Operations

3/7/2016
04:00 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Automakers In The Hotseat For Vehicle Cybersecurity

Car cybersecurity one to three years behind threats, as drivers look to automakers to secure vehicles from hacking.

As new-model vehicles increasingly come equipped with third-party applications and Internet connectivity, the majority of consumers say the car manufacturers are liable for the safety and security of their cars.

A pair of separate studies released last week at the RSA Conference in San Francisco shed light on the escalating pressures on automakers to address cybesecurity of their vehicles – even though many of the new software and connectivity features come from their third-party suppliers and cellular providers.

Nearly 90% of drivers in an IDC and Veracode study said car manufacturers should be responsible for locking down the cybersecurity and related safety issues of the vehicles, even if the car’s apps were created by a separate software company.

Kelley Blue Book found in its survey that more than 55% of drivers consider carmakers responsible for providing security software to protect cars from being hacked, and 44% say carmakers hold the most responsibility for securing a car, while two-thirds believe carmakers are partially responsible for car hacks. Half of consumers say carmakers should provide insurance for car-hacking losses.

“Whenever you have a supply chain and the more complicated it is, and the more individual pieces it has, the more difficult it is to do security,” says Chris Wysopal, CTO and co-founder of Veracode. “There are so many different parties involved: infotainment, connectivity, and they’re going with someone else to do the OS, like Apple Car Play, for example. Ford and Toyota are going with their own OSes. Who’s building the apps? [Likely] a third party.”

Wyospal says the software security issues with a traditional complex enterprise supply chain is challenging enough. This model for car comes with physical safety ramifications as well.

“Why the stakes are higher, and we should not replicate all [that was] done with enterprise security,” he says.

IDC and Veracode also surveyed and interviewed Bosh, Delphi, Fiat-Chrysler, Scania, Seat, and ADAC, Germany’s automotive industry association. The European carmakers say it will take one to three years for them to catch up with cybersecurity threats, and they all say they are concerned about the security of their “critical systems” amid the emergence of third-party apps in the car. Their worry is that vehicle safety would be out of the manufacturer’s control with these apps in play.

Veracode’s Wysopal thinks one year may be too optimistic, given the complicated mesh of suppliers for connected cars. And even the conventional wisdom calling for the car’s features to run on a different and air gapped network from the infotainment system and apps isn’t realistic today. “The software is intermingled” via the same user interface as car features, he says. “An airgap isn’t going to work. So you have to think: is there a certain class of app that gets more rigorous testing, is certified” and can’t communicate directly with the car’s performance systems. This needs to be thought through.”

The IDC-Veracode report points to how Tesla allows Internet-based software updates to its performance elements of the vehicle rather than updating software when the driver takes his vehicle in for maintenance.

Traditional automakers also are starting to beef up their cybersecurity profiles. General Motors now has a bug bounty program underway as well as a product security officer position. “Those all seem like steps in the right direction, that they get it: they are becoming a software company,” Wysopal says. “Security and software are coming to their business and they have to organize that way.”

“For at least three years they are going to have to deal with in-bound vulns at a rate higher than today and have to respond to them,” says Wysopal.

“Manufacturers cannot afford to be complacent when it comes to application and overall system security within vehicles,” said Duncan Brown, research director at IDC’s European Security Practice. “Manufacturers should increase their focus on how to secure applications that enhance car functionality, such as the many driving aids currently being developed.”

Millennials, meanwhile, are less likely to consider car hacking a big problem: about half say it will be a frequent issue in the next three years, while 70% of all respondents say so.

 

Related Content:

Interop 2016 Las VegasFind out more about security threats at Interop 2016, May 2-6, at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center, Las Vegas. Register today and receive an early bird discount of $200.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
20 Questions to Ask Yourself before Giving a Security Conference Talk
Joshua Goldfarb, Co-founder & Chief Product Officer, IDDRA,  10/16/2017
Printers: The Weak Link in Enterprise Security
Kelly Sheridan, Associate Editor, Dark Reading,  10/16/2017
Hyatt Hit With Another Credit Card Breach
Dark Reading Staff 10/13/2017
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Security Vulnerabilities: The Next Wave
Just when you thought it was safe, researchers have unveiled a new round of IT security flaws. Is your enterprise ready?
Flash Poll
The State of Ransomware
The State of Ransomware
Ransomware has become one of the most prevalent new cybersecurity threats faced by today's enterprises. This new report from Dark Reading includes feedback from IT and IT security professionals about their organization's ransomware experiences, defense plans, and malware challenges. Find out what they had to say!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.