Could cybersecurity issues undermine migration efforts to IP-based solutions?
What is in this article?
Could cybersecurity issues undermine migration efforts to IP-based solutions?
The good news is that FirstNet is going to be able to integrate security into its network from the earliest design phases—not as an afterthought—and that it has a team of professionals looking at the issues, supported by more professionals from industry and the federal government.
Will it be enough? It’s impossible to tell now, but at least public-safety agencies can take comfort in the fact that the issue has been identified, and there are professionals working to address it. If FIrstNet's system is accepted as secure, some believe that could be the network's "killer app" in the long term.
Cybersecurity also has been identified as a concern in the 911 industry, but it’s not clear who has the authority—much less the technical ability—to develop a solution for our nation’s 6,100 public-safety answering points (PSAPs) as next-generation 911 looms on the horizon. One thing that is certain is that PSAPs and FirstNet will be passing information back and forth on a constant basis, so it is important that their cybersecurity approaches are integrated appropriately.
One of the most intriguing security situations involves the rapid development of the market for Internet of Things (IoT) and autonomous vehicles, including driverless cars and drones. The technological advances in these industries are remarkable, providing science-fiction-like functionality that promises to solve a host of real-world problems in myriad sectors, including transportation, manufacturing, agriculture and public safety.
As with most IP-based solutions, I have little doubt that the ecosystem will develop solutions that meet all of the functional needs of customers. Some may come sooner than others, but I’m a big believer in engineers and their ability to find a way to get the job done, particularly when the functionality determines whether a product can be sold in the market.
But I am worried that security could be an afterthought, particularly with IoT sensors, which must be inexpensive to be deployed widely enough to realize the IoT vision. That may result in IoT devices with minimal security and can be compromised easily by a hacker.
Given that these IoT devices are connected to a network, what are the dangers that the IoT device can be used as a gateway into that network? It’s a question that is keeping many communications officials awake at night, especially with 50 billion of these IoT devices expected to be deployed within the next five years.
Meanwhile, what if a hacker takes control of a drone or a driverless car (actually, it has been proven that existing cars can be hacked, as well)? Or, what if someone buys a $30 jammer on the Internet and prevents the signals between vehicles crash-avoidance systems from communicating properly?
Not only can the potential physical damage be extreme, in terms of possible loss of life and property, the legal costs associated with trying to assess responsibility—hacker, vehicle owner, vehicle manufacturer, network owner or developer of guidance software—promise to be astronomical, particularly for early precedent-setting cases.