Water treatment plants, gas pipelines, and power production facilities are only some of the critical infrastructures that are controlled and monitored by SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems (Yang et al., 2017). An HMI delivers processed data to the operator, while a decision-making system collects data about the procedure, remote terminal units (RTUs) link sensors to programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and field devices to the supervisory system via a communication infrastructure (Yang et al., 2017).
Vulnerabilities
Unauthorized access to the software and control host machine is a significant risk in SCADA systems. Human interaction, intentionally induced alterations, viral infections, and other factors are all potential causes. There may be little or no security on the packet control protocol, making packet access to network segments that house SCADA equipment a potential vulnerability (Meng et al., 2022). This means that a SCADA device might be controlled by anybody who sends packets to it. Access to SCADA-related network switches and jacks can allow an attacker to circumvent security protocols for control software and SCADA networks.
Cyberterrorism and cyberwarfare assaults are another threat to SCADA systems. Power plants, gas pipelines, and oil refineries all employ SCADA systems to monitor and manage vital operations. The destruction or interruption of these systems might have catastrophic implications, making them appealing targets for hostile actors (Meng et al., 2022).
Mitigation Strategies
SCADA providers are creating particular industrial VPN and firewall strategies for SCADA associations based on TCP/IP to address these security flaws. These methods were developed to safeguard data transmissions and stop unauthorized users from gaining access to sensitive information. To further protect against unauthorized app updates, white-listing techniques have been deployed (Meng et al., 2022).
SCADA systems’ early iterations relied on modem associations or hybrids of nonstop and radio serial contact (Yang et al., 2017) for their means of and infrastructure supporting communication. In contrast, modern SCADA systems make use of wide-area network (WAN) protocols like Internet Protocol (IP) for communication. The internet and standard protocols have made SCADA systems more accessible, but they have also made them more susceptible to attack. However, the security of SCADA systems may be enhanced by employing security approaches and standard protocols (Yang et al., 2017).
Using blockchain technology is another way to increase the safety of SCADA systems. When opposed to centralized cloud servers, blockchain-based solutions can offer more security and privacy. Blockchain’s distributed and immutable ledgers protect SCADA systems’ data against unauthorized access and modification (Kshetri, 2017). Some researchers have even explored machine-learning techniques to improve SCADA security. SCADA intrusions and assaults may be identified and categorized using these methods. Machine learning algorithms may detect abnormalities and security vulnerabilities by analyzing data from a network’s and computer’s activity (Alimi et al., 2020).
As previously mentioned, SCADA systems are susceptible to cyber and physical assaults (Gao et al., 2013). Control software can be compromised if unauthorized users get physical access to network routers, switches, and jacks. Therefore, both physical and digital safeguards are required for optimal security.
Conclusion
In conclusion, SCADA systems are indispensable for managing and keeping tabs on vital infrastructure. On the other hand, they have flaws that may be taken advantage of by hackers and other bad actors. SCADA systems are particularly susceptible to attacks that include unauthorized packet access to network segments and software/control host machine access. Potential assaults of cyberterrorism or cyberwarfare also represent a danger. SCADA suppliers respond to these risks by creating and deploying white-listing and industrial VPN solutions. Protecting SCADA systems and guaranteeing the safety of critical infrastructure requires ongoing research and development of security solutions.
References
Alimi, O. A., Ouahada, K., & Abu‐Mahfouz, A. M. (2020). A review of machine learning approaches to power system security and stability. IEEE Access, 8, 113512-113531. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.3003568.
Gao, J., Liu, J., Rajan, K. B., Nori, R., Fu, B., Xiao, Y., … & Chen, C. L. P. (2013). Scada communication and security issues. Security and Communication Networks, 7(1), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1002/sec.698.
Kshetri, N. (2017). Blockchain’s roles in strengthening cybersecurity and protecting privacy. Telecommunications Policy, 41(10), 1027-1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.09.003.
Meng, L., Yao, X., Chen, Q., & Han, C. (2022). Vulnerability cloud: a novel approach to assess the vulnerability of critical infrastructure systems. Concurrency and Computation Practice and Experience, 34(21). https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.7131.
Yang, Y., Xu, H., Gao, L., Yuan, Y., McLaughlin, K., & Sezer, S. (2017). Multidimensional intrusion detection system for IEC 61850-based scada networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 32(2), 1068-1078. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpwrd.2016.2603339
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
