IoT Security Assessment - IEEE PAR Proposal
0 likes162 views
The document outlines a proposed IoT security assessment framework aimed at helping businesses understand and mitigate risks associated with IoT deployments, emphasizing the need for a user-friendly approach. It includes a checklist for assessing devices and applications, necessary conditions for security, and ways to enable data-driven decision making. Additionally, it discusses existing standards and the importance of broad applicability across various sectors while addressing the economic feasibility of implementing the framework.
IoT Security Assessment - IEEE PAR Proposal
- 1. Syam Madanapalli | Chair IEEE P1931.1 - The Roof Computing | June 27, 2020 IoT Security Assessment Framework A data driven approach for the businesses 1
- 2. Complex & uncomprehended The businesses should know • What they are deploying • A checklist for a calculated risk • Potential attack surface • Risk vs bene fi ts IoT Security Constrained Devices Big Scale Tech Illiterates Lack of UI, challenging to design & con fi gure, update, and prone to errors Applications & devices are personal, and involves humans & physical world Variety of devices, protocols, & applications Big Impact Safety & economic risks, loss of privacy and business interruptions 2
- 3. Typical IoT Network Segments Typical networking technologies and corresponding security protocols 3 Cloud PAN WAN LAN Internet IPSec Tunnel IPSec Tunnel WiFi/ Ethernet BB/LTE/MPLS BLE, 802.15.4, WiFi SSP Edge Router Apps OTAE CoAP/UDP/DTLS/IPv6
- 4. IoT Security Assessment Framework The proposal The assessment framework standard will provide • A way for the industry to assess IoT applications consisting of IoT devices and Edge • A checklist for devices and edge • Necessary and su ffi cient conditions • A scoring mechanisms • Enable decision making • Data driven analytics for security assessment A set guidelines for the device vendors and application developers A method for evaluating the IoT applications for security needs Self assessment/IEEE certi fi cation 4
- 5. Existing/Ongoing Standards/Work ... @IEEE-SA • Healthcare Device Security Assurance Working Group (EMB/Stds Com/ HDSecWG) • Standard for Wireless Diabetes Device Security Assurance: Product Security Evaluation Program • This standard de fi nes a framework for a connected electronic product security evaluation program P2621.1 P2733 • Clinical IoT Data and Device Interoperability with TIPPSS (EMB/Stds Com/ Clinical IoT DDI with TIPPSS) • Standard for Clinical Internet of Things (IoT) Data and Device Interoperability with TIPPSS - Trust, Identity, Privacy, Protection, Safety, Security • This standard establishes the framework with TIPPSS principles (Trust, Identity, Privacy, Protection, Safety, Security) for Clinical Internet of Things (IoT) data and device validation and interoperability. 5
- 6. Existing/Ongoing Standards/Work Outside IEEE • GSMA IoT Security Guidelines and Assessment • Provides recommendations for the secure design, development and deployment of IoT services • OneM2M, IoT Alliance Australia, Trusted Connectivity Alliance GSMA IoTSF • IoT Security Foundation - A not-for-pro fi t organization • Provides advice and framework for IoT Security • Has over 100 members, including ARM, NXP, Microchip, Samsung, Vodafone, Qualcomm 6 ETSI EN 303 645 • IoT Security requirements for Consumer Devices • Under development • A potential candidate to collaborate
- 7. Other Established Standards/Compliance Guidelines These will in fl uence the development of any new security standards Information technology — Security techniques — Evaluation criteria for IT security ISO/IEC 15408 GDPR Regulation on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (Data Protection Directive) HIPAA The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 PCI DSS Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard 7 IEEE Standard for an Architectural Framework for the Internet of Things IEEE 2413
- 8. IoT Security Requirements The capabilities of the end devices should be considered for security assessment Characteristic Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 RAM, ROM < 10KB, 100KB ~ 10KB, 100KB ~ 50KB, 250KB Internet No IP CoAP IPv6, HIP Cryptography Over the air Symmetric cryptography PKI based Protection One level up Assisted at one level up Self and services at one level up Interface IoT Services Security Provisioning and Services Security Services Applications Only for trusted environments Battery powered under the Roof Mains powered & standalone devices 8
- 9. The Need for a New Standard Data driven; Easy to understand and to be used by Business users • Training, scaling, reducing costs and making IoT deployments more secure • Device capabilities based approach • De fi ning Necessary and Su ffi cient conditions • Scoring/grading mechanism • Easy to interpret checklist and summary for for weighing risk vs. bene fi ts and decision making • Data driven approach (applying ML/AI for assessment) • Self assessment/IEEE certi fi cation 9
- 10. 5C Five Criteria
- 11. Broad Market Potential A standards project authorized by IEEE 802 shall have a broad market potential. Speci fi cally, it shall have the potential for: 11 • Broad sets of applicability • IoT being adopted almost all business sectors, including residential and government use. And security and privacy is the number one concern while considering an IoT application. Hence the output of this project will have broad set of applicability. • Multiple vendors and numerous users • The number of devices that would be connected to the Internet is estimated to be in tens of billions in the near future. • Balanced costs (LAN versus attached stations) • This project reduces the cost of IoT applications deployment by providing a repeatable approach for security assessment and reduces the need for special skilled personnel.
- 12. Compatibility IEEE 802 LMSC de fi nes a family of standards. All standards should be in conformance: IEEE Std 802, IEEE 802.1D, and IEEE 802.1Q. If any variances in conformance emerge, they shall be thoroughly disclosed and reviewed with IEEE 802.1 Working Group. In order to demonstrate compatibility with this criterion, the Five Criteria statement must answer the following questions. 12 A. Does the PAR mandate that the standard shall comply with IEEE Std 802, IEEE Std 802.1D and IEEE Std 802.1Q? • No. However, the standard would use the IEEE 802 standards. B. If not, how will the Working Group ensure that the resulting draft standard is compliant, or if not, receives appropriate review from the IEEE 802.1 Working Group? • Not applicable.
- 13. Distinct Identity Each IEEE 802 standard shall have a distinct identity. To achieve this, each authorized project shall be: 13 • Substantially di ff erent from other IEEE 802 standards • This standard is not related to IEEE 802 standards. • One unique solution per problem (not two solutions to a problem) • There is no standard within IEEE that provides this capability. • Easy for the document reader to select the relevant speci fi cation • Yes, this project will de fi ne an assessment framework for deploying IoT applications based on best practices for security and privacy.
- 14. Technical Feasibility For a project to be authorized, it shall be able to show its technical feasibility. At a minimum, the proposed project shall show: 14 • Demonstrated system feasibility • Security assessment is typically prerequisite for any connected applications in the enterprise, however the approach is proprietary. • Proven technology, reasonable testing • Not applicable. • Con fi dence in reliability • This standard will not reduce any existing system reliability. • Coexistence of IEEE 802 LMSC wireless standards specifying devices for unlicensed operation. • Not applicable.
- 15. Economic Feasibility For a project to be authorized, it shall be able to show economic feasibility (so far as can reasonably be estimated) for its intended applications. At a minimum, the proposed project shall show: 15 • Known cost factors, reliable data • This project will not introduce any new costs, rather will help in reducing the cost of connected application deployment and maintenance. • Reasonable cost for performance • The benefit of security assessment will outweigh the cost of assessment. • Consideration of installation costs • Not applicable.