Improving Security and Safety Modelling with Failure Sequence Diagrams

A. Opdahl, Christian Raspotnig
{"title":"Improving Security and Safety Modelling with Failure Sequence Diagrams","authors":"A. Opdahl, Christian Raspotnig","doi":"10.4018/JSSE.2012010102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While security assessments of information systems are being increasingly performed with support of security modelling, safety assessments are still undertaken with traditional techniques such as Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). As system modelling is becoming an increasingly important part of developing more safety critical systems, the safety field can benefit from security techniques that integrate system modelling and security aspects. This paper adapts an existing security modelling technique, Misuse Sequence Diagrams, to support failure analysis. The resulting technique, called Failure Sequence Diagrams, is used to support Failure Mode and Effect Analysis in an industrial setting. Based on the experiences, the authors suggest improvements both to traditional safety techniques and to security and safety modelling. DOI: 10.4018/jsse.2012010102 International Journal of Secure Software Engineering, 3(1), 20-36, January-March 2012 21 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. lack. Common to the security and safety fields is that important security and safety aspects must be communicated amongst stakeholders during the information systems development. If communication fails, it can lead to fatal mishaps and to useless systems. We have therefore investigated how to use a security modelling technique in combination with a traditional safety technique in an industrial setting. For security modelling technique, we propose Failure Sequence Diagrams (FSD), which adapts Misuse sequence diagrams (MUSD) to failure analysis. We chose MUSD as our starting point because it has been shown to be well suited for visualizing interactions between system components during an intrusion (Katta, Karpati, Opdahl, Raspotnig, & Sindre, 2010). For traditional safety technique, we use FMEA, which systematically addresses failure modes of components and investigates how they affect the system (Ericson, 2005). Our primary aim was to investigate whether FMEA could benefit from being combined with FSD for visualizing component interaction. We also wanted to investigate whether this could somehow improve security modelling with MUSD and to gain experiences from industrial use of FSD. Our research is part of a larger project, ReqSec – Requirements Engineering for Security, that investigates more broadly how modelling notations can be used to involve stakeholders in security requirements work (ReqSec project, 2008). To investigate how FSD can be used to support FMEA, we have conducted an empirical study in the Air Traffic Management (ATM) domain using research methods from case studies and field experiments. Our study shows that FSD can be used to support FMEA in at least three different ways: either using FMEA first before applying FSD to the results; using FSD first before summarize the results with FMEA; or, most beneficially in our case, using FSD and FMEA in parallel in an iterative way. Experiences with the three strategies are reported and discussed with an eye to how FSD (and thus MUSD) can be improved in further work. For example, even though we consider our proposed new way of modelling security and safety with sequence diagrams to be viable, we recognize that it needs further improvements, in particular for handling complexity. We also compare the safety and security fields more broadly, looking at how MUSD and FSD can be combined with other techniques, both traditional safety techniques and security modelling techniques. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the background for the research along with relevant work. Section 3 describes the research method used for obtaining the results that are presented in Section 4 and discussed further in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper and looks ahead at further work.","PeriodicalId":89158,"journal":{"name":"International journal of secure software engineering","volume":"8 1","pages":"20-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of secure software engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/JSSE.2012010102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

While security assessments of information systems are being increasingly performed with support of security modelling, safety assessments are still undertaken with traditional techniques such as Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). As system modelling is becoming an increasingly important part of developing more safety critical systems, the safety field can benefit from security techniques that integrate system modelling and security aspects. This paper adapts an existing security modelling technique, Misuse Sequence Diagrams, to support failure analysis. The resulting technique, called Failure Sequence Diagrams, is used to support Failure Mode and Effect Analysis in an industrial setting. Based on the experiences, the authors suggest improvements both to traditional safety techniques and to security and safety modelling. DOI: 10.4018/jsse.2012010102 International Journal of Secure Software Engineering, 3(1), 20-36, January-March 2012 21 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. lack. Common to the security and safety fields is that important security and safety aspects must be communicated amongst stakeholders during the information systems development. If communication fails, it can lead to fatal mishaps and to useless systems. We have therefore investigated how to use a security modelling technique in combination with a traditional safety technique in an industrial setting. For security modelling technique, we propose Failure Sequence Diagrams (FSD), which adapts Misuse sequence diagrams (MUSD) to failure analysis. We chose MUSD as our starting point because it has been shown to be well suited for visualizing interactions between system components during an intrusion (Katta, Karpati, Opdahl, Raspotnig, & Sindre, 2010). For traditional safety technique, we use FMEA, which systematically addresses failure modes of components and investigates how they affect the system (Ericson, 2005). Our primary aim was to investigate whether FMEA could benefit from being combined with FSD for visualizing component interaction. We also wanted to investigate whether this could somehow improve security modelling with MUSD and to gain experiences from industrial use of FSD. Our research is part of a larger project, ReqSec – Requirements Engineering for Security, that investigates more broadly how modelling notations can be used to involve stakeholders in security requirements work (ReqSec project, 2008). To investigate how FSD can be used to support FMEA, we have conducted an empirical study in the Air Traffic Management (ATM) domain using research methods from case studies and field experiments. Our study shows that FSD can be used to support FMEA in at least three different ways: either using FMEA first before applying FSD to the results; using FSD first before summarize the results with FMEA; or, most beneficially in our case, using FSD and FMEA in parallel in an iterative way. Experiences with the three strategies are reported and discussed with an eye to how FSD (and thus MUSD) can be improved in further work. For example, even though we consider our proposed new way of modelling security and safety with sequence diagrams to be viable, we recognize that it needs further improvements, in particular for handling complexity. We also compare the safety and security fields more broadly, looking at how MUSD and FSD can be combined with other techniques, both traditional safety techniques and security modelling techniques. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the background for the research along with relevant work. Section 3 describes the research method used for obtaining the results that are presented in Section 4 and discussed further in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper and looks ahead at further work.
用故障序列图改进安全性和安全性建模
虽然资讯系统的安全评估越来越多地在安全模型的支持下进行,但安全评估仍然采用传统的技术,如失效模式和影响分析(FMEA)。随着系统建模越来越成为开发更多安全关键系统的重要组成部分,安全领域可以从集成系统建模和安全方面的安全技术中受益。本文采用了一种现有的安全建模技术——误用序列图来支持故障分析。由此产生的技术称为故障序列图,用于支持工业环境中的故障模式和影响分析。基于这些经验,作者建议改进传统的安全技术以及安全与安全建模。DOI: 10.4018 / jsse.2012010102安全软件工程学报,3(1),20- 36,2012年1月21日版权所有©2012,IGI Global。未经IGI Global书面许可,禁止以印刷或电子形式复制或分发。所缺乏的。保安和安全领域的共同点是,在信息系统开发过程中,重要的保安和安全方面必须在利益相关者之间进行沟通。如果通信失败,可能会导致致命的事故和无用的系统。因此,我们研究了如何在工业环境中使用安全建模技术与传统安全技术相结合。对于安全建模技术,我们提出了故障序列图(FSD),它将误用序列图(MUSD)应用于故障分析。我们选择MUSD作为我们的起点,因为它已被证明非常适合于在入侵期间可视化系统组件之间的交互(Katta, Karpati, Opdahl, Raspotnig, & Sindre, 2010)。对于传统的安全技术,我们使用FMEA,它系统地解决组件的失效模式,并研究它们如何影响系统(Ericson, 2005)。我们的主要目的是研究FMEA是否可以从FSD与组件交互可视化相结合中获益。我们还想研究这是否能以某种方式改进MUSD的安全建模,并从FSD的工业应用中获得经验。我们的研究是一个更大的项目的一部分,ReqSec—安全需求工程,该项目更广泛地研究如何使用建模符号使涉众参与安全需求工作(ReqSec项目,2008)。为了研究消防处如何支持FMEA,我们利用案例研究和现场实验的研究方法在空中交通管理(ATM)领域进行了一项实证研究。我们的研究表明,FSD至少可以通过三种不同的方式来支持FMEA:在将FSD应用于结果之前先使用FMEA;先用FSD,再用FMEA总结结果;或者,在我们的案例中最有益的是,以迭代的方式并行使用FSD和FMEA。报告和讨论了这三种策略的经验,着眼于如何在进一步的工作中改进消防处(以及MUSD)。例如,尽管我们认为我们提出的用序列图对安全性和安全性建模的新方法是可行的,但我们认识到它需要进一步改进,特别是在处理复杂性方面。我们也会更广泛地比较安全及保安范畴,探讨警情处和消防处如何与其他技术结合,包括传统的安全技术和保安建模技术。本文的结构如下。第2节介绍了研究背景及相关工作。第3节描述了用于获得第4节中提出并在第5节中进一步讨论的结果的研究方法。最后,第六部分对全文进行了总结,并对下一步的工作进行了展望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信