Operating Physical Security- and Technology-Centered Programs

2022 ◽  
pp. 345-386
Author(s):  
Robert McCrie ◽  
Seungmug (Zech) Lee
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Shoop ◽  
Michael Johnston ◽  
Richard Goehring ◽  
Jon Moneyhun ◽  
Brian Skibba

2021 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. 114116
Author(s):  
Xiaolu Hou ◽  
Jakub Breier ◽  
Dirmanto Jap ◽  
Lei Ma ◽  
Shivam Bhasin ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-41
Author(s):  
Craig Bakker ◽  
Arnab Bhattacharya ◽  
Samrat Chatterjee ◽  
Draguna L. Vrabie

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 5458
Author(s):  
Sangjun Kim ◽  
Kyung-Joon Park

A cyber-physical system (CPS) is the integration of a physical system into the real world and control applications in a computing system, interacting through a communications network. Network technology connecting physical systems and computing systems enables the simultaneous control of many physical systems and provides intelligent applications for them. However, enhancing connectivity leads to extended attack vectors in which attackers can trespass on the network and launch cyber-physical attacks, remotely disrupting the CPS. Therefore, extensive studies into cyber-physical security are being conducted in various domains, such as physical, network, and computing systems. Moreover, large-scale and complex CPSs make it difficult to analyze and detect cyber-physical attacks, and thus, machine learning (ML) techniques have recently been adopted for cyber-physical security. In this survey, we provide an extensive review of the threats and ML-based security designs for CPSs. First, we present a CPS structure that classifies the functions of the CPS into three layers: the physical system, the network, and software applications. Then, we discuss the taxonomy of cyber-physical attacks on each layer, and in particular, we analyze attacks based on the dynamics of the physical system. We review existing studies on detecting cyber-physical attacks with various ML techniques from the perspectives of the physical system, the network, and the computing system. Furthermore, we discuss future research directions for ML-based cyber-physical security research in the context of real-time constraints, resiliency, and dataset generation to learn about the possible attacks.


2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lloyd J. Dumas

AbstractThe indirect effects of military spending on security are stronger and more important than its direct effects, and its long run impact more telling than its short run impact. In the short run, military spending can be a source of both physical security and economic stimulus. In the long run, it can be counterproductive in terms of physical security and will be a dead weight on the economy. How a society’s productive resources are deployed, as between military spending and more economically productive activities, sets it on a long-term course with powerful implications for the ability of its economy to do what it is supposed to do – provide for the material well-being of the population as a whole. The mechanism by which the extensive and extended diversion of productive economic resources to economically unproductive military spending drags an economy down is analyzed. Furthermore, it is possible to use properly structured international and domestic economic relationships in place of threats or use of military force to increase national and international security, while at the same time enhancing, rather than degrading, economic wellbeing. Three principles for structuring such a “peacekeeping economy” are set forth.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document