Operational Technology in the Military Domain

The modern military faces multiple, complex challenges both on and off the battlefield and key to any military success is the ability to prevail in all environments and situations.

An emerging complexity for military operations is the widespread adoption of smart, digitally enabled technology that has entered all aspects of the modern world. No longer is a door bell a simple button, it is now a combined camera, signalling and communications device connected to the Internet. This has implications for military operations.

We now have weapon platforms that are using commercial, off the shelf (COTS) digital technologies. Troop deployments will rely on digital systems across air, road and rail networks and the systems used to support deployed troops could rely on smart building management systems (for example air conditioning) through to power supply and water treatment plants. Operational technology (OT) is important in today’s battlespace.

The rise of connected OT systems has been fuelled over the past few years by cheap, accessible computer power integrated into devices and hardware. Once integrated into these devices connectivity has been enabled by the ubiquitous internet, providing a huge ecosystem of connected things. Whilst, undoubtably, OT and smart systems have improved many aspects of modern life, there is a need to be cautious.

Cybersecurity – the art and science of securing things in cyberspace – has evolved over the years into a sophisticated, profitable and growing industry. Indeed the term cybersecurity, and its shorthand term cyber, is now applied across many systems and processes from the humble laptop through to complex, enterprise wide and global networks. Information security, as it was known, has now been firmly trumped by cybersecurity.

But operational technology has presented a challenge to the conventional thinking behind the Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability triad. Availability is key. The need to ensure system uptime has created a conservative, risk averse culture in managing cybersecurity in OT systems.

In addition, there is a cultural and semantic gulf between many IT departments and their OT colleagues that is often reflected in battles over budget, risk ownership and management. This friction only increases as these systems go through upgrade cycles, inevitably moving to an IP-based (i.e. make use of the TCP/IP protocol suite) solution that uses COTS computing components. This presents a challenge to a military that has extensive experience and training focused on IT but little on OT and how to secure these more complex systems being used in the battlespace.

IT and OT are, at the same time, both similar and different. The move to COTS based OT systems sees lots of IT hardware, software, designs and approaches moving into the world of OT that may be useful from a cost saving perspective but can result in the proliferation of new, and often unbounded, risks.

Military IT systems are well understood. Hardware and software manufacturers understand the need for system patching and updating to address new and emerging threats. OT presents a different picture. Some OT installations have remained “frozen in time.” Fuelled by a lack of upgrades and a desire to “leave well alone” for fear of disrupting a facility or impacting other complex, often unknown and intertwined systems, regular patching is not generally under taken and OT systems can remain vulnerable for years.

But sense is starting to prevail across IT and OT systems as they inevitably start to merge. This coming together is often represented logically in the Purdue Enterprise Reference Architecture (often referred to as the Purdue model). This represents an architecture of IT and OT assets. Each layer has appropriate controls and firewalling in place to manage data flows. OT systems are found up to level 3 and then an appropriate demilitarised zone (DMZ) implemented to provide appropriate separation. Although ideal and stylised the Purdue model does provide a frame of reference for IT/OT conversations.

The worlds of safety and cybersecurity are now inextricably linked. Functional safety is the defence against random and systematic technical failure. Cybersecurity is the defence against negligent and wilful actions to protect devices and facilities. OT that is safe from technical failure could still be compromised by a cyber attack. On the other hand, a well secured processing system may be very difficult for cyber criminals to penetrate but if the RTUs (Real Time Units) are sending garbage to the supervisory controller the effect may be the same. Many plants and assets will use OT to control processes, machinery and hardware that, if compromised, may result in physical damage, environmental harm or injury to workers.

In the modern world of OT you can no longer be safe if you are not secure.

OT presents a myriad of challenges from governance, risk and regulations through to culture and organisational behaviour. The military needs to embrace OT and smart systems now as being part of military operations and consider how they can be both protected and utilised to enable a winning edge.

Link to full article.