Cybersecurity Risk Assessment for Public Transport OT Environments: A Practical Guide
Discover how rail operators can strengthen cybersecurity in OT environments. This blog explores the UITP framework, helping transport leaders assess risks, set protection goals, and build resilience across critical rail systems. A must-read for anyone securing modern public transport.
Serge Van themsche
Waterfall team
Why OT Cybersecurity Requires a Specialized Approach
Unlike IT systems, OT environments prioritize safety, reliability, and real-time operations. A cyber incident in an OT system, such as a signaling failure or a train control breach, can have immediate physical consequences, including service disruptions or safety hazards.
The UITP framework outlines two models: Track A for small PTOs and Track B for mid- to large-sized operators. In addition to offering corporate and IT risk assessment guidelines, the report introduces a comprehensive model specifically tailored for OT environments, where customized protections are essential to address unique risks.
Key Insights: Risk Assessment for OT Environments:
The Role of Track B in OT Cybersecurity
Track B is designed for larger operators with intermediate to advanced cybersecurity maturity. It provides detailed risk and vulnerability assessment, aligning with international standards such as IEC 62443, ISO 27005, and TS 50701/IEC 63452.
Practical Steps: From Risk Scoring to Security Level Targets
Step 1: Identify the System under Consideration (SuC)
Define the scope of the OT system to be assessed, by identifying the SuC’s boundaries and document the system’s architecture.
Step 2: Identify Assets
Create an inventory of OT assets within the SuC, by listing the physical and logical assets and group these assets into zones, based on their criticality and function.
Step 3: Define Risk Criteria
Establish scales for impact and likelihood to evaluate risks. Assess consequences in terms of safety, operational availability, and financial impact. Evaluate the Likelihood of a cyber incident based on threat actor capability (e.g., skill level, resources) and vulnerability exposure.
Step 4: Identify Threats and Vulnerabilities
Define the threat landscape for the OT system, by identifying threat actors (e.g., hacktivists, nation-states, insiders) and document vulnerabilities in the SuC.
Step 5: Conduct an Initial Risk Assessment
Security Level | Level of protection |
SL1 | Protection against casual violations |
SL2 | Protection against intentional violations |
SL3 | Protection against sophisticated attacks |
SL4 | Protection against high-resource attacks |
Evaluate the inherent risks in the SuC, by assigning risk scores based on impact and likelihood. To help you determine the risk level (Low: 1; Medium: 2, High: 3, Critical: 4) use UITP’s risk matrix.
Step 6: Translate Risk Scores into Security Level Target (SL-T)
The SL-T is transformed into a 7-dimension matrix based on the 7 Foundational Requirements (FRs) defined in IEC 62443’s / EN 50701.
FR | Description | Details |
FR1 | Identification and Authentication Control | Ensure only authorized personnel and devices access OT systems. |
FR2 | Use Control | Restrict system access based on roles (e.g., operators vs. maintenance). |
FR3 | System Integrity | Protect OT systems from unauthorized modifications or malware. |
FR4 | Data Confidentiality | Secure sensitive operational data within OT networks. |
FR5 | Restricted Data Flow | Segment OT networks to limit unnecessary communication. |
FR6 | Timely Response to Events | Implement real-time monitoring and incident response. |
FR7 | Resource Availability | Ensure OT systems remain operational during cyber incidents. |
Step 7: Perform Zoning and Define Zone Criticality
Group assets into security zones that should reflect common security requirements (e.g., safety-critical vs. business-critical) and assign Zone Criticality Levels (ZC-L) based on the worst-case impact of a breach.
Step 8: Implement Mitigation Strategies
Apply controls to meet SL targets, for each of the 7 Foundational Requirements. In order to do so, each defined Security Requirement must be addressed.
For example, if a signaling system is assessed with a risk score of 3 translated into a SL-T3, the Security Requirements in red in the following table must be met for FR5 (Restricted data flow). The same process applies to the 6 additional Foundational Requirements.
This is where cyber technologies play an active part in the process. For example, a network architecture based on firewalls could achieve SL1 for FR5 but would require additional means to meet SL2 (SR 5.1.(1): physical network segmentation), whereas a unidirectional gateway would inherently meet SL1, SL2, and SL3 for FR5.
Step 9: Address Tail Risks
Modern risk management introduces the concept of “tail risk”. The notion that some risks could bring down organizations or even entire industries has now entered the sphere of best cybersecurity practices. Even with robust risk mitigation, tail risks—low-probability, high-impact events—pose a real challenge. For instance, abusing a fail-safe mechanism to generate the derailment of a passenger train or of a freight convoy carrying dangerous goods could be considered a tail risk. Mitigation Strategies may include increasing the Security Level target (e.g.: from SL-T to SL-T4) or beefing up the resilience planning (by implementing backup systems and manual overrides) and the incident response plans by preparing for worst-case scenarios.
Applying UITP’s Risk Assessment Tools for OT
Tool 2 is specifically designed for OT systems, helping operators:
- Assess risks based on SL targets.
- Implement mitigation strategies aligned with the 7 Foundational Requirements.
- Address tail risks through resilience and contingency planning.
Next Steps:
- For guidance on OT risk assessment, contact us or members can download here
- Apply Tool 2 to assess and mitigate risks in your OT environment.
- Consult OT cybersecurity experts to tailor protections to your specific needs.
Conclusion: Proactive OT Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity in OT environments is not a one-time effort—it’s an ongoing process. By adopting UITP’s Track B methodology, operators can:
- Proactively protect their OT systems against evolving threats.
- Ensure safety, reliability, and resilience in public transport operations.
- Start the compliance process with standard EN 50701/IEC 63452.
Final Thought: OT cybersecurity requires a specialized approach that balances safety, reliability, and security. Which methodology, if any, does your company use?
Share
Trending posts
Managing Risk with Digital Twins – What Do We Do Next? – Episode 144
IT & OT Relationship Management
Stay up to date
Subscribe to our blog and receive insights straight to your inbox
