nach oben

Erschienen in:

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Critical Infrastructures

verfasst von : Stefan Rass, Stefan Schauer, Sandra König, Quanyan Zhu

Erschienen in: Cyber-Security in Critical Infrastructures

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter refines the introduction of security in critical infrastructures by going into deeper details about how threats and countermeasures differ and are specific for the physical domain, the cyber domain and intermediate areas. Gaining an understanding of these differences is crucial for the design of effective countermeasures against the diverse nature of today’s advanced persistent threats (APTs). As even local incidents may have far-reaching consequences beyond the logical or physical boundaries of a critical infrastructure, we devote parts of the chapter to a discussion and overview of simulation methods that help to model and estimate possible effects of security incidents across interwoven infrastructures. Such simulation models form an invaluable source of information and data for the subsequent construction of game-theoretic security models discussed in the rest of the book.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Introduction

Nächstes Kapitel Mathematical Decision Making

Akyol E, Rose K, Basar T (2015) Optimal zero-delay jamming over an additive noise channel. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 61(8):4331–4344. https://doi.org/10.1109/tit.2015.2445344 MathSciNetMATH

BABS (2019) Katalog der gefährdungen. Katalog der Gefhrdungen, Katastrophen und Notlagen Schweiz. Technical report, Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz (BABS)

Barrett C, Beckman R, Channakeshava K, Huang F, Kumar VA, Marathe A, Marathe MV, Pei G (2010) Cascading failures in multiple infrastructures: from transportation to communication network. In: 2010 5th international conference on critical infrastructure (CRIS). IEEE, pp 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/CRIS.2010.5617569

Barton DC, Eidson ED, Schoenwald DA, Stamber KL, Reinert R (2000) Aspen-EE: an agent-based model of infrastructure interdependency. Technical report. SAND2000-2925, 774027, Sandia National Labs. https://doi.org/10.2172/774027

Basu N, Pryor R, Quint T (1998) ASPEN: a microsimulation model of the economy. Comput Econ 12(3):223–241. https://doi.org/s10.1023/A:1008691115079 MATH

Bateman T (2013) Police warning after drug traffickers’ cyber-attack. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24539417. BBC News, retrieved 25 Feb 2020

Bompard E, Napoli R, Xue F (2009) Assessment of information impacts in power system security against malicious attacks in a general framework. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 94(6):1087–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2009.01.002

Borshchev A, Filippov A (2004) From system dynamics and discrete event to practical agent based modeling: reasons, techniques, tools. In: The 22nd international conference of the system dynamics society

Brown T, Beyeler W, Barton D (2004) Assessing infrastructure interdependencies: the challenge of risk analysis for complex adaptive systems. Int J Crit Infrastruct 1(1):108. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCIS.2004.003800

10.

Buldyrev SV, Parshani R, Paul G, Stanley HE, Havlin S (2010) Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature 464:1025. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08932

11.

Busby J, Gouglidis A, Rass S, Konig S (2016) Modelling security risk in critical utilities: the system at risk as a three player game and agent society. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics (SMC). IEEE, Budapest, pp 001758–001763. http://10.1109/SMC.2016.7844492. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7844492/

12.

Busby JS, Onggo B, Liu Y (2016) Agent-based computational modelling of social risk responses. Eur J Oper Res 251(3):1029–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.034 MATH

13.

Cardellini V, Casalicchio E, Tucci S (2006) Agent-based modeling of web systems in critical information infrastructures. In: International workshop on complex networks and infrastructure protection (CNIP 2006)

14.

Carreras BA, Lynch VE, Dobson I, Newman DE (2002) Critical points and transitions in an electric power transmission model for cascading failure blackouts. Chaos Interdiscip J Nonlinear Sci 12(4):985–994. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1505810 MathSciNetMATH

15.

Casalicchio E, Galli E, Tucci S (2010) Agent-based modelling of interdependent critical infrastructures. Int J Syst Syst Eng 2(1):60. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSE.2010.035381

16.

Chen J, Thorp JS, Dobson I (2005) Cascading dynamics and mitigation assessment in power system disturbances via a hidden failure model. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 27(4):318–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2004.12.003

17.

Chen P, Scown C, Matthews HS, Garrett JH, Hendrickson C (2009) Managing critical infrastructure interdependence through economic input-output methods. J Infrastruct Syst 15(3):200–210. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2009)15:3(200)

18.

Chen PY, Cheng SM, Chen KC (2012) Smart attacks in smart grid communication networks. IEEE Commun Mag 50(8):24–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/mcom.2012.6257523

19.

Cimpanu C (2017) WannaCry ransomware infects actual medical devices, not just computers. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/wannacry-ransomware-infects-actual-medical-devices-not-just-computers/. Bleeping Computer. Retrieved 25 Feb 2020

20.

Condliffe J (2016) Ukraine’s power grid gets hacked again, a worrying sign for infrastructure attacks, 22 Dec 2016. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603262/ukraines-power-grid-gets-hacked-again-a-worrying-sign-for-infrastructure-attacks/. Retrieved 26 July 2017

21.

Crowther KG, Haimes YY, Taub G (2007) Systemic valuation of strategic preparedness through application of the inoperability input-output model with lessons learned from hurricane katrina. Risk Anal 27(5):1345–1364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00965.x

22.

Dey P, Mehra R, Kazi F, Wagh S, Singh NM (2016) Impact of topology on the propagation of cascading failure in power grid. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7(4):1970–1978. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2558465

23.

Dobson I (2012) Estimating the propagation and extent of cascading line outages from utility data with a branching process. IEEE Trans Power Syst 27(4):2146–2155. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2012.2190112

24.

Dobson I, Carreras B, Newman D (2004) A branching process approximation to cascading load-dependent system failure. In: Proceedings of the 37th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2004. IEEE, 10pp. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2004.1265185

25.

Dobson I, Carreras BA, Lynch VE, Newman DE (2007) Complex systems analysis of series of blackouts: cascading failure, critical points, and self-organization. Chaos Interdiscip J Nonlinear Sci 17(2):026103. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2737822 MATH

26.

Dobson I, Carreras BA, Newman DE (2005) A loading-dependent model of probabilistic cascading failure. Probab Eng Inf Sci 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269964805050023

27.

Dobson I, Kim J, Wierzbicki KR (2010) Testing branching process estimators of cascading failure with data from a simulation of transmission line outages. Risk Anal 30(4):650–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01369.x

28.

Dobson I, Newman DE (2017) Cascading blackout overall structure and some implications for sampling and mitigation. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 86:29–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2016.09.006

29.

Dong H, Cui L (2016) System reliability under cascading failure models. IEEE Trans Reliab 65(2):929–940. https://doi.org/10.1109/TR.2015.2503751

30.

Dong P, Han Y, Guo X, Xie F (2015) A systematic review of studies on cyber physical system security. Int J Secur Appl 9(1):155–164. https://doi.org/10.14257/ijsia.2015.9.1.17

31.

Etesami SR, Başar T (2019) Dynamic games in cyber-physical security: an overview. Dyn Games Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13235-018-00291-y

32.

European Commission (2008) COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection. Off J Eur Union (L345):75–82. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32008L0114&from=EN

33.

Fan W, Huang S, Mei S (2016) Invulnerability of power grids based on maximum flow theory. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 462:977–985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2016.06.109 MathSciNetMATH

34.

Fang J, Su C, Chen Z, Sun H, Lund P (2016) Power system structural vulnerability assessment based on an improved maximum flow approach. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 9(2):777–785. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2565619

35.

Gouglidis A, König S, Green B, Rossegger K, Hutchison D (2018) Protecting water utility networks from advanced persistent threats: a case study. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 313–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75268-6_13

36.

Greenberg A (2018) WIRED: the untold story of NotPetya, the most devastating cyberattck in history. https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-cyberattack-ukraine-russia-code-crashed-the-world/

37.

Guo H, Zheng C, Iu HHC, Fernando T (2017) A critical review of cascading failure analysis and modeling of power system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 80:9–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.206

38.

Haimes Y, Santos J, Crowther K, Henry M, Lian C, Yan Z (2007) Risk analysis in interdependent infrastructures. In: Goetz E, Shenoi S (eds) Critical infrastructure protection, vol 253. Springer, pp 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75462-8_21

39.

Haimes YY, Pu J (2001) Leontief-based model of risk in complex interconnected infrastructures. J Infrastruct Syst 7(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2001)7:1(1)

40.

Hasan S, Foliente G (2015) Modeling infrastructure system interdependencies and socioeconomic impacts of failure in extreme events: emerging R&D challenges. Nat Haz 78(3):2143–2168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1814-7

41.

Hausken K (2017) Defense and attack for interdependent systems. Eur J Oper Res 256(2):582–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.06.033 MathSciNetMATH

42.

Henneaux P, Labeau PE, Maun JC (2012) A level-1 probabilistic risk assessment to blackout hazard in transmission power systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 102:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.02.007

43.

Henneaux P, Labeau PE, Maun JC, Haarla L (2016) A two-level probabilistic risk assessment of cascading outages. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(3):2393–2403. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2015.2439214

44.

Hines P, Cotilla-Sanchez E, Blumsack S (2010) Do topological models provide good information about electricity infrastructure vulnerability? Chaos Interdiscip J Nonlinear Sci 20(3):033122. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3489887

45.

Holme P (2002) Edge overload breakdown in evolving networks. Phys Rev E 66(3). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.66.036119

46.

Holme P, Kim BJ (2002) Vertex overload breakdown in evolving networks. Phys Rev E 65(6). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.65.066109

47.

Holmgren A, Jenelius E, Westin J (2007) Evaluating strategies for defending electric power networks against antagonistic attacks. IEEE Trans Power Syst 22(1):76–84. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpwrs.2006.889080

48.

ICS-CERT (2016) Cyber-attack against Ukrainian critical infrastructure. https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/alerts/IR-ALERT-H-16-056-01

49.

Jung J, Santos JR, Haimes YY (2009) International trade inoperability input-output model (IT-IIM): theory and application. Risk Anal 29(1):137–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01126.x

50.

Kaegi M, Mock R, Kröger W (2009) Analyzing maintenance strategies by agent-based simulations: a feasibility study. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 94(9):1416–1421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2009.02.002

51.

Kar D, Nguyen TH, Fang F, Brown M, Sinha A, Tambe M, Jiang AX (2016) Trends and applications in Stackelberg security games. In: Handbook of dynamic game theory. Springer International Publishing, pp 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27335-8_27-1

52.

Karnouskos S (2011) Stuxnet worm impact on industrial cyber-physical system security. In: IECON 2011 – 37th annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/iecon.2011.6120048

53.

Kelic A, Warren DE, Phillips LR (2008) Cyber and physical infrastructure interdependencies. Technical report, SAND2008-6192, 945905, Sandia National Laboratories. https://doi.org/10.2172/945905

54.

Khouzani M, Sarkar S, Altman E (2012) Saddle-point strategies in malware attack. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 30(1):31–43. https://doi.org/10.1109/jsac.2012.120104

55.

Kim CJ, Obah OB (2007) Vulnerability assessment of power grid using graph topological indices. Int J Emerg Electr Power Syst 8(6). https://doi.org/10.2202/1553-779X.1738

56.

Kim J, Dobson I (2010) Approximating a loading-dependent cascading failure model with a branching process. IEEE Trans Reliab 59(4):691–699. https://doi.org/10.1109/TR.2010.2055928

57.

König S, Gouglidis A, Green B, Solar A (2018) assessing the impact of malware attacks in utility networks. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 335–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75268-6_14

58.

König S, Rass S, Schauer S (2019) Cyber-attack impact estimation for a port. In: Jahn C, Kersten W, Ringle CM (eds) Digital transformation in maritime and city logistics: smart solutions for logistics. In: Proceedings of the hamburg international conference of logistics (HICL), vol 28. epubli GmbH, pp 164–183. https://doi.org/10.15480/882.2496. ISBN 978-3-7502-4949-3

59.

La QD, Quek TQS, Lee J (2016) A game theoretic model for enabling honeypots in IoT networks. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/icc.2016.7510833

60.

Lechner U, Dännart S, Rieb A, Rudel S (eds) (2018) Case Kritis – Fallstudien zur IT-Sicherheit in Kritischen Infrastrukturen. Logos Verlag, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/4727

61.

Lee RM, Assante MJ, Conway T (2016) Analysis of the cyber attack on the Ukrainian power grid. Technical report, E-ISAC, Washington. https://ics.sans.org/media/E-ISAC_SANS_Ukraine_DUC_5.pdf

62.

Leontief WW (1951) Input-output economics. Sci Am 185:15–21

63.

Li Y, Shi L, Cheng P, Chen J, Quevedo DE (2015) Jamming attacks on remote state estimation in cyber-physical systems: a game-theoretic approach. IEEE Trans Autom Control 60(10):2831–2836. https://doi.org/10.1109/tac.2015.2461851 MathSciNetMATH

64.

Lian C, Haimes YY (2006) Managing the risk of terrorism to interdependent infrastructure systems through the dynamic inoperability input–output model. Syst Eng 9(3):241–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20051

65.

Mehic M, Fazio P, Rass S, Maurhart O, Peev M, Poppe A, Rozhon J, Niemiec M, Voznak M (2019) A novel approach to quality-of-service provisioning in trusted relay quantum key distribution networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2019.2956079. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8935373/

66.

Motter AE, de Moura APS, Lai YC, Dasgupta P (2002) Topology of the conceptual network of language. Phys Rev E 65(6). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.65.065102

67.

North MJ (2000) Smart II: the spot market agent research tool version 2.0. Nat Res Environ Issues 8(11)

68.

North MJ (2001) Toward strength and stability: agent-based modeling of infrastructure markets. Soc Sci Comput Rev 19(3):307–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930101900306

69.

Office of Homeland Security (2002) National strategy for homeland security. Technical report, Department of Homeland Security

70.

Oliva G, Panzieri S, Setola R (2012) Modeling and simulation of critical infrastructures. In: Flammini F (ed) WIT transactions on state of the art in science and engineering, vol 1, 1 edn. WIT Press, pp 39–56. https://doi.org/10.2495/978-1-84564-562-5/03

71.

Ouyang M (2014) Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infrastructure systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 121:43–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.06.040. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0951832013002056

72.

Owusu A, Mohamed S, Anissimov Y (2010) Input-output impact risk propagation in critical infrastructure interdependency. In: International conference on computing in civil and building engineering (icccbe). Nottingham University Press

73.

Pita J, Jain M, Ordonez F, Portway C, Tambe M, Western C (2008) ARMOR security for Los Angeles international airport. In: Proceedings of the 23rd AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (2008), pp 1884–1885

74.

Pita J, Tambe M, Kiekintveld C, Cullen S, Steigerwald E (2011) GUARDS – innovative application of game theory for national airport security. In: IJCAI 2011, pp 2710–2715. https://doi.org/10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-451

75.

Qi J, Dobson I, Mei S (2013) Towards estimating the statistics of simulated cascades of outages with branching processes. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(3):3410–3419. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2243479

76.

Qi J, Ju W, Sun K (2016) Estimating the propagation of interdependent cascading outages with multi-type branching processes. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1212–1223. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2577633

77.

Qi J, Sun K, Mei S (2015) An interaction model for simulation and mitigation of cascading failures. IEEE Trans Power Syst 30(2):804–819. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2337284

78.

Rahnamay-Naeini M, Hayat MM (2016) Cascading failures in interdependent infrastructures: an interdependent Markov-chain approach. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7(4):1997–2006. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2539823

79.

Rahnamay-Naeini M, Wang Z, Ghani N, Mammoli A, Hayat MM (2014) Stochastic analysis of cascading-failure dynamics in power grids. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(4):1767–1779. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2297276

80.

Rass S, König S (2012) Turning Quantum Cryptography against itself: how to avoid indirect eavesdropping in quantum networks by passive and active adversaries. Int J Adv Syst Meas 5(1 & 2):22–33

81.

Rass S, Konig S, Schauer S (2017) Defending against advanced persistent threats using game-theory. PLoS ONE 12(1):e0168675. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168675

82.

Rezazadeh A, Talarico L, Reniers G, Cozzani V, Zhang L (2018) Applying game theory for securing oil and gas pipelines against terrorism. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.04.021

83.

Rinaldi S (2004) Modeling and simulating critical infrastructures and their interdependencies. In: Proceedings of the 37th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2004. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2004.1265180

84.

Rinaldi SM, Peerenboom JP, Kelly TK (2001) Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Syst 21(6):11–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/37.969131

85.

Rosato V, Issacharoff L, Tiriticco F, Meloni S, Porcellinis SD, Setola R (2008) Modelling interdependent infrastructures using interacting dynamical models. Int J Crit Infrastruct 4(1):63. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCIS.2008.016092

86.

Rose A (2004) Economic principles, issues, and research priorities in hazard loss estimation. In: Okuyama Y, Chang SE (eds) Modeling spatial and economic impacts of disasters. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 13–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24787-6_2

87.

Rose A (2005) Tracing infrastructure interdependence through economic interdependence. Technical report, CREATE Research Archive. http://research.create.usc.edu/nonpublished_reports/78. Non-published Research Reports, Paper 78

88.

Santella N, Steinberg LJ, Parks K (2009) Decision making for extreme events: Modeling critical infrastructure interdependencies to aid mitigation and response planning. Rev Policy Res 26(4):409–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2009.00392.x

89.

Santos JR (2006) Inoperability input-output modeling of disruptions to interdependent economic systems. Syst Eng 9(1):20–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20040

90.

Santos JR, Haimes YY, Lian C (2007) A framework for linking cybersecurity metrics to the modeling of macroeconomic interdependencies. Risk Anal 27(5):1283–1297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00957.x

91.

Schneider CM, Yazdani N, Araújo NAM, Havlin S, Herrmann HJ (2013) Towards designing robust coupled networks. Sci Rep 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep01969

92.

William S (2018) Lessons learned review of the WannaCry Ransomware Cyber Attack. Report NHS, Feb 2018

93.

Shao J, Buldyrev SV, Havlin S, Stanley HE (2011) Cascade of failures in coupled network systems with multiple support-dependence relations. Phys Rev E 83(3). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.83.036116

94.

Shekhtman LM, Danziger MM, Havlin S (2016) Recent advances on failure and recovery in networks of networks. Chaos Solitons Fractals 90:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2016.02.002 MATH

95.

Mei S, He F, Zhang X, Wu S, Wang G (2009) An improved OPA model and blackout risk assessment. IEEE Trans Power Syst 24(2):814–823. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2009.2016521

96.

Shieh EA, An B, Yang R, Tambe M, Baldwin C, DiRenzo J, Maule B, Meyer G (2013) PROTECT: an application of computational game theory for the security of the ports of the United States. In: Proceedings of the 26th AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’12), pp 2173–2179

97.

Song J, Cotilla-Sanchez E, Ghanavati G, Hines PDH (2016) Dynamic modeling of cascading failure in power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(3):2085–2095. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2015.2439237

98.

Tazi K, Abdi F, Abbou MF (2015) Review on cyber-physical security of the smart grid: Attacks and defense mechanisms. In: 2015 3rd international renewable and sustainable energy conference (IRSEC). IEEE, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IRSEC.2015.7455127

99.

Touhiduzzaman M, Hahn A, Srivastava A (2018) A diversity-based substation cyber defense strategy utilizing coloring games. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2018.2881672

100.

UP KRITIS (2014) Public-private partnership for critical infrastructure protection – basis and goals. Technical report, Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnick (BSI)

101.

Wang WX, Chen G (2008) Universal robustness characteristic of weighted networks against cascading failure. Phys Rev E 77(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.77.026101

102.

Wang Z, Scaglione A, Thomas RJ (2012) A Markov-transition model for cascading failures in power grids. In: 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE, pp 2115–2124. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.63

103.

Wei DQ, Luo XS, Zhang B (2012) Analysis of cascading failure in complex power networks under the load local preferential redistribution rule. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 391(8):2771–2777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2011.12.030

104.

Wei L, Sarwat AI, Saad W, Biswas S (2018) Stochastic games for power grid protection against coordinated cyber-physical attacks. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 9(2):684–694. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2561266

105.

Wu SJ, Chu MT (2017) Markov chains with memory, tensor formulation, and the dynamics of power iteration. Appl Math Comput 303:226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2017.01.030 MathSciNetMATH

106.

Zetter K (2016) Everything we know about Ukraine’s power plant hack | WIRED. https://www.wired.com/2016/01/everything-we-know-about-ukraines-power-plant-hack/

107.

Zhang L, Reniers G (2016) A game-theoretical model to improve process plant protection from terrorist attacks. Risk Anal 36(12):2285–2297. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12569

108.

Zhang L, Reniers G (2018) Applying a Bayesian Stackelberg game for securing a chemical plant. J Loss Prev Process Ind 51:72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2017.11.010

109.

Zhang P, Peeta S (2011) A generalized modeling framework to analyze interdependencies among infrastructure systems. Transp Res Part B Methodol 45(3):553–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2010.10.001

110.

Zhang X, Zhan C, Tse CK (2017) Modeling the dynamics of cascading failures in power systems. IEEE J Emerg Sel Top Circuits Syst 7(2):192–204

111.

Zhu Q, Saad W, Han Z, Poor HV, Başalr T (2011) Eavesdropping and jamming in next-generation wireless networks: a game-theoretic approach. In: 2011-MILCOM 2011 military communications conference. IEEE, pp 119–124

Titel: Critical Infrastructures
verfasst von: Stefan Rass
Stefan Schauer
Sandra König
Quanyan Zhu
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Cyber-Security in Critical Infrastructures
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46907-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-46908-5

Copyright-Jahr: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46908-5_2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner