Invoking Systems Security Engineering Perspectives to Meet the Security Complexities of Advanced and Small Modular Reactors
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Williams, Adam David [Sandia National Laboratories↗
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.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Designing a Secure Conveyance: Cyber-Physical Security Risk Mitigation Leveraging In-Vehicle Computers
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Hollifield, Sam [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000151499268)↗
Nuclear Security Education Program at the Pennsylvania State University
The availability of trained and qualified nuclear and radiation security experts worldwide has decreased as those with hands-on experience have retired while the demand for these experts and skills have increased. The U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) has responded to the continued loss of technical and policy expertise amongst personnel and students in the security field by initiating the establishment of a Nuclear Security Education Initiative, in partnership with Pennsylvania State University (PSU), Texas A and M (TAMU), and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). This collaborative, multi-year initiative forms the basis of specific education programs designed to educate the next generation of personnel who plan on careers in the nonproliferation and security fields with both domestic and international focus. The three universities worked collaboratively to develop five core courses consistent with the GTRI mission, policies, and practices. These courses are the following: Global Nuclear Security Policies, Detectors and Source Technologies, Applications of Detectors/Sensors/Sources for Radiation Detection and Measurements Nuclear Security Laboratory, Threat Analysis and Assessment, and Design and Analysis of Security Systems for Nuclear and Radiological Facilities. The Pennsylvania State University (PSU) Nuclear Engineering Program is a leader in undergraduate and graduate-level nuclear engineering education in the USA. The PSU offers undergraduate and graduate programs in nuclear engineering. The PSU undergraduate program in nuclear engineering is the largest nuclear engineering programs in the USA. The PSU Radiation Science and Engineering Center (RSEC) facilities are being used for most of the nuclear security education program activities. Laboratory space and equipment was made available for this purpose. The RSEC facilities include the Penn State Breazeale Reactor (PSBR), gamma irradiation facilities (in-pool irradiator, dry irradiator, and hot cells), neutron beam laboratory, radiochemistry laboratories, and various radiation detection and measurement laboratories. A new nuclear security education laboratory was created with DOE NNSA- GTRI funds at RSEC. The nuclear security graduate level curriculum enables the PSU to educate and train future nuclear security experts, both within the United States as well as worldwide. The nuclear security education program at Penn State will grant a Master's degree in nuclear security starting fall 2015. The PSU developed two courses: Nuclear Security- Detector And Source Technologies and Nuclear Security- Applications of Detectors/Sensors/Sources for Radiation Detection and Measurements (Laboratory). Course descriptions and course topics of these courses are described briefly: - Nuclear Security - Detector and Source Technologies; - Nuclear Security - Applications of Detectors/Sensors/Sources for Radiation Detection and Measurements Laboratory.
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
International Symposium on Transport Security of Nuclear and other Radioactive Material; Tokyo, Japan, November 2019
As an outcome of the Fourth Nuclear Security Summit of 2016, held in Washington D.C., the Governments of Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Spain, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States reaffirmed, through INFCIRC/909, their will to further improve the overall security in the transport of nuclear and other radioactive materials. With this goal in mind, each expressed their commitment to further exchange national practices with other countries through the IAEA and the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT). They also committed to actively support the IAEA as the central organization for coordinating activities and developing guidance documents and to support the GICNT and the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction in developing and implementing its nuclear transport security activities. Both of these organizations address the commitments regarding nuclear transport security as outcomes of the Nuclear Security Summit 2016. In an effort to continue the momentum from the Nuclear Security Summit, the Government of Japan, in cooperation with the Integrated Support Center for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Nuclear Security of Japan Atomic Energy Agency (ISCN/JAEA), hosted the International Transport Security Symposium in November 2019. With over fifty countries invited to attend, the event exchanged and promoted good practices in several topical area sessions related to the security of nuclear and other radioactive material in transport. Topical sessions included Laws and Regulatory Framework, Physical Protection Systems, Response Actions, and Insider/Information Security. The Symposium built support for transport security and encouraged IAEA Member States to actively work regionally and internationally with the IAEA’s transport security programme through the practical implementation and incorporation of IAEA Nuclear Security Series recommendations and guidance into their national frameworks for transport security. From these sessions, to the host detailed a recommended path forward for future engagements in the security of nuclear and radioactive material in transport. The paper will discuss the Symposium’s outcomes and highlight the forward momentum made by both signatories and non-signatories for the strengthening of all the critical elements of a State’s transport security regime, including physical protection systems, insider threats to the nuclear and radioactive material supply chains, planning and capabilities for law enforcement response to malicious transport security events, and employment of technology to address critical vulnerabilities to the transport of nuclear and other radioactive materials.
Holt, Katherine↗
Advanced Reactor Designs Security Analysis, Risk, and Recommendations: Risks, Consequences, and Possible by-Design Mitigation Approaches Associated with Select Advanced Reactors
Next-generation advanced reactors (ARs) incorporate enhanced safety systems, have smaller source terms, and feature compact modular designs, which should lessen their collective risk profiles. However, to fully evaluate risk, security needs to be a part of the equation. Without taking security into consideration, safety systems and components in the new ARs may be vulnerable to sabotage. These base attributes, coupled with enhanced security features specific to AR design through sound engineering and security-by-design (SeBD), should provide developers and operators with lower inherent security risk profiles. Building security early into the AR design may remove or passively secure potential critical targets from an adversary’s reach , thereby increasing overall safety and security. An integrated approach and diverse design team that includes engineering, operations, and security experts are fundamental to building security into the design without sacrificing fundamental operational efficiencies and principles. The objective of this project was to evaluate the security and safety interfaces for five classes of reactors, identify potential security vulnerabilities of structures, systems, and components (SSC), and underscore the need to consider security alongside safety in the design o f these concepts. The five reactor classes evaluated in this project and presented in this report are molten-salt reactors (MSR), high temperature gas reactors (HTGR), sodium-fast reactors (SFR), advanced light-water reactors (ALWR), and microreactors. These designs were selected because they reflect the concepts that are closest to market deployment and have received significant resource investments from the public and private sector. This project assesses the inherent security risks posed by common classes of ARs, provides a methodology and framework to assess security along with safety, and offers an analysis of potential mitigation strategies that could be incorporated. For each AR technology, the SSCs that relate to radionuclide source safety functions are discussed to understand the SSC contribution to safety and relative importance in the protective strategy for the design. The assumptions that went into evaluating each reactor concept originated from generic publicly available nonproprietary information and should not directly be used to qualify an absolute risk profile nor to rank specific AR designs. Instead, the purpose of the analysis is to understand and compare the generic inherent security risks of different AR technologies.
98 - NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL↗
Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Spent Fuel Pool Cooling System Failure Considering Safety and Security Initiating Events
In order to quantify the probable risk associated with a safety system, nuclear safety risk evaluation process is applied which is generally performed in three steps. The first step is to calculate the damage frequency of a critical system. This step is followed by the radioactive source term estimation due to the potential system damage. The final step is the assessment of off-site consequences. The safety risk formula is shown by Eq. (1). P{sub F} is the probability of safety system failure (the probability used describes a random, independent event), and C is the consequence value. R{sub SAF} = P{sub F} * C (1) The security risk associated with an attack on critical infrastructure and/or special nuclear materials theft is usually evaluated using three- term risk equation (probability of attack, probability of adversary success, and consequence). A security threat and the related initiating events are not considered in a pure safety risk analysis. The vulnerability of the physical protection system is performed independently even though the consequence resulting from a security initiating event can be similar to a safety related initiating event and thus gets double counted. The security risk can be calculated using Eq. (2) R{sub SEC} = P{sub A} * P{sub S} * C (2) PA is the probability of attack, P{sub S} is the probability of adversary success (P{sub S} = 1 - P{sub I} P{sub N}). P{sub I} being the probability of interruption which accounts for the probabilities of detection of all timely detection elements along an adversary path. PN being the probability of neutralization: the result of engagement of the response force with the adversaries after the interruption has occurred. C is the consequence magnitude from a successful attack. The two security probabilities do not describe random, independent events. As a result, because of the differences in the randomness and independence of the respective safety and security probabilities, the safety and the security risks are currently calculated separately. The consequence term in nuclear safety and security risk evaluation have the same definition. An effort is made here to study the effect on the overall risk by considering security initiating events along with the subsequent failure of the intermediate safety element. The target selected is a spent fuel storage pool for analyzing the public risk arising from the interplay between nuclear security and safety initiating events. EASI (Estimate of Adversary Sequence Interruption) model is used to calculate the probability of interruption related to a security system that leads to the calculation of the security initiating event frequency. Further progression of this initiating security event to a top event is analyzed using a Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) tool, SAPHIRE (version 8) to obtain a joint pool damage frequency. For the progression of events leading to a top event, the failure of the intermediate safety elements is assumed to be external random events such as heavy load drop and fire events. The objectives of this study is to (1) determine the double accounting of frequency of failure, risk and allocated resources in the scenario of a non-random security initiating event leading to a safety random event chain (2) compare the damage frequency from pure security with the frequency of combined security-safety failure event and pure safety failure events. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Tailoring NIST Security Controls for the Ground System: Selection and Implementation -- Recommendations for Information System Owners
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) invests millions of dollars in spacecraft and ground system development, and in mission operations in the pursuit of scientific knowledge of the universe. In recent years, NASA sent a probe to Mars to study the Red Planet's upper atmosphere, obtained high resolution images of Pluto, and it is currently preparing to find new exoplanets, rendezvous with an asteroid, and bring a sample of the asteroid back to Earth for analysis. The success of these missions is enabled by mission assurance. In turn, mission assurance is backed by information assurance. The information systems supporting NASA missions must be reliable as well as secure. NASA - like every other U.S. Federal Government agency - is required to manage the security of its information systems according to federal mandates, the most prominent being the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002 and the legislative updates that followed it. Like the management of enterprise information technology (IT), federal information security management takes a "one-size fits all" approach for protecting IT systems. While this approach works for most organizations, it does not effectively translate into security of highly specialized systems such as those supporting NASA missions. These systems include command and control (C&C) systems, spacecraft and instrument simulators, and other elements comprising the ground segment. They must be carefully configured, monitored and maintained, sometimes for several years past the missions' initially planned life expectancy, to ensure the ground system is protected and remains operational without any compromise of its confidentiality, integrity and availability. Enterprise policies, processes, procedures and products, if not effectively tailored to meet mission requirements, may not offer the needed security for protecting the information system, and they may even become disruptive to mission operations. Certain protective measures for the general enterprise may not be as efficient within the ground segment. This is what the authors have concluded through observations and analysis of patterns identified from the various security assessments performed on NASA missions such as MAVEN, OSIRIS-REx, New Horizons and TESS, to name a few. The security audits confirmed that the framework for managing information system security developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for the federal government, and adopted by NASA, is indeed effective. However, the selection of the technical, operational and management security controls offered by the NIST model - and how they are implemented - does not always fit the nature and the environment where the ground system operates in even though there is no apparent impact on mission success. The authors observed that unfit controls, that is, controls that are not necessarily applicable or sufficiently effective in protecting the mission systems, are often selected to facilitate compliance with security requirements and organizational expectations even if the selected controls offer minimum or non-existent protection. This paper identifies some of the standard security controls that can in fact protect the ground system, and which of them offer little or no benefit at all. It offers multiple scenarios from real security audits in which the controls are not effective without, of course, disclosing any sensitive information about the missions assessed. In addition to selection and implementation of controls, the paper also discusses potential impact of recent legislation such as the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 - aimed at the enterprise - on the ground system, and offers other recommendations to Information System Owners (ISOs).
GOVERNANCE↗
Panel Session 82: Shareholder Engagement with DOE Associate Undersecretary's Environment, Health, Safety, and Security
This panel discussed the mission of the US DOE Office of the Associate Under Secretary for the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (AU) and its functional support to the overall mission of the DOE, DOE Office of Environmental Management, and the contractor partners that support that overall mission. Participation in this panel helps achieve one of AU's strategic plan goals - to engage stakeholders to ensure AU's Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHS and S) policy and support activities align with DOE mission needs. The Panel included stakeholders to discuss their perspectives on AU stakeholder engagement as well as representatives from four policy and support offices from AU. This panel was an important implementation of the DOE Office of the Associate Under Secretary for the Office of EHS and S (AU) strategic plan goals - to engage stakeholders to ensure AUs Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHS and S) policy and support activities align with DOE mission needs. The panel included stakeholders to discuss their perspectives on AU stakeholder engagement as well as representatives from four policy and support offices from AU including the Office of Health and Safety (AU-10); Office of Environmental Protection and ES and H Reporting (AU-20); Office of Nuclear Safety (AU-30); and Office of Security (AU-50). Presentations proposed include: 1 - Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (AU) - Stakeholder Engagement (Matthew Moury, US DOE, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (USA)); 2 - Environment, Health, Safety, and Security Policy Making: Rules, Directives, Technical Standards and Programs (Patricia Worthington, US DOE, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (USA)); 3 - Environment, Health, Safety, and Security: Corporate Programs (Josh Silverman, US DOE, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (USA)); 4 - Environment, Health, Safety and Security: Technical Assistance (Marc Brooks, US DOE, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (USA)); 5 - Environment, Health, Safety and Security: Goals and Initiatives (Tom Hiltz, US DOE, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (USA)); 6 - Shareholder Engagement with DOE Associate Undersecretary's Environment, Health, Safety, and Security (Greg Sosson, US DOE (USA)); 7 - Nuclear Safety Center of Excellence (Chip Lagdon, Bechtel National, Inc (USA)); 8 - EFCOG Safety Working Group (Jan Preston, Fluor Corporation (USA))
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Quantitative analysis of Indonesia’s reserves and energy security as an evaluation by the nation in facing global competition
Energy security has become a serious concern for all countries in the world and each country has its own definiton for measuring its energy security. The objective of this study was to measure energy security of Indonesia quantitatively by comparing it with other countries and provide some recommendations for enhancing the energy security. In this study, the database was developed from various sources and was cross-checked to confirm validity of the data. Then the parameters of energy security were defined, where all of data will be processed towards the selected parameters. These parameters (e.g. Primary Energy mix, TPES/capita, FEC/capita, Self Sufficiency, Refining capacity, Overseas Energy Resources, Resources diversification) are the standards used to produce an analysis or evaluation of national energy management. Energy balances for Indonesia and 10 selected countries (USA, Germany, Russia, England, Japan, China, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand and India) were presented from 2009 to 2013. With a base index of 1.0 for Indonesia, calculated energy security index capable of representing Indonesia energy security compared relatively to other countries were also presented and discussed in detail. In 2012, Indonesia security index is ranked 11 from 11 countries, while USA and South Korea are the highest with security index of 3.36 and 2.89, respectively. According to prediction for 2025, Indonesia energy security is ranked 10 from 11 countries with only Thailand has lower security index (0.98). This result shows that Indonesia energy security was vulnerable to crisis and must be improved. Therefore this study proposed some recommendations to improve Indonesia energy security. Indonesia need to increase oil production by constructing new refinery plants, developing infrastructure for energy distribution to reduce the potential of energy shortage and accelerating the utilization of renewable energy to reduce the excessive use of primary energy. From energy policy proposed in this study, Indonesia energy security for 2025 could be improved to ranked 8 of 11 countries, better than Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore.
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
An Evaluation of The Dynamic Physical Security Risk Assessment Methodology for Fleet-Wide Applications
The requirements for U.S. nuclear power plants to maintain a large onsite physical security force contribute to their high operational costs. The cost of maintaining the current physical security posture is approximately 10% of the overall operation and maintenance budget for commercial nuclear power plants. The goal of the Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program’s physical security pathway is to develop tools, methods, and technologies and provide the technical basis for an optimized physical security posture. The conservatisms built into current security postures may be analyzed and minimized to reduce security costs while still ensuring adequate security and operational safety. The research performed at Idaho National Laboratory within LWRS program’s physical security pathway has successfully developed a dynamic force-on-force modeling framework using various computer simulation tools and integrating them with the dynamic assessment Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD) tool. This integrated process for physical security analysis is named Modeling and Analysis for Safety Security using Dynamic EMRALD Framework (MASS-DEF). This document provides an update on the progress in applying the MASS-DEF process to an operating commercial nuclear power plant as well as additional industry feedback regarding use of the tool for other physical security risk-informed topics. This report is only a summary of the progress and does not contain specific modeling results as those contain sensitive security information. Previous reports described how a user could integrate their plant-specific force-on-force models with the dynamic simulation tool EMRALD, model operator actions, and integrate with probabilistic risk assessment tools, such as CAFTA (Computer Aided Fault Tree Analysis System) or SAPHIRE (Systems Analysis Programs for Hands-on Integrated Reliability Evaluations), and with thermal-hydraulic tools, such as RELAP-5 or MAAP. Previous reports applied various combinations of available simulations codes with EMRALD using generic plant models to demonstrate how to perform the analysis. This report is an update the progress of applying the dynamic computational framework to an actual nuclear facility using their security scenarios and timelines. This report also provides an update to the procedural guidance for the MASS-DEF process and an overview of the generic models available for use by utilities. This report does not contain any plant’s sensitive information and/or safeguards information. This study’s purpose was to verify that the results achieved using generic models are similar to actual plant results and refine our guidance on the use of the framework. This assessment enables further analysis, such as what-if scenarios and staff-reduction evaluation, thereby optimizing physical security at plants.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
The Interface of Safety and Security in Transport: A Regional Perspective
Security of nuclear and other radioactive material in transport continues to be a challenge for States that are working on strengthening their nuclear security regime. One reason for this is that State regulatory agencies and other organizations lack the resources and trained personnel to dedicate to this field. For over 50 years safety has been a major focus in the use, storage and transport of radioactive material. Only recently, since the late 1990s, has dedicated focus been given to the field of security. One way to assist States to advance nuclear security is to reach out to safety workers (regulators, inspectors, and safety compliance personnel) and showcase the need to better integrate safety and security practices. A recent IAEA regional workshop in Bangkok, Thailand (June 2015) yielded profound results when subject matter experts lectured on both the safety and the security of radioactive material in transport. These experts presented and discussed experiences and best practices for: 1) developing and implementing safety requirements and security recommendations for radioactive material in transport; 2) national and international cooperation; and 3) preventing shipment delays/denials of radioactive material. The workshop participants, who were predominantly from safety organizations, shared that they received the following from this event: 1. A clear understanding of the objectives of the IAEA safety requirements and security recommendations for radioactive material in transport. 2. A general understanding of and appreciation for the similarities and differences between safety requirements and security recommendations for radioactive material in transport. 3. A greater appreciation of the interface between transport safety and security and potential impacts of this interface on the efforts to strengthen the compliance assurance regime for the safe transport of radioactive material. 4. A general understanding of assessing the transport security scenarios and developing transport security plans. Many participants also reported their appreciation of the workshop exercises that specifically focused on practical aspects of safety and security of transport of radioactive material. These workshop outcomes highlight the important role professionals can offer when they receive additional safety training and education for radioactive material in transport. Moreover, these professionals can help to increase capacity in countries with developing nuclear security regimes. This paper explores workshop outcomes and transportation regulations and guidelines for radioactive material.
Welch, Tim↗
Fostering Nuclear Security Culture through Effective Leadership: An Operational Perspective
Security culture plays a critical role in determining the effectiveness of an organization's security performance, making its significance impossible to overemphasize. It encompasses the collective values, shared perceptions, and habitual actions embraced by all individuals within a nuclear organization—from leadership to frontline staff. When the entire workforce recognizes the reality of potential threats, accepts that security is a shared duty, and integrates security-minded behavior into everyday routines, it fosters an environment where strong security practices are the norm. In such a setting, everyone can take pride and feel reassured in being part of an organization where a strong security culture is deeply embedded. Security culture is based on the broader concept of organizational culture. All organizations—whether families, social clubs, religious institutions, businesses, non-governmental organizations, or governments—possess an underlying culture shaped by core values and beliefs. These values and beliefs influence attitudes and drive behavior throughout the organization. While multiple factors contribute to the development of a strong security culture, leadership plays a particularly pivotal role. In organizations where security culture is well-established, leaders go beyond rhetoric; they demonstrate a genuine commitment to security through their actions. They implement policies and procedures that actively engage all employees, foster open dialogue around security concerns, and encourage teamwork in resolving issues. Furthermore, they reward proactive behavior and ensure that corrective actions are taken promptly. Regular assessments of the organization's security culture allow such leaders to gauge its effectiveness and take strategic steps to strengthen it when necessary. This paper leverages practical, real-world experience to guide leadership and senior management within nuclear organizations through the foundational steps of cultivating a robust, organization-wide culture of nuclear security. It emphasizes the critical importance of early leadership engagement in shaping this culture and outlines a comprehensive approach that includes strategic, tactical, and operational measures. Additionally, it explores methods for fostering a unified vision across all levels of the organization to ensure alignment, commitment, and continuous improvement in nuclear security practices.
Zineddin, Dr. Z. [ORNL] (ORCID:0009000848740725)↗
Enhancing Global Food Security: Opportunities for the American Meteorological Society
Food security is a key pillar of environmental security yet remains one of the world’s greatest challenges. Its obverse, food insecurity, negatively impacts health and well-being, drives mass migration, and undermines national security and global sustainable development. Ensuring food security is a delicate balance of myriad concerns within the atmospheric and Earth sciences, agronomy and agriculture engineering, social sciences, economics, monitoring, and policymaking. A Food Security Presidential Session at the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS) 2022 Annual Meeting brought together experts across disciplines to tackle issues at the nexus of weather, climate, and food security. The starkest takeaway was the realization that, despite its importance and clear roles for the atmospheric and climate sciences, food security has not been a focus for the AMS community. The aim of this paper is to build on the perspectives shared by this expert panel and to identify overlapping issues and key points of intersection between the food-security community and AMS. We examine 1) the interactions between weather, climate, and the food system and how they influence food security; 2) the time and spatial scales of food security decision support that match weather and climate phenomena; 3) the role of both providers and users of information as well as decision-makers in improving research to operations for food security; and 4) the opportunities for the AMS community to address food security. We conclude that, moving forward, the AMS community is well-positioned to scale up its engagement across the global food system to address existing scientific needs and technology gaps to improve global food security.
Food security↗
IT Security Support for the Spaceport Command Control Systems Development Ground Support Development Operations
Security is one of the most if not the most important areas today. After the several attacks on the United States, security everywhere was heightened from Airports to the communication among the military branches legionnaires. With advanced persistent threats (APTs) on the rise following Stuxnet, government branches and agencies are required, more than ever, to follow several standards, policies and procedures to reduce the likelihood of a breach. Attack vectors today are very advanced and are going to continue to get more and more advanced as security controls advance. This creates a need for networks and systems to be in an updated and secured state in a launch control system environment. FISMA is a law that is mandated by the government to follow when government agencies secure networks and devices. My role on this project is to ensure network devices and systems are in compliance with NIST, as outlined in FISMA. I will achieve this by providing assistance with security plan documentation and collection, system hardware and software inventory, malicious code and malware scanning and configuration of network devices i.e. routers and IDSsIPSs. In addition I will be completing security assessments on software and hardware, vulnerability assessments and reporting, conducting patch management and risk assessments. A guideline that will help with compliance with NIST is the SANS Top 20 Critical Controls. SANS Top 20 Critical Controls as well as numerous security tools, security software and the conduction of research will be used to successfully complete the tasks given to me. This will ensure compliance with FISMA and NIST, secure systems and a secured network. By the end of this project, I hope to have carried out stated above as well as gain an immense knowledge about compliance, security tools, networks and network devices, policies and procedures.
computer information security↗
IT Security Support for the Spaceport Command Control Systems Development Ground Support Development Operations
Security is one of the most if not the most important areas today. After the several attacks on the United States, security everywhere has heightened from airports to the communication among the military branches legionnaires. With advanced persistent threats (APT's) on the rise following Stuxnet, government branches and agencies are required, more than ever, to follow several standards, policies and procedures to reduce the likelihood of a breach. Attack vectors today are very advanced and are going to continue to get more and more advanced as security controls advance. This creates a need for networks and systems to be in an updated and secured state in a launch control system environment. FISMA is a law that is mandated by the government to follow when government agencies secure networks and devices. My role on this project is to ensure network devices and systems are in compliance with NIST, as outlined in FISMA. I will achieve this by providing assistance with security plan documentation and collection, system hardware and software inventory, malicious code and malware scanning, and configuration of network devices i.e. routers and IDS's/IPS's. In addition, I will be completing security assessments on software and hardware, vulnerability assessments and reporting, and conducting patch management and risk assessments. A guideline that will help with compliance with NIST is the SANS Top 20 Critical Controls. SANS Top 20 Critical Controls as well as numerous security tools, security software and the conduction of research will be used to successfully complete the tasks given to me. This will ensure compliance with FISMA and NIST, secure systems and a secured network. By the end of this project, I hope to have carried out the tasks stated above as well as gain an immense knowledge about compliance, security tools, networks and network devices, as well as policies and procedures.
security↗
Secure Storage Architectures
The purpose of this report is to clarify the challenges associated with storage for secure enclaves. The major focus areas for the report are: - review of relevant parallel filesystem technologies to identify assets and gaps; - review of filesystem isolation/protection mechanisms, to include native filesystem capabilities and auxiliary/layered techniques; - definition of storage architectures that can be used for customizable compute enclaves (i.e., clarification of use-cases that must be supported for shared storage scenarios); - investigate vendor products related to secure storage. This study provides technical details on the storage and filesystem used for HPC with particular attention on elements that contribute to creating secure storage. We outline the pieces for a a shared storage architecture that balances protection and performance by leveraging the isolation capabilities available in filesystems and virtualization technologies to maintain the integrity of the data. Key Points: There are a few existing and in-progress protection features in Lustre related to secure storage, which are discussed in (Chapter 3.1). These include authentication capabilities like GSSAPI/Kerberos and the in-progress work for GSSAPI/Host-keys. The GPFS filesystem provides native support for encryption, which is not directly available in Lustre. Additionally, GPFS includes authentication/authorization mechanisms for inter-cluster sharing of filesystems (Chapter 3.2). The limitations of key importance for secure storage/filesystems are: (i) restricting sub-tree mounts for parallel filesystem (which is not directly supported in Lustre or GPFS), and (ii) segregation of hosts on the storage network and practical complications with dynamic additions to the storage network, e.g., LNET. A challenge for VM based use cases will be to provide efficient IO forwarding of the parallel filessytem from the host to the guest (VM). There are promising options like para-virtualized filesystems to help with this issue, which are a particular instances of the more general challenge of efficient host/guest IO that is the focus of interfaces like virtio. A collection of bridging technologies have been identified in Chapter 4, which can be helpful to overcome the limitations and challenges of supporting efficient storage for secure enclaves. The synthesis of native filesystem security mechanisms and bridging technologies led to an isolation-centric storage architecture that is proposed in Chapter 5, which leverages isolation mechanisms from different layers to facilitate secure storage for an enclave. Recommendations: The following highlights recommendations from the investigations done thus far. - The Lustre filesystem offers excellent performance but does not support some security related features, e.g., encryption, that are included in GPFS. If encryption is of paramount importance, then GPFS may be a more suitable choice. - There are several possible Lustre related enhancements that may provide functionality of use for secure-enclaves. However, since these features are not currently integrated, the use of Lustre as a secure storage system may require more direct involvement (support). (*The network that connects the storage subsystem and users, e.g., Lustre s LNET.) - The use of OpenStack with GPFS will be more streamlined than with Lustre, as there are available drivers for GPFS. - The Manilla project offers Filesystem as a Service for OpenStack and is worth further investigation. Manilla has some support for GPFS. - The proposed Lustre enhancement of Dynamic-LNET should be further investigated to provide more dynamic changes to the storage network which could be used to isolate hosts and their tenants. - The Linux namespaces offer a good solution for creating efficient restrictions to shared HPC filesystems. However, we still need to conduct a thorough round of storage/filesystem benchmarks. - Vendor products should be more closely reviewed, possibly to include evaluation of performance/protection of select products. (Note, we are investigation the option of evaluating equipment from Seagate/Xyratex.) Outline: The remainder of this report is structured as follows: - Section 1: Describes the growing importance of secure storage architectures and highlights some challenges for HPC. - Section 2: Provides background information on HPC storage architectures, relevant supporting technologies for secure storage and details on OpenStack components related to storage. Note, that background material on HPC storage architectures in this chapter can be skipped if the reader is already familiar with Lustre and GPFS. - Section 3: A review of protection mechanisms in two HPC filesystems; details about available isolation, authentication/authorization and performance capabilities are discussed. - Section 4: Describe technologies that can be used to bridge gaps in HPC storage and filesystems to facilitate...
Aderholdt, Ferrol↗
Plant-specific Model and Data Analysis using Dynamic Security Modeling and Simulation
The requirements for U.S. nuclear power plants to maintain a large on-site physical security force contribute to their high operational costs. The cost of maintaining the current physical security posture is approximately 10% of the overall operation and maintenance budget for commercial nuclear power plants. The goal of the Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program’s physical security pathway is to develop tools, methods, and technologies and provide the technical basis for an optimized physical security posture. The conservatisms built into current security postures may be analyzed and minimized in order to reduce security costs while still ensuring adequate security and operational safety. The research performed at Idaho National Laboratory within LWRS program’s physical security pathway has successfully developed a dynamic force-on-force modeling framework using various computer simulation tools and integrating them with the dynamic assessment Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD) tool. This document provides an update on the progress in applying a dynamic computational framework that links results from a commercially available force-on-force simulation tool, a commercially available thermal-hydraulic tool, and EMRALD to an operating commercial nuclear power plant. This report is only a summary of the progress and does not contain specific modeling results as those contain sensitive security information. This process of including plant procedures and multiple analysis results is being called Modeling and Analysis for Safety Security using Dynamic EMRALD Framework or MASS-DEF. Previous reports described how a user could integrate their plant-specific force-on-force models with the dynamic simulation tool EMRALD, model operator actions, integrate with probabilistic risk assessment tools, such as CAFTA (Computer Aided Fault Tree Analysis System) or SAPHIRE (Systems Analysis Programs for Hands-on Integrated Reliability Evaluations), and with thermal-hydraulic tools, such as RELAP-5. Previous reports applied various combinations of available simulations codes with EMRALD using generic plant models to demonstrate how to perform the analysis. This report documents the results of applying the dynamic computational framework to an actual nuclear facility using their security scenarios and timelines. This report does not contain any plant's sensitive information and/or Safeguards Information. The purpose of this study was to verify that results achieved using generic models are similar to actual plant results and to refine our guidance on the use of the framework. This assessment enables further analysis, such as what-if scenarios and staff-reduction evaluation, thereby optimizing physical security at plants.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
Keyless Infrastructure Security Solution (KISS) (Technology Landscape Analysis Report)
The following landscape analysis explores blockchain or distributed ledger technologies application to securing electricity infrastructure. The exploration of how distributed ledger technologies can be used to increase the trustworthiness and integrity of the grid’s edge is imperative to the economic, security and well-being of all modern societies that rely on electricity. Blockchain technology’s ability to secure, track and optimize complex data transactions provides an exciting value proposition to securing and optimizing the U.S. power grid. An energy delivery system (EDS) operating at the grid’s edge requires unprecedented levels of security and trustworthiness to verify integrity of data and manage complex transactive and distributed Energy Resources (DERs) exchanges. Moreover, grid-edge devices lack visibility, control and security to conduct real-time energy transactions with the required security, speed and scale. The U.S. power grid is a complex system of systems that requires secure, reliable and trustworthy EDSs. Grid modernization has increased the speed and size of data sets exchanged on these systems (Gordes and Mylrea 2014). Exasperating the challenge is these systems are increasingly distributed creating new data fidelity and interoperability challenges for grid operators struggling to balance and incorporate DERs. Blockchain technology provides an atomically verifiable cryptographic signature to help increase the trustworthiness of EDSs at the grid’s edge. This feature is especially important at distribution level since EDSs and field devices have increasing operational and security requirements that are often diametrically opposed. For example, as data, speed and analytic requirements increase, security and functionality requirements increase. Further, as the grid’s edge incorporate DERs and transacts in real time, availability is prioritized over the integrity and confidentially of that data. Blockchain presents the prospect of solving some of these complex challenges related to grid security and modernization. However, there are more questions about blockchain applicability than answers. There are number of theoretical blockchain applications to the energy sector, but few energy utilities have actually applied, implemented or even experimented with the underlying distributed ledger technology and consensus algorithms that enable blockchain to exchange data more efficiently and securely.
24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗