CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 189Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare StudiesInformation and Cyber SecurityNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cyber-Security Challenges in Aviation Industry: A Review of Current and Future Trends

Open access
Ukwandu, Elochukwu, Ben-Farah, Mohamed Amine, Hindy, Hanan, Bures, Miroslav, Atkinson, Robert, Tachtatzis, Christos, Andonovic, Ivan, Bellekens, Xavier·2022·Information
DOI 10.3390/info13030146
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools into mechanical devices in routine use within the aviation industry has heightened cyber-security concerns. The extent of the inherent vulnerabilities in the software tools that drive these systems escalates as the level of integration increases. Moreover, these concerns are becoming even more acute as the migration within the industry in the deployment of electronic-enabled aircraft and smart airports gathers pace. A review of cyber-security attacks and attack surfaces within the aviation sector over the last 20 years provides a mapping of the trends and insights that are of value in informing on future frameworks to protect the evolution of a key industry. The goal is to identify common threat actors, their motivations, attacks types and map the vulnerabilities within aviation infrastructures most commonly subject to persistent attack campaigns. The analyses will enable an improved understanding of both the current and potential future cyber-security protection provisions for the sector. Evidence is provided that the main threats to the industry arise from Advance Persistent Threat (APT) groups that operate, in collaboration with a particular state actor, to steal intellectual property and intelligence in order to advance their domestic aerospace capabilities as well as monitor, infiltrate and subvert other sovereign nations’ capabilities. A segment of the aviation industry commonly attacked is the Information Technology (IT) infrastructure, the most prominent type of attack being malicious hacking with intent to gain unauthorised access. The analysis of the range of attack surfaces and the existing threat dynamics has been used as a foundation to predict future cyber-attack trends. The insights arising from the review will support the future definition and implementation of proactive measures that protect critical infrastructures against cyber-incidents that damage the confidence of customers in a key service-oriented industry.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/info13030146

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 73

  1. Bellekens, X., Jayasekara, G., Hindy, H., Bures, M., Brosset, D., Tachtatzis, C., and Atkinson, R. (2019). From cyber-security deception to manipulation and gratification through gamification. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer. · DOI
  2. Okoli, C., and Schabram, K. (2021, December 06). A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research. Available online: https://asset-pdf.scinapse.io/prod/1539987097/1539987097.pdf.
  3. Haass, 2016, Aviation and cybersecurity: Opportunities for applied research, TR News, 304, 39
  4. Lykou, G., Anagnostopoulou, A., and Gritzalis, D. (2018, January 4–7). Implementing cyber-security measures in airports to improve cyber-resilience. Proceedings of the 2018 Global Internet of Things Summit (GIoTS), Bilbao, Spain. · DOI
  5. Lykou, G., Anagnostopoulou, A., and Gritzalis, D. (2019). Smart airport cybersecurity: Threat mitigation and cyber resilience controls. Sensors, 19. · DOI
  6. Gopalakrishnan, 2013, Cyber security for airports, Int. J. Traffic Transp. Eng., 3, 365, 10.7708/ijtte.2013.3(4).02 · DOI
  7. Mathew, A.R. (2019). Airport Cyber Security and Cyber Resilience Controls. arXiv. · DOI
  8. Suciu, G., Scheianu, A., Vulpe, A., Petre, I., and Suciu, V. (2018). Cyber-attacks–The impact over airports security and prevention modalities. World Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, Springer. · DOI
  9. Corretjer, P.J. (2018). A Cybersecurity Analysis of Today’s Commercial Aircrafts and Aviation Industry Systems. [Master’s Thesis, Utica College].
  10. Kagalwalla, N., and Churi, P.P. (2019, January 19–21). Cybersecurity in Aviation: An Intrinsic Review. Proceedings of the 2019 5th International Conference On Computing, Communication, Control And Automation (ICCUBEA), Pune, India. · DOI
  11. Lehto, M. (2020). Cyber Security in Aviation, Maritime and Automotive. Computation and Big Data for Transport, Springer. · DOI
  12. Abeyratne, R. (2020). Aviation and Cybersecurity in the Digital World. Aviation in the Digital Age, Springer. · DOI
  13. Viveros, C.A.P. (2016). Analysis of the Cyber Attacks against ADS-B Perspective of Aviation Experts. [Master’s Thesis, University of Tartu].
  14. Duvelleroy, M. (2020, September 22). Airbus Statement on Cyber Incident. Available online: https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2019-01-airbus-statement-on-cyber-incident.
  15. Efe, 2021, Air Traffic Security against Cyber Threats, Bilge Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res., 3, 135, 10.30516/bilgesci.405074 · DOI
  16. Dessiatnikoff, 2012, Potential attacks on onboard aerospace systems, IEEE Secur. Priv., 10, 71, 10.1109/MSP.2012.104 · DOI
  17. Papp, D., Ma, Z., and Buttyan, L. (2015, January 21–23). Embedded systems security: Threats, vulnerabilities, and attack taxonomy. Proceedings of the 2015 13th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST), Izmir, Turkey. · DOI
  18. (1987). Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, Academic Press.
  19. Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K., Holloway, R., Kariyawasam, S., Ayub, S., Seeam, A., and Atkinson, R. (2015, January 13–17). Challenges of security and trust in avionics wireless networks. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/AIAA 34th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), Prague, Czech Republic. · DOI
  20. Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K., Mayes, K., Bonnefoi, P.F., Sauveron, D., and Chaumette, S. (2016, January 25–29). An efficient, secure and trusted channel protocol for avionics wireless networks. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), Sacramento, CA, USA. · DOI
  21. Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K., Mayes, K., Bonnefoi, P.F., Sauveron, D., and Chaumette, S. (2016, January 25–29). Security and performance comparison of different secure channel protocols for Avionics Wireless Networks. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), Sacramento, CA, USA. · DOI
  22. Markantonakis, K., Akram, R.N., and Holloway, R. (2016, January 19–21). A secure and trusted boot process for avionics wireless networks. Proceedings of the 2016 Integrated Communications Navigation and Surveillance (ICNS), Herndon, VA, USA. · DOI
  23. Smith, M., Moser, D., Strohmeier, M., Lenders, V., and Martinovic, I. (2017). Analyzing privacy breaches in the aircraft communications addressing and reporting system (acars). arXiv. · DOI
  24. Smith, 2018, Undermining privacy in the aircraft communications addressing and reporting system (ACARS), Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol., 2018, 105, 10.1515/popets-2018-0023 · DOI
  25. Ali, B.S. (2013). A Safety Assessment Framework for Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) and Its Potential Impact on Aviation Safety. [Ph.D. Thesis, Centre for Transport Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental, Imperial College London].
  26. Ali, 2017, Evaluation of the capability of automatic dependent surveillance broadcast to meet the requirements of future airborne surveillance applications, J. Navig., 70, 49, 10.1017/S0373463316000412 · DOI
  27. Ali, 2015, A safety assessment framework for the Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) system, Saf. Sci., 78, 91, 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.011 · DOI
  28. Manesh, 2017, Analysis of vulnerabilities, attacks, countermeasures and overall risk of the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) system, Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot., 19, 16, 10.1016/j.ijcip.2017.10.002 · DOI
  29. Strohmeier, 2014, On the security of the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast protocol, IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor., 17, 1066, 10.1109/COMST.2014.2365951 · DOI
  30. Wolf, 2014, Information technology security threats to modern e-enabled aircraft: A cautionary note, J. Aerosp. Inf. Syst., 11, 447
  31. Taleqani, A.R., Nygard, K.E., Bridgelall, R., and Hough, J. (2018, January 3–5). Machine Learning Approach to Cyber Security in Aviation. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology (EIT), Rochester, MI, USA. · DOI
  32. Ugwoke, F., Okafor, K., and Chijindu, V. (2015, January 4–7). Security QoS profiling against cyber terrorism in airport network systems. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Cyberspace (CYBER-Abuja), Abuja, Nigeria. · DOI
  33. Clark, R.M., and Hakim, S. (2016). Cyber-Physical Security: Protecting Critical Infrastructure at the State and Local Level, Springer. · DOI
  34. Martellini, M. (2013). Cyber Security: Deterrence and IT Protection for Critical Infrastructures, Springer. · DOI
  35. Zamorano, 2020, Smart Airports: Acceptance of Technology by Passengers, Cuad. Tur., 45, 567
  36. Koroniotis, 2020, A Holistic Review of Cybersecurity and Reliability Perspectives in Smart Airports, IEEE Access, 8, 209802, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3036728 · DOI
  37. Mahmoud, M.S.B., Larrieu, N., Pirovano, A., and Varet, A. (2010, January 3–7). An adaptive security architecture for future aircraft communications. Proceedings of the 29th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. · DOI
  38. Neumann, P.G. (1997). Computer security in aviation: Vulnerabilities, threats, and risks. International Conference on Aviation Safety in the 21st Century, White House Commission on Safety and Security and George Washington University.
  39. Sampigethaya, 2008, Secure operation, control, and maintenance of future e-enabled airplanes, Proc. IEEE, 96, 1992, 10.1109/JPROC.2008.2006123 · DOI
  40. Sampigethaya, 2011, Future e-enabled aircraft communications and security: The next 20 years and beyond, Proc. IEEE, 99, 2040, 10.1109/JPROC.2011.2162209 · DOI
  41. Siboni, S., Sachidananda, V., Shabtai, A., and Elovici, Y. (2016). Security Testbed for the Internet of Things. arXiv.
  42. Wang, 2019, Capacity of blockchain based internet-of-things: Testbed and analysis, Internet Things, 8, 100109, 10.1016/j.iot.2019.100109 · DOI
  43. Waraga, 2020, Design and implementation of automated IoT security testbed, Comput. Secur., 88, 101648, 10.1016/j.cose.2019.101648 · DOI
  44. Lee, 2018, Design and implementation of cybersecurity testbed for industrial IoT systems, J. Supercomput., 74, 4506, 10.1007/s11227-017-2219-z · DOI
  45. Kim, 2019, SODA: A software-defined security framework for IoT environments, Comput. Netw., 163, 106889, 10.1016/j.comnet.2019.106889 · DOI
  46. Shafiq, 2020, Selection of effective machine learning algorithm and Bot-IoT attacks traffic identification for internet of things in smart city, Future Gener. Comput. Syst., 107, 433, 10.1016/j.future.2020.02.017 · DOI
  47. Zolanvari, M., Teixeira, M.A., and Jain, R. (2018, January 9–11). Effect of imbalanced datasets on security of industrial IoT using machine learning. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI), Miami, FL, USA. · DOI
  48. Elnour, 2020, A Dual-Isolation-Forests-Based Attack Detection Framework for Industrial Control Systems, IEEE Access, 8, 36639, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2975066 · DOI
  49. Farris, 2018, Enhancing IoT security through network softwarization and virtual security appliances, Int. J. Netw. Manag., 28, e2038, 10.1002/nem.2038 · DOI
  50. Nanda, 2019, Testbed evaluation of Lightweight Authentication Protocol (LAUP) for 6LoWPAN wireless sensor networks, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp., 31, e4868, 10.1002/cpe.4868 · DOI
  51. Hammad, 2019, Implementation and development of an offline co-simulation testbed for studies of power systems cyber security and control verification, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 104, 817, 10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.07.058 · DOI
  52. Poudel, 2017, Real-time cyber physical system testbed for power system security and control, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 90, 124, 10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.01.016 · DOI
  53. Hahn, 2013, Cyber-physical security testbeds: Architecture, application, and evaluation for smart grid, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 4, 847, 10.1109/TSG.2012.2226919 · DOI
  54. Rad, 2019, Implementation of deep packet inspection in smart grids and industrial Internet of Things: Challenges and opportunities, J. Netw. Comput. Appl., 135, 32, 10.1016/j.jnca.2019.02.022 · DOI
  55. Adepu, S., Kandasamy, N.K., and Mathur, A. (2018). Epic: An electric power testbed for research and training in cyber physical systems security. Computer Security, Springer. · DOI
  56. Fujdiak, R., Blazek, P., Chmelar, P., Dittrich, P., Voznak, M., Mlynek, P., Slacik, J., Musil, P., Jurka, P., and Misurec, J. (2019). Communication Model of Smart Substation for Cyber-Detection Systems. International Conference on Computer Networks, Springer. · DOI
  57. Cheng, Z., and Chow, M.Y. (2018, January 21–23). The Development and Application of a DC Microgrid Testbed for Distributed Microgrid Energy Management System. Proceedings of the IECON 2018-44th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Washington, DC, USA. · DOI
  58. Liu, R., and Srivastava, A. (2015, January 13). Integrated simulation to analyze the impact of cyber-attacks on the power grid. Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems (MSCPES), Seattle, WA, USA. · DOI
  59. Oyewumi, I.A., Jillepalli, A.A., Richardson, P., Ashrafuzzaman, M., Johnson, B.K., Chakhchoukh, Y., Haney, M.A., Sheldon, F.T., and de Leon, D.C. (2019, January 7–8). ISAAC: The idaho CPS smart grid cybersecurity testbed. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Texas Power and Energy Conference (TPEC), College Station, TX, USA. · DOI
  60. Kezunovic, M., Qian, C., Seidl, C., and Ren, J. (2019, January 21–23). Testbed for Timing Intrusion Evaluation and Tools for Lab and Field Testing of Synchrophasor System. Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Smart Grid Synchronized Measurements and Analytics (SGSMA), College Station, TX, USA. · DOI
  61. Marino, 2019, Cyber and Physical Anomaly Detection in Smart-Grids, IEEE Resil. Week (RWS), 2019, 187
  62. Konstantinou, C., Sazos, M., and Maniatakos, M. (2019, January 18–21). FLEP-SGS 2: A Flexible and Low-cost Evaluation Platform for Smart Grid Systems Security. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), Washington, DC, USA. · DOI
  63. Patil, 2019, Designing an efficient security framework for detecting intrusions in virtual network of cloud computing, Comput. Secur., 85, 402, 10.1016/j.cose.2019.05.016 · DOI
  64. Celesti, 2019, An approach for the secure management of hybrid cloud–edge environments, Future Gener. Comput. Syst., 90, 1, 10.1016/j.future.2018.06.043 · DOI
  65. Mishra, 2020, KVMInspector: KVM Based introspection approach to detect malware in cloud environment, J. Inf. Secur. Appl., 51, 102460
  66. Van, V.N., Chi, L.M., Long, N.Q., Nguyen, G.N., and Le, D.N. A performance analysis of openstack open-source solution for IaaS cloud computing. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computer and Communication Technologies.
  67. Ullah, 2019, Design and Implementation of an Open Source Framework and Prototype for Named Data Networking-Based Edge Cloud Computing System, IEEE Access, 7, 57741, 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2914067 · DOI
  68. Al Sunny, S.N., Liu, X., and Shahriar, M.R. (2018, January 2–7). Remote Monitoring and Online Testing of Machine Tools for Fault Diagnosis and Maintenance Using MTComm in a Cyber-Physical Manufacturing Cloud. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 11th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), San Francisco, CA, USA. · DOI
  69. Sanatinia, A., Deshpande, S., Munshi, A., Kohlbrenner, D., Yessaillian, M., Symonds, S., Chan, A., and Noubir, G. (2017, January 25–26). Hyperdrive: A flexible cloud testbed for research and education. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Technologies for Homeland Security (HST), Waltham, MA, USA. · DOI
  70. Frank, M., Leitner, M., and Pahi, T. (2017, January 6–10). Design Considerations for Cyber Security Testbeds: A Case Study on a Cyber Security Testbed for Education. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 15th Intl Conf on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, 15th Intl Conf on Pervasive Intelligence and Computing, 3rd Intl Conf on Big Data Intelligence and Computing and Cyber Science and Technology Congress (DASC/PiCom/DataCom/CyberSciTech), Orlando, FL, USA. · DOI
  71. Gao, H., Peng, Y., Jia, K., Wen, Z., and Li, H. (2015, January 23–25). Cyber-physical systems testbed based on cloud computing and software defined network. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing (IIH-MSP), Adelaide, SA, Australia. · DOI
  72. Khorsandroo, S., and Tosun, A.S. (2018, January 2–7). Time Inference Attacks on Software Defined Networks: Challenges and Countermeasures. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 11th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), San Francisco, CA, USA. · DOI
  73. Kalliola, A., Lal, S., Ahola, K., Oliver, I., Miche, Y., and Holtmanns, S. (2017, January 6–8). Testbed for security orchestration in a network function virtualization environment. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software Defined Networks (NFV-SDN), Berlin, Germany. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
Ukwandu, E., Ben-Farah, M. A., Hindy, H., Bures, M., Atkinson, R., Tachtatzis, C., Andonovic, I., & Bellekens, X.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff Metropolitan University (GB)
  • Department of Networks and Cyber Security, Birmingham City University, Birmingham B5 5JU, UK
  • Ain Shams University (EG)
  • Department of Computer Science, FEE, Czech Technical University in Prague, 166 36 Prague, Czech Republic
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
  • Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XW, UK
  • Lupovis Limited, Glasgow G2 2BA, UK
Corresponding author
Bellekens, Xavier
ORCID
Venue
Information
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-03-10
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
146
ISSN
2078-2489 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/info13030146
OpenAlex
W3181288465
Cited by
189
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 14
FWCI
75.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Information (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (acceptedVersion)
  • BCU Open Access Repository (Birmingham City University) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
European Commission (833673)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
Keywords
cybersecurity, airline industry, cyberattacks, attack surface, advanced persistent threats, state-sponsored hacking, smart airports, critical infrastructure protection, threat actors, intellectual property theft, IT infrastructure security

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review