Vulnerability of CPS inference to DoS attacks

We study distributed inference of Cyber Physical Systems (CPS) subject to Denial of Service (DoS). For the purpose of inference, we assume the CPS as a physical-layer (dynamical system) monitored by a cyber-layer (multiagent network). Under DoS, an adversary may disrupt the sensor network monitoring the system either at the underlying communication or at sensors. We investigate countermeasures and CPS resiliency to such failures. We show that the rank-deficiency of the physical system increases the prevalence of hubs in the cyber-layer, and consequently, the vulnerability to the adversary attacks. We provide a power system monitoring example to illustrate our approach.

[1]  Sandip Roy,et al.  Kronecker products of defective matrices: Some spectral properties and their implications on observability , 2012, 2012 American Control Conference (ACC).

[2]  Sameera S. Ponda,et al.  Real-time dynamic planning to maintain network connectivity in a team of unmanned air vehicles , 2011, 2011 IEEE GLOBECOM Workshops (GC Wkshps).

[3]  Sajal K. Das,et al.  Security and Discoverability of Spread Dynamics in Cyber-Physical Networks , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems.

[4]  Soummya Kar,et al.  A structured systems approach for optimal actuator-sensor placement in linear time-invariant systems , 2013, 2013 American Control Conference.

[5]  Usman A. Khan,et al.  Secure distributed estimation in cyber-physical systems , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.

[6]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Controllability of complex networks , 2011, Nature.

[7]  Yifan Hu,et al.  Efficient, High-Quality Force-Directed Graph Drawing , 2006 .

[8]  M.D. Ilic,et al.  Modeling future cyber-physical energy systems , 2008, 2008 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century.

[9]  Kurt Johannes Reinschke,et al.  Multivariable Control a Graph-theoretic Approach , 1988 .

[10]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[11]  S. Shankar Sastry,et al.  Safe and Secure Networked Control Systems under Denial-of-Service Attacks , 2009, HSCC.

[12]  Usman A. Khan,et al.  On the Genericity Properties in Distributed Estimation: Topology Design and Sensor Placement , 2012, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing.

[13]  Shinkyu Park,et al.  Necessary and sufficient conditions for the stabilizability of a class of LTI distributed observers , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[14]  Noah E. Friedkin,et al.  ATTITUDE CHANGE, AFFECT CONTROL, AND EXPECTATION STATES IN THE FORMATION OF INFLUENCE NETWORKS , 2003 .

[15]  Kazuo Murota,et al.  Matrices and Matroids for Systems Analysis , 2000 .

[16]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Observability of complex systems , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Usman A. Khan,et al.  Graph-Theoretic Distributed Inference in Social Networks , 2014, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing.

[18]  Siu-Ming Yiu,et al.  Security Issues and Challenges for Cyber Physical System , 2010, 2010 IEEE/ACM Int'l Conference on Green Computing and Communications & Int'l Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing.

[19]  Sajal K. Das,et al.  Security and vulnerability of cyber-physical infrastructure networks: A control-theoretic approach , 2012 .

[20]  Do Hieu Trinh,et al.  Observability preservation under sensor failure , 2006, Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[21]  Usman A. Khan,et al.  A sensor placement and network design paradigm for future smart grids , 2011, 2011 4th IEEE International Workshop on Computational Advances in Multi-Sensor Adaptive Processing (CAMSAP).