A Comparative Study of STPA-Extension and the UFoI-E Method for Safety and Security Co-analysis

被引:17
作者
Guzman, Nelson H. Carreras [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Jin [1 ,3 ]
Xie, Jing [4 ]
Glomsrud, Jon Arne [4 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Denmark DTU, Engn Syst Design Sect, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
[2] Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol NTNU, Dept Mech & Ind Engn, N-7034 Trondheim, Norway
[3] Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol NTNU, Dept Comp Sci, N-7034 Trondheim, Norway
[4] DNV GL, Grp Technol & Res, N-1363 Hovik, Norway
关键词
Safety and security; comparative study; risk identification; cyber-physical systems (CPSs); autonomous ship; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.ress.2021.107633
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Emerging challenges in cyber-physical systems (CPSs) have been encouraging the development of safety and security co-analysis methods. These methods aim at mitigating the new risks associated with the convergence of safety-related systemic flaws and security-related cyber-attacks that have led to major losses in CPSs. Although several studies have reviewed existing safety and security co-analysis methods, only a few empirical studies have attempted to compare their strengths and limitations to guide risk analysis in practice. This paper bridges the gap between two novel safety and security co-analysis methods and their practical implementations. Namely, this paper compares a novel extension of the System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA-Extension) and the Uncontrolled Flows of Information and Energy (UFoI-E) method through a common case study. In our case study, the CPS under analysis is a conceptual autonomous ship. We conducted our comparative study as two independent teams to guarantee that the implementation of one method did not influence the other method. Furthermore, we developed a comparative framework that evaluates the relative completeness and the effort required in each analysis. Finally, we propose a tailored combination of these methods, exploiting their unique strengths to achieve more complete and cost-effective risk analysis results.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] How the definition of security risk can be made compatible with safety definitions
    Amundrud, Oystein
    Aven, Terje
    Flage, Roger
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART O-JOURNAL OF RISK AND RELIABILITY, 2017, 231 (03) : 286 - 294
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2014, RES DESIGN QUALITATI
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2019, P 29 EUR SAF REL C H
  • [4] Aven T, 2018, SOC RISK ANAL GLOSSA, DOI [10.4135/9781412959216.n276, DOI 10.1177/1748006X17699145]
  • [5] Body OHS, 2012, MODELS CAUSATION SAF
  • [6] Carreras Guzman N.H., 2018, European Safety and Reliability Association Newsletter, P2
  • [7] Carreras Guzman N. H., 2020, CYPHASS PROTOTYPE CY
  • [8] Carreras Guzman N. H., 2019, INFORMATION, V10, DOI [10.3390/info10110343, DOI 10.3390/INF010110343]
  • [9] Carreras Guzman NH, 2020, SAFETY SCI UNPUB
  • [10] Chockalingam S, 2013, LNCS, V8328, DOI [10.1007/978-3-319-03964-0, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-03964-0]