We propose extensions to the Dolev-Yao attacker model to make it suitable for arguments about security of Cyber-Physical Systems. The Dolev-Yao attacker model uses a set of rules to define potential actions by an attacker with respect to messages (i.e. information) exchanged between parties during a protocol execution. The model can be used to argue about the security of such protocols (e.g., using model checking). As the traditional Dolev-Yao model considers only information (exchanged over a channel controlled by the attacker), the model cannot directly be used to argue about the security of cyber-physical systems where physical-layer interactions are possible. In this work, we propose a cyber-physical Dolev-Yao (CPDY) attacker model, a general extension of the Dolev-Yao model to allow additional orthogonal interaction channels between the parties. In particular, such orthogonal channels can be used to model physical-layer mechanical, chemical, or electrical interactions between components. In addition, we discuss the inclusion of physical properties such as location or distance in the rule set. We present an example set of additional rules for the Dolev-Yao attacker, using those we are able to formally discover physical attacks that previously could only be found by empirical methods or detailed physical process models.
The formal verification of security properties of CPS is a non trivial task, as CPS introduce physical properties to the system under analysis. SAT SMT solvers used by security analysis tools (e.g., @cite_28 ) do not support such properties. In order to overcome this limitation, one could simulate the process (e.g., @cite_7 ) or adapt the level of abstraction of CPS components. @cite_9 , the author presents a formal definition of an attacker model for CPS. The attacker is defined as a set of pairs representing locations and capabilities. Capabilities are defined as a set of tuples expressing actions, cost (energy time) and range (with respect to the topology) of the attacker. The attacker is assumed to perform two types of attacks: , against a device and against the communications; where the first requires physical access while the second proximity to the node. The actions of the attacker are (remove, read write, reveal, reprogram, starve) and (block, eavesdrop, inject).
@cite_28 @cite_9 @cite_7
2127240436 2509307846 2963052334 2030140501
Formal verification and validation play a crucial role in making cyber-physical systems (CPS) safe. Formal methods make strong guarantees about the system behavior if accurate models of the system can be obtained, including models of the controller and of the physical dynamics. In CPS, models are essential; but any model we could possibly build necessarily deviates from the real world. If the real system fits to the model, its behavior is guaranteed to satisfy the correctness properties verified with respect to the model. Otherwise, all bets are off. This article introduces ModelPlex, a method ensuring that verification results about models apply to CPS implementations. ModelPlex provides correctness guarantees for CPS executions at runtime: it combines offline verification of CPS models with runtime validation of system executions for compliance with the model. ModelPlex ensures in a provably correct way that the verification results obtained for the model apply to the actual system runs by monitoring the behavior of the world for compliance with the model. If, at some point, the observed behavior no longer complies with the model so that offline verification results no longer apply, ModelPlex initiates provably safe fallback actions, assuming the system dynamics deviation is bounded. This article, furthermore, develops a systematic technique to synthesize provably correct monitors automatically from CPS proofs in differential dynamic logic by a correct-by-construction approach, leading to verifiably correct runtime model validation. Overall, ModelPlex generates provably correct monitor conditions that, if checked to hold at runtime, are provably guaranteed to imply that the offline safety verification results about the CPS model apply to the present run of the actual CPS implementation. Abstract Estimating the possible impacts of security attacks on physical processes can help to rank the critical assets based on their sensitivity to performed attacks and predict their attractiveness from the attacker’s point of view. To address this challenge, this paper proposes a new method for assessing the direct and indirect impacts of attacks on cyber–physical systems (CPSs). The proposed method studies the dynamic behavior of systems in normal situation and under security attacks and evaluates the consequence propagation of attacks. The inputs to the model are control parameters including sensor readings and controller signals. The output of the model is evaluating the consequence propagation of attacks, ranking the important assets of systems based on their sensitivity to conducted attacks, and prioritizing the attacks based on their impacts on the behavior of system. The validation phase of the proposed method is performed by modeling and evaluating the consequence propagation of attacks against a boiling water power plant (BWPP). Cyber-physical systems (CPS) consist of sensors, actuators, and controllers all communicating over a network; if any subset becomes compromised, an attacker could cause significant damage. With access to data logs and a model of the CPS, the physical effects of an attack could potentially be detected before any damage is done. Manually building a model that is accurate enough in practice, however, is extremely difficult. In this paper, we propose a novel approach for constructing models of CPS automatically, by applying supervised machine learning to data traces obtained after systematically seeding their software components with faults ("mutants"). We demonstrate the efficacy of this approach on the simulator of a real-world water purification plant, presenting a framework that automatically generates mutants, collects data traces, and learns an SVM-based model. Using cross-validation and statistical model checking, we show that the learnt model characterises an invariant physical property of the system. Furthermore, we demonstrate the usefulness of the invariant by subjecting the system to 55 network and code-modification attacks, and showing that it can detect 85 of them from the data logs generated at runtime. Security of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) against cyber attacks is an important yet challenging problem. Since most cyber attacks happen in erratic ways, it is difficult to describe them systematically. In this paper, instead of identifying a specific cyber attack model, we are focused on analyzing the system's response during cyber attacks. Deception attacks (or false data injection attacks), which are performed by tampering with system components or data, are not of particular concern if they can be easily detected by the system's monitoring system. However, intelligent cyber attackers can avoid being detected by the monitoring system by carefully design cyber attacks. Our main objective is to investigate the performance of such stealthy deception attacks from the system's perspective. We investigate three kinds of stealthy deception attacks according to the attacker's ability to compromise the system. Based on the information about the dynamics of the system and existing hypothesis testing algorithms, we derive the necessary and sufficient conditions under which the attacker could perform each kind of attack without being detected. In the end, we illustrate the threat of these cyber attacks using an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) navigation example.