Discrimination between replay attacks and sensor faults for cyber-physical systems via event-triggered communication

Abstract In this paper, a threat discrimination methodology is proposed for cyber-physical systems with event-triggered data communication, aiming to identify sensor bias faults from two possible types of threats: replay attacks and sensor bias faults. Event-triggered adaptive estimation and backward-in-time signal processing are the main techniques used. Specifically, distinct incremental systems of the event-triggered cyber-physical system resulting from the considered threat types are established for each threat type, and the difference between their inputs are found and utilized to discriminate the threats. An event-triggered adaptive estimator is then designed by using the event-triggered sampled data based on the system in the attack case, allowing to reconstruct the unknown increments in both the threat cases. The backward-in-time model of the incremental system in the replay attack case is proposed as the signal processor to process the reconstructions of the increments. Such a model can utilize the aforementioned input difference between the incremental systems such that its output has distinct quantitative properties in the attack case and in the fault case. The fault discrimination condition is rigorously investigated and characterizes quantitatively the class of distinguishable sensor bias faults. Finally, a numerical simulation is presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology.

[1]  Xiaojie Su,et al.  Fault detection filtering for nonlinear switched systems via event-triggered communication approach , 2019, Autom..

[2]  Wassim M. Haddad,et al.  Impulsive and Hybrid Dynamical Systems: Stability, Dissipativity, and Control , 2006 .

[3]  Thomas Kailath,et al.  A further note on backwards Markovian models (Corresp.) , 1979, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[4]  Riccardo M. G. Ferrari,et al.  A Sliding Mode Observer Approach for Attack Detection and Estimation in Autonomous Vehicle Platoons using Event Triggered Communication , 2019, 2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[5]  Audine Subias,et al.  Diagnosis approaches for detection and isolation of cyber attacks and faults on a two-tank system , 2019 .

[6]  Roy S. Smith,et al.  A Decoupled Feedback Structure for Covertly Appropriating Networked Control Systems , 2011 .

[7]  Jan Lunze,et al.  A state-feedback approach to event-based control , 2010, Autom..

[8]  J. Farrell,et al.  Adaptive Approximation Based Control: Unifying Neural, Fuzzy and Traditional Adaptive Approximation Approaches (Adaptive and Learning Systems for Signal Processing, Communications and Control Series) , 2006 .

[9]  David P. Fidler,et al.  Was Stuxnet an Act of War? Decoding a Cyberattack , 2011, IEEE Security & Privacy.

[10]  S. Shankar Sastry,et al.  Secure Control: Towards Survivable Cyber-Physical Systems , 2008, 2008 The 28th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops.

[11]  Steven X. Ding,et al.  Model-based Fault Diagnosis Techniques: Design Schemes, Algorithms, and Tools , 2008 .

[12]  Riccardo M. G. Ferrari,et al.  Detection and Isolation of Replay Attacks through Sensor Watermarking , 2017 .

[13]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Backwards Markovian models for second-order stochastic processes (Corresp.) , 1976, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[14]  Bruno Sinopoli,et al.  Secure control against replay attacks , 2009, 2009 47th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton).

[15]  M. Polycarpou,et al.  Enhanced Anomaly Detector for Nonlinear Cyber-Physical Systems against Stealthy Integrity Attacks , 2020 .

[16]  Donghua Zhou,et al.  An $H_{i}/H_{\infty }$ Optimization Approach to Event-Triggered Fault Detection for Linear Discrete Time Systems , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[17]  Michel Kinnaert,et al.  Diagnosis and Fault-Tolerant Control , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[18]  Paulo Tabuada,et al.  Event-Triggered Real-Time Scheduling of Stabilizing Control Tasks , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[19]  Paulo Tabuada,et al.  An introduction to event-triggered and self-triggered control , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[20]  Nader Meskin,et al.  Cyber Attack and Machine Induced Fault Detection and Isolation Methodologies for Cyber-Physical Systems , 2020, ArXiv.

[21]  Yang Xiang,et al.  A survey on security control and attack detection for industrial cyber-physical systems , 2018, Neurocomputing.

[22]  Thomas Parisini,et al.  Detection of Covert Cyber-Attacks in Interconnected Systems: A Distributed Model-Based Approach , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[23]  Karl Henrik Johansson,et al.  A secure control framework for resource-limited adversaries , 2012, Autom..

[24]  Marios M. Polycarpou,et al.  Fault diagnosis of a class of nonlinear uncertain systems with Lipschitz nonlinearities using adaptive estimation , 2010, Autom..

[25]  Roy S. Smith,et al.  Covert Misappropriation of Networked Control Systems: Presenting a Feedback Structure , 2015, IEEE Control Systems.

[26]  Riccardo M. G. Ferrari,et al.  A Switching Multiplicative Watermarking Scheme for Detection of Stealthy Cyber-Attacks , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[27]  Bruno Sinopoli,et al.  A Model Inversion Based Watermark for Replay Attack Detection with Output Tracking , 2019, 2019 American Control Conference (ACC).

[28]  M. Pirani,et al.  A systems and control perspective of CPS security , 2019, Annu. Rev. Control..