smart buildings are operated, which will raise the need for protection against cyber risks quite significantly. A delayed head start not only poses huge challenges in dealing with this complex issue but undermines the value and adequacy of initiatives that could potentially be used to ward off adversarial impacts. Irrespective of such shortfalls, however, inaction is no longer an option for the smart buildings industry. (Frost Sullivan – Cybersecurity in Smart Buildings)''</span></div>

Pinfold at 17:36, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:36:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:36, December 6, 2021
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\| poc = Colin Dunn		\| poc = Colin Dunn
	\| email = colin@fend.tech		\| email = colin@fend.tech
	\| document = ~~TransportationBlueprintFeb18~~.pdf		\| document = 2020-SBSC-blueprint.pdf
	\| chapter = 1004		\| chapter = 1004
	}}		}}

Pinfold at 17:05, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:05:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:05, December 6, 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	}}		}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

Pinfold at 17:05, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:05:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:05, December 6, 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	}}		}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

Pinfold at 17:05, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:05:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:05, December 6, 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Chapter		{{Chapter
	\| blueprint = Buildings		\| blueprint = Buildings
	\| sectors = Buildings		\| sectors = Buildings, Cybersecurity and Privacy
	\| authors = Colin Dunn, François Bégin		\| authors = Colin Dunn, François Bégin
	\| poc = Colin Dunn		\| poc = Colin Dunn

Pinfold at 17:03, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:03:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:03, December 6, 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	}}		}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

Pinfold at 17:02, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:02:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:02, December 6, 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	}}		}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

Pinfold at 17:02, December 6, 2021

2021-12-06T17:02:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:02, December 6, 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:
	}}		}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__