/*
A Lack of Industrial Security

A Lack of Industrial Security

Almost a decade has gone by since I performed my first risk analysis of a nuclear plant and discovered a completely new world. Since then, security professionals will have heard a lot more about the current state OT security (or lack thereof). Operational Technology designates systems specially designed to monitor or make changes to physical processes; these systems are often called Industrial Control Systems (ICS).

It doesn’t matter if we’re referring to Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems or Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), the fact is security was never considered during the design of OT or ICS systems and the protocols they implement. These systems were not built to be interconnected with traditional IT networks. Their security relies on physical “air gaps” and physical access control to the plants or locations where these systems are implemented.

It’s clear that the risks impacting OT systems have grown exponentially during the last 10-15 years. Additionally, we’ve seen an increase in the attack surface and potential impact of an outage or catastrophic system failure. Risks in this area continue to grow as businesses require interconnectivity between IT and OT networks to enable organizations to provide remote access for engineering, operation, support or monitoring activities.

OT networks often leverage standard commercial off the shelf (COTS) technologies such as Microsoft Windows, SQL Servers, and TCP/IP based networks along with customized ICS/OT hardware. Using these COTS solutions often makes the critical systems vulnerable to the same security risks and issues that IT systems face. In fact, the situation is arguably worse, because often patching is not possible due several operational constraints and availability requirements. These constraints often include the potential of losing vendor support if the underlying COTS software or systems are upgraded or the reality that many of these systems cannot be taken offline or rebooted in order to apply patches because they must keep running 24x7x365.

Another reason it’s not possible and often dangerous to run standard vulnerability scanning products is due to the inherent fragility of those systems and the problems that unexpected traffic can cause to them. To complicate matters further, the non-TCP/IP protocols used within these OT networks are often proprietary protocols where authentication or encryption are not present.

In short, these are technologies built with out-of-date operating systems with dozens (or hundreds) of well-known vulnerabilities, built using an insecure network and communications protocols. These technologies must now be interconnected to the corporate IT systems due to business requirements but the systems cannot be scanned, patched, or secured using traditional security solutions and methodologies. OT/SCADA systems are currently used to monitor and operate everything from factory production chains to the critical infrastructure required to deliver electricity to the masses. What could possibly go wrong here?

The risks highlighted above are not just theoretical, in the past few years we have seen a significant increase in the number of attacks specially designed to target ICS/SCADA systems such as:

  • 2010 Stuxnet was uncovered. Stuxnet is worm-like malware that targets PLCs designed to enrich uranium. Stuxnet looked for specific Siemens PLCs connected to very specific hardware and if found modified the configuration causing centrifuges to spin too fast. Stuxnet was a targeted attack addressing the Iranian nuclear program that famously became the first nation-state backed cyberattack design to cause physical damage to industrial control systems.
  • December 2015, a Ukrainian regional electricity distribution company reported service outages affecting 225,000 customers and lasted for several hours. The outages were discovered to be part of an attack on the power generation systems. Attackers were able to remotely access and control the ICS to cause the outage and delay the restoration efforts.
  • June 2017 Crashoverride was uncovered. This malware specifically targets ICS electric grid components. When Crashoverride infects Windows machines, it automatically maps out the controls systems, records network logs (to later be replayed by operators). Crashoverride is an advanced modular malware framework that can adapt to many protocols and is designed to be stealthy, disruptive, and automatic.
  • December 2017 Triton was discovered. Triton is a new malware strain designed to target ICS systems. Triton was discovered after causing a shutdown of critical infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. This malware targets Schneider Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) controllers. By modifying these SIS controllers, the attackers are able to increase the likelihood of system failures resulting in physical damage to the ICS.

In addition to all these security challenges, we also need to be looking towards the future and prepare for the evolution of ICS and now “IOT” systems. I’m confident that, as we have seen in other industries like finance or telco in the past, ICS and SCADA vendors will move towards providing cloud-based offerings for some of their systems. I really think that in the near future we will be talking about Historian-, HMI-, PLC- or even Control-as-a-Service approaches.

With this risk landscape and the associated challenges, we can easily understand that CISOs are having a tough time being responsible for their organization’s ICS security programs. CISOs will face challenges not only because OT security is an entirely new world for most security professionals, but also because historically priorities and concerns for IT and OT teams have been quite different. The stringent operational and availability requirements placed on OT systems often create difficulties when traditional security teams need to work closely with OT engineers.

Furthermore, when we talk about risks and incidents in ICS we need to keep in mind that the potential damage is going beyond financial losses or reputational damage. Attacks in this space could very likely result in physical losses, severe damage to the environment or even the tragic cost of human lives.

Fortunately, it’s not all bad news since the industry is working diligently to design solutions to help mitigate these risks. New best practices and guidelines have been published such as the ISA/IEC-62443 (Formerly ISA-99), a series of standards and guides on how to implement secure ICS.

Additionally, vendors have recently built technologies to identify anomalies or potential intrusions through passively monitoring traffic that then monitors OT networks? It’s important to note that machine learning approaches will struggle to become operational and effective in traditional IT networks, though they work perfectly well on OT networks.

Machine learning works well in OT environments because the traffic and the communications are very consistent and predictable. These tools are not only useful for security professionals to receive easily understandable alerts on potential threats but are also helping OT teams to gain a new level of visibility within their operational technology network and assets that they’ve never had before. They have clear operational advantages. This allows organizations to both improve their detection capabilities while also providing the OT engineering staff tangible benefits. I believe that working closely with the OT teams to show them the operational capabilities of these OT security solutions will lead to better communication and cooperation between OT and IT teams.

All in all, while protecting and hardening ICS networks is an incredibly difficult challenge for any CISO, there are still paths for the success to be followed. I think the efforts should be put on identifying the potential risks, focus heavily on network segmentation including limiting the potential paths of connectivity between OT and IT networks using one-way data diodes. Finally, building a smart security monitoring approach that not only enables the identification of security threats but also provides visibility and added value to the operational team will be a key factor to success.

Do you want to learn more? Click here to read our new Operational Technology whitepaper.

Securing Industrial Control Systems: A Holistic Defense-In-Depth Approach

Securing Industrial Control Systems: A Holistic Defense-In-Depth Approach

Critical infrastructure is infused with proprietary protocols and software, air-gapped networks, and robust physical security systems—an amalgam that effectuated the notion of “security by obscurity” in the industrial control systems (ICS) community. Still, business needs eventually necessitated the convergence of information technology (IT) and ICS architectures. Although this seems like a match made in heaven, from an IT perspective, designing visibility and control into a system that inherently lacks them is a challenge that can be painful.

However, IT’s “defense-in-depth” security approach could be effective for ICS security. After all, this strategy employs a holistic approach to protect all assets—people, technology, operations, and adversarial awareness—while considering its interconnections and dependencies to provide effective layers of monitoring and protection based on exposure to cybersecurity risks (Figure 1).

1. A holistic approach. A defense-in-depth security approach employs a holistic methodology to protect all assets while considering dependencies to provide effective layers of monitoring and protection based on exposure to risks. Courtesy: Kudelski Security

1. A holistic approach. A defense-in-depth security approach employs a holistic methodology to protect all assets while considering dependencies to provide effective layers of monitoring and protection based on exposure to risks. Courtesy: Kudelski Security

The following highlights plausible best-practices for securing ICS environments using a defense-in-depth approach (Figure 2).

2. Defense-in-depth framework. Application and data security are at the center of all security efforts. Courtesy: Kudelski Security

Policy, Procedures, and Training

An effective ICS security program depends on the willingness of the operations staff and management to accept security as an enabler for all computer-oriented activities, as well as their ability to apply controls from a standpoint of acceptable risk.

With this in mind, organizational leadership must clearly define and communicate cybersecurity roles, responsibilities, expectations for performance, and authorities for managers, system administrators, and users through training programs and policies, while holding individuals accountable for their performance. This minimizes the likelihood of organizational personnel inadvertently disclosing sensitive information regarding supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system design, operations, or security controls. Likewise, good management practices in handling delicate situations, recognizing and rewarding employees, and looking after their well-being can help diffuse potential insider threats.

Risk Management

Designing an effective ICS security architecture requires a risk model that maps functional requirements of these complex systems and provides a holistic image of potential real-world consequences. A thorough risk analysis procedure consists of identifying all assets (including software, network elements, and people) in the organization, as well as risk drivers or threats such as disgruntled employees, terrorists, hostile countries, and more.

Establishing a “Red Team” to identify potential attack scenarios and evaluate system vulnerabilities can help detect plausible intrusion methods, which should be evaluated as risks and categorized based on their likelihood of occurrence and impact to the organization. Note that actionable policies and procedures, along with monitoring and feedback, should be part of the risk management program. Periodic review is essential to stay current with evolving threat landscapes.

Vendor and Supply Chain Management

Organizations regularly employ contractors and third-party vendors who do not have uniform cybersecurity policies and practices. This creates exploitable weaknesses in the operations chain. Therefore, it is recommended that third-party requests be reviewed by IT—as well as legal and other relevant departments—with proper documentation. Documentation should be accompanied by regularly scheduled compliance reviews/revalidation, all based on assessed risks while confining intellectual property access to a need-to-know basis only. Likewise, rigid guidelines for evaluating the purchase of new SCADA devices must be established.

Incident Response Management

A comprehensive cyber incident response plan should include both proactive (to prevent incidents) and reactive measures (to detect and manage an incident). Therefore, it is recommended to establish a 24/7 incident monitoring program with the ability to detect threats to the ICS network. Having a comprehensive response plan (such as isolation strategies and disabling affected accounts) when adversarial activity is detected is also important. As critical is having a restoration plan—including establishing system backups (redundant hardware and fault-tolerant systems)—and disaster recovery plans (fallback mechanisms).

Audit and Assess

Auditing eliminates the “paths of least resistance” that an attacker could exploit. This involves technical audits of SCADA devices and networks, physical security surveys, and assessments of all remote sites connected to the SCADA network. This will identify security concerns while maintaining compliance with standards such as NIST-80053, NERC CIP, French ANSSI, CIDX/ACC, AGA 12, API, ISA/IEC 62443, CPNI, CPNI, ISO 27001, and others.

Compliance with standards/regulations does not guarantee continuous security, but it does provide a snapshot of required controls at a point-in-time. Considering numerous factors affect the security of a system throughout its life cycle, periodic testing and verification are important in achieving optimal security.

Physical Security

Physical considerations typically refer to a ringed architecture of layered security measures that restricts access to users to fulfill their duties only. Some measures include authentication for physical access such as key cards and biometrics, facility monitoring (cameras and motion detectors), perimeter defense (fences and anti-vehicle ditches), and visitor escort procedures.

Network Management

Securing ICS against modern threats requires well-planned and implemented strategies to give network defense teams a chance to quickly and effectively detect, counter, and expel an adversary. Therefore, it is recommended to:

  • Document network architecture and identify critical systems, connections to SCADA networks, and host-to-host communications paths. Evaluate the risks and disconnect items that aren’t required.
  • Physically separate corporate and control domains. Ensure isolation of ICS networks from untrusted networks and allow real-time connectivity to external networks only if there is a defined business requirement or control function.
  • Logically segment networks and isolate critical parts of systems. Demilitarized zones (DMZ) and data warehousing provide a secure buffer zone where services and data can be shared and secure transfer of data from the SCADA network to business networks can be ensured.
  • Deploy network access control and manage authentication (preferably two-factor or more) by requiring separate credentials for corporate and control network zones, and store these in separate trust stores. Never share active directories, RSA ACE servers, or other trust stores between corporate and control networks.
  • Require any remote access to be operator-controlled and time-limited. Firewalls, virtual private networks, callback (for dial-up), multi-factor authentication, user access control, and intrusion detection can provide “secure” remote access to computer networks.
  • Engage network monitoring tools and complement them by enabling logging on all systems. Regularly audit system logs to detect suspicious activity as soon as possible.
  • Take measures to avoid “watering hole” attacks. Use a web domain name (DNS) reputation system. Get updates from authenticated vendor sites. Validate the authenticity of downloads. Insist vendors digitally sign updates and publish hashes via an out-of-bound communications path, and require they use these to authenticate.
  • Lockdown all unused ports, services on routers, switches, and network daemons. Change all default configurations and passwords.
  • Deploy deception networks to boost the odds of finding an adversary early and mitigating overall damage.

Host Management

Asset inventory is an accurate baseline for identifying necessary security controls. Having identified the assets, lock down all unused ports and services on the host, and restrict privileges to only those needed. Also, manage authentication (preferably multi-factor) with secure password policies—stressing length over complexity—which should be unique and changed at least every 90 days. Harden the host by methods that include application dynamic whitelisting, memory protection, write protection and read protection.

Implement change management policies and procedures for protection against improper modifications prior to, during, and after commissioning. Have a configuration/patch management program centered on the safe importation and implementation of trusted patches. Monitor host activity and alert unauthorized changes.

Application and Data Management

Applications and data are critical elements of ICS environments. Avoid embedding hard-coded passwords in ICS applications. Also, demand that vendors disclose any backdoors or vendor interfaces to your SCADA systems and expect them to provide systems that are capable of being secured.

Conduct an initial assessment (static and dynamic analysis) and ensure compatibility of the application with the host operating system before deploying it. Restrict access to the application and data only to intended users. Finally, it is recommended to use cryptographic controls and data sanitation techniques to maintain the integrity and authenticity of the data collected.

3. ICS threat spectrum. State-sponsored actors have the motivation, capabilities, and means to be especially disruptive, but defense-in-depth security solutions are particularly effective against those threats. Courtesy: Kudelski Security

No environment is 100% secure. A threat-actor, through intent, capability, and opportunity, will always pose a threat to an ICS network by trying to compromise an organization’s systems through its operations, personnel, technology, and other vulnerabilities. Implementing the strategies and controls presented in this article can greatly improve the security posture of ICS.

This said, the determination of a security control is context-based, and there might arise a situation where ICSs have functional or operational properties that disallow application of a security control. In such cases, it is recommended to identify, assess, and implement necessary compensatory controls and ensure the SCADA security policies and standards complement the organization. IT security policies should also evolve to meet changing threat profiles and be scalable to accommodate different standards and regulations.

It needs to be foremost in everyone’s mind that in the SCADA world, availability, reliability, and stability are the most important criteria to be considered.

Vishruta Rudresh is senior cybersecurity researcher at Kudelski Security www.kudelskisecurity.com.

Courtesy of Power Magazine. Read the original article here.