Safety Analysis for security-protected communications
Error Models and Validation Options
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17560/atp.v62i4.2474Keywords:
safety, security, communication, integrity, error detection, fieldbusAbstract
Fail-safe communications with techniques that are mainly tailored to random errors (safety) often require cryptographic techniques (security) in order to be protected against attacks. In principle, these cryptographic techniques are not different from those applied in a non-safety-related environment. Although not developed for the detection of random errors, they contribute to this – and modify the models used to determine safety characteristics. The discussion of this effect started a few years ago; it is now also taking place in standardization committees. A specific choice of model-preserving cryptographic techniques is
possible, or an adaptation of the models and the calculation of the safety characteristics based on them. The latter approach offers greater efficiency and flexibility, since it makes it possible for the cryptographic techniques to be viewed as part of the Black Channel from the safety perspective.
References
IEC 61784-3. (2019). Industrial communication networks – Part 3: functional safety fieldbuses. IEC: www.iec.ch
IEC 61508. (2010). Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems. IEC: www.iec.ch
Wieczorek, F., Schiller, F. (2013). Safety und Security für Feldbus-Anforderungen. atp magazin, 54(10), 44-51. Abgerufen am März 12, 2020 von http://ojs.di-verlag.de/index.php/atp_edition/article/view/2146
Wieczorek, F., Schiller, F. Wolf, J. (2015). Security for Fail-Safe Communication in Automation. In 8th International Conference Safety of Industrial Automated Systems, SIAS, 2015, ISBN 978-3-86423-163-6, pp. 80–87.
Bellare, M. and Namprempre, C. (2007). Authenticated Encryption: Relations among notions and analysis of the generic composition paradigm. Abgerufen von: https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~mihir/papers/oem.html
Rescorla, E., Dierks, T. (2018). The transport layer security (TLS) protocol version 1.3.
Peterson, W. W., Brown, D. T. (1961). Cyclic codes for error detection. Proceedings of the IRE, 49(1), 228-235.
Preneel, B., Rijmen, V. (Eds.). (2003). State of the Art in Applied Cryptography: Course on Computer Security and Industrial Cryptography, Leuven, Belgium, June 3-6, 1997 Revised Lectures. Springer.
Švenda, P. (2016). Basic comparison of Modes for Authenticated-Encryption (IAPM, XCBC, OCB, CCM, EAX, CWC, GCM, PCFB, CS).
Inoue, A., Iwata, T., Minematsu, K., Poettering, B. (2019, August). Cryptanalysis of OCB2: Attacks on authenticity and confidentiality. In Annual International Cryptology Conference (pp. 3-31). Springer, Cham.
Jutla, C. (2000). Encryption modes with almost free message integrity. In Advances in Cryptology, EURO-CRYPT ’01, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 2045, B. Pfitzmann (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, 2001. doi: 10.1007/s00145-008-9024-z. Abgerufen von: https://eprint.iacr.org/2000/039.pdf
Rogaway, P., Bellare, M., Black, J. (2003). OCB: A block-cipher mode of operation for efficient authenticated encryption. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 6(3), pp. 365-403.
Kohno, T., Viega, J., Whiting, D. (2004). CWC: A high-performance conventional authenticated encryption mode. In International Workshop on Fast Software Encryption (pp. 408-426). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
McGrew, D. A., Viega, J. (2004). The security and performance of the Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) of operation. In International Conference on Cryptology in India (pp. 343-355). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Dworkin, M. (2004). Recommendation for block cipher modes of operation: The CCM mode for authentication and confidentiality (No. NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-38C (Withdrawn)). National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Bellare, M., Rogaway, P., and Wagner, D. (2003). A conventional authenticated-encryption mode. Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2003/069. Abgerufen von: https://eprint.iacr.org/2003/069, 2003
Gligor, V. D., Donescu, P. (2001). Fast encryption and authentication: XCBC encryption and XECB authentication modes. In International Workshop on Fast Software Encryption (pp. 92-108). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Fiat, R., Störtkuhl, T., Plöb, M., Zugfil, C., Gappmeier G., Damm, M. (2017). OPC UA Security Analysis, Federal Office for Information Security, Bonn, Germany, 2017
OPC Foundation. (2019). Unified Architcture Profile Reporting Tool. Abgerufen von: https://opcfoundation-onlineapplications.org/ProfileReporting/index.html
Schiller, F., Mattes, T. (2010, September). Residual error probability of embedded CRC by stochastic automata. In International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security (pp. 155-168). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Horch, A., Hannen, H., Schween, H., Wagner, K. (2019). Verschlüsselung sicherer Kommunikation. atp magazin, 61(6-7), 93-99. doi:10.17560/atp.v61i6-7.2412
Horch, A., Hannen, H.-T., Ditting, S., Schween, H. und Wagner, K. (2019). Die Verschlüsselung sicherer Kommunikation: Eine Herausforderung für die Bahnindustrie. In SIGNAL + DRAHT 111(4), pp. 23-29, DVV Media Group GmbH, Eurailpress, 2019
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Die Zeitschrift und alle in ihr enthaltenen Beiträge und Abbildungen sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Bearbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Auch die Rechte der Wiedergabe durch Vortrag, Funk- und Fernsehsendung, im Magnettonverfahren oder ähnlichem Wege bleiben vorbehalten.
