SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “security”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 505 records · Page 28

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2011

The National Criticality Experiments Research Center at the Device Assembly Facility, Nevada National Security Site: Status and Capabilities, Summary Report

The National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) was officially opened on August 29, 2011. Located within the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), the NCERC has become a consolidation facility within the United States for critical configuration testing, particularly those involving highly enriched uranium (HEU). The DAF is a Department of Energy (DOE) owned facility that is operated by the National Nuclear Security Agency/Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). User laboratories include the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Personnel bring their home lab qualifications and procedures with them to the DAF, such that non-site specific training need not be repeated to conduct work at DAF. The NNSS Management and Operating contractor is National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) and the NNSS Safeguards and Security contractor is Wackenhut Services. The complete report provides an overview and status of the available laboratories and test bays at NCERC, available test materials and test support configurations, and test requirements and limitations for performing sub-critical and critical tests. The current summary provides a brief summary of the facility status and the method by which experiments may be introduced to NCERC.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Virtual Machine and Cloud Computing Security

Virtualization has become the standard for computing within organizations. The questions that arise when considering virtualization and cloud computing are whether these systems are, or can be, as secure as physical machines, and whether they are appropriate for production services. This paper identifies the security concerns that are associated with virtualization and cloud computing, and how they can be addressed in order to properly secure these systems. In order to accomplish this, the first goal of this paper was to identify relevant security concerns. The second goal was to identify measures that could be put in place to mitigate and address these concerns. HPC-3’s production services are evaluated in the context of available virtualization technologies, with recommendations for appropriate options.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2012

Secure Control Systems for the Energy Sector

Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories (SEL) will conduct the Hallmark Project to address the need to reduce the risk of energy disruptions because of cyber incidents on control systems. The goals is to develop solutions that can be both applied to existing control systems and designed into new control systems to add the security measures needed to mitigate energy network vulnerabilities. The scope of the Hallmark Project contains four primary elements: 1. Technology transfer of the Secure Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Communications Protocol (SSCP) from Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL) to Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories (SEL). The project shall use this technology to develop a Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 compliant original equipment manufacturer (OEM) module to be called a Cryptographic Daughter Card (CDC) with the ability to directly connect to any PC enabling that computer to securely communicate across serial to field devices. Validate the OEM capabilities with another vendor. 2. Development of a Link Authenticator Module (LAM) using the FIPS 140-2 validated Secure SCADA Communications Protocol (SSCP) CDC module with a central management software kit. 3. Validation of the CDC and Link Authenticator modules via laboratory and field tests. 4. Creation of documents that record the impact of the Link Authenticator to the operators of control systems and on the control system itself. The information in the documents can assist others with technology deployment and maintenance.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2013

Nevada National Security Site Environmental Report 2012

This report was prepared to meet the information needs of the public and the requirements and guidelines of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for annual site environmental reports. It was prepared by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), for the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) (formerly designated as the Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO]). The new field office designation occurred in March 2013. Published reports cited in this 2012 report, therefore, may bear the name or authorship of NNSA/NSO. This and previous years’ reports, called Annual Site Environmental Reports (ASERs), Nevada Test Site Environmental Reports (NTSERs), and, beginning in 2010, Nevada National Security Site Environmental Reports (NNSSERs), are posted on the NNSA/NFO website at http://www.nv.energy.gov/library/publications/aser.aspx. This NNSSER was prepared to satisfy DOE Order DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” Its purpose is to (1) report compliance status with environmental standards and requirements, (2) present results of environmental monitoring of radiological and nonradiological effluents, (3) report estimated radiological doses to the public from releases of radioactive material, (4) summarize environmental incidents of noncompliance and actions taken in response to them, (5) describe the NNSA/NFO Environmental Management System and characterize its performance, and (6) highlight significant environmental programs and efforts. This NNSSER summarizes data and compliance status for calendar year 2012 at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) (formerly the Nevada Test Site) and its two support facilities, the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing Laboratory–Nellis (RSL-Nellis). It also addresses environmental restoration (ER) projects conducted at the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR). Through a Memorandum of Agreement, NNSA/NFO is responsible for the oversight of these ER projects, and the Sandia Site Office of NNSA (NNSA/SSO) has oversight of all other TTR and NTTR activities. NNSA/SSO produces the TTR annual environmental report available at http://www.sandia.gov/news/publications/environmental/index.html.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2013

Quantifiably secure power grid operation, management, and evolution :

This report summarizes findings and results of the Quantifiably Secure Power Grid Operation, Management, and Evolution LDRD. The focus of the LDRD was to develop decisionsupport technologies to enable rational and quantifiable risk management for two key grid operational timescales: scheduling (day-ahead) and planning (month-to-year-ahead). Risk or resiliency metrics are foundational in this effort. The 2003 Northeast Blackout investigative report stressed the criticality of enforceable metrics for system resiliency the grid s ability to satisfy demands subject to perturbation. However, we neither have well-defined risk metrics for addressing the pervasive uncertainties in a renewable energy era, nor decision-support tools for their enforcement, which severely impacts efforts to rationally improve grid security. For day-ahead unit commitment, decision-support tools must account for topological security constraints, loss-of-load (economic) costs, and supply and demand variability especially given high renewables penetration. For long-term planning, transmission and generation expansion must ensure realized demand is satisfied for various projected technological, climate, and growth scenarios. The decision-support tools investigated in this project paid particular attention to tailoriented risk metrics for explicitly addressing high-consequence events. Historically, decisionsupport tools for the grid consider expected cost minimization, largely ignoring risk and instead penalizing loss-of-load through artificial parameters. The technical focus of this work was the development of scalable solvers for enforcing risk metrics. Advanced stochastic programming solvers were developed to address generation and transmission expansion and unit commitment, minimizing cost subject to pre-specified risk thresholds. Particular attention was paid to renewables where security critically depends on production and demand prediction accuracy. To address this concern, powerful filtering techniques for spatio-temporal measurement assimilation were used to develop short-term predictive stochastic models. To achieve uncertaintytolerant solutions, very large numbers of scenarios must be simultaneously considered. One focus of this work was investigating ways of reasonably reducing this number.

Gray, Genetha Anne.↗

DOE OSTI2013

Review of July 2013 Nuclear Security Insider Threat Exercise November 2013

This document is a review of the Nuclear Security Insider Threat Exercise which was hosted at ORNL in July 2013. Nuclear security culture and the insider threat are best learned through experience. Culture is inherently difficult to teach, and as such is best learned through modeled behaviors and learning exercise. This TTX, NSITE, is a tool that strives to aid students in learning what an effective (and ineffective) nuclear security culture might look like by simulating dynamic events that strengthen or weaken the nuclear security regime. The goals of NSITE are to stimulate complex thought and discussion and assist decision makers and management in determining the most effective policies and procedures for their country or facility.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2014

Water Security Toolkit User Manual Version 1.2.

The Water Security Toolkit (WST) is a suite of open source software tools that can be used by water utilities to create response strategies to reduce the impact of contamination in a water distribution network . WST includes hydraulic and water quality modeling software , optimizati on methodologies , and visualization tools to identify: (1) sensor locations to detect contamination, (2) locations in the network in which the contamination was introduced, (3) hydrants to remove contaminated water from the distribution system, (4) locations in the network to inject decontamination agents to inactivate, remove, or destroy contaminants, (5) locations in the network to take grab sample s to help identify the source of contamination and (6) valves to close in order to isolate contaminate d areas of the network. This user manual describes the different components of WST , along w ith examples and case studies. License Notice The Water Security Toolkit (WST) v.1.2 Copyright c 2012 Sandia Corporation. Under the terms of Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000, there is a non-exclusive license for use of this work by or on behalf of the U.S. government. This software is distributed under the Revised BSD License (see below). In addition, WST leverages a variety of third-party software packages, which have separate licensing policies: Acro Revised BSD License argparse Python Software Foundation License Boost Boost Software License Coopr Revised BSD License Coverage BSD License Distribute Python Software Foundation License / Zope Public License EPANET Public Domain EPANET-ERD Revised BSD License EPANET-MSX GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.3 gcovr Revised BSD License GRASP AT&T Commercial License for noncommercial use; includes randomsample and sideconstraints executable files LZMA SDK Public Domain nose GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.2.1 ordereddict MIT License pip MIT License PLY BSD License PyEPANET Revised BSD License Pyro MIT License PyUtilib Revised BSD License PyYAML MIT License runpy2 Python Software Foundation License setuptools Python Software Foundation License / Zope Public License six MIT License TinyXML zlib License unittest2 BSD License Utilib Revised BSD License virtualenv MIT License Vol Common Public License vpykit Revised BSD License Additionally, some precompiled WST binary distributions might bundle other third-party executables files: Coliny Revised BSD License (part of Acro project) Dakota GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.2.1 PICO Revised BSD License (part of Acro project) i Revised BSD License Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * Neither the name of Sandia National Laboratories nor Sandia Corporation nor the names of its con- tributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IM- PLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL SANDIA CORPORATION BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUD- ING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. ii Acknowledgements This work was supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development (Interagency Agreement # DW8992192801). The material in this document has been subject to technical and policy review by the U.S. EPA, and approved for publication. The views expressed by individual authors, however, are their own, and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey official U.S. EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. The Water Security Toolkit is an extension of the Threat Ensemble Vulnerability Assessment-Sensor Place- ment Optimization Tool (TEVA-SPOT), which was also developed with funding from the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development (Interagency Agreement # DW8992192801). The authors acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to the devel- opment of TEVA-SPOT: Jonathan Berry (Sandia National Laboratories), Erik Boman (Sandia National Laboratories), Lee Ann Riesen (Sandia National Laboratories), James Uber (University of Cincinnati), and Jean-Paul Watson (Sandia National Laboratories). iii Acronyms ATUS American Time-Use Survey BLAS Basic linear algebra sub-routines CFU Colony-forming unit CVAR Conditional value at risk CWS Contamination warning system EA Evolutionary algorithm EDS Event detection system EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EC Extent of Contamination ERD EPANET results database file GLPK GNU Linear Programming Kit GRASP Greedy randomized adaptive sampling process HEX Hexadecimal HTML HyperText markup language INP EPANET input file LP Linear program MC Mass consumed MILP Mixed integer linear program MIP Mixed integer program MSX Multi-species extension for EPANET NFD Number of failed detections NS Number of sensors NZD Non-zero demand PD Population dosed PE Population exposed PK Population killed TAI Threat assessment input file TCE Tailed-conditioned expectation TD Time to detection TEC Timed extent of contamination TEVA Threat ensemble vulnerability assessment TSB Tryptic soy broth TSG Threat scenario generation file TSI Threat simulation input file VAR Value at risk VC Volume consumed WST Water Security Toolkit YML YAML configuration file format for WST iv Symbols Notation Definition Example { , } set brackets { 1,2,3 } means a set containing the values 1,2, and 3. [?] is an element of s [?] S means that s is an element of the set S . [?] for all s = 1 [?] s [?] S means that the statement s = 1 is true for all s in set S . P summation P n i =1 s i means s 1 + s 2 + * * * + s n . \ set minus S \ T means the set that contains all those elements of S that are not in set T . %7C given %7C is used to define conditional probability. P ( s %7C t ) means the prob- ability of s occurring given that t occurs. %7C ... %7C cardinality Cardinality of a set is the number of elements of the set. If set S = { 2,4,6 } , then %7C S %7C = 3. v

Klise, Katherine A.↗

DOE OSTI2013

A Historical Evaluation of the U16a Tunnel, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada Volume 1

This report presents a historical evaluation of the U16a Tunnel on the Nevada National Security Site in southern Nevada. The work was conducted by the Desert Research Institute at the request of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office and the U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Threat Reduction Agency. The U16a Tunnel was used for underground nuclear weapons effects tests in Shoshone Mountain in Area 16 of the Nevada National Security Site. Six nuclear tests were conducted in the U16a Tunnel from 1962 to 1971. These tests are Marshmallow, Gum Drop, Double Play, Ming Vase, Diamond Dust, and Diamond Mine. The U.S. Department of Defense Threat Reduction Agency, with participation from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Las Alamos National Laboratory, sponsored the tests. Fifteen high explosives tests were also conducted at the tunnel. Two were calibration tests during nuclear testing and the remaining were U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Threat Reduction Agency tunnel defeat tests. The U16a Tunnel complex is on the top and slopes of Shoshone Mountain, encompassing an area of approximately 16.7 hectares (41.1 acres). Major modifications to the landscape are a result of three principal activities, road construction and maintenance, mining activities related to development of the tunnel complex, and site preparation for activities related to testing. Forty-seven cultural features were recorded at the portal and on the slopes of Shoshone Mountain. At the portal area, features relate to the mining, construction, testing, and general every day operational support activities within the tunnel. These include concrete foundations for buildings, equipment pads, and rail lines. Features on the slopes above the tunnel relate to tunnel ventilation, borehole drilling, and data recording. Feature types include soil-covered bunkers, concrete foundations, instrument cable holes, drill holes, and ventilation shafts. The U16a Tunnel complex is eligible to the National Register of Historic Places under criteria a and c, consideration g of 36 CFR Part 60.4 as a historic landscape. Scientific research conducted at the tunnel has made significant contributions to the broad patterns of our history, particularly in regard to the Cold War era that was characterized by competing social, economic, and political ideologies between the former Soviet Union and the United States. The tunnel also possesses distinctive construction and engineering methods for conducting underground nuclear tests. The Desert Research Institute recommends that the U16a Tunnel area be left in place in its current condition and that the U16a Tunnel historic landscape be included in the Nevada National Security Site monitoring program and monitored on a regular basis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2013

A Historical Evaluation of the U16a Tunnel, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada Volume 2

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

Review of Enabling Technologies to Facilitate Secure Compute Customization

High performance computing environments are often used for a wide variety of workloads ranging from simulation, data transformation and analysis, and complex workflows to name just a few. These systems may process data for a variety of users, often requiring strong separation between job allocations. There are many challenges to establishing these secure enclaves within the shared infrastructure of high-performance computing (HPC) environments. The isolation mechanisms in the system software are the basic building blocks for enabling secure compute enclaves. There are a variety of approaches and the focus of this report is to review the different virtualization technologies that facilitate the creation of secure compute enclaves. The report reviews current operating system (OS) protection mechanisms and modern virtualization technologies to better understand the performance/isolation properties. We also examine the feasibility of running ``virtualized'' computing resources as non-privileged users, and providing controlled administrative permissions for standard users running within a virtualized context. Our examination includes technologies such as Linux containers (LXC [32], Docker [15]) and full virtualization (KVM [26], Xen [5]). We categorize these different approaches to virtualization into two broad groups: OS-level virtualization and system-level virtualization. The OS-level virtualization uses containers to allow a single OS kernel to be partitioned to create Virtual Environments (VE), e.g., LXC. The resources within the host's kernel are only virtualized in the sense of separate namespaces. In contrast, system-level virtualization uses hypervisors to manage multiple OS kernels and virtualize the physical resources (hardware) to create Virtual Machines (VM), e.g., Xen, KVM. This terminology of VE and VM, detailed in Section 2, is used throughout the report to distinguish between the two different approaches to providing virtualized execution environments. As part of our technology review we analyzed several current virtualization solutions to assess their vulnerabilities. This included a review of common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs) for Xen, KVM, LXC and Docker to gauge their susceptibility to different attacks. The complete details are provided in Section 5 on page 33. Based on this review we concluded that system-level virtualization solutions have many more vulnerabilities than OS level virtualization solutions. As such, security mechanisms like sVirt (Section 3.3) should be considered when using system-level virtualization solutions in order to protect the host against exploits. The majority of vulnerabilities related to KVM, LXC, and Docker are in specific regions of the system. Therefore, future "zero day attacks" are likely to be in the same regions, which suggests that protecting these areas can simplify the protection of the host and maintain the isolation between users. The evaluations of virtualization technologies done thus far are discussed in Section 4. This includes experiments with 'user' namespaces in VEs, which provides the ability to isolate user privileges and allow a user to run with different UIDs within the container while mapping them to non-privileged UIDs in the host. We have identified Linux namespaces as a promising mechanism to isolate shared resources, while maintaining good performance. In Section 4.1 we describe our tests with LXC as a non-root user and leveraging namespaces to control UID/GID mappings and support controlled sharing of parallel file-systems. We highlight several of these namespace capabilities in Section 6.2.3. The other evaluations that were performed during this initial phase of work provide baseline performance data for comparing VEs and VMs to purely native execution. In Section 4.2 we performed tests using the High-Performance Computing Conjugate Gradient (HPCCG) benchmark to establish baseline performance for a scientific application when run on the Native (host) machine in contrast with execution under Docker and KVM. Our tests verified prior studies showing roughly 2-4% overheads in application execution time & MFlops when running in hypervisor-base environments (VMs) as compared to near native performance with VEs. For more details, see Figures 4.5 (page 28), 4.6 (page 28), and 4.7 (page 29). Additionally, in Section 4.3 we include network measurements for TCP bandwidth performance over the 10GigE interface in our testbed. The Native and Docker based tests achieved >= ~9Gbits/sec, while the KVM configuration only achieved 2.5Gbits/sec (Table 4.6 on page 32). This may be a configuration issue with our KVM installation, and is a point for further testing as we refine the network settings in the testbed. The initial network tests were done using a bridged networking configuration. The report outline is as follows: - Section 1 introduces the report and clarifies the scope of the proj...

Aderholdt, Ferrol↗

DOE OSTI2017

Building Foundations for Nuclear Security Enterprise Analysis Utilizing Nuclear Weapon Data

The Nuclear Security Enterprise, managed by the National Nuclear Security Administration - a semiautonomous agency within the Department of Energy - has been associated with numerous assessments with respect to the estimating, management capabilities, and practices pertaining to nuclear weapon modernization efforts. This report identifies challenges in estimating and analyzing the Nuclear Security Enterprise through an analysis of analogous timeframe conditions utilizing two types of nuclear weapon data - (1) a measure of effort and (2) a function of time. The analysis of analogous timeframe conditions that utilizes only two types of nuclear weapon data yields four summary observations that estimators and analysts of the Nuclear Security Enterprise will find useful.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2017

Security System Design Concepts Instructor Guide

The goal of this session is to introduce five security system design concepts that will enable the development of an integrated security system and will increase the likelihood of effective security management. As a regulator, it’s important to be aware of these design concepts so that when you inspect or evaluate a facility’s security system, you can ensure that these concepts have been applied.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2016

Response to External Peer Review Team Report for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 1

The Underground Test Area (UGTA) Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 97, Yucca Flat/Climax Mine (YF/CM), in the northeast part of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) requires environmental corrective action activities to assess contamination resulting from underground nuclear testing. These activities are necessary to comply with the UGTA corrective action strategy defined in Appendix VI, Revision No. 4, of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended). The Phase I Flow and Transport Model Document for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (N-I, 2013a) was developed and subjected to an external peer review as required by the corrective action investigation (CAI) stage of the UGTA strategy. The YF/CM Peer Review Committee (PRC) raised a number of questions and provided recommendations for supplemental analyses (in the External Peer Review Team Report for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada [N-I, 2015]). The purpose of this document is to provide responses to the PRC recommendations addressing the uncertainties identified by the PRC so that sufficient confidence in the contaminant boundary forecasts is established to advance to the Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD)/Corrective Action Plan (CAP) stage and initiate model evaluations. The PRC summarized their concerns and recommendations, and presented discussions of each of these uncertainties in their report (N-I, 2015). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) responses are summarized in Table ES-1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Systems Security Architecture Research and Development

The general technical goals of the project were to better understand the assumptions of security guarantees using secure commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies, to identify possible security weaknesses introduced during system integration, and to create improved security hardware and software which result in well understood reference architectures for critical computing systems and applications.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2015

Procedure for Performing Security Camera Optical Performance Analysis Tests

Digital security camera technologies proliferate the security marketplace with manufacturers extoling the functions, features, specifications and virtues of their cameras. A process to comparatively analyze security camera technologies using international camera analysis standards and methods provides a defensible means to assess camera image quality on a technically comparable basis. The procedures in this document use ISO standard camera test charts and camera image analysis software to perform test chart image analysis for comparative camera assessment. Step-by-step procedures for acquiring test chart images in the laboratory and producing analysis data using analysis software GUI controls and interfaces for comparative analysis of security camera image quality are detailed in this document. The procedures have been validated through the test and analysis of fixed box and 180 degree field of view multi-imager cameras as well as, fixed and varifocal lenses and analog-to-digital video encoder image quality performance attributes.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2019

Pulse Connect Secure © (PCS) is a trusted platform for government agencies to provide secure access to web portals. As more and more accounts are being hacked and web sites are being compromised, single factor authentication with a username and password has become insufficient to adequately protect authenticated web portals. Multi-factor authentication (MFA), granting user access only when two or more independent pieces of information are presented, has become a necessary tool in the prevention of security breaches. This paper provides an overview of three MFA solutions that utilize the features of PCS. Categories include Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card authentication, service provider initiated (SP–initiated) Security Assertion Markup Language based (SAML–based) authentication, and identity provider initiated (IdP–initiated) SAML–based authentication.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2019

Alliance Project: Secure Control Systems for the Energy Sector

The Alliance Project addresses Area of Interest 4: Secure Remote Access for the Energy Sector, by combining physical and cyber access under one cybersecurity access system. The Alliance Project built on the successful completion of the Lemnos and Padlock Project (DOE-Funded Project started in 2007 and 2010) and researched and developed a solution for an Ethernet Security Gateway with the functionality required to integrate the physical access control cyber system and interface with legacy and new proximity card readers used for physical access requests. This project focused on securing and enhancing the cyber system the physical access control system operates on. The team tested and demonstrated the system solution on the SEL campus. Currently the physical access cyber system is completely separate from the cyber access control cyber system. With a single system industry benefits include: (1) Single system to learn and teach employees; (2) Single system that collects and alerts on logs and events simplifying incident response plans and NERC CIP compliance; (3) Unifies trust management to a single system reducing the potential errors in privilege escalation or revocation; (4) Provides a stronger cybersecurity platform the physical access control system operates on. Today they are mostly plain text protocols and little cyber awareness; (5) Integration of physical access awareness allows the cyber system to react and adjust. In some cases, the cyber access can be enhanced with authorized physical access and other cases the cyber access can be more restricted with unauthorized physical access; and (6) Enables the utility to establish as large or as small a physical access control system as they require. One example would be when a utility shares a substation with a neighbor utility and can’t rely on the substation door for the physical access control. The Alliance technology enables them to lock equipment racks simply with no scalability issues because it stands on the cyber security infrastructure which is already highly scalable.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Global Security: 5-10 Year Strategy [Slides]

Global Security delivers innovative engineering solutions to protect the nation from strategic threats home and abroad. Global Security programs focus on developing and implementing technical solutions to address global security challenges through three enduring missions: Global Monitoring, Preventing Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapon Security.

42 ENGINEERING↗