NERC CIP – Waterfall Security Solutions https://waterfall-security.com Unbreachable OT security, unlimited OT connectivity Sun, 13 Jul 2025 09:47:43 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.2 https://waterfall-security.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/cropped-favicon2-2-32x32.png NERC CIP – Waterfall Security Solutions https://waterfall-security.com 32 32 Cybersecurity in the AVEVA Enterprise SCADA Product – Going Deep | Episode 122 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-security-standards/cybersecurity-in-the-aveva-enterprise-scada-product-going-deep-jake-hawkes-episode-122/ Thu, 29 Feb 2024 09:41:52 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/?p=20433 From supply chain to Active Directory to segmentation designing security into ICS products is hard. Jake Hawkes walks us through how security gets built into AVEVA Enterprise SCADA.

The post Cybersecurity in the AVEVA Enterprise SCADA Product – Going Deep | Episode 122 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>

Cybersecurity in the AVEVA Enterprise SCADA Product – Going Deep | Episode 122

From supply chain to Active Directory to segmentation designing security into ICS products is hard. Jake Hawkes walks us through how security gets built into AVEVA Enterprise SCADA.

Picture of Waterfall team

Waterfall team

Industrial Security Podcast Episode 122 Jake Hawkes

 “…staying still is moving backwards in (cyber) security.”

Available on

About AVEVA Enterprise SCADA and Jake Hawkes

Jake HawkesJake Hawkes from AVEVA is a Senior Product Manager at AVEVA with over 20 years of SCADA experience. Jake has held positions in Customer Support, Technical Sales, Proposal Support, Project Leadership and now in Product Management for an Enterprise SCADA product. He has worked in a variety of industries including Oil & Gas, Water & Wastewater, Transportation, Agriculture, and Advanced Weather Systems. He holds a Bachelor of Computer Systems Engineering from the University of South Australia.

AVEVA Enterprise SCADA was formerly called OASyS and is considered the world’s most trusted Pipeline Management System. It serves as digital transformation platform for midstream operators to leverage advanced analytics and cloud capabilities, and to deliver safe pipeline operations, leak detection, and enterprise decision support applications.

Share

Transcript of this podcast episode #122: 
Cybersecurity in the AVEVA Enterprise SCADA Product – Going Deep | Episode 122

Please note: This transcript was auto-generated and then edited by a person. In the case of any inconsistencies, please refer to the recording as the source.

Nathaniel Nelson
Welcome listeners to the industrial security podcast. My name is Nate Nelson I’m here with Andrew Ginter the vice president of industrial security at waterfall security solutions who’s going to introduce the subjects and guest of our show say Andrew how are you?

Andrew Ginter
I’m well thank you Nate. Our guest today is Jake Hawks. He is a senior product manager at AVEVA. And his topic is going to be doing product security for AVEVA Enterprise SCADA. And this is the product that he is the product manager for. And you know, I know this product line for a long time – as the industry leader in control systems for oil and gas pipelines. And today I know they have many other industries that they’re involved with but the oil and gas pipeline thing – that was sort of how they got started – You know 15 years twenty years ago. They used to be called Telvent OASyS but AVEVA bought Telvent or at least bought the product line I’m I’m weak on the details and they renamed it to AVEVA Enterprise SCADA. So that’s what we’re going to be doing talking to Jake about. How they do cybersecurity for AVEVA Enterprise SCADA

Nathaniel Nelson
Then without further ado let’s listen in to you with Jake.

Andrew Ginter
Hello Jake and thank you for joining us before we get started. Can you give us a few words of introduction about yourself and about the good work that you’re doing out of viva.

Jake Hawkes
SCADA workerYou bet? Yeah I’m a senior product manager at AVEVA um, based here in Calgary and I’m in charge of the Enterprise SCADA product which was formerly known as OASyS SCADA. Um, and it. It predates AVEVA when AVEVA bought tel vent. Essentially, that’s how they acquired this this product. Um, they acquired this? so AVEVA acquired enterpriseka as part of the carve out of the software business from schneider electric me myself personally I started my SCADA journey about twenty three years ago as an intern for a pipeline operator in Australia where I was first exposed to the UNIX version of OASyS since then I have held positions in customer support technical sales proposal support project management and now product management most of my career I’ve been in oil and gas. But. Because our products are used in water and wastewater I’ve spent some time over there as well as transportation agriculture and then I took a brief hiatus from oil and gas and did some advanced weather systems still using OASyS and and using some of my computer systems engineering degree with with a bit of hardware thrown in for some fun. So I’ve I’ve come a full circle starting at all as an intern on this product for which I am now the product manager. So very very satisfying arc of my career.

Andrew Ginter
Thanks for that. Our our topic today is sort of the the approach for for cybersecurity that you folks are using in the the Enterprise SCADA product. But you know before we dive into security. You know I’m familiar with the product you guys are here in Calgary I’ve sort of. Watched you from the outside for a very long time but for everybody else. Can you say a few words about what is Enterprise SCADA who uses it this kind of thing.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, thank you? Yeah so previously. It was known as OASyS and and it has been known as that for longer. So perhaps your listeners know it by that name when we were Telvent and before that Valmet we’ve had a lot of names over the years it is a skta system. So SCADA is an acronym supervisory control and data acquisition. It is a computer system or a a system of systems really that does supervisory control and data acquisition not to repeat myself but that is what it does it. It. It acquires data from across the entire asset. And it it provides that situational awareness to the operator who is sitting in a control room operating the asset twenty four seven and enables them to send commands to the field to operate the asset. So their job is. Primarily to move product through the pipeline but secondarily to keep it all in the pipeline and and so the system starts with bringing back the raw data and allowing controls from the operator to to the field. But then it it. That’s really its starting point and then on top of that we layer applications that make it easier for the operator to manage and operate a pipeline. There are many SCADA systems on the market ours comes out of the box with all of these heightened.

Jake Hawkes
Pipeline applications layered on top of it and integrated into it on top of that or next to it if you will coming out of our same product group are other pipeline industry applications. We sort of know these as the advisor application. So we have. Measurement advisor we have gas day advisor commercial advisor these products then are ancillary products around the SCADA system and they bridge between the OT space the control room with say the commercial aspects of buying and selling product from your suppliers and customers as well as then. Accounting for the product as it goes through your your pipe so measurement advisor is a gas measurement system. We’re working on a liquids enhancement to that so that we’ll be able to measure NGLs and and other things like that. But the gas measurement accounting system then is a way for you know the the company to. Bill based on an energy value. Not just a volume. So so there’s an example of some of the the layered applications on top but fundamentally Enterprise SCADA is a SCADA system SCADA systems differ from DCS systems direct control systems mostly by the way in which. Communications is is arranged and DCSs are usually on site with the actual field equipment like at a compressor station or or something like that whereas a SCADA system is meant to control the entire pipeline and will often interface with the DCS systems.

Jake Hawkes
Ah, you know in the form of talking to the Plc and and so on directly. So yeah so SCADA system primarily but for us it’s the platform on top of which we layer other pipeline specific applications.

Andrew Ginter
So just a little side. Note there to give you some insight into the industry Nate in my recollection. You know it was valmet created OASyS and then telvent a conglomerate bot. Valmet and then later on Schneider Electric bought Telvent and then you know as Jake relates spun off you know or sold off their software businesses to a viva. So this product went to a viva. And very recently Schneider Electric bought a viva back so the the product line has has bounced into an out of Schneider Electric for a while. There’s Schneider Electric is is a behemoth they’ve they’ve purchased a lot of stuff including AVEVA recently? you know. It’s it’s a truism of the industry that the the industry is very fragmented. There are you know you ask? What is what’s the world’s most you know, best known I don’t know relational database. Well it probably Oracle maybe sql server. You know, maybe Mysql which is the the free one that everyone uses under the hood of of you know, big web applications. 3 of them. That’s it those those are sort of your choices. Yeah there’s other databases in the world but none of them have the market share that those 3 do. What’s the top industrial control system in the world duno highly fragmented market. Really duno. What’s what’s the top but you know.

Andrew Ginter
Nowadays because Schneider Electric has bought so many other businesses nobody knows what is the world’s most popular industrial control system. But we we know that whatever it is Schneider Electric probably owns it so that’s that’s the world we live in

Andrew Ginter
Good. So You know, thanks for the intro as I said I’m I’m here in the same City I’ve been watching you folks for some time I know you I know you know tent and OASyS and now a Viva and Enterprise Gada. I Know you folks as pioneers in this space I Know you’ve been doing this this cybersecurity you know in the product space for a very long time. You know I see you as as leaders in the space from the very beginning. Can you talk about I don’t know if you want to go into the history but can you talk about the big Picture. What are you doing. With you know cybersecurity in your in your product line right Now. What approach are you taking to that.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, great question. Our our approach is is for sure. Not one of complacence. Yeah, we we became you know I mentioned that my started back in the UNIX versions. So when the. Big big switch in the early 90 s came where we went from UNIX to and nt we did it for many reasons. Not least of which for the fact that it was now just a single operating system to support the UNIX flavors back then were different enough that you know it it really poses some problems for us. But. But also also the switch to and nt which was controversial back in the early 90 s but we did it so that we could leverage active directory Kerboros authentication. And and other parts that the operating system would bring. To bear for us so that we didn’t have to and that has proved very smart in hindsight. When we first started deploying NT systems with active directory fully fully admit I don’t think we did it right? The first time but we we you know learned more about active directory and started to use. Adam the lightweight directory service or adlds that goes on top of active directory and that really helped our PSR our performance. Stability and reliability.

Jake Hawkes
But you know prior to that the security mindset at the time I think in the in our company and throughout the industry even myself was you know, mostly security through obscurity. No one thought that a UNIX server behind locked doors and air-gapped from the internet was a risk and. Yeah, ironically today that actually might be true. Some old legacy UNIX system behind locked doors air gat from the internet probably isn’t really a risk anymore except it it is and and I probably shouldn’t have said that but we we now have a very robust security model that was ahead of its time back then. But now is becoming the emerging standard in the ics space I’ve I’ve attended a couple of department of homeland security working groups where they’re looking at you know, formalizing I guess or.

Jake Hawkes
Formalizing might not be the quite white word but essentially centralizing what would be the best practice for a topology and network topology and and it only took a couple of those sessions for me to realize that oh they’re kind of catching up to where we’ve been for several years now so we follow the Purdue model. You know segmentation network segmentation and you know and and you know I could go on and on about what our security model is but our approach to security in AVEVA is interesting I think so as a product manager I I get to decide what R&D does we have a fixed capacity. In terms of hours of development time we can do per year. And at this time of year frankly here in November we’re looking at how to spend it next year 1 thing that I actually don’t have much say over is security. That capacity is sliced away from me. And it is managed by a dedicated security team in AVEVA. Who are constantly looking at the security industry and the security landscape and are finding things to do and and prioritizing them according to a standardized score. And and they and and they decide what the R&D is going to do with that percentage of the capacity. Then at the end of the release cycle when we’re getting to release again the the security mindset in AVEVA is so prevalent that they actually have released veto power on my product. So if we don’t meet the right security progressive.

Jake Hawkes
So if we don’t meet the right security score or if we haven’t made sufficient progress or if our internal code scanning tools reveal a vulnerability that scores high enough. That’s it the release is on hold until those things are resolved and. Is one area where you know there’s always a little bit of give and take between the business and r and d in terms of balancing priorities and capacities and pressures. But this is one that is not off a debate. And and I’m very happy to to have experts. That are you know, full time watching. The the industry and and making sure that the product is as secure as it can be you know without trying to sound too. Immodest my product moves a lot of petroleum in the world. And you know I go to bed with the. Surety that my product is not going to end up on the front page of the newspaper in the following day and and I take that very seriously and and we all do as well. It’s a concerted effort. The product group. Obviously when we put out our release we we package up our Msi and we’re done. But then that’s the beginning of how our develop our sorry our delivery group. What they take it from there and they deploy it in a secure way. A secure process so that there’s no chance of supply chain infiltration. And then the last layers of security are the customers and and I think this podcast is probably delved into that topic many times around the.

Jake Hawkes
People processes and procedures that customers need to do to secure their system. You know I like to say that the the the system is only as secure as the last person who touched it and so it has to be a comprehensive and holistic approach. Otherwise you know otherwise it cracks will form and. And then it’s game over.

Nathaniel Nelson
Andrew I maybe I’m just making an obvious assumption here I would have assumed that in the kind of case that we’re talking about here management tends to run the show but it sounds to me based on what Jake is saying that. The developers have a lot more say and control in this process.

Andrew Ginter
That that is true and it’s it’s not that unusual I mean I’ve only worked in a handful of businesses in my career doing product development. But where I’ve worked and and a lot of this was sort of pre. Cybersecurity I’m thinking way back to the the early 1990 s you know when I joined Hewlett Packard pre-security you know security wasn’t the thing back then but quality was huge because we were producing control systems and. You know in Jake’s case the the control system is controlling natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure in our case, it was oil pipelines and power grids and you know when we’re developing the control system. We’re developing new features. We’re adding tens hundreds sometimes of thousands of lines of new code. Into the product every release. Well I’m sorry people are human they make mistakes if you’ve added 100000 lines of code you’ve probably added you know five hundred or a thousand defects into the product as well and now you’ve got to go through and painfully clean them all out. Um. And so we had a quality decision making process that sounded analogous to what what Jake is talking about on the cybersecurity side. Yeah, the the management team set the goal it has to be you know this level of quality. So that we’re not embarrassed when we release it so that our customers don’t.

Andrew Ginter
You know scream blue murder because their control system is falling over dead every 10 minutes and then it was up to the and but the you know the managers did not they they weren’t face down into the code all day long. The engineers were the software developers were and you know we were the ones. Had to say okay, there’s the bar that’s been set for quality have we met that bar yet and if we came back and said no, we’re not there yet. It didn’t matter if we were late. It didn’t matter how much the manager screamed they were not going to overrule us because they knew that if they released if they overruled us. The business would be majorly embarrassed their necks would be on the line and so yeah, the the people who are close to the problem. You know, very technically staring at the security holes staring at the the quality defects they’re the ones you know that have to assess whether you’ve met. The yeah, the standard you know the the requirement management can set the requirement but they generally don’t want to vary that for schedule reasons because they’re going to be majorly embarrassed. So this is not that unusual. It’s it’s you know it sort of Jives with my own experience in the space.

Andrew Ginter
So you know there’s a lot of stuff there. But what what sort of leapt out at me was your mention of the the supply train. You know a lot of people in in the supply chain world. Are you know NERC CIP house standards saying are your suppliers trustworthy. Did you buy. Software or hardware components from untrustworthy suppliers who might have embedded a backdoor that’s not what you mentioned you know lots of other people are talking about. Well I embedded a library from a trustworthy supplier in my product a year ago and released the product and today. The vendor of that library has announced a vulnerability can I track that how do I get that out. That’s another thing you know that’s sort of the the S-baum topic the the software bill of materials topic that everyone’s talking about nobody is talking about what I see as the biggest problem which is the the solar wind scenario which is. The bad guys get into your system and tamper with the product under development. Yet. That’s the the first thing you mentioned so I’m I’m I’m a little surprised can you can you go deeper on on what you’re doing on on supply chain and and especially the the last element how you. You know, sort of secure your development process.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, yeah, supply chain. It can mean I think a lot of different things so to take those in random order as part of our fsr final security so final security review there are a number of scans that get run against the codebase. One of them is third -part library and open source attribution checks. So the open source attribution checks are are interesting because when I first learned about them. It included things that I hadn’t thought about. For example, we don’t like to use open source projects that aren’t. <Unk> under development. So no abandon where obviously we have to attribute the open source licenses and our product which we also do and we know where they all are, but but I thought that was interesting too that only open source that are and are active development and and then of course that code gets scanned with our tools as well. The the third -party libraries is another thing that is in the fsr process. And we have a hard rule that says that third -party libraries have to remain current. For exactly the reasons that you mentioned we have quite a few third -party libraries in our product. And if any vulnerability is found it is we have an obligation to our customers to take the updated third -party library and and spin it into a service pack. Well bring it into the next service pack and those rules manifest for us in in this way which is that if you have third -party libraries that are not current.

Jake Hawkes
You have to update them. When you release your service pack. It’s a non-negotiable. Then the last part of this then is really I think driven by some of our customers who maybe have some of the nerrksip sensitivities because not all of our customers. Do. And and this is you know some some people call it the double glove essentially it’s how do I trust that the the software the Msi package the zip file the Vm image. Whatever how do I trust that I can accept that into my secure clean zone if you will I’m now the customer. And and because that’s like a major vector for infection is is that I am now accepting some large piece of binary software through all of my firewalls and so on so some customers have taken an extreme approach where they don’t want to accept our vms. And they don’t want us to build their vms. So this is where the double glove approach comes in where instead of our project team building vms which is normal. You know previously to this. We used to bring hardware to our our office here in Calgary staged the customers hardware put this put the bespoke software on it tear it all down after fat ship it to site and reassemble. It.

Jake Hawkes
With the advent of virtual machines that’s basically gone completely by the wayside and we’re in that we we regularly move vm images around but some customers are saying no, we would rather that Vm image be built from the ground up here in our clean room. And we’d actually don’t want you touching it. At all. So the double glove becomes you know gloves behind glass if you will where we sit there and watch the customer and instruct and mentor them and and say you know step them through the installation process that we would normally provide. That’s an extreme example there. There was one customer that went even more extreme to the point where. We were sitting around with our lawyer scratching our heads like I’m not actually sure how we will ever get any software to you because you’ve kind of closed every potential way in which we could deliver software to you I’m not quite sure how you would ever take it so that that was an interesting negotiation as well. But yeah, it’s in It’s an interesting concept in in terms of how to protect our codebase. Obviously we have code reviews. So with pool requests and so on so they would have to they would have to infiltrate you know identity hack or something our developer. So viva it t. It has locked our environments down very very hard. We have multifactor authentication for everything that we do some things are also behind vpns as well. You know we take that very very seriously obviously because if we were to have been breached then.

Jake Hawkes
You know it puts a lot of I don’t even want it I’m coming out in hives just thinking about it but we would have we have an incident response that would kick in at that point we’ve I think we’ve only had to do it once and it was a it was a it ended up being nothing but it would. Boy it was. It was a panic that was quite a few years ago now though I want to sure hear your listeners that it was a bit of a false alarm. But since then you know we we take that very seriously and and we have regularly responded to the s-bo kind of. Questions in rfps and with customers we have to have a very open relationship with our customers with regards to security. So if they do a penetration test. They want to know that we’re you know going to to be interested in their results and of course we are happy to say that the penetration tests that our customers are performing are not turning up anything. Or if they’re they’re turning up some minor things that we’re like yup that’s safe to ignore that’s that’s reasons you yup you can turn that off that kind of thing and so like I said at the very beginning. It’s a constant evolutionary process here where every time we we put out a release. We’re always updating our gpos from the center of internet security. And so on. But I think I’m now straying off the topic of the of it of the supply chain question. So yeah, suffice to say it. It starts like I said it starts from the bottom layer how we manage our code how we access our code how we accept changes all the way to how we actually get binaries to site for the customer.

Jake Hawkes
And this is just the AVEVA on-prem experience right? The Cloud is a is a different beast. And it but it has the same kind of security oversight. And more because of because of the nature of cloud.

Nathaniel Nelson
I think that the the point that you made in your question there and then Jake’s response kind of interesting I mean the subject of supply chain security is not new to our podcast if I recall. In not so far away episodes. We’ve been talking about sbomb a few times sbo is just a way to account for what the heck kind of software. You’re dealing with and it seems like the point that Jake was making there among among others is that maybe. Beyond just knowing what’s in your product using only the kinds of software that you can hold to account that’s continuously updated so that you’re not just um.

Nathaniel Nelson
So that you so that you know that all the components of your product are ultimately just as securable and enforceable as all the others.

Andrew Ginter
Yes, the the the thing is that you know, in my recollection supply chain is is like 4 different things 3 of them in a sense are are verifiable. The the vendor can prove to the customer that they’ve done it right? And the fourth one is just hard. You know the the 3 that are verifiable. Are you know things like did you buy your components hardware and software from trustworthy sources or you know did you buy them from band sources. Well, you can look at the components you can see the labels on them. You can look at your contract you can you know in in the worst case. Bring a lawyer in to review the contracts under nondisclosure and prove that you purchased your stuff from you know, trustworthy sources. Another sort of gotcha is did you buy you know, even if the the stuff was manufactured by somebody trustworthy. Did you buy it from an intermediary. Who is criminal who is you know, taking some of the profits and and funding terrorism or something horrible like this and again you know you can prove with your contracts and with your paper trail that you haven’t done this. The third one is your you know? are there vulnerabilities in the libraries that you’ve used and. There are tools that can scan the product that can figure out which libraries you’ve used and which versions they can verify the customer can verify that you know what you’ve advertised in terms of your libraries and versions are the ones that are in the product can go and look to the the cbe the vulnerability database and prove to themselves that.

Andrew Ginter
None of these libraries have known vulnerabilities. You can prove all of this the thing that you can’t prove is what I asked about which is you know and in in a sense was Jake’s first answer. The the thing that you you can’t prove is that you know the bad guys haven’t snuck a sleeper a terrorist or you know? spy into your development organization who is inserting malware into the product as 1 of the developers. You know how do you prove? that hasn’t happened. That’s really hard and you know what you have to do to deal with that risk you just have to be really. Paranoid from one end of your development process to the other. It’s just it’s just hard and yet that’s exactly the behavior. That’s exactly the attitude that that Jake has described here so you know these folks have been doing this for a long time. You know they’ve wrapped their heads around the degree of paranoia you need in your development process to assure that you know with a high degree of confidence that the bad guys aren’t sneaking something in under the hood. So you know good on them.

Andrew Ginter
So that’s a lot I mean it’s you know, reassuring to hear a vendor with with you know, such a what’s the right word. A broad approach to to cybersecurity in the product. You know again, you’re.

Andrew Ginter
The leading provider for at least natural gas pipeline control systems. And you know active in lots of other space. But when we talk when we say the word pipeline. You know the elephant in the room is the Colonial incident. You want to talk about that. What were sort of the the consequences of that of that incident for for AVEVA and for the whole industry.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, you know we had the SCADA director from Colonial join us on stage at our recent pipeline summit here in Calgary I hosted a cybersecurity panel and it was the second time we had done it and. Mr. Warrenberger from Colonial he he had joined me previously last year at at in San Francisco at the avivo world conference and for the same thing a cybersecurity panel for our midstream user group. Um. You know and when he when he agreed to volunteer for that panel. The first question I asked him is oh you are you sure like do you want to get up in front of everybody and he he’s 100% and the first thing he says is we’re sorry but you’re also welcome. You know we we kind of forced us all to become secure and and you should. You should be taking this seriously and of course we all are I don’t know. Yeah you know and of course you know there’s limits to what I can talk about and and there’s limits to what I know about what happened at Colonial. But my our understanding is that the enterprise data system wasn’t compromised. And that the shutdown of the pipe was due to an abundance of caution. You know our system being ergat from the corporate network and designed to to operate independently and everything is is all well and good until your entire business operations depend on.

Jake Hawkes
Applications that are not in the control room and cannot be air-gapped. So so that’s you know that’s an interesting thing that the industry is grappling with right now is how to how to survive an ongoing cyber incident and not be fine for shutting down. Which was sort of the Colonial takeaway that surprised me so so that’s very interesting is is how resilient do we need to be how how does your disaster recovery or business continuity which is slightly different. How does your business continuity now change given the idea that maybe you can’t. You can’t shut down now Colonial may have been able to go to manual operations but some of our larger customers there there just might not be enough people to to send out to the field to operate manually. And in fact, do you even have you know when was the last time you tested your manual operation. Procedure. So so these are. These are some of the interesting lessons learned and like I said you know being very transparent about this and the and the corrective actions that we’re making it’s it’s extremely important for the industry to to share this kind of knowledge back and forth.

Jake Hawkes
So so as a result the the tsa rule came out that had a bunch of guidelines and so on and and what we were so we struck a team I struck a little committee that met daily to discuss the progression of these rules and to understand how our. Our customers were going to be impacted. Happy to report that because of our topology because of our design. And our approach that I’ve detailed already our customers didn’t have to do much? 1 thing that they did have to do was to cycle their system passwords which for the older versions of our product was a little bit.

Jake Hawkes
Um, and labor intensive perhaps and and a little bit risky. But our but our technical support team was able to to work with our customers to get those passwords rotated without causing downtime.

Jake Hawkes
Um, the later versions of our product. We leveraged group managed service accounts which is an active directory microsoft windows feature that rotates these system passwords automatically for you. So so going forward again. Our customers have to do nothing there. To comply with that rule. However, 1 other major change for me that affected me as product manager here was was how our products interacted with the various third -party security tools so previously we had been quite prescriptive. Um. It’s a long story but we had got into the situation where we were in testing integrating and and certifying one third-party security tool and and overwhelmingly our customers said that. Well, we don’t want to use that tool because our it department is is forcing us to use this other tool and so just a note on that itot convergence. Sometimes it’s a swear word sometimes it’s the answer to your problem in this case, you know the guidance that we’ve been giving here is don’t fight your it department when picking a security tool. You have to work with them because ultimately you need a holistic response to the to the entire operations of your business which includes it and ot so it it it is in your best interest to have an overarching response to this. It doesn’t have to be a single tool. You don’t want to violate any.

Jake Hawkes
You know any network security rules or guidelines or best practices but to have a common response and and perhaps a common tool if not just a single instance of that tool we think is probably the better way to go and so as a result we We announced that we were not going to be endorsing any individual tools nor were we going to be testing them because there’s obviously too many and we can’t test them all. So instead. We we pivoted and we documented in great detail. The. Elements of our product that you need to know about when you’re shopping for configuring testing and operating a third -party security tool. So I’m talking antivirus I’m talking allow listing I’m talking multifactor authentication I’m talking host host firewalls. So there’s several chapters now in our administration guide. That step you through what you need to know about our product. So that you can you can pick those third -party tools and then work with your it department to to to consolidate and collaborate on on the tools and then the overarching processes that you need to to be. You know. To be safe and to and to sleep well at night.

Andrew Ginter
So Nate let me add just a bit of background here I mean back in the in the early days of industrial cybersecurity I was working for a control system vendor. 1 of Jake’s competitors but but every vendor in the industry was facing the same problems the same demands from customers the same sort of changing landscape. You know one of the big issues back then was that the the customers were demanding that the vendors support the customer’s antivirus system of choice. The customer whitelisting vendor of choice. The customer’s file system change tracking vendor of choice the file so you know the the host firewall for whatever host the the customer is wanting the software on you know, any kind of network firewall the customer chose because of course you know. Enterprise security teams were dictating security choices company-wide and they would dictate to the you know the ot folks the engineering teams. You know you want to use an antivirus you have to use this one. It’s the company standard which meant that the control system vendors. Had to support everything you know back in the day the control system vendors were told you have to support antivirus. So every one of us picked and 1 antivirus vendor. You know and you have to support firewall so we picked 1 firewall vendor and we tested our stuff exhaustively.

Andrew Ginter
Against that 1 vendor’s products and we documented our stuff for that 1 vendor’s product so that the customer could get some some some security going the customers came back and said no, we don’t want your vendor. We’ve already standardized on this other vendor but you know if. The control system vendors. You know if we had to support everything. There was enormous costs I mean were we supposed to buy 1 of each antivirus I mean buying the antivirus wasn’t the cost. The cost was testing against all of the antivirus vendors all of the antivirus systems. To make sure that nothing malfunctioned you know there were there were malfunctions I mean if you run a full antivirus scan everything slows down and stops and you can’t do that with you know, a power plant or a pipeline. You know were we supposed to test our stuff with one of every kind or. All of every kind of control system security potential product on the market. All the file system change tracking vendors all the white listing vendors all the different firewalls and if we get a support call. What are we supposed to do you know the engineers on the other end of the line did not know how to operate the the. The security technology 9 times audit ten we had to teach them how to operate the security stuff because they hadn’t taken training. You know enterprise firewalls. You might be used to doing a little bit of you know if if you have to do something tricky on your home firewall while it’s got 6 screens. It’s not that hard.

Andrew Ginter
I’m sorry enterprise-grade firewalls. You need to take training to figure out how to use this morass of screens. So it was a real problem back then and over time you know, everyone had to change the the vendors had to change AVEVA was one of the leaders in. You know leading change in that space. But the customers had to change. They had to learn you know the enterprise the engineering teams had to learn that they had to take training. You know the the vendors had to learn that we had to support everything we had to document. Everything so that you could use the firewall of of your choice because we documented what ports you need. You know the vendors had to take training on how to operate their security gear. They had to take training on how to test their security gear so that they didn’t call us. And say oh your stuff is broken when in fact, they’d fumble fingered the firewall configuration. And you know all of us had to learn to to cut each other a bit of slack. You know if the engineering team had taken the training and. Still had a problem and we had tested the stuff and our stuff still wasn’t working well you know we had to come together so it was it was a difficult time today you know the the leading vendors in the space support a lot more than.

Andrew Ginter
Used to back in the day. Maybe not everything. Everyone’s learned to make a few compromises but it was it was a difficult period for a number of years as we figured this out.

Andrew Ginter
Good you know lots of lots of activity because of the the incident and the new rules. Can I ask you 1 detail you haven’t haven’t really touched on the the security direcives out of the TSA talked about shared trusts. And about documenting these things. You know in my understanding shared trust is code for active directory on the it side in in a sense. You know, controlling or you know having the power to create users and and manage permissions on the ot side. Um. Can you talk about shared trusts in in the Enterprise SCADA product.

Jake Hawkes
Sure? yeah, we were I was really excited personally for the idea of single sign on from the IT domain into the OT domain it. It seemed like such an obvious user experience improvement. But. You know it’s a skip to the end I would say that you know trusts between domains is now not best practice. But if I was to back up a little bit you know using using Active Directory has I think we’re largely over it at this point. But when we first started to Deploy Active Directory. You know the ITOT relationship with the customer would really come to bear its active. Directory therefore IT should be in charge of it right? and in charge of that domain. Now I don’t want to start like a debate amongst your your listeners but you know there there clearly is ways in which you can bring it into your OT zone to do this management and obviously you know and take advantage of the fact that they’ve got all the extra stuff they may have dbas on stuff and so on but you do need to give them that OT training they do need to become aware of the differences between OT and IT So when we started Using. It systems like Active Directory you know we had to politely but but firmly insist that they do not put our product into an IT domain. We don’t have that we don’t have that debate anymore.

Jake Hawkes
And now in terms of you know and and we were also at the time you know, really that many firewalls that many different domains really that seems like overkill We. We don’t We don’t hear that complaint anymore you know now that it’s become best practice so you know Trusts. We’re seen as a great way of giving corporate users access to the decision support system which is that read onlyly sk a system that sits in the DMZ between OT and it T. You know we thought in and it’s still true that it it. Removes the burden from the SCADA administrators for things like accounts and password resets and then with single sign on access to the Historian in the DSS they have access to all the historical data they could ever want. However, you know that the. User Persona of who uses the DSS is changing and I’m happy to talk about that further if you’d like and and but but you know the the net net of all of this is that without a trust between your it T domain and your OT even the otDSS domain. There is no single sign on So the DSS now is essentially out of reach. From your your corporate users. Outside of you know, predefined reports and and perhaps yeah, well other things that we have in our product like a remote hmi that you can peer into it. So.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, the future of the DSS is is an interesting one as a result of the security landscape changing.

Andrew Ginter
Ah, just a quick clarification. You’ve used the word DSS a number of times decision support system is that sort of the new branding or a superset of functionality sort of around the Historian or is is the Historian a different animal than than DSS.

Jake Hawkes
Scada ControlsSo certainly an historian would be in the DSS the DSS decision support system is a you know not to be repetitive but it is a system to help people make decisions. So for us. This is a a replica. Of the control system that is in the secure zone. So the main SCADA system that the operators are using to send commands to the field we replicate that into the DMZ network zone and we call it the DSS the DSS has no abilities to send commands to the field. So it’s a read-only system but it contains both historical data and real-time data. So our product has a real-time side and a historical side. Our real-time side is obviously what brings back the data from the field and shows it to the operator and then allows the commands to be sent. Um. Scada administrator will configure which of those points in the real-time servers need to be historized. And so we will historize that data into a smaller historian in the secure zone purely for for trending and for operator trending.

Jake Hawkes
Then all of that data is also sent to the DSS along with all the real-time data and the historian in the DSS will then usually contain a lot more data. A lot a lot older data but now and also now we’re seeing that there is another historian outside of. That zone. In the corporate zone and you know AVEVA having purchased osioft. We’re seeing we’re we’re seeing PI I mean we would recommend PI and putting PI outside of the OT zones be it zone 3 or 3 point 5.

Jake Hawkes
To use the Purdue nomenclature putting PI outside of all of that means it can be the the destination for all of your corporate data. Not just data from the field. So getting back to the question DSS Yes, it contains a Historian but it also contains a read-only Replica of the real time allowing. Non-operators to see operator screens without without the ability to actually do anything other than navigate and and see Data. So the DSS then because it was designed at the time with a trust for the corporate users any corporate user then could essentially pretend to be. Scada operator with the exception of being able to send commands and change configuration or whatever just read only. But because the trusts have gone away the DSS now is inaccessible to them So we we are needing to find a different solution for the DSS to make it to to get it back to what it needs to be to help. People outside the control room make decisions.

Andrew Ginter
Interesting I mean some of the features you talk about you know, giving the the anyone with access to the DSS on the outside on the Enterprise Network giving them the ability to see the same screens that the operators would have seen if they’d if they’d clicked through to them this it. You know I’ve I’ve heard the word digital twin. You know I’ve heard the word digital twin usually applied to a system in the cloud that in some sense emulates the the control system you know in the in the OT Network or the physical process in the OT Network can you talk about you know.

Andrew Ginter
Is this a digital twin and can you talk about the Cloud What what is the future of the cloud. Are we talking about operating the pipeline from the Cloud. What what? what does the Cloud mean security wise.

Jake Hawkes
Yeah, straight for the jugular. Yeah SCADA in the cloud so it used to be that making making reference to cloud in in my user’s presence would have me politely but firmly shown the door. Time marches on and the cloud is not as scary as it once it was the cloud. Remember is’s just somebody else’s computer. So with our product as it is today on-prem on-premise you know sometimes the computers are not not belonging to the OT they belonging to the IT sometimes the data center is in a different building across town that is a cloud. It’s just your private cloud. So I think that the concept of understanding you know the risks and and and so on of on-prem software versus the cloud. We’re seeing a shift. So so definitely digital twin. You know it’s it’s a bit buzzwordy of course. But. The DSS is essentially like a 20 year old version perhaps of the digital twin so yet just like you say the digital twin is supposed to be a a virtual representation of the entire asset. So I think for example that the digital twin will have a big role to play in how we. Manage and reduce the cost of point-to- point checkouts if you were able to show to a regulator that you have paperwork all the way from instrument to eyeball. Then that you can prove that you know where the changes have been made you ought to then be able to reduce the amount of effort it takes to do a p to p a point-to-point checkout.

Jake Hawkes
Um, and then that information you know should be stored in a digital twin but digital twin is a lot more than that and AVEVA is definitely investing heavily in this concept. Aveva wants to be a cloud first SAAS business. Um. But that would seem to be at odds with you know the world’s leading oil and gas control system. So what what I have done then is we’re going to. We’re going to put our toe in the water with DSS in the cloud. So with DSS being almost useless now to non-controll room people. Aveva brings to bear a bunch of products that replace what the on-premise DSS used to do and still does for those that that are using it which is everybody so products like AVEVA Insight which Which allows you know ad hoc user access to analytics and and dashboarding AVEVA Reports which is Dream Reports rebranded and then AVEVA Teamwork which is a workforce workforce automation tool. These are just the first 3 products that I think we want to bring to the midstream industry. And all of it would be backed by AVEVA Data hub which is the Osisoft pie technology but in our AVEVA cloud there are other regions in the world that are.

Jake Hawkes
Actually a little bit more progressive with their thinking about cloud I have several Latin American customers that are thinking about backup as a service so a backup control center would no only be like a direct replica of your primary control center. Um. With you know, building cooling UPS racks power internet supply all of the rest of it. They’re they’re because of there a little bit on the smaller side. They’re interested in in the in shifting that backup server to the cloud in order to reduce their operating costs. And so I’m I’m actively looking into what it would take to to make it easier to run Enterprise SCADA in the cloud. But I am not advocating for North American oil and gas customers to put their primary control center in the in in the cloud. Um. In fact, I’m not quite sure what the future will bring I have some visions that I’m working on in terms of the next twenty years or 10 years for Enterprise SCADA in the cloud but suffice to say we will always have to have some sort of fallback to on-prem I think if if no other reason then that’s usually where all of your. Your communications infrastructure is is you know originating from but I can see a future where the cloud has demonstrated its stability and and security and reliability to the point where there are customers that are and are happy to run their their SCADA system in the cloud now having said that.

Jake Hawkes
We have many customers that are running our product in an infrastructure as a service which is a form of cloud the difference though is that that’s still just vms a lift and shift approach. So so yeah, the cloud is. Cloud is coming for sure and and you know and even in within North America we have users that are saying we want to know how you’re going to move SCADA to the cloud and then we have other customers which are saying don’t say cloud in my presence and then we have some in the middle and I would say that second one very few now. Um. In fact, at our pipeline summit I mentioned it already. But I’ll say another anecdote from that event was someone come up to me and say yeah your your DSS in the cloud presentation was very interesting but I just don’t think we’d ever be able to do it. And I was getting ready for their usual list of reasons why we couldn’t go to the cloud right? Security latency data but data privacy data summary these kinds of things but instead the customer surprised me with the actual reason why they would probably be hesitant to go to the cloud. Which is that it would require having to having to run proxies within the IT DMZ and they don’t have a healthy relationship with their IT group and that really threw me for a loop right? like.

Jake Hawkes
Like I said I was expecting a whole bunch of other pushback as to why we couldn’t move to the Cloud but the real reason is because they don’t have a healthy relationship with their IT department. And and the reasons behind that I hope are clear. Obviously we have several firewalls to transverse to get to the Cloud and back and and so we need proxies and. And secure proxies and other things to live in these other network zones outside of OT I was kind of shocked to hear that that there could be customers out there. These were largely and this was a large customer too that that still have such an unhealthy relationship with their IT department That to me is as Alarming. And and as an industry I think we ought to be trying to close that gap somehow.

Nathaniel Nelson
Jake Hawkes said a lot there, but it sounds like maybe the overall point is that the cloud is complicated or maybe just too complicated for me.

Andrew Ginter
But he did make the point that it you know the industry the the customers who are using these control systems seem to be all over the map. You know some are saying over my dead body read my lips. You know some are saying you know.

Andrew Ginter
Ah, let’s do this everybody else is is somewhere in between you know and and it is complicated. You know relationship-wise with IT Reliabilitywise is the internet reliable enough to do a a cloud-based control system security-wise you know is it wise to have your control system that. Exposed to the internet by operating across the internet you know something new that I heard in his answer that I’m still thinking about is the possibility of a backup control center in the Cloud because you know these control centers the physical buildings with you know, wiring coming into them computers throughout that sit there. Basically idle through the entire sometimes through the entire life of the facility unless you’re unless you’re testing the backup system. It’s a big investment and if you can host your backup in the Cloud. You know in the life of facility of a facility. You might never use it. You know? are you exposed? Can you design the backup so that you know a cloud-based backup so that you’re not exposed to the security problems unless you switch over and you might never switch over. These are all to me. These are all interesting questions that you know I’d I’d have to think about the the idea of a backup in the Cloud security wise What does that mean, you know is is something new and and you know something I’m certainly going to be going to be thinking about going forward.

Andrew Ginter
Wow you know there’s a lot of stuff there. You know, maybe we need to have you back and and just do a whole whole episode on what’s going on with with the future of the cloud. And so you know thank you for joining us. Before we let you go can you sum up for us. What are the most important you know lessons that that you think we should be. We should be taking away about you know the product security and and especially product security in in you know the. Your your perspective the way that that you folks do it.

Jake Hawkes
Sure yeah, definitely. Security is is a layered approach security in depth is essential and and it starts before you’ve even written a single line of code through your design. And and then all the way through deployment and then the the you know the the last person who touched it. So it it is a collective exercise. It starts years before you need it. And you you have to invest in it and you have to continuously invest in it. You know I mentioned how we pivoted from our guidance on third -party security tools. 1 of the things that we mentioned in there is you know, be sure to understand the the resource requirements in terms of human staffing because if you buy a third -party tool test it and deploy it and then never check it. It’s not there. It’s not doing anything for you if you’re not actively looking at the results and chasing down the false positives and and and so on and constantly improving that you’re you’re not progressing. You know, staying still is moving backwards in the security I think. So you have to keep on top of it. And then I would say you know really in terms of cloud you know this is my chance I guess to to to talk a little bit about where we want to go with the product into the future is I guess you know maybe.

Jake Hawkes
Introspectively look at some of the prejudices that you have about cloud and really and really ask yourselves the kind of questions that you’re going to get from me if you challenge me and in in person right? which is latency and data privacy data security so you know the data security one it’s like do you think that you have more people on your security. Taskforce than AVEVA does because I can tell you we have quite a few people looking at you know at devops and and the security landscape as I’ve mentioned many times so its you know maybe have that have that introspection and challenge some of your internal prejudices. But you know security like I said it’s it’s extremely important. And it’s it’s a group effort. It needs to be a collective effort and and yeah and if you want to know more about how AVEVA is keeping the world secure I guess is to reach out to your account manager if you’re already a customer or hit me up on Linkedin. And I’d be happy to to start this discussion with you and put you in charge put you in touch with people who can who can you know continue this discussion with you. We’re only a software vendor you need to be having this discussion with all of your vendors. Your Plc vendors your your your payroll vendor and so on it’s like it’s it’s no point locking only 1 door of your house right? You have to look at all of your doors and that starts with even finding them. There are there are companies out there that that will help you even just understand what your security footprint is before you even start.

Jake Hawkes
Figuring out how to secure it. So. So yeah I think but you know what we have a great industry. Lots of fantastic people I like for yourself that are promoting these kinds of security concepts. It’s extremely important that we all get on board and do have those conversations with your IT team try to make them friends instead of enemies. Note back-to-back firewalls because you don’t trust the other guy’s firewall right and I have seen that multiple times which is you know, sad, but there it is. But yeah, you know our our product is secure come and have a look. We have our AVEVA conference next year we’re going to do our pipeline summit again in Calgary I think. Again, so watch out for that and yeah, hit me up on Linkedin and let’s take this conversation deeper I want to know more about why we don’t want to go to cloud because I need to I need to start formalizing a strategy for that. So yeah, very interested. Thanks for having me on Andrew.

Nathaniel Nelson
Andrew that was the conclusion of your interview with Jake Hawks do you have anything else. You’d like to take us out today.

Andrew Ginter
Yeah I mean I was impressed. I asked hard questions and I heard a lot of of the right answers I mean you know deep transparent documentation. So people can make informed decisions about you know, using the security tools of their choice. This is this is the right answer you know vendors used to push back on this and AVEVA isn’t anymore. You know a security budget for the development team sounds really interesting. This is you know it sounds like the right answer you know if you don’t have that the the. Push for features the push for schedule tends to muscle out security investments and you can’t afford to do that. So you know you give that decision-making authority over to the the development team you take it out of the hands of of management in a sense deliberately because management wants. Security as well. You know paranoia is the right answer to assure the integrity of the development process you know and he’s right, you know AVEVA he at AVEVA looks at 1 thing the product. But you know his point that that owners and operators have to have this security conversation with all of their vendors with all of their teams with with their I t teams and their engineering teams. You know it’s it’s a big picture and and we all need to be you know talking to each other and and doing the right things so you know again I’m very impressed.

Nathaniel Nelson
Well thank you to Jake Hawks for all of that and Andrew is always thank you for speaking with me this has been the industrial security podcast from waterfall. Thanks to everyone out there listening.

Andrew Ginter
It’s always a pleasure. Thank you Nate.

Stay up to date

Subscribe to our blog and receive insights straight to your inbox

The post Cybersecurity in the AVEVA Enterprise SCADA Product – Going Deep | Episode 122 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Webinar: AVEVA | Enabling the Digital Transformation of Electric Utilities https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-cybersecurity-insights-center/webinar-recording-aveva-enabling-the-digital-transformation-of-electric-utilities-with-engineering-grade-security/ Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:50:10 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/?p=11244 Cyber attacks are becoming more sophisticated, cloud-based innovation is increasing attack opportunities, and governments are issuing stronger cyber regulations, such as the new European NIS2 and the new German KRITIS directives.

The post Webinar: AVEVA | Enabling the Digital Transformation of Electric Utilities appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>

Webinar: AVEVA | Enabling the Digital Transformation of Electric Utilities

We had a great webinar with a nice turnout. The topic was how the digital transformation of the Electric Utilities industry is unleashed once engineering-grade cybersecurity is able to protect in the industrial systems.
Picture of Waterfall team

Waterfall team

AVEVA | Webinar | Engineering Grade Security for Water Utilities

Our Webinar with Andrew Ginter of Waterfall Security Solutions and Bill McEvoy of AVEVA covered many facets of the growing inter-connectivity within the electric utilities industry, and how securing that connectivity is vital for enabling it. 

Some of the main topics discussed throughout the webinar included:

  • New tools and approaches for digitization, innovation and cost savings.
  • New cyber threats and regulations.
  • New engineering-grade solutions for cyber threats to OT systems.

Listen in >>

Once a connectivity product can be installed safely, there is little reason not to use it.

The main takeaways from the webinar focused around the increased relevance between increased connectivity, and how secure that connectivity is. The only obstacles to increase connectivity are the security implications. Once a connectivity product can be installed safely, there is little reason not to use it.

Share

Stay up to date

Subscribe to our blog and receive insights straight to your inbox

The post Webinar: AVEVA | Enabling the Digital Transformation of Electric Utilities appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Saving Money and Effort Automating Compliance | Episode 107 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-cybersecurity-insights-center/saving-money-and-effort-automating-compliance-episode-107/ Mon, 05 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/uncategorized/saving-money-and-effort-automating-compliance-episode-107/ The post Saving Money and Effort Automating Compliance | Episode 107 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Apple Podcasts Google Podcasts Spotify RSS Icon

In this episode, Kathryn Wagner, the Vice President, Industry Solutions, Energy & Utilities at Assurx, joins us to explore the ways we can save time and money by automating compliance processes such as NERC CIP, the TSA Pipeline & Rail Directives, and other regulations.

Listen now or Download for later
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv_RJSaMRNU

THE INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PODCAST HOSTED BY ANDREW GINTER AND NATE NELSON AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE YOU LISTEN TO PODCASTS​

About Kathryn Wagner

Kathryn Wagner is responsible the development, strategic vision, and tactical product roadmap for Assurx’s ECOS products which focus on compliance within the energy and utilities sectors. She also develops and manages partnerships and represent AssurX at industry events and conferences as a subject matter expert.

In addition, she’s also responsible for guiding the strategic development and expansion of the ECOS product into other regulated markets within the energy sector, such as companies involved in the exploration, management, and production of critical resources such as water, oil, and electricity.

Kathryn Wagner Assurx

Saving Money and Effort Automating Compliance

Transcript of this podcast episode:

Please note: This transcript was auto-generated and then edited by a person. In the case of any inconsistencies, please refer to the recording as the source.

Nathaniel Nelson: Welcome everyone to the industrial security podcast I’m Nate Nelson I’m here with Andrew Ginter the vice president of industrial security at Waterfall security solutions who’s going to introduce the subject and guest of our show today Andrew how you.

Andrew Ginter: I’m very well. Thank you Nate our guest today is Kathryn Wagner she is the VP of industry solutions for energy and utilities at Asurex and our topic is compliance. I mean compliance can be a very expensive process. We’re going to be talking about automation. How to automate some or most of this this compliance work so that it doesn’t cost us so much.

Nathaniel Nelson: All right then without further ado here’s your interview with Kathryn.

Andrew Ginter: Hello Kathryn and welcome to the podcast. before we get started can I ask you to say a few words about yourself and about the good work that you’re doing at AssureX?

Kathryn Wagner: Yeah, good morning Andrew I’m very happy to be here. I am Kathryn Wagner the vice president of industry solutions for energy and utilities at AssurX so I have a background in engineering and and also software development and management.

I have nearly thirty years of experience with systems integration and compliance and a bunch of industries used to be a bunch of manufacturing and now it’s mostly energy for the last eleven years I’ve been with AssurX helping our customers implement solutions for NERC and other quality and compliance related requirements while. Being a product manager for our for NERC compliance and related systems that focus on reliability and resilience I also help guide the strategic vision and seek expansion opportunities into other regulated industries within the energy sector or even other critical infrastructure sectors. A no doubt AssurX. So AssurX has been a leader in quality and compliance management systems for over twenty years we operate in highly regulated industries such as energy and utilities which is my part of it. So pharma and biotech medical devices manufacturing and food and beverage and and those are things I don’t really deal with all the time, but our company does.

Regulation and Compliance

Andrew Ginter: So thanks for that. we’re going to be talking about compliance management in just a minute, but I understand that you folks got started years ago in the space of quality management are the 2 fields related.

Kathryn Wagner: Yeah, Andrew their natural their natural evolution from one to the other so quality management involves things like managing documents processes procedures issues. Non-conformances CAPPA which are corrective and preventive corrective and preventive actions, audits suppliers customers changes risk workflows approvals. So all those things to meet regulatory obligations and optimize quality. So compliance management has similar elements but with a different language. That’s way I like to think about it. For example, in quality space. Manufacturers must manage their suppliers. They have supplier risk assessments contracts contacts what parts they supply communications with those suppliers and in the utility world. We must manage vendors so that requirements defined in 13 supply chain risk management, but it includes things like vendor risk assessments vendor contacts vendor contracts so the hardware software and service that that vendor supplies and vendor communications. So. It’s a different terminology but very much the same.

Andrew Ginter: So that makes sense and this brings us to our topic which is compliance management I mean I was introduced to the idea of compliance and compliance management with NERC CIP. Back in the day and of course you’re in the electric sector you know much more about this than I do can you talk a bit about NERC CIP. You mean you read NERC CIP and it on the surface. It looks like any other security standard. What is compliance in the NERC CIP context? How does this work?

Kathryn Wagner: Okay, Andrew so NERC CIP is all about cybersecurity. It’s cybersecurity as it relates to, energy folks so that is making sure that you have controls so that your power facility or your substations and your control centers so that they’re all secure so they’re not going to get hacked so that the grid stays up ultimately, and it really involves protecting the people processes assets and data that keep the grid running and the NERC CIP is really about the cybersecurity but compliance with the NERC CIP is what happens when the auditors show up.

You’ve got to be able to produce all the data and evidence that those auditors want as it relates to those CIP standards. So that’s going to involve. so that involves this thing called the ERT. So it’s evidence request tool the auditors over recent years they’ve produce the spreadsheet so that everybody reports in the same way. So it makes it easier both on the regulators and on the entities that are being in compliance. So that evidence request tool people spend hours and hours filling it out the first it’s it comes in two parts. So. The first part is a bunch of lists of data. So they list out their sites. They list out the cyber assets at those sites they list out all the people interacting with that who has access to those things and  then a couple other parameters. Physical security parameters electronic security parameters data storage locations. Vendors and other things but all that data is supplied in lists at the first part of the audit and then the next thing that they do is the auditors pick sample sets from those lists, and then they request more data.

So they have these they have at least 75 different reports that they ask for which is very detailed data on every single requirement that’s in the NERC CIP standards So some examples of those. Like was this location commissioned or decommissioned during the audit period. They might want to know all of the access authorization records for a set of individuals. All security patches that were released evaluated applied for set of assets evidence that the full configuration change process was followed for any kind of installation. Evidence that incidents cybersecurity incidents that the response plan was followed for each incident that they asked you about so all this data is very challenging to organize. It’s not trivial at all to pick out this data I’ve heard some horror stories from. Our customers – it takes weeks and weeks of pulling data from different systems. You know the learning management system The HR system the asset management system. Pulling all this data and then they have to manually. Cross-reference it and reformat it so that it fits in the ERT so that the auditors are happy.

Nathaniel Nelson:  Andrew I got not only bored but a little bit vex just like listening to that answer and all the steps involved all the files all the – you know it’s a lot is everything that Kathryn just described really like all the bureaucracy the documentation necessary. and it kind of makes sense that we’re now talking about this in the context of maybe automating some of these processes.

Andrew Ginter: As far as I know it is necessary, I’ve heard countless complaints about the amount of paperwork involved in NERC CIP and I mean. I struggled just when I heard or describe the spreadsheet much less the other 75 documents that have to go along with it. I have a little personal experience very recently with spreadsheets we were doing the threat report for the annual Waterfall threat report I needed to put a spreadsheet together my colleagues and I of really only like 100 incidents, security incidents, with a dozen columns and it took just forever to get that 1 rotten little spreadsheet organized and here in the NERC CIP spreadsheet, we’re not talking a hundred rows. We’re talking more than like several thousand if you have 700 substations and you know how many computers and network devices have you got in each substation. That’s a lot of data to be to be dealing with in a spreadsheet much less the other stuff. So yeah, it’s – you know – I’m, I’m feeling the pain here.

Andrew Ginter: Okay, so there’s a lot of data and it makes Sense. When you’re dealing with large amounts of data makes sense to automate that process. but can I ask you sort of a subtlety here. The people who are looking at automation for compliance. Is the main motivation here saving money reducing the cost of gathering all the data or is there something else that work. Does the machine – would a machine gathering of the data sort of do a more thorough job and, I don’t know, reduce your compliance risk somehow the risk of an auditor saying you have missing data.

Kathryn Wagner: Well absolutely companies want to save money and that is a huge motivator but there’s a bunch of different aspects to that the first aspect is kind of obvious they want to avoid regulatory penalties and I think everybody knows that with everybody in the industry knows that NERC CIP noncompliance can cause fines of up to $1,000,000 per day per violation. So that’s a lot of money and there has been some examples in the past there was one entity that got charged something like $1,000,0000 for cyber security noncompliance. The second motivation is really what is the cost of poor cybersecurity and that really says if you’re not secure then the hackers can get in and those hackers cost money whether it’s ransomware or they start controlling your equipment like they did over in the Ukraine couple years ago they can cause damages which of course costs money to go and fix that up. But not just the fixing the problem that those hackers caused but also it damages the utilities reputation and that’s a really subtle cost. It’s hard to put a finger on a number but it’s out there. The last thing that affects the cost and why we want to do some of these better management of compliance is a desire to reduce workload and improve efficiency without a good program people spent hours and hours preparing for audits and then doing compliance tasks.

I’ve heard over and over again over the years how their users hate doing compliance. They don’t want to do it. They save it to the last minute the compliance teams it’s hard to force them to do that work if you get a system in place then you make it minimal impact on the seams and then the compliance team has everything in a central location so that yeah I’ve heard that there’s been incredible savings preparing for audits because of having a good program Yeah, so there’s the 3 different ways that I feel that utilities are saving money with a program avoiding regulatory penalties having good cyber security and then reducing the workload of their employees.

Andrew Ginter: Okay, so automation makes sense. You know saves money makes the job more thorough, makes us more secure actually, but it’s 1 thing to wave a magic wand and say let’s automate the whole thing. It’s another thing to actually do it. What does this automation actually look like? How does it feel to use it?

Kathryn Wagner: Well Andrew the real goal is to make sure that you stay in compliance year-round. Not just waiting and till the audit to go find out if you were in compliance or not you need to be able to prove it at any point in time on short notice and that’s why people use compliance management software. Now any good compliance management software is going to include features for managing the compliance data and protecting it so that the right people get access to it and the wrong people stay out tracking responsibility knowing who’s responsible for what tasks for what regulations and then documenting that. Managing documentation and evidence managing risk issue tracking incident tracking and then the mitigation plans or corrective action plans to  resolve those issues task management and especially important is the notifications reminders and escalations. So if. Those tasks those compliance tasks are not getting done or not getting logged into the system that people are reminded and and people are aware and there’s visibility to those tasks so that they do get done on time. Audit reporting is the output of the compliance management system when. You’re dealing with NERC you know there’s 2 pieces of it. There’s the CIP evidence request tool that I talked about earlier for all that CIP data. But then there’s also the management of the RSAWS which is the older.

The others So the other NERC standards have to do these RSAWs. They’re reliability standard audit worksheets and they’re really filling in a narrative and listing out the evidence that they’ve collected to meet that requirement and those are time consuming so software will help pull that data together. And help you report on it when it’s necessary.

Andrew Ginter: Okay, so there’s a lot of stuff that needs automation. But how do you actually do the automation I mean these records Do you pull them from I don’t know the brains of the PLCs or do you, You know? How do? How do you? What does automation actually do in terms of gathering and organizing the data for you?

Kathryn Wagner: Ah, well there’s a lot of different ways that automation can help you and there’s a lot of different forms that that can take so let’s look at an example. Okay, so for one of the requirements says that. you have to verify at least once every calendar quarter that the individuals with active electronic access or unescorted physical access have authorization records. So you’re comparing. What they have access to based on access lists to you know what? They’ve been authorized to do. So that might really involve 2 different systems while many different systems because they have access it to many different networks or OT devices or 2 devices and so on and the access card system to get in the different areas of the plant so you can do you can set up the automation to help with that in a couple different ways. So one of those is a very manual way if you set up some sort of a scheduled task that wants a quarterer somebody is going to be required to remember to go out and pull the asset list manually from the devices. And then pull the authorization information from the that system and then manually compare those 2 lists together and see it took for any anomalies. So that’s awfully manual, but it is automated because they’re automating that task every quarter. You could also set up something that you have a quarterly task initiated.

But it uses integration to automatically pull that data from the various networks and other software out there or the devices themselves to get those asset lists and automatically pull the data from, whatever is tracking the authorization records and then either you could have a person. Do the comparison between the 2 now that they’ve automatically got the information or maybe you’re clever enough to put together some sort of computer program to do the comparison and perform that validation automatically as Well.

A last good example I have setting up automation to help you out is setting up a daily feed or daily pulling of information from those other sources pulling it into the compliance management software so that you always have the ability to report on or see. The 2 different things and make that validation and you could even go further than that and set up controls so that the system can detect some discrepancy between the two and it can alert on it send out emails or show it up on a dashboard or even initiate other tasks and workflows to get that accomplished. So that’s a good example of a couple different ways that you can do automation with within the NERC CIP environment, and I have a list of examples here things like polling the network for asset lists and open ports querying assets for baseline information. Connecting to an HR system to get your up-to-date employee information on the learning management system to get your training information patch discovery services to obtain patch information and then things like scheduling document review when evidence collection and tasks so a number of different ways to leverage automation.

Nathaniel Nelson: So Andrew it sounds like luckily a lot of this long and arduous process can be automated but is there anything outside of the scope here like what do you still really need to do by hand.

Andrew Ginter: Ah, a part so Nate there’s that’s a good question There’s there’s a couple of answers to it in terms of what’s possible today and what could be possible in the future. let’s take, just a simple rule. There’s a requirement to change passwords every I don’t know twelve months or eighteen months or something like this. and if I mean if a Plc even has a password but network switches have passwords firewalls have passwords a lot of gear nowadays. Has passwords may not be per user maybe be shared but still a password is a password and if it exists in the in the CIP world. It has to be changed periodically it’s 1 thing to ask the question of the device.

Andrew Ginter: Do you have a password who’s got accounts list the accounts on the device that that’s sort of a more common feature of devices that you’re able to figure that out but trying to figure out. When did the password change I mean does the device even keep track of when the password changed the last time is that even something you can ask the device so, some of the data can is some of the data is there Some of the data you just have to. Keep track of manually you got to make a note in your you know compliance tool or something saying I change the password because the device can’t tell you when things happened when was the last patch Applied. You might be able to ask the device which patches are applied but can you ask it when they were applied. so the that’s a long way of saying you know some of it. You can automate some of it. You have to keep track of yourself in your system. You can either keep track of it on a sticky note or you can keep track of it in in a software system but down the road. It seems to me that all of this stuff can be automated in the long run Now you might need the cooperation of the device Vendors. You might need to upgrade the versions in the device vendors. it. It seems to me. There’s sort of nearly infinite opportunity to like innovate and create new software to simplify this process here and it strikes me that over time you’re going to see more and more of that happen.

Because there’s just so much money being spent by the electric utilities on this compliance task and if they’re spending the money doing it manually. They are open to spending less money getting it automated and spending more money on automation On newer versions of devices that keep track of some of this stuff automatically newer versions of automation tools that can pull the data from devices. So it sounds to me like it’s an area that’s sort of ripe for innovation.

Andrew Ginter: So That’s a lot of stuff that that a compliance manager could do and you folks produce these products you produce and sell a compliance manager for NERC CIP among others. can you talk about? sort of not just what does your stuff do. But. In a sense. How does it do it. I mean if I say yes I’ll take 3 of the assurance things. What am I buying are seats in the Cloud or agents that that snuggle up to the plcs to to gather Data What does your system look like?

Kathryn Wagner: Yeah, so AssurX software we do have cloud options and on-premise options I will say that most of the NERC entities that use our software have it on-premise due to the sensitive nature of the data that they’re trying to manage and it is. Probably a little bit easier to secure the integration with those third party devices and so on and other software if you’re all on-premise. So what does it look like so we have a user interface which is browser-based and behind there. There’s a database and a server. you can configure those in all different architectures so that you have load balancing and failover and all sorts of things we typically have things like a development environment a testing environment and a production environment and our software. Yeah, we have the AssurX platform. Which has all the features to create solutions any solutions whether they’re energy solutions or life sciences manufacturing solutions that platform gives you the ability to create unlimited dashboards and forms but has the security it has the database layer and it does all the code or has all the code in it. Everything that you do with the AssurX is point and click drag and drop easily configurable etc etcetera and then we use those features on our platform to create the whole suite of these NERC compliance management solutions. So we call that eco a AssurX energy compliance system.

Compliance rubber stamper

And that is a full suite of solutions that does both the op NERC compliance management and the CIP compliance management and then it can be extended to do a bunch of other things as well. So what our customers do is they install, they get the platform installed then they load up our solutions some of them focus in one area some of them focus in a different area. We provide all of them and then the customers configure our system. AssureX is highly configurable, and they adapt the forms and the workflows. To meet their needs. Okay, so and that’s where you can do all of it without integration – a human is interacting with things tasks are assigned to humans to go and do things or you can start plugging in that integration to pull the data and interact with all the third party software. So that eco solution is focused on NERC compliance and other compliance management aspects and I do want to say that we’re expanding our offerings. So not only to do with NERC CIP but things like the TSA pipeline security directives. A lot of our customers are energy customers but they also do gas and that makes the gas pipeline very applicable and those TSA regulations are similar enough to the NERC CIP regulations that our existing solutions can be easily adapted to meet those needs.

Nathaniel Nelson: So in this episode we’re talking about Kathryn’s specialties energy. We talk about NERC CIP but what about other industries Andrew.

Andrew Ginter: Yeah, you might imagine that NERC CIP is what 12 or 15 documents by now with a lot of detail in in them. You might imagine that if you have sort of a compliance system set up for NERC CIP. You could use the same system for, other industries because if you’ve already got 15 standards in the NERC package is that not everything you might need for everyone and the answer is no I mean the TSA?

Andrew Ginter: You know like six weeks after the colonial incident came out with a new security directive for pipelines. and it was only I don’t know it was as long as 1 or 2 of the NERC CIP of the 15 NERC standards put together. So it was like only a fraction of NERC CIP but still it covered different stuff. Concrete example it talked about dependencies. It said if your OT system depends on your IT system then you have to get rid of those dependencies and if you can’t get rid of them. You have to document them. You have to report them to the TSA. Because every one of those dependencies means that if you cripple the IT network and you cripple the systems that OT depends upon then you’ve crippled the OT system because the OT system needs the crippled IT systems to work none of those words exist in NERC CIP this is sort of a new concept. In the TSA yeah in spite of the NERC CIP documents being much bigger than the TSA document.

Nathaniel Nelson: So then that might beg the question. if we have these characteristically different regulatory needs and standards and whatnot. are they equally or more or less automatable. You know like for talking about. Power versus water treatment or whatever would Kathryn’s kind of approach work in the equivalent way elsewhere.

Andrew Ginter: And that’s a good question and in fact I asked Kathryn that question so let’s so let’s go back to her and see what she says

Andrew Ginter: And you did mention the TSA directive and I mean I’ve been looking at the TSA directives over the last several weeks they seem very different from NERC CIP I mean they’re structured differently. You know the TSA directive has for instance, a section in the requirements that says your goal as a pipeline operator is to keep the pipeline running at necessary capacity. Even if the IT network is crippled and they don’t define necessary I assume it means necessary to the business or necessary to the society. A lot of these pipelines are critical infrastructure. you don’t have to keep it running at full capacity have necessary capacity I’m going how can you audit against that? But I look at the thing and it has that’s sort of a high-level requirement and then it’s got a bunch of much more specific requirements that seem sort of much more auditable. Can you talk about? This seems like a fairly different animal from NERC CIP. Can you talk about what can you track in that space.

Kathryn Wagner: Well Andrew I want to say that we’re not trying to control the OT nor the IT network or any of the devices that operate on it. We’re really focused on pulling in and gathering that data that we’re going to need for compliance purposes, and we also are able to coordinate activities that may result from. The interruption to the network or even just some changes to the network like firmware updates and security patches and access changes so on among other things. The TSA security directive mandates that you must have a cybersecurity incident response plan. Okay. This is very similar to CIP 8 which is the cybersecurity incident reporting and response planning so same idea you have to have a plan for dealing with things. Both of them require an update up to date documented plan for responding to cybersecurity incidents that includes the procedures for what needs to happen. But it also includes the roles and responsibilities of all the people that are going to be dealing with those incidents and then of course notifications to whoever needs to be notified after the incident.

And then it says within ninety days you must document the lessons learned from the instant and then update the plan accordingly making sure that each person who has a role in the plan is notified of those updates.

Andrew Ginter: Well thank you Catherine this is this has been great before we let you go can you sum up for us I mean what’s the most important thing to remember about the yeah the world of compliance automation.

Kathryn Wagner: Well compliance automation especially with cybersecurity things like NERC CIP. It’s challenging. There’s a ton of data to coordinate. There’s a ton of people to coordinate and it makes sense to automate those tasks and gathering up that data anytime you can take the human element out of it. You’re improving things so we do of course have the software to help you with that if you’d like we also have experienced people. You know we’ve worked in a lot of different industries to help with quality and compliance. So please reach out to us our website, of course is www.assurx.com and then you can always reach out to me on Linkedin if you want I’d love to hear from people and talk about how we can help solve your problems. So. Thank you Andrew for having me here today on your podcast I really enjoyed it. It’s been a lot of fun.

Nathaniel Nelson: All right? Andrew that was your interview with Katherine is there anything that you can take us out with today.

Andrew Ginter: Yeah I mean I remember seeing the very beginning of the compliance automation space when I was at industrial defender over a decade ago and I have to confess that at the time I really did not recognize sort of the business opportunity that that the space represented. I thought the big challenge back then was designing the security system making things secure not proving that you’re following the policy that that you’ve set up I thought that’s yeah I Just I was dismissive of it, I recall a younger man. but. You know this space to me is not going to go away. This is a space that you’re just going to see more and more demand for as regulations increase as the cyber threat environment gets Worse. We’re probably going to see more and more governments all over the world issuing more and more regulations and I’m sorry they’re all going to be a little bit, or a lot different but every one of them, every regulation is going to demand that you prove that you’ve complied with the regulation and as I said it’s not just a matter of sort of housekeeping, put some automation in there so that you can get rid of the horrible spreadsheets. But there’s opportunities to gather the data automatically from a huge variety of IT systems of industrial systems. This to me sounds like a space with a lot of opportunity because businesses are going to spend money on reducing their need to spend labor and money doing this stuff manually. So yeah, I think this is a piece of the industry that’s got a bright future ahead of it.

Nathaniel Nelson: All right? well with that thanks to Katherine Wagner for speaking with you Andrew and Andrew as always thanks for speaking with me.

Andrew Ginter: It’s my pleasure. Thank you, Nate.

Nathaniel Nelson: This has been the industrial security podcast from Waterfall. Thanks to everybody out there listening.

Previous episodes

The post Saving Money and Effort Automating Compliance | Episode 107 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
NERC CIP Tricky Bits – Active Directory Servers https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-cybersecurity-insights-center/nerc-cip-tricky-bits-active-directory-servers/ Tue, 03 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/uncategorized/nerc-cip-tricky-bits-active-directory-servers/ The post NERC CIP Tricky Bits – Active Directory Servers appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
The NERC CIP standards define required cybersecurity programs and controls for North American Bulk Electric System (BES) Cyber Systems. The standards are written in an abstract language that is technology-independent and network-independent. Interpreting the language for specific technologies and network designs can be tricky. In this article, we look at one of the tricky bits in the standard: mixed-trust Active Directory servers.

Why is this important? Ransomware criminal groups are increasingly causing production outages and other physical consequences by compromising IT networks in critical infrastructures. One of the ways that compromised IT networks cause production outages is dependencies. If OT or BES systems depend on IT systems, such as Active Directory servers, for correct and continuous operation, and those IT systems are compromised and impaired, then the BES systems are likely to fail.

Active Directory

A common example of OT dependencies on IT systems is joining industrial control systems to IT Active Directory servers and domains. NERC CIP does not forbid such dependencies, but the standard contains language that makes such dependencies very difficult. Finding this language can be problematic – the words “Active Directory” do not appear in the standard.

Worse, it is very tempting to join BES assets into IT-managed security domains. Active Directory or equivalent systems dramatically simplify compliance with certain NERC CIP directives. For example: CIP-004-R5.4 requires that owners and operators revoke access to CIP-critical information within one calendar day of the termination of any employee with such access. An Active Directory server lets enterprise security personnel delete all such permissions for terminated employees, company-wide, with a few mouse clicks.

NERC CIP Compliance – The Problem

Here’s the problem, though. In NERC CIP terminology, Active Directory servers that control passwords and permissions for BES Cyber Systems are Electronic Access Control or Monitoring Systems (EACMS). All EACMS systems are in scope for many requirements in the NERC CIP standard – requirements that IT teams generally find onerous. Consider for example CIP-004-R4.3 – for High Impact BES Cyber Systems and Medium Impact systems and their associated EACMS (ie: Active Directory servers):

R4.3: For electronic access, verify at least once every 15 calendar months that all user accounts, user account groups, or user role categories, and their specific, associated privileges are correct and are those that the Responsible Entity determines are necessary.

So consider the numbers – a large power utility might have 40,000 employees, ranging from power plant operators to sales people and janitors. Most of these employees have accounts on the IT network and in the IT Active Directory servers – so that the company can send them email for example. Most of these employees do not have accounts on or access to OT / BES systems.

004-R4.3 requires that, if even one of the company’s Medium Impact power plants or high voltage substations is managed by the IT Active Directory server, then all accounts on that AD server come into scope for R4.3. All 40,000 accounts must be reviewed every 15 months to ensure that each and every account, account group, role and privilege is correct. Not just the accounts relevant to the substations or power plants – all the company’s accounts. This is an enormous amount of work.


NERC CIP WF UGW at the IT/OT boundary with a mixed-trust AD server on each side
Separate Trusts in a Power Plant

Separate Trusts​

As a result, to my knowledge, no power utility in North America with Medium Impact or High Impact BES Cyber Systems manages any computers in those cyber systems with an IT-based Active Directory controller, nor do they set up an OT AD controller that trusts any IT-based controller. Computers in those BES / industrial networks are either not in a domain, or they are in an OT domain that uses Active Directory Servers that are completely distinct and separated from the IT domains and servers.

Now, in theory, NERC CIP allows some advanced functions of Active Directory servers to be shared with OT networks – services such as patch management and anti-virus policies. But if even one account or permission for any important BES Cyber System winds up managed by that IT AD, that dependency brings all the accounts on the IT AD server into scope for all CIP EACMS rules. In practice, nobody risks this.

Other Industries

Why is this important outside of the NA power grid? Well, many industries in many geographies take inspiration from the NERC CIP standards – the CIP standards have a very good reputation in much of the world. When I talk to practitioners in these other industries and geographies about eliminating OT dependencies on IT systems, Active Directory always comes up. The question I’m asked repeatedly is “why?” Why must we pay to set up two AD systems, one for OT and one for IT? Why set up two Anti-Virus systems? Two WSUS systems? Two SolarWinds Orion firewall management domains?

Two of anything costs close to twice what one costs – though there can be minor savings on the second instance because of marginally reduced purchasing and training costs. The answer is that two of all these things are going to cost much less than an unplanned outage due to ransomware taking over your IT network.

Modern attacks often target Active Directory or other important enterprise-wide management systems specifically. An adversary with control of our AD system can create accounts for themselves, accounts that let them log into our OT systems or any other systems they want to log into. Such an adversary can also disable any accounts they wish. If they disable accounts that OT systems rely on, that adversary has just crippled all our industrial operations at one stroke.


NERC CIP lessons learned document about mixed trust environments
NERC CIP lessons learned document

Bottom Line

Many industries in many geographies take inspiration from the NERC CIP standards, and so I wish the standards would say some things a little more precisely – in examples if necessary. To be fair, there is a document on the NERC website that talks about OT dependencies on IT Active Directory servers, but the document is not a standard. The document is guidance: Lessons Learned – CIP Version 5 Transition Program – Mixed Trust Authentication Environments.

The bottom line: IT networks are constantly exposed to attacks from the Internet. When the worst-case physical consequences of compromise of OT systems are unacceptable, no OT systems should depend on Active Directory systems or any other systems that are hosted on IT networks – not in the power grid and not in any other industry. The NERC CIP standards do not forbid such dependencies, but they make these kinds of dependencies prohibitively expensive – and they do so for a reason. These kinds of dependencies are dangerous.

NERC CIP provisions in a real sense strongly encourage separate IT and OT Active Directory servers and domains, but they do so in a way that is a little hard to find.

The post NERC CIP Tricky Bits – Active Directory Servers appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Security vs Compliance & other NERC CIP insights | Episode #77 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-cybersecurity-insights-center/security-vs-compliance-other-nerc-cip-insights-episode-77/ Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/uncategorized/security-vs-compliance-other-nerc-cip-insights-episode-77/ The post Security vs Compliance & other NERC CIP insights | Episode #77 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Which is better – security or compliance? Suzanne Black of Network + Security Technologies brings a new perspective to this old question and covers a lot of other ground in the latest NERC CIP standards.

Listen now or Download for later

Apple Podcasts Google Podcasts Spotify RSS Icon

THE INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PODCAST HOSTED BY ANDREW GINTER AND NATE NELSON AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE YOU LISTEN TO PODCASTS​

Previous episodes

The post Security vs Compliance & other NERC CIP insights | Episode #77 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Learnings from the SolarWinds Breach – Bryan Owen | Episode #54 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/ot-cybersecurity-insights-center/learnings-from-the-solarwinds-breach-bryan-owen-episode-54/ Mon, 01 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/uncategorized/learnings-from-the-solarwinds-breach-bryan-owen-episode-54/ The post Learnings from the SolarWinds Breach – Bryan Owen | Episode #54 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
The SolarWinds supply chain breach is arguably the biggest hack in history. OSIsoft’s Security Architect, Bryan Owen, joins us to explore the breach and what it means for industrial security.

Listen now or Download for later

Apple Podcasts Google Podcasts Spotify RSS Icon

The Industrial Security Podcast Hosted By Andrew Ginter and Nate Nelson AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE YOU LISTEN TO PODCASTS​

Previous episodes

The post Learnings from the SolarWinds Breach – Bryan Owen | Episode #54 appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Securing Power Generation At New Brunswick Power https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/power/securing-power-generation-at-new-brunswick-power/ Sun, 08 Nov 2020 07:45:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/?p=10072 Securing the continuous operation of power production networks in all power plants, while enabling real-time OT monitoring and compliance with NERC-CIP regulatory requirements.

The post Securing Power Generation At New Brunswick Power appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>

Securing Power Generation At New Brunswick Power

Partnering With Énergie NB Power To Secure Production And Assure Compliance
Securing Power Generation At New Brunswick Power
Customer/ Partner:

Énergie NB Power.

Customer Requirement:

Secure, safe and continuous operation of power production networks in all power plants, while enabling real-time OT monitoring and compliance with NERC-CIP regulatory security requirements.

Waterfall’s Unidirectional Solution:

Waterfall Unidirectional Gateways were deployed to separate the OT and enterprise networks. All business and operational applications – especially ICCP / PI servers – continue to operate reliably to ensure smooth operation and maintenance of power stations.

Protecting Reliability And Ensuring Compliance At Power Generation Sites

Énergie NB Power supplies wholesale energy products in a competitive environment. Electricity is generated at 14 hydro, coal, oil, and diesel-powered stations, with an installed net capacity of 3,142 MW, comprised of 1,724 MW thermal, 893 MW hydro and 525 MW combustion turbines. Énergie NB Power’s industrial and corporate networks support power generation plants as well as business offices, all with different business needs. From these networks, the OSIsoft PI™ application and ICCP protocol are used for monitoring of the power stations.

The Challenge icon
The challenge

Énergie NB Power wanted to prevent cyber attacks that could result in power outages, loss of revenues and physical damage to equipment. The company was also challenged with the task of complying with NERC-CIP standards and cyber-security requirements. The business determined that using firewalls to allow real-time data flows from a control network to an enterprise network introduced unacceptable risks to safe, correct, continuous and efficient power generation operations.

Waterfall solution - icon
Waterfall solution

Waterfall Unidirectional Security Gateways were deployed at each power plant, along with Waterfall’s OSIsoft PI and ICCP server replications. The Waterfall Gateways replicated PI servers and ICCP servers unidirectionally from each plant’s OT network to the Énergie NB Power enterprise network. On this external network, users and applications continue to interact normally and bi-directionally with the replica servers.

Results and benefits - icon
Results & benefits

Security: Absolute protection from online attacks originating on the IT network, and from Internet-based attacks.

Visibility: Online access to real-time operations data, with no change in end-user or business application- integration procedures.

Compliance: Reduced NERC CIP compliance costs for Énergie NB Power.

Operational Costs: Reduced operating costs associated with training, administration, audit, testing, and monitoring costs when compared to a firewall-based solution.

vertical red line
Theory of Operation
Click to enlarge

“Waterfall’s Unidirectional Security Gateways have proven to be highly reliable and easily integrated into our existing networks. They are instrumental in helping us comply with the NERC-CIP standards and secure our critical assets against any type of external cyber-attack or hacking threats”

Waterfall Unidirectional Security Gateways replace firewalls in industrial network environments, providing absolute protection to control systems and industrial control networks from attacks emanating from external networks. Waterfall Gateways contain both hardware and software components. The hardware is physically able to send information in only one direction. The software replicates servers and emulates devices. The gateway software produces an accurate, timely replica of PI and ICCP servers for use by enterprise and external applications and users.

Unidirectional Gateways enable safe IT/OT integration, vendor monitoring, industrial cloud services, and visibility into operations for modern enterprises and customers. The gateways replicate servers, emulate industrial devices and translate industrial data to cloud formats. Unidirectional Gateway technology represents a plug-and-play replacement for firewalls, without the vulnerabilities and maintenance issues that always accompany firewall deployments. Replacing at least one layer of firewalls in a defense-in-depth architecture breaks the attack path from the Internet into critical systems

vertical red line
Unidirectional Security Gateways Benefits:

arrow red rightDramatically reduces NERC-CIP compliance costs.

arrow red rightEliminates any risks from external cyber attacks and human errors.

arrow red right Enables secure, high throughput and real-time access to ICCP and PI server information.

arrow red rightStrong, physical protection for production processes and personnel safety.

vertical red line
Global Cybersecurity Standards Recommend Unidirectional Security Gateways

Waterfall Security is the market leader for Unidirectional Gateway technology with installations at critical infrastructure sites around the world. The level of protection provided by Waterfall’s Unidirectional Security Gateway technology is recognized as best practice by leading industry standards bodies and authorities such as NIST, ANSSI, NERC CIP, ISA / IEC 62443, the US DHS & CISA, ENISA, TS50701 and many others.

Share

Stay up to date

Subscribe to our blog and receive insights straight to your inbox

The post Securing Power Generation At New Brunswick Power appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>
Cybersecurity For Hydropower Generation https://waterfall-security.com/ot-insights-center/power/cybersecurity-for-hydropower-generation/ Tue, 23 May 2017 08:58:00 +0000 https://waterfall-security.com/?p=10402 Compliance with NERC-CIP standards while protect critical assets from cyberattacks and protecting operational and business processes efficiencies.

The post Cybersecurity For Hydropower Generation appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>

Cybersecurity For Hydropower Generation

Protecting The Connected Hydropower Plant From Evolving Cyber Threats
Cybersecurity For Hydropower Generation
Customer/ Partner:

Canadian power generation company.

Customer Requirement:

To comply with NERC-CIP standards and protect critical assets from cyberattacks while protecting operational and business processes efficiency.

Waterfall’s Unidirectional Solution:

Secure the control system network perimeter from external threats with Unidirectional Security Gateways, and enable Real-Time Enterprise Connectivity & 3rd Party Monitoring creating fully operational OSIsoft PI, GE OSM turbine monitoring, and ICCP server replicas.

The Growing Hydropower Industry And Facing Modern Cyber Threats

With an average growth of 4% per year, hydropower has become the leading renewable source for electricity generation – globally supplying 71% of all renewable electricity. Today, hydropower offers not only clean energy but its infrastructure is also used for freshwater management, such as water supply, and flood management. The importance of hydropower has increased significantly in the past decade, leading to the adoption of innovative technology, advanced control systems, and stronger equipment.

When malicious attackers gain access to an industrial control system they are able to sabotage industrial control and safety processes, leading to costly outages, damaged turbines, threats to personnel safety and even environmental disasters. This is why NERC CIP and other industrial security regulations urge operators to thoroughly secure IT/OT interconnections in order to protect these highrisk access points against cyber terrorism and other attacks. The question is – how to achieve 100% protection from remote cyber threats?

The Challenge icon
The challenge

To secure the safe, reliable and continuous operation of hydropower control and safety networks from threats emanating from less trusted external networks, yet still provide real-time access to operations data to enterprise users and applications, as well as to turbine vendors and other third parties. The control systems in modern plants are responsible for power generation and water supply which ultimately affect the lives of millions of people. Protecting these critical assets with software (firewalls or other IT security measures) is not enough as all software by nature can be compromised.

Waterfall solution - icon
Waterfall solution

A Waterfall Unidirectional Gateway was installed between the industrial control system network and the enterprise network. Unidirectional Gateway software connectors replicate OSISoft PI, GE OSM, and ICCP servers from the control network to the enterprise network where enterprise clients can interact normally and bi-directionally with the replicas. A file server replication connector was also deployed, to eliminate the routine use of USB drives and other removable media. Enterprise users and applications, as well as vendors and NERC Balancing Authorities interact bi-directionally with replica servers, while the Unidirectional Gateway hardware physically prevents any Internet-based attack from reaching protected control networks.

Results and benefits - icon
Results & benefits

100% Security: The industrial network is now physically protected from threats emanating from external, less-trusted networks.

100% Visibility: The enterprise network continues to operate as if nothing has changed. Instead of accessing servers on the critical operational network, users on the external network now access real-time data from replicated servers for all informational and analytical requirements.

100% Compliance: Unidirectional Gateways are recognized by the NERC CIP standards, as well as other North American and global industrial cyber security standards and regulations.

vertical red line
Theory of Operation
Click to enlarge

Waterfall Unidirectional Security Gateways replace firewalls in industrial network environments, providing absolute protection to control systems and industrial control networks from attacks emanating from external less-trusted networks. Unidirectional Gateways contain both hardware and software components. The hardware components include a TX Module, containing a fiber-optic transmitter/ laser, and an RX Module, containing an optical receiver, but no laser. The gateway hardware can transmit information from an industrial network to an external network, but is physically incapable of propagating any virus, DOS attack, human error or any cyber attack at all back into the protected industrial network. The Gateways enable vendor monitoring, industrial cloud services, and visibility into operations for modern enterprises and customers. Unidirectional Gateways replicate servers, emulate industrial devices and translate industrial data to cloud formats. As a result, Unidirectional Gateway technology represents a plug-and-play replacement for firewalls, without the vulnerabilities and maintenance issues that accompany firewall deployments.

vertical red line
Unidirectional Security Gateways Benefits:

arrow red rightSafe integration of hydropower safety & control systems with external networks

arrow red rightSafe, continuous monitoring of critical systems

arrow red rightCompliance with industrial cyber-security regulations, standards and best-practice guidance, including NERC CIP

arrow red rightSafe cloud vendor/services supply chain integration

arrow red rightReplacing at least one of the layers of firewalls in a defense-indepth architecture with Unidirectional Gateways breaks the chain of malware infection and prevents pivoting attacks from less-trusted IT networks

vertical red line
Global Cybersecurity Standards Recommend Unidirectional Security Gateways

Waterfall Security is the market leader in Unidirectional Gateway technology with installations at critical infrastructure sites across the globe. The enhanced level of protection provided by Waterfall’s Unidirectional Security Gateway technology is recognized as best practice by many leading industry standards bodies, including NIST, ANSSI, NERC CIP, the ISA, the US DHS, ENISA and many more.

Share

Stay up to date

Subscribe to our blog and receive insights straight to your inbox

The post Cybersecurity For Hydropower Generation appeared first on Waterfall Security Solutions.

]]>