Secure-by-Design Is More Than Just a Cybersecurity Risk Problem
Building trustworthy secure systems has a great deal in common with building a house. It starts with a good architectural plan, input from structural engineers, quality products (e.g., lumber, concrete, plumbing and electrical components, roofing materials, doors and windows), skilled tradespeople to carry out the site grading and construction, building inspections at various stages in the construction process, and a construction supervisor to oversee the work. It’s a well-established construction?process?that is designed to help ensure quality outcomes. The home is, in reality, a “system.” So, after 50 years of trying to develop computing systems that we trust and are resilient in the face of threats from determined adversaries, why is it that we still have significant risk in this area? Why are building codes in home construction and other disciplines far more complete than in cybersecurity?
To be fair, computing systems are highly complex entities composed of trillions of lines of code in software applications and firmware, billions of interconnected devices, and hardware components at the foundation where computer science meets physics. But given those distinct differences, homes and computing systems are both “systems” in their own right. Have we applied the foundational, time-tested?design principles in a life cycle-based systems engineering process to produce?outcomes?that we need to ensure our critical systems (integral to everything we care about including our privacy) are well protected? Do we have sufficient information to understand how system components are designed and built and how those products come together in a system to provide critical capabilities that keep the lights on, purify water systems, keep the planes, trains and automobiles running, ensure ubiquitous communications essential for commerce, and protect the country with reliable, state-of-the-practice weapons systems?
There are many ongoing initiatives to improve the security and transparency of component products developed by industry and to promote a secure-by-design approach to cybersecurity. The fundamental problem, however, cannot be constrained to cybersecurity risk—rather, it is a much broader problem that extends into the world of systems and system complexity. Building trustworthy secure systems and systems that have sufficient?resilience to operate in stressful environments with a myriad of threats requires “systems thinking” and the discipline of a well-defined?systems engineering process?that can reduce and manage complexity.
领英推荐
Having quality component products with security features is a necessary condition for achieving trustworthy secure systems, but it is certainly not sufficient. Why? Because “the adversaries live in the cracks.” Just like you can build a structurally-unsound home with quality products, you can also build an untrustworthy system with individual component products loaded with security features. A lack of?intentional?systems thinking and systems engineering results in systems that are more susceptible to successful cyber-attacks and subject to ongoing, expensive maintenance activities (e.g., remediating a growing list of system vulnerabilities, including zero-days after-the-fact, that require patching). Recognizing the holistic nature of “computing systems” is important for building the types of systems (including cyber-physical systems) we depend on to keep the country safe, secure, and productive.
A special note of thanks to?Victoria PIllitteri and?Brian Barnier, long-time cybersecurity and SSE colleagues, who graciously reviewed and provided sage advice for this article.
Founder & CEO, NetSecurity Corp. | Inventor and Architect of ThreatResponder? Platform, a Cyber Resilient Endpoint Innovation | Cybersecurity Visionary, Expert, and Speaker
1 年Managing cybersecurity risk in isolation is insufficient to address the complex challenges we face in today's digital landscape. To effectively protect our systems and critical capabilities, we must adopt a holistic approach that combines cybersecurity risk management with the principles of systems thinking and systems engineering.
President and Manager at Beehive Technology Solutions LLC Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB) Federal and State Small Certified Business; Microsoft Partner Risk Digital Services
1 年Thank you, Ron, for another great piece of your experience and wisdom; well done and appreciated by us all. What is often missed because of the cyber marketing hype is the requirement for culture and process and its importance at the conceptual vision stage, as we say in DOD and DOAF, the OV-1 view. The all-powerful array of NIST publications and the NIST support team provides the baseline, and the publications, when used correctly and applied digitally, can be "tailored" from a commercial building to home construction. For example, HVAC commercial may be tailored for homes powered by low voltage (CAD and Blueprints-MBSE) (City Permitting), which may be traced to DHS CISA. We are in the digital convergence of physical-cyber-Digital Twins. So true that adversaries "live in the cracks" I also encountered a few in my federal IT years. Still not sure if they were digital roaches or blind termites. I recently heard that they caught one, but we are sure there are many more (APTs). It's very accurate that they multiply rapidly in certain risk cultures. A prescriptive approach could be proactive extermination at the design foundation level. "Intentional Systems Thinking" points to DevSecOps (IoT-SCADA) CI/CD; well said!
CEO, Founder @ MAX Cybersecurity | 8a Certified
1 年For Sure Sir