The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Protecting Drinking Water Utilities from Cyberthreats
Abstract
As cybersecurity threats in the water sector increase, new guidance tools can help utilities develop countermeasures to protect water sources and supply.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Clark et al . (2017) developed significant knowledge gaps in the regulatory frameworks that produced inconsistent cybersecurity demands among various water utilities, which might leave critical vulnerabilities unaddressed.”
From Cyber-Physical Risk Assessment for U.S. Water Utilities: A Comprehensive Analysis of SCADA and Operational Technology Vulnerabilities (2025) · cites this paper as Clark et al. (2017)
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- AWWA, 2015, G430‐14 Security Practices for Operation and Management
- AWWA, 2014, Process Control System Security Guidance for the Water Sector
- Baker S., 2010, In the Crossfire—Critical Infrastructure in the Age of Cyber War: A Global Report on the Threats Facing Key Industries
- Bush G.W., 2003, National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace
- Clapper J.R., 2012, Unclassified Statement for the Record on the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
- Clark R.M., 2016, Protecting Critical Infrastructure at the State, Provincial, and Local Level: Issues in Cyber‐Physical Security
- Dakin R., 2009, Journal AWWA, 30
- DHS (Department of Homeland Security), 2016, NCCIC/ICS‐CERT Year in Review: National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center/Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team FY 2015
- 10.1002/j.1551-8833.2010.tb11335.x · DOI
- Fischer E.A., 2013, The 2013 Cybersecurity Executive Order: Overview and Considerations for Congress
- Fisher R., 2014, Proc. Colorado Technical University Doctoral Symposium
- Ginter A.P., 2016, Cyber‐Physical Security at the State, Provincial, and Local Level: Protecting Critical Infrastructure
- 10.1002/j.1551-8833.2007.tb07881.x · DOI
- HSPD‐7 (Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7), 2003, Directive on Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection
- 10.1007/978-3-319-01092-2_2 · DOI
- 10.1002/j.1551-8833.2007.tb08028.x · DOI
- 10.5942/jawwa.2015.107.0174 · DOI
- Obama B., 2009, Remarks by the President on Securing Our Nation's Cyber Infrastructure
- 10.1007/978-3-319-32824-9_7 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-1-4614-0189-6_16 · DOI
- Panguluri S., 2004, Water Supply Systems Security
- Ponemon Institute, 2013, The Post Breach Boom
- 10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0101 · DOI
- Szabo J., 2016, Water Security Test Bed Experiments at the Idaho National Laboratory
- USGAO (US Government Accountability Office), 2013, Cybersecurity: National Strategy, Roles, and Responsibilities Need to Be Better Defined and More Effectively Implemented
- USGAO, 2011, High Risk Series: An Update
- 10.1007/978-3-319-01092-2_3 · DOI
- The White House 2013.Press Release: Presidential Policy Directive—Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience (PPD‐21).www.whitehouse.gov/the‐press‐office/2013/02/12/presidential‐policy‐directive‐critical‐infrastructure‐security‐and‐resil._ReleasedFeb. 12 2013 (accessed June 2 2016).
- WSCCCSWG (Water Sector Coordinating Council Cyber Security Working Group), 2013, Roadmap to a Secure and Resilient Water Sector
Cited by
A Systematic Review of the State of Cyber-Security in Water Systems
Tuptuk, N., Hazell, P., Watson, J., & Hailes, S. (2021) · Water · doi:10.3390/w13010081 · Cited by 138
Aniebonam, S. O., & Aniebonam, C. P. (2025) · Journal of Environment, Climate, and Ecology · doi:10.69739/jece.v2i1.1031 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Clark, R. M., Panguluri, S., Nelson, T. D., & Wyman, R. P.
- Venue
- Journal AWWA
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 50-58
- ISSN
- 0003-150X
- 1551-8833
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
