Author: AUTOCRYPT

It has only been a little more than a decade since the introduction of the smartphone, yet they have now replaced laptops and desktops as the primary personal computing device. As we become so used to being connected to the Internet anytime and anywhere, more and more “things” now come equipped with such connectivity. One of the most common Internet of Things (IoT) devices are vehicles, but what happens when vehicles connect to each other and infrastructure?

How does vehicle connectivity work?

Most new cars in 2020 come with either embedded (built-in) or tethered (brought-in) internet connectivity, or a mixture of both. Vehicles with embedded connectivity are equipped with a built-in modem to directly receive cellular data, while those with tethered connectivity borrow the driver’s smartphone data to access the Internet (similar to WI-FI hotspots).

Most automakers offer embedded connectivity free trials for a few months, after which the driver would need to pay for continued internet access. This works similarly to a smartphone plan. For instance, AT&Tprovides a connected car data plan at cost per month for coverage in the US and Canada.

Some automakers offer embedded connectivity only for critical functions such as remote control and crash notification, and require tethered internet for all other entertainment purposes.

Whether having embedded or tethered internet connectivity, connected vehicles bring a lot of convenience and joy to the drivers. They have remote control features that allow users to unlock the doors, turn on the engine, and adjust the in-vehicle environment via their smartphone. They allow users to listen to the news, search for information, and access their smartphone all through voice control. In addition, they provide high definition streaming media content for both drivers and passengers.

Why hack a connected vehicle?

Wherever there exists an internet connection, there are security threats. The cyberthreats a connected vehicle system faces are very similar to that of a traditional IT system, in which almost all threat actors are driven by financial or political motives. In the context of a traditional IT system, the three most common objectives of cyberattacks are:

1) to exfiltrate or encrypt data for financial gains (by using the data for phishing and identity theft, selling the data to third parties, or demanding a ransom),

2) to steal intellectual property from adversaries (either businesses or political units), and

3) to disrupt operations and activities of adversaries (either businesses or political units).

In contrast, let us take a look at the most common objectives for someone to attack a car:

Vehicle theft

Believe it or not, vehicle thefts are still common. Over 150,000 vehicles were stolen in California alone in 2018 according to the Insurance Information Institute. Connected cars with smart or digital keys might decrease the chance of theft from unskilled thieves, but could as well increase the chance of theft from high-skilled hackers.

Personal data theft

Connected vehicles collect and store tons of personal data. At the very least, they store the driver’s contact list, call history, calendar, search history, entertainment preferences, driving history, and location data. Some might even store financial information for automatic payment of toll fees and EV charging fees. Attackers who gain the data may use them for identity theft, sell them to third parties, or blackmail the car owner for ransoms.

Personal attack or terrorism

This is perhaps the most concerning risk involving connected vehicles. When used abusively, cars have the potential to cause serious physical damage and death. When a threat actor hacks the system and takes full control of a car, the car becomes a destructive weapon that can be used to target specific individuals or the general public. What’s worse is that such a crime would be very difficult and expensive to solve as cybercriminals are much harder to catch.

Notice that under the third objective, a so-called cyberattack has crossed the line of cyberspace to threaten our physical safety. This has always been the biggest concern of autonomous driving. To prevent criminal groups and terrorists from destroying our transportation system, governments must work with industry experts to establish a complete international regulatory compliance for vehicle security.

In a traditional IT system, we create the network, then secure it. In a connected car system, we secure first, then ride. Having an unsecured car network is essentially the same as having a bridge built with substandard materials. This is why it is critical for us to understand where the weaknesses come from and protect them accordingly. To read more on the specific threats modern vehicles face, click here.

IoT, Connected Vehicles, and Transport Security 

As IoT technology advances, we start to wonder if the security around the technology is sufficient enough. The time has come to assume that people with somewhat accessibility to IoT devices know how it should have stronger security than ICT security as it can directly affect and control the devices and cause actual and physical damages when exploited. 

Autonomous Security and Regulative Security

Simply put, there are basically 4 areas that need security in the IoT environment: 1) smart home, 2) smart factory, 3) smart car, and 4) smart energy grid. 

1) and 2) tend to have the nature of being autonomous. Users can decide whether they need IoT implementations and if or when they do, they get to make their own decision of whether their implementations need security applications or not. In terms of factories, it is critical to apply security for the sole reason of safety, however, most of the factories haven’t even applied the existing ICT security as we know it.

This is when autonomous security slowly sprawls in as a form of crisis management. Crisis management in the context of IoT security most likely explains why security, of any sort, is applied only after an accident occurs. This is just like how personal computers are secured nowadays, hence most of the IoT security companies are setting their minds on this method. It’s easier and more convenient, as it resembles the ICT security application method rather than the ideal IoT security we expected. 

3) and 4) rather have the nature of being regulative. 3) not only threatens the safety of oneself but also for others and 4), in order to allow billing (pay-per-use of energy) to be programmed fairer, it is critical to have strict management and security supervision. Therefore, regulatory security can innovatively be applied as a method of pre-emptive security.

After all, being pre-emptive is all about minimizing the risks and threats after deciding to deploy security measures in the very early stages, like when designing the entire system, in the first place. It’s inevitable in order to prevent hazards and unfair charges. It’s similar to constructing private networks for the existing major infrastructures like the nuclear power plants, where they are only operated once enough security has been applied throughout the system and the network. It is established on a nationwide scale as an infrastructure, which is perceived as an integral technology application process.

IoT Security as Life Security

Since IoT is a combination of the existing IT security and OT (operational technology) it has higher risks of suffering from physical damages when failed to protect from threats. Therefore it follows rather stricter rules and regulations compared to OT, which definitely needs closed-security by blocking any risks prior to connection. 

If failed to accomplish proper IT security, the losses are exploited assets at most, however, in OT security, it could end up threatening human lives. Let’s take a look at vehicles. Everything that has to do with insufficient vehicle security threatens safety. Remotely controlling the steering wheel or locking the vehicle, changing the speed and stopping the engine, and manipulating the GPS location – all these examples have actually been carried out by hackers. 

Therefore security in vehicles means more than just protecting the vehicles. Many countries are establishing and practicing vehicle security-related regulations. The US has announced strict regulations such as ‘SELF DRIVE Act’, ‘DoT Guideline’, ‘AV START Act’, and the EU as well with their own ‘EC C-ITS’ business, smart car cybersecurity-related recommendations by ‘ENISA’, in addition to the UK’s ‘Smart Car Cybersecurity Guideline’, ‘Vehicle Security Authentication Framework’ by EC, and ‘Vehicle Cybersecurity Principles’ by ACEA. In China, the government has established the ‘Vehicle Security Committee’ in 2016 and proceeded with its ‘China Cybersecurity Law’ since 2017. 

Vehicle Security is Transport Security 

However, vehicle hacking cannot be completed just by its in-vehicle security features therefore it is more about the overall transport security rather than protecting the vehicle itself. As vehicles become smarter and connected, their ‘simple internet connection’ is transforming to allow the vehicle to become a ‘transport network direct participant’ and now is on its way to universalization thanks to the development of 5G. 

It is critical to deploy V2X (vehicle-to-everything) communications security that is not only related to internal security but also other vehicles and intelligent transport systems like C-ITS. As a matter of fact, it needs to have the capability to support edge computing security, V2D (vehicle-to-device) mobile integration security, V2G (vehicle-to-grid) electric vehicle ecosystem security in order to fully accomplish the vehicle security system. Vehicle security is just like basketball’s full-court press, and it deals with the entire transport system’s safety, via its whole-system approach. 

On the other hand, the existing vehicle security is mostly about securing a simple internet connection, which explains the reason for the deployment of telematics server security, terminal security, and general web security. However, as the vehicle directly starts to participate in the transport network, the security also transforms itself to ‘transport security’. 

Vehicles also become connected to other vehicles, smart roads, and transport systems like RSU and C-ITS via V2X as well as to energy services such as EV charging systems and electrical grid via V2G. It is only feasible when there is technical infrastructure including the existing  ICT security and new technologies such as V2X and V2G, as well as distinct features of EV and PnC (plug-and-charge). In other words, this well explains the high barrier for new entrants to the market. 

The Future of IoT Security

There sure are other areas to look into in transport-related systems. In addition to the developments of vehicles and transport systems like C-ITS, the EV market is foreseen to be taking over the fuel market and expand and grow as much as the potentials of services and technologies. The EV market is not only about the vehicle itself, but also about the energy grid like the smart meter and forms the entire infrastructure. 

The industry also requires a higher level of technologies like ‘internet of things’ authentication or decision making due to the process limitations of central management and efficiency. We believe it’ll eventually lead to the development of BIoT (Blockchain + IoT) and guide the competitive edges.  Therefore, unlike the existing ICT security where issues were resolved by only taking financial responsibilities, IoT security could really have an impact on people’s lives. So the question is – the industry is evolving, but is the security really sufficient?