CyberSecurity in a World of Connected Devices: IoT Security

COPYRIGHT 2015 © Haluk Demirkan 1
Security in a World of Connected Devices:
A Smart IoT Security Services Framework
@ ISSIP Discovery Summit: IoT Security
November 11 & 12, 2015, SANTA CLARA, CA
Haluk Demirkan, PhD & PMP
• Professor of Service Innovation & Business Analytics,
University of Washington - Tacoma
• Digital Innovation and Analytics Strategist & Solution Architect
• Board of Director, International Society of Service Innovation
Professionals (with IBM, Cisco & HP)
versatility is the KEY
1

ongoing international leadership and reputation in strategic IT, service innovation,
intelligent analytics & digital transformation
SELECTED AWARDS AND HONORS
2015 - IBM Faculty Award - Cognitive Assistance Framework for Watson
2014 - Association for Inf. Sys. ranked 5th in Top-100 World-wide IS Researchers
(Center for Services Leadership, Journal of Service Research, IEEE Computing Society,
Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, PMI, etc.)
ACADEMIC EXPERIENCES: Professor of Service Innovation & Business Analytics;
Founder of Center for Information Based Management, University of Washington.
15+ years higher education teaching, and inter- and trans-disciplinary
applied research at U. of Washington, Arizona State U., U. of Florida, Sabanci,
Warwick, Exeter Universities
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCES: Co-Founder & Board of Director, International Society
of Service Innovation Professionals (with IBM, Cisco & HP); Service Innovation, IT,
Data Science & Analytics Strategist & Solution Architect. 20+ years professional work
& executive education experiences at 40+ Fortune 500 companies
SELECTED APPLIED RESEARCH ACCOMPLISHMENTS SINCE 2002
150+ publications including HBR, Informs, IEEE, ACM, and others
Co-Editor of a Book Collection Service Systems & Innovations in Business and Society
EDUCATION: Dual degree PhD in Information Systems & Operations Management;
PME & ME in Industrial & Systems Eng.; BS in Mechanical Eng; Certified PMP
WHO I AM - Haluk Demirkan, PhD & PMP
2

Service Innovation & Smart Service Systems
• Open service innovation, transformation & management
• Value co-creation, customer experience & outcome
• Service-orientation (e.g. service-oriented -data, -information,
-analytics, -architecture, -infrastructure, on-demand SCM)
Data, Analytics & Intelligence
• Strategic, tactical & operational decision making & planning
• Digital- , business-, social-, cloud, mobile-, video-, & stream-
intelligence & predictive analytics
• Data warehousing, big data analysis, cognitive business
Digital Transformation & Business IT Innovation Strategy
• Digital technology vision / leadership, transformation, process
& culture change
• Creation, measurement & management of IT enabled-services
• Recommendation engines for digital economy
• Internet-of-X; Enterprise-as-a-service, cloud & fog computing
specialties Strong business understanding with deep technical background
3
DATA GIG

value co-creation industry engagements: consulting, education, research
5

Outline
Motivation – are internet of things secure?
Summary of requirements for a new smart security
framework for IoT
Research model
From Cartel Sustainability to Secure Network
Collaborations
Netchains
Security-based SLAs
Summary & future work
6COPYRIGHT 2015 © Haluk Demirkan

COPYRIGHT 2015 © Haluk Demirkan 7
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM
/WATCH?V=QBDRRL7D5ZA

Smart Cars got pwned!!
12
COPYRIGHT 2015 © Haluk Demirkan

Are Internet of Things Secure?

SO WHAT? …what is needed? and how?
How can things share the data and information with
minimum amount of risk (Grant, 1996).
Research is needed to address security as part of
the mappings of process to virtualized resource – in
a way that cuts across organizational boundaries.
So, we think that maybe it’s time to rethink IT
architecture – from new organizational and
technical vantage points.
14Like Driving into the Fog...COPYRIGHT 2015 © Haluk Demirkan

Agility Anticipating market changes, customer requirements and reacting quickly; Rapid expansion or contraction of the value
chain to reallocate resources in response to changing customer requirements with existing products, programs and
services; Supporting the commoditization of business processes, software and hardware
Adaptive Adapting and modifying key business processes and more quickly delivering applications; Dynamic reconfiguration of
the value chain to meet new customer needs and to leverage relative competitive advantage among participants
Collaborative Working closely with up/down stream partners to achieve common goals through new ways of organizing data to
facilitate more effective decisions (relationism instead of transactions)
Supporting the need for common and normalized business semantics when describing processes internally and
externally
Reuse and
Integration
Providing the ability to respond to business changes quickly and accurately while reusing functional and integration
components
Virtual Extending control over key processes and assets without owning them
Synchronous Coordinating information flow and process execution throughout the value chain to optimize performance
Accurate Reducing time in decision making by having an operating framework that can process existing data into new forms of
information and knowledge.
Servitization Support work with information without concern for what application is involved or where the data comes from and work
with task-centric procedures.
Establish platform and guidelines for service-oriented Web application development, capabilities for
• loosely-coupled solutions rather than tightly-coupled applications
• coordination oriented rather than function oriented development
• customization rather than standardization
• enterprise solutions rather than application silos
• incrementally built and deployed rather than prolonged development cycles
• build to last rather than build to change
• distributed federated model rather than centralized governance model
Summary of requirements for a new smart security framework for IoT

Research Model
we propose a data & information sharing security
architecture that
utilizes Cartel Sustainability to Secure Network
Collaborations
targeted at proactive governance of binary data &
information sharing (w. mobile agents) exchanges
through process patterns in netchains (with
webservice-enabled docking stations)
used semantic-based SLAs
supported by the Value Chain Reference Model (VCOR),
the Federated Enterprise Reference Architecture Model
(FERA), data & information sharing patterns, and
multidimensional data warehouse technologies to allow
for the proactive monitoring of shared data &
information assets across an SOA-based netchain as
part of an organization’s overall Business Intelligence
strategy.
16
The ultimate goal is to facilitate the handling of breaches by automating as
much of their root-cause detection as possible and facilitating the exchange
of revised trust profiles through closely collaborating netchain subsets.

From Cartel Sustainability to Secure
Network Collaborations
17

Lessons Learned from Cartel Sustainability Secure Network Collaborations
If cartel members are engaged in cross
markets, they require different linkage
patterns with other members based on the
informational environment.
Most of the current security approaches defined
based on centralized security approach that is too
vulnerable. Various collaboration patterns and
mixed-security approached (centralized,
distributed, brokage) need to be architected.
Cartel member trust relationships vary by
economic sector (e.g. sugar, oil, and shipping).
Most current security algorithms don’t address trust
and how it is based on the ‘type’ of collaborations.
Cartel sustainability is based on the ability to
coordinate across language barriers.
Most current security algorithms don’t model trust
based on ‘type of collaborative transactions
(semantics, standards, frameworks).’
Cartels use moral hazard and hidden action
in contract enforcement.
Most of the current security approaches do not
have strong enforcement. Collaboration partner
selection processes need to be based on inclusion
of trust ranking.
Cartel sustainability requires frequent
contract changes based on competition.
Most current security algorithms are based on static
contracts embedded in system and application
deployments. They are not dynamic enough to
support environmental changes.
If cartel members are engaged in cross
markets, the cartel must be tightly
coordinated.
Collaborations with indirect partners will be
carefully monitored by the network’s security
model.
Cost sharing cartels have the buying power to
drive down collective service costs.
Security service providers are likely better
positioned to bundle services to meet cross-network
collaboration needs.

“netchain analysis” combines supply and value chain
analysis research streams with network analysis research
a netchain is a set of networks comprised of horizontal ties
between nodes within a particular group such that these networks
(or layers) are sequentially arranged based on the vertical ties
between things in different layers.
Binary
organizational
data &
information
exchanges
19
Soper, D., Demirkan, H. and Goul, M. (2007) “A Proactive Interorganizational Knowledge-Sharing
Security Model with Breach Propagation Detection and Dynamic Policy Revision,” The Special
Issue on Secure Knowledge Management in Information Systems Frontiers, 9 (5), 469-479, Nov.

Service supply chain
conductor/broker
(choreographs/orch
estrates inter-
organizational
business processes
20
Demirkan, H., Harmon, R. and
Goul, M. (2011) “Service-Oriented
Web Application Framework:
Utility-grade Instrumentation of
Emergent Web Applications,” the
special issue of the IEEE IT
Professional on the Future of
Web Applications: Strategies
and Design, 15-21,
September/October.

Intra-enterprise Business
Process Execution Stack
Inter-enterprise Business
Process Execution Stack
Goul, M., Demirkan, H and Nichols, J. “Inter-Enterprise Business Process Execution in Logistic Network Services with On-
demand Healthcare Supply Chain Management,” University of Washington, Working Paper, 2015.

Integration of Business Semantics
(VCOR) with Architecture Model (FERA)
• There are two independent process representations to be reconciled
– Business representation defines business semantics or business processes
– Technology environment representation defines run time environment
For accurate, fast and flexible implementations of the process models, we need a
conceptual architecture representation that maps the business semantics
(process models with activities, rules and inputs and outputs) to technology
semantics

Tier 2:
An architectural framework that defines principles and
provides guidelines for implementing service-oriented
solutions for essential value chain collaborations
Federation Server
Gateway
Collaborative
Services
Event
Management
Agent
Framework
Portal
ChoreographyAdministration
federated
administrators
federated
systems
federated
users
Federation Server
Gateway
Collaborative
Services
Event
Management
Agent
Framework
Portal
Federation Server
Gateway
Collaborative
Services
Event
Management
Agent
Framework
Portal
federated
administrators
federated
systems
federated
users
Enables accurate,
fast and flexible
implementations of
in SOA environment
Facilitates mapping
of business process
resource
requirements to SOI
FERA-based SOAIs the basis for
new standards for SOA
that drive convergence

Entries into the Trust Repository
CONTEXT BASED Context Type = CT = {BP, SS, IR}
Business (sub) process = BP = {1, ……..B}
Software Service = SS = {1, ………S}
Infrastructure Resource = IR = {1, ………….I}
Organization 1 gives a context based trust ranking to Organization 2 = {O1
CT, O2
CT, TrustRankingCB}
TASK BASED Task Type = TT = {VC, VG, VA}
VCOR Process Category = VC = {1, ……..C}
VCOR Process Group = VG = {1, ……..G}
VCOR Activity = VA = {1, ………A}
Organization 1 gives a task based trust ranking to Organization 2 =
{O1
VC,VG,VA, O2
VC, VG,VA, TrustRankingTB}
COLLABORATION PATTERN
BASED
Authority Type = AT = {centralized, decentralized}
Pattern Role = PR = {People, System}
Organization 1 gives a collaboration pattern based trust ranking to Organization 2 = {O1
PR, O2
PR, AT,
TrustRankingCP}
ROLE BASED Roles in Organization 1 = R1 = {1, ………….r1}
Roles in Organization 2 = R2 = {1, ………….r2}
Organization 1 gives a role based trust ranking to Organization 2 =
{O1
R1, O2
R2, TrustRankingRB}
EXAMPLE
1 ) SLA-clause ::= (TRCB > 3) ^ (TRTB > 2) ^ (TRCP > 6) ^ (TRRB > 4)
Context Based Trust Rank is required to be greater than 3 and Task Based Trust Rank is required to be greater than 2 and Collaboration
Pattern Based Trust Rank is required to be greater than 6 and Role Based Trust Rank is required to be greater than 4 for this engagement.
2 ) SLA-clause ::= {[(CT | NULL) X (TT | NULL) X (PR-AT | NULL) X (R | NULL)] ,TR } >7
Any combination of trust rankings is required to be greater than 7. (Note: This implies that a single trust ranking may be in the
repository for a combination of, for example, context type and collaboration pattern. For that fixed combination, a query to the repository
would provide a single ranking. From the Boeing scenario, Boeing may wish to dictate that a direct partner may source a software
service from another partner using a centralized authority, but the trust ranking must be greater than 7.)
OPERATORS ::= {> | < | <= | >= | = | <>}
fn ::= {AVG | SUM | DIFFERENCE | /* other trust ranking aggregators */}
sub-clause ::= {(CT | TT | PR-AT | R) | [(CT | NULL) X (TT | NULL) X (PR-AT | NULL) X (R | NULL)} | (sub-clause) | (sub-clause AND sub-clause) |
(sub-clause OR sub-clause) | (NOT (sub-clause))
SLA-clause ::= sub-clause OPERATOR (TrustRanking | fn(TrustRanking)) | (SLA-clause) | (SLA-clause AND SLA-clause) | (SLA-clause OR SLA-clause)
| (NOT (SLA-clause))
Demirkan, H. and Goul, M. (2013) “Taking Value-Networks to the Cloud Services: Security Services, Semantics and Service
Level Agreements,” Information Systems and e-Business Management, 11 (1), March, 51-91. 28

Security-based SLA Example
{Assume WS SLA here)
(Resource-Type==“Cluster” &
NodeCPU.Speed>=1.6 GHz &
(if (NodeMemory.Size <2 GB) then (NumberofNodes > 30)
else if (NodeMemory.Size <3 GB) then (NumberofNodes > 20)
else (NumberofNodes >10))
AND
(Collaborator1 = Machine AND Collaborator2 = Machine)
AND
(VCORop = PLAN(Research)) AND Collaborator2.ranking
>= 8) AND (ServiceExPartner.ranking >= 9)
SOIExPartner.ranking >= 6))

A data & information security policy hub located at each netchain entity.
We propose a cloud service broker model – using semantics and SLA based middleware
– to serve as a trusted interface between the enterprise, cloud service providers and
other organizations collaborating in a value-network.
30

with a security hub
We propose a data warehouse coupled data & information
security hub located at each netchain entity.
Policies are to be maintained and managed within each
associated FERA implementation.
The hub must have the ability to manage and control
the governance of data & information sharing security
for each of the patterns.
Common FERA semantics at the two entities enable
interpretation of security provisions for this type of data
& information exchange, and the exchange pattern that
is being used can be deployed according to those
security provisions.

Database Coupled data & information
Security Policy Hub
All of the linkages
between netchain entities
need to be stored and
managed in a tightly
coupled data base system
in order to contain
security breaches in a
timely fashion.
The required database
schema must be able to
support fully automated
business intelligence and
data mining functionalities
with active data
warehousing.
NODE
Node_ID
Node_Description
etc
POLICY
Policy_ID
Policy_Description
etc
PLANE
Plane_ID
Plane_Description
etc
Netchain_Entity_ID
SNAPSHOT
Snapshot_ID
Snapshot_Date_Time
etc
BREACH
Breach_ID
Breach_Description
etc
PATTERN
Pattern_ID
Pattern_Description
Sub_Pattern_of
etc
NETCHAIN_LINK_STATE
Link_ID
Start_Node_ID (FK)
End_Node_ID (FK)
Start_Node_Plane_ID (FK)
End_Node_Plane_ID (FK)
Pattern_ID (FK)
Policy_ID (FK)
Snapshot_ID (FK)
Breach_ID (FK)
VCOR_Semantic_ID (FK)
Comments
etc
VCOR_SEMANTIC
VCOR_Semantic_ID
VCOR_Semantic_Description
VCOR_Sub_Process
VCOR_Process
etc
a high-level entity/relationship model
Soper, D., Demirkan, H. and Goul, M. (2007) “A Proactive
Interorganizational Knowledge-Sharing Security Model with Breach
Propagation Detection and Dynamic Policy Revision,” The Special Issue
on Secure Knowledge Management in Information Systems Frontiers, 9
(5), 469-479, Nov.

Security breach
34

Now, we consider the situation of a breach
When a breach is discovered by any partner in the federation,
information about that breach must be broadcast to all relevant
partners.
Upon receipt of breach information, an organization’s
NETCHAIN_LINK_TABLE can be queried to ascertain the potential
causes of the breach, to assess the policies relevant to mitigating
breaches of this type in the future, and to examine the potential for the
source of the breach to cause loss of security over other data &
information sharing arrangements. It can also guide in the
development of a breach impact mitigation strategy.
If an organization is able to discover or find a limited subset of those
organizations that could have caused the breach through its search of
its policy hub data, then that information would also be broadcast to
the federation partners.
Of course, the federation may have to develop specific policies such as
when a root cause is traced to a federation member. Upon receipt of
broadcast information regarding the limited set of potential culprits,
another node may possess, through analysis of its policy hub data,
sufficient information to further limit that subset.
As the root cause of the breach is possibly ferreted out in this process,
there is major advantage to being a part of the federation – even while
each individual organization is clearly in charge of maintaining and
implementing its own, independent data & information sharing policies.

A simple simulated data & information-sharing
environment.
Simulation Results
Each of the 15,000 simulations described
above yielded four output values: (1) the
total size of the netchain, (2) the maximum
number of business partners per
organization, (3) the allowable data &
information-sharing distance, and (4) the
time required before the breach was
detected.
Parameter N Min Max Mean Std Dev
Netchain Size 15000 10 500 255.00 144.31
Maximum Business Partners 15000 2 250 54.61 51.42
data & information Sharing
Distance 15000 1 3 1.46 0.63
Breach Detection Time 15000 2 34 2.24 1.17
As shown in the table, the average time required to detect a breach across all 15,000 simulated
interorganizational data & information-sharing environments was 2.24 hops. Given that two hops
are minimally necessary for detecting any data & information-sharing breach (per network flow
theory), this result implies that data & information-sharing breaches can on average be detected
quite rapidly, regardless of the netchain size, the data & information sharing distance, or the
number of business partners per organization. 36

Summary
The need for new collaboration and infrastructure models relevant
to today’s very complex and continuous innovation-required
business world are apparent.
Novel aspects of suitable models must reflect value-chained based
collaboration needs and requirements, and facilitate any security
issues.
Our approach to data & information security in netchains is
targeted at proactive governance of binary data & information
sharing exchanges through process patterns supported by the
emerging FERA standard.
In addition, the meta-policy provisions maintained in our policy hub
approach extend value chain collaboration advantages to the realm
of enhanced security.
By relying on VCOR semantics, specific provisions can be applied to
data & information sharing both vertically and horizontally within
netchains.
By using dynamic adaptation mechanisms to handle breaches as
facilitated through netchain analysis, the security model can be
adapted as appropriate by netchain partners.
In short, the idea is to facilitate the handling of breaches by
automating as much of their root-cause detection as possible and
facilitating the exchange of revised trust profiles through closely
collaborating netchain subsets.
37

Future Work
Next steps include assessing the stability of
our approach under a variety of conditions.
By stability, we are investigating netchain
characteristics (like number of partners by
layer, number of relationships on a given layer
and between layers, etc.) and their propensity
for potential collapse under situations of
severe data & information exchange breaches.
Similarly, we seek to assess the impacts of
alternative ‘indirect breach relationships,’ and
we are examining the best methods for
supporting meta-policy revision/update in a
dynamic setting given different types of
indirect breach relationships.
Innovations dilemma?????? 38

we need to
expect the unexpected
43
…just a few acronyms and phrases we threw around…
Inter-organizational data & information sharing, agility,
VCOR, FERA, netchain, SOA, SOI, SOE, SLAs,
semantics, value chain, supply chain, reuse, enterprise
stack, policy hub, security-breach, data warehouse,
data & information sharing patterns…
haluk@uw.edu; haluk.demirkan@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/halukdemirkan
https://twitter.com/profhaluk
Questions?

CyberSecurity in a World of Connected Devices: IoT Security

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to CyberSecurity in a World of Connected Devices: IoT Security

Similar to CyberSecurity in a World of Connected Devices: IoT Security (20)

More from Haluk Demirkan

More from Haluk Demirkan (9)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

CyberSecurity in a World of Connected Devices: IoT Security