Critical Infrastructure Protection

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 80-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Tabansky
Keyword(s):  
Cyber Security ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Public Security ◽  
Cyber Warfare ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Defense Systems ◽  
Regulatory Model ◽  
National Infrastructure

Cyber Warfare holds a grave hazard of striking national infrastructure while circumventing traditional defense systems. This article examines the evolution of Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) policy in Israel and analyses its performance. Israel has developed a unique legal and regulatory model for critical infrastructure protection, which was implemented in late 2002. Recently, a comprehensive review of cyber security posture has been conducted, and significant policy changes are in progress. The Israeli approach to CIP and beyond, fostering cooperation between public, security, academic and private sectors, appears to be successful. This study of the evolution of Israeli Critical Infrastructure Protection policy may assist policy-making in other countries.

Maturity and Process Capability Models and Their Use in Measuring Resilience in Critical Infrastructure Protection Sectors

2015 ◽  
pp. 506-526
Author(s):  
Clemith J. Houston Jr. ◽  
Douglas C. Sicker
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Process Capability ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Maturity Models ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Management Capabilities ◽  
Use Of Models ◽  
Measurement Capabilities

This paper provides a literature review and survey of maturity and process capability models, Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) tools and frameworks to identify strategies for assessing and measuring resilience and risk management capabilities, with a specific focus on the electricity generating sector. The focus is on the use of models such as CERT-RMM, and others, as a means of addressing challenges associated with cyber security and risk management. Foundational concepts, terminology and definitions are provided; examples of maturity and process capability models are presented and discussed, tools that enable process capability and resilience are identified, including those specific to the electricity generating sector. The evolution of models and how they have addressed challenges is presented, in addition to the characteristics and differences of models and the growth in domains where they can be used. The benefits of the application of process capability and maturity models in maintaining and enhancing resilience and cyber security protection is supported in this paper and recommendations for research opportunities that may yield further insight and measurement capabilities are offered.

scholarly journals Protection of Australia in the Cyber Age

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Warren ◽  
Shona Leitch
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Security Policies ◽  
Government Policies ◽  
Security Threats ◽  
Cyber Warfare ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Security Risks ◽  
Infrastructure Protection

Australia has developed sophisticated national security policies and physical security agencies to protect against current and future security threats associated with critical infrastructure protection and cyber warfare protection. In this paper, the authors examine some common security risks that face Australia and how government policies and strategies have been developed and changed over time, for example, the proposed Australian Homeland Security department. This paper discusses the different steps that Australia has undertaken in relation to developing national policies to deal with critical infrastructure protection.

Maturity and Process Capability Models and Their Use in Measuring Resilience in Critical Infrastructure Protection Sectors

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-63
Author(s):  
Clemith J. Houston Jr. ◽  
Douglas C. Sicker
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Process Capability ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Management Capabilities ◽  
Use Of Models ◽  
Measurement Capabilities ◽  
Provided Examples

This paper provides a literature review and survey of maturity and process capability models, Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) tools and frameworks to identify strategies for assessing and measuring resilience and risk management capabilities, with a specific focus on the electricity generating sector. The focus is on the use of models such as CERT-RMM, and others, as a means of addressing challenges associated with cyber security and risk management. Foundational concepts, terminology and definitions are provided; examples of maturity and process capability models are presented and discussed, tools that enable process capability and resilience are identified, including those specific to the electricity generating sector. The evolution of models and how they have addressed challenges is presented, in addition to the characteristics and differences of models and the growth in domains where they can be used. The benefits of the application of process capability and maturity models in maintaining and enhancing resilience and cyber security protection is supported in this paper and recommendations for research opportunities that may yield further insight and measurement capabilities are offered.

Critical Infrastructure Protection from a National Perspective

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Brem
Keyword(s):  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Public Private Partnership ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Private Partnership ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Legal Foundation ◽  
National Perspective ◽  
National Infrastructure

This article addresses conceptional components of national strategies on critical infrastructure protection (CIP). In particular, it focuses on the Swiss CIP programme and its strategic components. As in other countries, Switzerland divides its national infrastructure into critical sectors, but rather distinctively it subdivides them into critical subsectors and even lists specific critical infrastructure objects in a classified inventory. The article stresses the importance of a pragmatic public private partnership in further strengthening the CI's resiliency, but also argues for a more explicit legal foundation to provide some clearer guidelines in this evolving field of collaboration.

scholarly journals Security and the performative politics of resilience: Critical infrastructure protection and humanitarian emergency preparedness

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Brassett ◽  
Nick Vaughan-Williams
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Extreme Events ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Humanitarian Emergency ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Neoliberal Governmentality ◽  
Everyday Practices ◽  
National Infrastructure

This article critically examines the performative politics of resilience in the context of the current UK Civil Contingencies (UKCC) agenda. It places resilience within a wider politics of (in)security that seeks to govern risk by folding uncertainty into everyday practices that plan for, pre-empt, and imagine extreme events. Moving beyond existing diagnoses of resilience based either on ecological adaptation or neoliberal governmentality, we develop a performative approach that highlights the instability, contingency, and ambiguity within attempts to govern uncertainties. This performative politics of resilience is investigated via two case studies that explore 1) critical national infrastructure protection and 2) humanitarian emergency preparedness. By drawing attention to the particularities of how resilient knowledge is performed and what it does in diverse contexts, we repoliticize resilience as an ongoing, incomplete, and potentially self-undermining discourse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document