System security assessment method and apparatus, and device, storage medium and program product

Abstract

The present application relates to a system security assessment method and apparatus, and a device, a storage medium and a program product. The method comprises: acquiring first security assessment indicators corresponding to an industrial control system, wherein the industrial control system at least comprises an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer and a terminal device layer; according to each first security assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, determining a security assessment parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, wherein each indicator assessment model is used for calculating the security assessment parameter for the corresponding first security assessment indicator; and according to the security assessment parameters, determining a security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system. By means of the method, the accuracy of a security assessment result of a cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system can be improved.

Description

System security assessment method, device, equipment, storage medium and program product

[0001] Related applications

[0002] This application claims priority to Chinese patent application number 2023109333428, filed on July 26, 2023, entitled “System security assessment method, device, equipment, storage medium and program product,” the entire text of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Technical Field

[0003] Information security technology field Background Art

[0004] As industrial control systems (ICS) evolve toward cloud-edge collaborative open architectures, the physical isolation security boundaries they rely on have collapsed. Once a functional safety incident stems from a cyberattack, it can cause major incidents that impact social security, such as power or water outages, traffic disruptions, and production paralysis. Furthermore, the uncertainty and unpredictability of the launch time, targets, and methods of cyberattacks significantly impact the operational security of ICS. To protect this complex system, it is necessary to study security assessment methods for ICS under cyberattacks.

[0005] In some cases, when conducting a security assessment of a cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system under a network attack, the security assessment of the cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system is mainly based on the information layer. Here, the assessment is based on the information layer. For example, it may be considered to set up some network attacks to assess the security of the system under the network attack.

[0006] However, in the above situation, there is a problem that the accuracy of the evaluation results obtained when evaluating the security of the cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system is not high.

[0007] Summary of the Invention

[0008] Based on this, it is necessary to provide a system security assessment method, device, equipment, storage medium and program product that can improve the accuracy of security assessment results of cloud-edge collaborative industrial control systems in response to the above technical problems.

[0009] In a first aspect, the present application provides a system security assessment method, the method comprising:

[0010] Obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0011] Determining a safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on each first safety assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is used to calculate a safety assessment parameter for the corresponding first safety assessment indicator;

[0012] According to each security assessment parameter, the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined.

[0013] In one embodiment, before determining the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, the method further includes:

[0014] Obtaining each lower-level second safety assessment indicator corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each second safety assessment indicator of each first safety assessment indicator is an indicator of the same level and / or different levels;

[0015] Determining first weight parameters corresponding to the first safety assessment indicators according to the preset analytic hierarchy process and the first safety assessment indicators;

[0016] According to the hierarchical analysis method and the second safety assessment indicators at the same level, second weight parameters corresponding to the second safety assessment indicators at the same level are determined.

[0017] In one embodiment, determining the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator includes:

[0018] Inputting each second safety assessment indicator into a corresponding indicator assessment model, and determining a sub-assessment parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator;

[0019] Each second weight parameter is input into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, and mathematical operations are performed on each sub-evaluation parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter to determine the safety evaluation parameter corresponding to each first safety evaluation indicator.

[0020] In one embodiment, the determining of the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator according to the preset analytic hierarchy process and each first security assessment indicator includes:

[0021] Determining a comparison matrix corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on the relative importance of each first safety assessment indicator obtained;

[0022] Determine the importance of each first safety assessment indicator according to the comparison matrix;

[0023] According to the importance corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator itself and a preset optimal transfer matrix, a first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator is determined.

[0024] In one embodiment, determining the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system based on the security assessment parameters includes:

[0025] According to the first weight parameters corresponding to the first safety assessment indicators, weighted summation processing is performed on the safety assessment parameters to determine the safety assessment result.

[0026] In one embodiment, the security assessment result includes a security assessment value, and the method further includes:

[0027] Match the security assessment value with multiple preset security assessment ranges to determine the target security level corresponding to the security assessment value;

[0028] Among them, each security assessment scope corresponds to a different security level.

[0029] In a second aspect, the present application further provides a system security assessment device, the device comprising:

[0030] An acquisition module is configured to obtain a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0031] A first determination module is configured to determine a security assessment parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is configured to calculate a security assessment parameter for the corresponding first security assessment indicator;

[0032] The second determining module is configured to determine a security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system according to each security assessment parameter.

[0033] In a third aspect, the present application further provides a computer device, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the computer program, the following steps are implemented:

[0034] Obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0035] Determining a safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on each first safety assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is used to calculate a safety assessment parameter for the corresponding first safety assessment indicator;

[0036] According to each security assessment parameter, the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined.

[0037] In a fourth aspect, the present application further provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the following steps:

[0038] Obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0039] Determining a safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on each first safety assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is used to calculate a safety assessment parameter for the corresponding first safety assessment indicator;

[0040] According to each security assessment parameter, the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined.

[0041] In a fifth aspect, the present application further provides a computer program product, the computer program product comprising a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the following steps:

[0042] Obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0043] Determining a safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on each first safety assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is used to calculate a safety assessment parameter for the corresponding first safety assessment indicator;

[0044] According to each security assessment parameter, the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined.

[0045] The above-mentioned system security assessment method, device, equipment, storage medium and program product first obtain the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system, and then determine the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, and finally determine the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system based on each security assessment parameter; wherein each indicator assessment model is used to calculate the security assessment parameters for the corresponding first security assessment indicator, and the industrial control system at least includes an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer and a terminal device layer; in this method, by obtaining the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system, and then according to each first security assessment indicator and each The indicator evaluation model corresponding to the first security evaluation indicator determines the security evaluation parameters corresponding to each first security evaluation indicator, and finally determines the security evaluation results corresponding to the industrial control system based on each security evaluation parameter, so that the security of the industrial control system can be evaluated in real time, providing an intuitive understanding of the security level of the system, helping to correctly deploy prevention and control measures, reducing the risk of severe accidents caused by network attacks on the industrial control system, and enhancing the safe and stable operation level of the system; in addition, by using the security evaluation parameters corresponding to the first security evaluation indicator to determine the security evaluation results corresponding to the industrial control system, the security risk of the industrial system can be evaluated, thereby effectively dealing with the uncertainty problem in the security risk evaluation process, and thus improving the accuracy of the evaluation. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0046] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the conventional technology, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the conventional technology descriptions. Obviously, the drawings described below are merely embodiments of the present application. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on the disclosed drawings without any creative work.

[0047] FIG1 is a diagram showing the internal structure of a computer device according to an embodiment;

[0048] FIG2 is a schematic diagram of a flow chart of a system security assessment method according to an embodiment;

[0049] FIG3 is a topological architecture of a traditional industrial control system according to an embodiment;

[0050] FIG4 is a connection diagram of a management network MNet according to an embodiment;

[0051] FIG5 is a connection diagram of a system network SNet according to an embodiment;

[0052] FIG6 is a connection diagram of a control network CNet according to an embodiment;

[0053] FIG7 is a topological architecture of a cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system in one embodiment;

[0054] FIG8 is a schematic diagram of a first security assessment indicator and a second security assessment indicator of an industrial control system according to another embodiment;

[0055] FIG9 is a flow chart of a system security assessment method according to another embodiment;

[0056] FIG10 is a schematic diagram of a second security assessment indicator of an industrial control system according to another embodiment;

[0057] FIG11 is a flow chart of a system security assessment method according to another embodiment;

[0058] FIG12 is a diagram showing the evaluation level of the system inherent safety capability in another embodiment;

[0059] FIG13 is a flow chart of a system security assessment method according to another embodiment;

[0060] FIG14 is a structural block diagram of a system security assessment device in one embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0061] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of this application to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application. Obviously, the embodiments described are only part of the embodiments of this application, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in this application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0062] Cyberattacks causing significant physical damage to industrial control systems have become a significant and pressing issue in the global cybersecurity field. From an internal perspective, modern industrial control systems are gradually transitioning from closed, proprietary control communication protocols to general-purpose Internet protocols, and from specialized hardware and operating systems to general-purpose hardware and operating systems. These systems are becoming increasingly interconnected with other information systems, exposing them to a growing attack surface. From an external perspective, the intent and techniques of attacks against industrial control systems, the capabilities and intensity of vulnerability analysis, and the organization and capabilities of cyber attackers are all continuously improving. From a threat perspective, the 2010 Stuxnet cyberattack, which physically destroyed thousands of uranium enrichment centrifuges in Iran, marked the beginning of cyber warfare. Physical damage to industrial control systems caused by cyberattacks has become a significant threat to national security.

[0063] Against the backdrop of accelerating the development of the digital economy and promoting the integrated development of the digital revolution, new demands are emerging in the industrial control sector. These include the need for unified management of large-scale data acquisition, storage, and monitoring systems; the need for diversified expansion and unified management of heterogeneous data within control objects; the need for ultra-large computing and storage resources; and the need for collaboration among multiple devices driven by refined management. Traditional industrial network architectures face numerous challenges in capturing and processing massive amounts of data, interconnecting devices, and addressing the diverse demands of computing resources. These challenges make it difficult to meet the urgent demands of networked control collaboration, business collaboration, and remote system management. To address these challenges, the industrial sector is building cloud-edge collaborative industrial control systems based on the distributed computing, virtualization, and interactive service technologies of next-generation information technology.

[0064] As industrial control systems (ICS) evolve towards cloud-edge collaborative open architectures, the physical isolation security boundaries they rely on are collapsing. Once a functional safety incident stemming from a cyberattack occurs, it can cause major incidents impacting public safety, such as power and water outages, traffic disruptions, and production paralysis. The timing, targets, and methods of cyberattacks are uncertain and unpredictable, significantly impacting the operational security of cloud-edge collaborative ICS. To protect complex ICS systems, it is necessary to study security assessment methods for cloud-edge collaborative ICS under cyberattacks. This method accurately identifies and quantitatively assesses ICS security factors. It is crucial to implement timely and precise preventive, remedial, and mitigation measures before and after an attack occurs. Security assessments assess the security of ICS in real time, using both quantitative and qualitative methods. This provides an intuitive understanding of the system's security level, facilitates the proper deployment of prevention and control measures, reduces the risk of serious incidents caused by cyberattacks, and enhances the safe and stable operation of ICS systems.

[0065] Currently, industrial control system security assessment methods mainly evaluate the security of industrial control systems at the information level, but there is little research on the process of attacks at the physical function level. The information and physics of industrial control systems are closely coupled together, and cannot be evaluated from a single perspective of the information layer or the physical layer. The overall security of the industrial control system should be evaluated. It can be seen that the above-mentioned technology has the problem of low accuracy of the assessment results when evaluating the security of cloud-edge collaborative industrial control systems. Based on this, the present application provides a system security assessment method, device, equipment, storage medium and program product that can solve the above-mentioned technical problems.

[0066] The system security assessment method provided in the embodiment of the present application can be applied to a computer device, which can be a terminal or a server. Taking the server as an example, its internal structure diagram can be shown in Figure 1. The computer device includes a processor, a memory and a network interface connected via a system bus. Among them, the processor of the computer device is used to provide computing and control capabilities. The memory of the computer device includes a non-volatile storage medium and an internal memory. The non-volatile storage medium stores an operating system, a computer program and a database. The internal memory provides an environment for the operation of the operating system and computer program in the non-volatile storage medium. The database of the computer device is used to store data in the system security assessment process. The network interface of the computer device is used to communicate with an external terminal through a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, a system security assessment method is implemented.

[0067] Those skilled in the art will understand that the structure shown in FIG1 is merely a block diagram of a portion of the structure related to the solution of the present application, and does not constitute a limitation on the computer device to which the solution of the present application is applied. The specific computer device may include more or fewer components than shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or have a different arrangement of components.

[0068] In one embodiment, as shown in FIG2 , a system security assessment method is provided. The method is described by taking the computer device in FIG1 as an example, and includes the following steps:

[0069] S202, obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer.

[0070] Among these, industrial control systems primarily refer to cloud-edge collaborative industrial control systems. The topology of these cloud-edge collaborative industrial control systems has evolved from that of traditional industrial control systems. Specifically, as shown in Figure 3, the topology of a traditional industrial control system consists of the management layer, the engineer station (or operator station) layer, and the field control layer (the field control layer includes programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and distributed control systems (DCSs). The management layer and the engineer station (or operator station) layer are connected via industrial switches, while the management layer, the engineer station (or operator station) layer, and the field control layer are connected via industrial switches. The management layer and the engineer station layer are connected via a management network, the engineer station layer and the field control layer via a system network, and the field control layer itself can be connected via a control network. As shown in Figure 4, the management network MNet enables data communication, coordinated control, and scheduling management between the engineer station, data servers, production processes (including quality management, production planning, and sales operations), and production workshops. As shown in Figure 5, the system network SNet enables data transmission between field control stations, operator stations, and engineer stations, as well as between each other, maintaining data consistency. As shown in Figure 6, the control network CNet can realize the interconnection and information transmission between the I / O modules and control modules inside the control station.

[0071] As shown in Figure 7, the topology of a cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system consists of the industrial cloud platform layer, the edge control platform layer, and the terminal device layer, from top to bottom. The evolutionary process from the traditional industrial control system topology to the cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system topology is as follows: the management layer of the traditional industrial control system can be evolved into the industrial cloud platform layer. The cloud platform's cloud has powerful computing capabilities and can perform functions such as design, optimized scheduling, virtual production, and virtual testing. The cloud platform's functions mainly include service management, production management, intelligent applications, and data management. The engineer station (or operation station) layer of the traditional industrial control system is evolved into the edge control platform layer. The edge control platform's main functions are production management (quality, process, etc.), intelligent applications (fault diagnosis, predictive maintenance, edge simulation process production, etc.), data management (data acquisition, preprocessing, storage, analysis), and perception control (protocol conversion, device interconnection, intelligent monitoring, and precise control). The field control layer of the traditional industrial control system is evolved into the terminal device layer, which mainly performs field control and data collection.

[0072] In some embodiments, the first security indicator can be system availability, system reliability, and system inherent security capability. Among them, system availability refers to the ability of the industrial control system to execute specified or restore functions under specified conditions and within specified moments or time intervals, provided that the required external resources are guaranteed. System availability mainly focuses on the impact of a failure on the industrial control system after it occurs. System reliability refers to the ability of the industrial control system to complete specified functions under specified conditions and within specified time. System reliability aims to maintain the normal execution of the functions of the industrial control system. System inherent security capability refers to the characteristics of the industrial control system that are immune to unacceptable risk impacts. System inherent security capability aims to prevent casualties and property losses.

[0073] In this step, the server can obtain a first security indicator corresponding to the industrial control system, which includes at least an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer.

[0074] S204 , determining a safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on each first safety assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model is used to calculate a safety assessment parameter for the corresponding first safety assessment indicator.

[0075] In this step, after obtaining the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system, the server will determine the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator and each first security assessment indicator. Among them, the indicator assessment model corresponding to the first security assessment indicator mainly refers to the model for processing and calculating the security assessment parameters of the first security assessment indicator of the industrial control system. The first security indicator of the industrial control system is shown in Figure 8. Since the first assessment indicators mainly include system availability, system credibility and system inherent security capability, the indicator assessment models corresponding to different first assessment indicators are also different. Specifically, the indicator assessment model corresponding to system availability is the system availability assessment model, the indicator assessment model corresponding to system credibility is the system credibility assessment model, and the indicator assessment model corresponding to the system inherent security capability is the system inherent security capability assessment model. In addition, since the indicator assessment model mainly includes the system availability assessment model, the system credibility assessment model and the system inherent security capability assessment model, the security assessment parameters corresponding to different indicator assessment models are also different. Specifically, the security assessment parameters corresponding to the system availability assessment model may be the system availability assessment parameters, the security assessment parameters corresponding to the system credibility assessment model may be the system credibility assessment parameters, and the security assessment parameters corresponding to the system inherent safety capability assessment model may be the system inherent safety capability assessment parameters.

[0076] S206: Determine a security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system according to each security assessment parameter.

[0077] In this step, after determining the security assessment parameters corresponding to the first security assessment indicator, the server determines a security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system based on the obtained security assessment parameters. The security assessment result is the result of an assessment of the security of the industrial control system. The result can be a numerical value or a numerical range, and the numerical value or numerical range can indirectly reflect the security of the industrial control system.

[0078] In the above-mentioned system security assessment method, the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system are first obtained, and then the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator can be determined based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator. Finally, the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined based on each security assessment parameter. Wherein, each indicator assessment model is used to calculate the security assessment parameters for the corresponding first security assessment indicator. The industrial control system includes at least an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer. In this method, by obtaining the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system, and then determining the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, and finally determining the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system based on each security assessment parameter, the security of the industrial control system can be assessed in real time, providing an intuitive understanding of the security level of the system, helping to correctly deploy prevention and control measures, reducing the risk of serious accidents caused by network attacks in the industrial control system, and enhancing the safe and stable operation level of the system. In addition, by using the security assessment parameters corresponding to the first security assessment indicator to determine the security assessment results corresponding to the industrial control system, the security risks of the industrial system can be evaluated, thereby effectively dealing with the uncertainty problem in the security risk assessment process and improving the accuracy of the assessment.

[0079] In the above embodiment, it is mentioned that the server can obtain the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system. The following embodiment describes in detail the specific process of the server obtaining the second security assessment indicators of each lower level corresponding to each first security assessment indicator before obtaining the first security assessment indicators corresponding to each level in the industrial control system, and determining the first weight parameter corresponding to the first security assessment indicator and the second weight parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator of the same level according to the preset hierarchical analysis method.

[0080] In another embodiment, another system security assessment method is provided. Based on the above embodiment, as shown in FIG9 , before S204 , the method may further include the following steps:

[0081] S302: Acquire each lower-level second safety assessment indicator corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each second safety assessment indicator of each first safety assessment indicator may be an indicator of the same level and / or different levels.

[0082] Continuing with Figure 8, the second security assessment indicator includes the mean time between failures and mean time to repair corresponding to system availability. It can also be the device reliability, operating system reliability, software reliability, and data reliability corresponding to system reliability. It can also be the security of the industrial cloud platform layer, the edge control platform layer, and the terminal device layer corresponding to the system's inherent security capabilities. The mean time between failures and the mean time to repair are used to assess system availability. Device reliability, operating system reliability, software reliability, and data reliability are used to assess system reliability. The security of the industrial cloud platform layer, the edge control platform layer, and the terminal device layer are used to assess the system's inherent security capabilities.

[0083] Alternatively, as shown in FIG10 , the second security assessment indicator may also be injection attacks, distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks, vulnerability / backdoor attacks, and password attacks corresponding to the security of the industrial cloud platform layer, the security of the historical / real-time database, the security of the resource management system, and the security of the industrial gateway corresponding to the security of the edge control platform layer, or interference attacks, configuration attacks, and firmware attacks corresponding to the security of the terminal device layer. Injection attacks, distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks, vulnerability / backdoor attacks, and password attacks are used to assess the security of the industrial cloud platform layer. The security of the historical / real-time database, the security of the resource management system, and the security of the industrial gateway are used to assess the security of the edge control platform layer. Interference attacks, configuration attacks, and firmware attacks are used to assess the security of the terminal device layer.

[0084] In this step, the server may obtain the second security assessment indicators of each lower level corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, and each second security assessment indicator of each first security assessment indicator may be an indicator of the same level and / or different levels.

[0085] S304: Determine a first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to a preset analytic hierarchy process and each first safety assessment indicator.

[0086] Among them, the preset hierarchical analysis method is the hierarchical analysis method improved by the optimal transfer matrix, and the weight parameters of each indicator can be directly calculated through the hierarchical analysis method improved by the optimal transfer matrix.

[0087] In this step, the server can determine the first weight parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on the preset analytic hierarchy process and each first security assessment indicator. The preset analytic hierarchy process can calculate the first weight parameters corresponding to the first security assessment indicator. The first weight parameter corresponding to the first security assessment indicator refers to the relative importance of the first security assessment indicator, namely, system availability, system reliability, and system inherent security capability in the overall evaluation of the security of the industrial control system. For example, the first weight parameters corresponding to the first security assessment indicator can be ω1, ω2, ω3, where ω1, ω2, ω3 represent the first weight parameters of the system availability, system reliability, and system inherent security capability indicators, respectively.

[0088] S306 : Determine a second weight parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator at the same level according to the analytic hierarchy process and each second safety assessment indicator at the same level.

[0089] In this step, the server determines the second weight parameters corresponding to the second security assessment indicators of the same level according to the hierarchical analysis method and the second security assessment indicators of the same level. Among them, the hierarchical analysis method can calculate the second weight parameters corresponding to the second security assessment indicators. The second weight parameters corresponding to the second security assessment indicators refer to the relative importance of the second security assessment indicators of the same level in the evaluation of the first security assessment indicator. Taking the first security indicator as system credibility as an example, the second weight parameter is the relative importance of device credibility, operating system credibility, software credibility and data credibility in the evaluation of system credibility. For example, the second weight parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can be ω 21 ,ω 22 ,ω 23 ,ω 24 ,ω 21 ,ω 22 ,ω 23 ,ω 24 The second weight parameter representing the system credibility sub-indicators device credibility, system credibility, software credibility, and data credibility in sequence. The second weight parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can also be ω 31 ,ω 32 ,ω 33 ,ω 31 ,ω 32 ,ω 33 The second weight parameter representing the security of the industrial cloud platform layer, the security of the edge control platform layer, and the security of the terminal device layer of the system inherent security capability sub-indicator is ω. 311 ,ω 312 ,ω313 ,ω 314 ,ω 311 ,ω 312 ,ω 313 ,ω 314 The second weight parameter of the sub-indicators of the security of the cloud platform layer, injection attack, DDoS attack, vulnerability backdoor attack, and password attack, respectively. The second weight parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can also be ω 321 ,ω 322 ,ω 323 ,ω 321 ,ω 322 ,ω 323 The second weight parameter of the sub-indicators of the security of the edge control platform layer, namely, the security of the historical / real-time database, the security of the asset management system, and the security of the industrial gateway, can be represented in sequence. The second weight parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can also be ω 331 ,ω 332 ,ω 333 ,ω 331 ,ω 332 ,ω 333 The second weight parameters of the sub-indicators of the security of the terminal device layer, namely, interference attack, configuration attack, and firmware attack, are respectively represented.

[0090] In this embodiment, first, the second safety assessment indicators of the lower levels corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator are obtained, wherein the second safety assessment indicators of each first safety assessment indicator are indicators of the same level and / or different levels. Then, based on the preset analytic hierarchy process and each first safety assessment indicator, the first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator can be determined. Alternatively, based on the analytic hierarchy process and each second safety assessment indicator of the same level, the second weight parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator of the same level can be determined. In this method, by obtaining the second safety assessment indicators of the lower levels corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator, the analysis of the first safety assessment indicator can be more comprehensive, thereby making the assessment of the safety of the industrial system more accurate. In addition, by using the preset hierarchical analysis method to determine the first weight parameter corresponding to the first security assessment indicator and the second weight parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator at the same level, the weight parameters corresponding to the indicators at each level can be calculated, thereby determining the relative importance of each indicator, providing a data basis for the subsequent determination of the security assessment results corresponding to the industrial control system. At the same time, the hierarchical analysis method can directly obtain the weights of each indicator, thereby avoiding the consistency verification problems brought about by consistency verification, and thus improving the evaluation efficiency.

[0091] The above embodiment mentioned that the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator can be determined based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator. The following embodiment describes in detail the specific process of determining the security assessment parameters corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator.

[0092] In another embodiment, another system security assessment method is provided. Based on the above embodiment, as shown in FIG11 , the above S204 may include the following steps:

[0093] S402: Input each second safety assessment indicator into an indicator assessment model corresponding to the first safety assessment indicator, and determine a sub-assessment parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator.

[0094] In this step, the server can input each second security assessment indicator into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, so as to determine the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator. Wherein, the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator is the evaluation value calculated by the second security assessment indicator. For example, when the indicator evaluation model is a system availability evaluation model, the second evaluation indicator is the mean time between failures and the mean time to repair failures, and the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can be the availability evaluation value of the system. For another example, when the indicator evaluation model is a system credibility evaluation model, the second evaluation indicator is the device credibility, the operating system credibility, the software credibility and the data credibility, and the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can be the credibility evaluation value of the system. For another example, when the indicator evaluation model is a system inherent security capability evaluation model, the second evaluation indicator is the security of the industrial cloud platform layer, the security of the edge control platform layer and the security of the terminal device layer, and the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to the second security assessment indicator can be the inherent security capability evaluation value of the system.

[0095] S404: Input each second weight parameter into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, perform mathematical operations on each sub-evaluation parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, and determine the safety evaluation parameter corresponding to each first safety evaluation indicator.

[0096] In this step, the server inputs each second security assessment indicator into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, determines the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator, and then inputs each second weight parameter into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, thereby performing mathematical operations on each sub-evaluation parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, and finally determines the security assessment parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator. Specifically, taking the indicator evaluation model as the system availability evaluation model as an example,

[0097] First, we can list the probabilities R of all possible states that the system may be in. The set of all possible states can be expressed as: R = [r1, r2, ..., r n ]

[0098] Where r i is the probability that the system is in the i-th state, and its value range is [0, 1]. n is the number of possible states that the system may be in. The n possible states constitute the sample space, so we can know that:

[0099] Here we only consider the two working states of the system: normal operation and failure. Let MTBF be the mean time between failures of the system, and MTTR be the mean time to repair the failures of the system. Then the system availability r1 and the system unavailability r2 can be expressed as: r2=(1-r1)

[0100] The security assessment parameters corresponding to system availability can be expressed as:

[0101] Then, the system reliability of industrial control systems can be evaluated by using the evidence reasoning method based on fuzzy synthesis. Specifically, there are four reliability evaluation indicators for industrial control systems, namely equipment reliability, system reliability, software reliability and data reliability.

[0102] The indicator set of the system credibility to be evaluated can be expressed as: u={u1,u2,u3,u3}

[0103] The expert set can be expressed as: DM L (L=1,2,...,r)

[0104] The relative weight setting of experts can be: w={w1,w2,...,w r}

[0105] The fuzzy evaluation level of the indicator can be: H={H k |k=1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}

[0106] The fuzzy evaluation levels of the indicators are expressed as extremely poor, very poor, poor, slightly poor, average, slightly high, high, very high, and extremely high. Here we can take: P(H) = {P(H1), P(H2), P(H3), P(H4), P(H5), P(H6), P(H7), P(H8), P(H9)} = {0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9}

[0107] The confidence level is given to each indicator at the comment level H. The confidence level can be expressed as:

[0108] The unknown degree of evaluation of each indicator is: H Θ (U ik )

[0109] Among them, Θ is the identification framework; according to the indicator confidence provided by the experts, the basic credibility distribution function of the indicator is established, that is, the Mass function, and the indicator with the largest weight is set as the key indicator u ia , the others are non-key indicators, and the Mass function of the key indicators is: m L (H k |u ia )=TU ik

[0110] Non-key indicators if The Mass function of m is: L (H k |u if )=(w if / w ia )TU ik

[0111] Among them, w if is the weight of non-key indicators, w ia is the key indicator weight, and T is the discount coefficient.

[0112] The synthesis rule in the theory of evidential reasoning: m(O)=0

[0113] Where k is the evidence conflict factor, m(A) reflects m1,m2...,m r The corresponding r basic evidences’ joint support degree for proposition A.

[0114] According to the above synthesis rules, evidence synthesis is performed to obtain the Mass function of the upper level indicator, m(H k |u), calculate the certainty evaluation value S of the second safety assessment index u, which is the sub-evaluation parameter corresponding to the second safety assessment index:

[0115] According to the second weight parameter and sub-evaluation parameter of each second safety indicator, the safety evaluation parameter of the system credibility can be obtained as follows:

[0116] Taking the indicator evaluation model as an example of the system inherent security capability evaluation model, when calculating the evaluation parameters of the inherent security capability of the cloud-edge collaborative industrial control system, the evidence reasoning method based on fuzzy synthesis is adopted. Without loss of generality, taking the security of the industrial cloud platform layer as an example, its next-level indicators include four types of attacks: injection attack, DDos attack, vulnerability / backdoor attack, and password attack. The security evaluation of injection attack (including two sub-indicators of attack frequency and degree of harm) can be carried out in the following steps: Set the injection attack evaluation indicator set to be expressed as The expert set is denoted as DM L (L=1,2,...,r), the relative weight of the experts is set as w={w1,w2,...,w r}, the fuzzy evaluation level of the indicator is H={H k |k=1,2,3,4,5}, the system inherent safety capability evaluation level, as shown in Figure 12, the evaluation values ​​can be [0,0.2), [0.2,0.4), [0.4,0.6), [0.6,0.8), [0.8,1), here we take: P(H)={P(H1),P(H2),P(H3),P(H4),P(H5)}={0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7,0.9}

[0117] The subsequent calculation process refers to the system credibility assessment process. The fuzzy synthesis-based evidence reasoning method is used to calculate the sub-evaluation parameters of the indicators: injection attack, DDoS attack, vulnerability backdoor attack, password attack, historical / real-time database, asset management system, industrial gateway, interference attack, configuration attack, firmware attack, etc., which are expressed as e 311 ,e 312 ,e 313 ,e 314 、e 321 ,e 322 ,e 323 、e 331 ,e 332 ,e 333 ; Then the sub-evaluation parameters corresponding to the security of the industrial cloud platform layer are Sub-evaluation parameters corresponding to edge control platform layer security The sub-evaluation parameters corresponding to the terminal device layer are

[0118] According to the second weight parameter and sub-evaluation parameter of each second safety indicator, the safety evaluation parameter of the system's inherent safety capability can be calculated as: G =ω 31 σ1+ω 32 σ2+ω 33 σ3;

[0119] Among them, ω 31 ,ω32 ,ω 33 The second weight parameters of the industrial cloud platform layer, edge control platform layer, and terminal device layer of the system's inherent security capability sub-indicators are represented in turn.

[0120] In this embodiment, each second safety assessment indicator is first input into a corresponding indicator evaluation model to determine a sub-assessment parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator. Subsequently, each second weight parameter is input into a corresponding indicator evaluation model. The indicator evaluation model performs mathematical operations on each sub-assessment parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, thereby determining the safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator. In this method, by performing mathematical operations on each sub-assessment parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, the safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator can be determined. Based on each safety assessment parameter, the corresponding safety assessment result for each industrial system can be determined, thereby assessing the safety risk of the industrial system, effectively addressing the uncertainty in the safety risk assessment process, and improving the accuracy of the assessment.

[0121] The above embodiment mentioned that the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator can be determined based on the preset hierarchical analysis method and each first security assessment indicator. The following embodiment describes in detail the specific process of determining the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on the preset hierarchical analysis method and each first security assessment indicator.

[0122] In another embodiment, another system security assessment method is provided. Based on the above embodiment, as shown in FIG13 , the above S304 may include the following steps:

[0123] S502: Determine a comparison matrix corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the obtained relative importance of each first safety assessment indicator.

[0124] S504: Determine the importance of each first safety assessment indicator according to the comparison matrix.

[0125] S506 : Determine a first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the importance corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator and a preset optimal transfer matrix.

[0126] In the above steps, the server can determine the comparison matrix corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on the relative importance of each first security assessment indicator obtained, then determine the importance of each first security assessment indicator based on the comparison matrix corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, and finally determine the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on the importance of each first security assessment indicator and a preset optimal transfer matrix. Specifically, obtaining the weight of each indicator through the improved hierarchical analysis method using the optimal transfer matrix can include the following steps:

[0127] (1) Continuing to refer to FIG8, according to the first safety evaluation index and the second safety evaluation index system of the industrial control system established, a judgment matrix A=(a ij ) n×n ,in,

[0128] Wherein, i and j both represent the first safety assessment index or the second safety assessment index, and n represents that there are n first safety assessment indexes or n second safety assessment indexes.

[0129] (2) According to the comparison matrix A, define φ i is the importance of the i-th indicator, using Calculate the importance of the first safety assessment indicator, set φ max ,φ min Represent the maximum and minimum values ​​of importance, that is, φ max =max{φ i},φ min =min{φi}, on this basis, a new importance judgment matrix B=(b ij ) n×n

[0130] Among them, φ i is the importance of the i-th indicator, φ j is the importance of the jth indicator, φ max Indicates the maximum value of importance, φ min Indicates the minimum value of importance.

[0131] (3) According to the importance judgment matrix B = (b ij ) n×n Design an optimal transfer matrix C=(c ij ) n×n ,in

[0132] Among them, b il Represents the element in row i and column l of the importance judgment matrix B, b jlrepresents the j-th row and l-th column element of the importance judgment matrix B, and n represents that there are n first safety assessment indicators.

[0133] The first weight parameter ω corresponding to the first security index of the i-th item i It can be calculated by the following formula:

[0134] Among them, n represents n first safety evaluation indicators, ω i Indicates the first weight parameter corresponding to the first safety assessment indicator.

[0135] Thus, the first weight parameter corresponding to the first safety index can be obtained. ω1, ω2, and ω3 represent the first weight parameters of the system availability, system credibility, and system inherent safety capability indexes respectively.

[0136] It should be noted that when calculating the second weight parameter, the server can determine the comparison matrix corresponding to each second security assessment indicator based on the relative importance of each second security assessment indicator obtained, and then determine the importance of each second security assessment indicator itself based on the comparison matrix corresponding to each second security assessment indicator. Finally, based on the importance of each second security assessment indicator itself and the preset optimal transfer matrix, the server determines the second weight parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator. The specific calculation process is the same as the process of determining the first weight parameter, and will not be repeated here.

[0137] In this embodiment, a comparison matrix corresponding to each first security assessment indicator is first determined based on the relative importance of each first security assessment indicator obtained. The importance of each first security assessment indicator itself is then determined based on the comparison matrix. Finally, a first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator is determined based on the importance of each first security assessment indicator itself and a preset optimal transfer matrix. In this method, the weight of each indicator can be obtained through the optimal transfer matrix, thereby avoiding consistency verification problems caused by consistency verification and improving assessment efficiency.

[0138] The above embodiments mentioned that the security assessment results corresponding to the industrial control system can be determined based on the various security assessment parameters. The following embodiments describe in detail the specific process of determining the security assessment results corresponding to the industrial control system based on the various security assessment parameters.

[0139] In another embodiment, another system security assessment method is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the above S206 may include the following steps:

[0140] Step A: performing weighted sum processing on each security assessment parameter according to the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator to determine a security assessment result.

[0141] In this step, the server can perform weighted summation on the security assessment parameters calculated in the above embodiment according to the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator, thereby determining the security assessment result. The calculation formula of the security assessment result can be expressed as: E = T a ω1+T s ω2+T G ω3

[0142] Where E represents the security assessment result, ω1, ω2, and ω3 represent the first weight parameters of system availability, system reliability, and system inherent security capability indicators respectively, and T a ,T s ,T G They represent the security assessment parameters corresponding to system availability, system reliability, and system inherent security capability, respectively.

[0143] In this embodiment, the first weight parameters corresponding to the first security assessment indicators are first used to perform weighted summation on the security assessment parameters to determine the security assessment result of the industrial control system. The security of the industrial control system can be evaluated in real time based on the security assessment result, providing an intuitive understanding of the system's security level, helping to correctly deploy prevention and control measures, reducing the risk of severe accidents caused by network attacks on the industrial control system, and enhancing the safe and stable operation level of the system.

[0144] In another embodiment, another system security assessment method is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the method may further include the following steps:

[0145] Step B: Match the security assessment value with a plurality of preset security assessment ranges to determine the target security level corresponding to the security assessment value, wherein each security assessment range corresponds to a different security level.

[0146] The security assessment value range is [0, 1]. The closer to 0, the lower the security level of the industrial system, and the closer to 1, the higher the security level of the industrial system. The preset multiple security assessment ranges refer to the ranges of security assessment values ​​obtained in advance by the staff. The security assessment value range can be [0, 1). The range of the security assessment value can be, for example, [0, 0.2), [0.2, 0.4), [0.4, 0.6), [0.6, 0.8), [0.8, 1]. Among them, the target security level corresponding to [0, 0.2) can be an extremely low security level, the target security level corresponding to [0.2, 0.4) can be a low security level, the target security level corresponding to [0.4, 0.6) can be a slightly higher security level, the target security level corresponding to [0.6, 0.8) can be a high security level, and the target security level corresponding to [0.8, 1) can be a very high security level.

[0147] In this step, the server can match the security assessment value with multiple preset security assessment ranges to determine the target security level corresponding to the security assessment value. Each security assessment range corresponds to a different security level. For example, if the calculated security assessment value is 0.1, it indicates that the target security level of the industrial system is extremely low.

[0148] In this step, by matching the security assessment value with multiple preset security assessment ranges, the target security level corresponding to the security assessment value can be determined, so that the security of the industrial control system can be evaluated in real time, providing an intuitive understanding of the system's security level, helping to correctly deploy prevention and control measures, reducing the risk of severe accidents caused by cyber attacks on industrial control systems, and enhancing the system's safe and stable operation level.

[0149] The following is a detailed example to illustrate the process of the system security assessment method in this application. Based on the above example, the implementation process of the method may include the following:

[0150] S1, obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to the industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0151] S2, obtaining each lower-level second safety assessment indicator corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each second safety assessment indicator of each first safety assessment indicator is an indicator of the same level and / or different levels;

[0152] S3, determining a comparison matrix corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the obtained relative importance of each first safety assessment indicator;

[0153] S4, determining the importance of each first safety assessment indicator according to the comparison matrix;

[0154] S5, determining a first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on the importance corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator and a preset optimal transfer matrix; wherein the first safety assessment indicators include system availability, system credibility, and system inherent safety capability; and the indicator evaluation models corresponding to the first safety assessment indicators include a system availability evaluation model, a system credibility evaluation model, and a system inherent safety capability evaluation model;

[0155] S6, determining a second weight parameter corresponding to each second security assessment indicator at the same level according to the analytic hierarchy process and each second security assessment indicator at the same level;

[0156] S7, the indicator evaluation model is used to calculate the security evaluation parameters for the corresponding second security evaluation indicators, each second security evaluation indicator is input into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, and the sub-evaluation parameters corresponding to each second security evaluation indicator are determined;

[0157] S8, the indicator evaluation model is further used to calculate the security evaluation parameter for the corresponding first security evaluation indicator, input each second weight parameter into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, perform mathematical operations on each sub-evaluation parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, and determine the security evaluation parameter corresponding to each first security evaluation indicator;

[0158] S9, performing weighted summation processing on each security assessment parameter according to the first weight parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator to determine a security assessment result, the security assessment result including a security assessment value;

[0159] S10, matching the security assessment value with a plurality of preset security assessment ranges to determine a target security level corresponding to the security assessment value; wherein each security assessment range corresponds to a different security level.

[0160] It should be understood that, although the steps in the flowcharts of the above embodiments are shown in sequence as indicated by the arrows, these steps are not necessarily performed in the order indicated by the arrows. Unless otherwise specified herein, there is no strict order restriction on the execution of these steps, and these steps can be performed in other orders. Moreover, at least a portion of the steps in the flowcharts of the above embodiments may include multiple steps or multiple stages, and these steps or stages are not necessarily performed at the same time, but can be performed at different times. The execution order of these steps or stages is not necessarily to be performed in sequence, but can be performed in turn or alternately with other steps or at least a portion of steps or stages in other steps.

[0161] Based on the same inventive concept, embodiments of the present application also provide a system security assessment device for implementing the aforementioned system security assessment method. The implementation solution provided by this device is similar to the implementation solution described in the aforementioned method. Therefore, the specific limitations in one or more embodiments of the system security assessment device provided below can be found in the above-mentioned limitations on the system security assessment method and will not be repeated here.

[0162] In one embodiment, as shown in FIG14 , a system security assessment device is provided, comprising: an acquisition module 11 , a first determination module 12 , and a second determination module 13 , wherein:

[0163] An acquisition module 11 is configured to acquire a first security assessment indicator corresponding to an industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least an industrial cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer;

[0164] The first determining module 12 is configured to determine a security assessment parameter corresponding to each first security assessment indicator based on each first security assessment indicator and an indicator assessment model corresponding to each first security assessment indicator; each indicator assessment model calculates a security assessment parameter for the corresponding first security assessment indicator; wherein the first security assessment indicator includes system availability, system credibility, and system inherent security capability; and the indicator assessment models corresponding to the first security assessment indicator include a system availability assessment model, a system credibility assessment model, and a system inherent security capability assessment model;

[0165] The second determining module 13 is configured to determine a security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system according to various security assessment parameters.

[0166] In another embodiment, another system security assessment device is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the system security assessment device may further include:

[0167] The second safety indicator acquisition module is configured to acquire each lower-level second safety assessment indicator corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each second safety assessment indicator of each first safety assessment indicator is an indicator of the same level and / or different levels.

[0168] A first weight parameter determination module is configured to determine a first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator based on a preset analytic hierarchy process and each first safety assessment indicator;

[0169] The second weight parameter determination module is configured to determine the second weight parameters corresponding to the second safety assessment indicators at the same level according to the hierarchical analysis method and the second safety assessment indicators at the same level.

[0170] In another embodiment, another system security assessment device is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the first determination module 12 may further include:

[0171] a sub-assessment parameter determination unit configured to input each second safety assessment indicator into a corresponding indicator evaluation model, and determine a sub-assessment parameter corresponding to each second safety assessment indicator;

[0172] The safety assessment parameter determination unit is configured to input each second weight parameter into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, perform mathematical operations on each sub-evaluation parameter and the corresponding second weight parameter, and determine the safety assessment parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator.

[0173] In another embodiment, another system security assessment device is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the first weight parameter determination module may further include:

[0174] a comparison matrix determining unit, configured to determine a comparison matrix corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the relative importance of each first safety assessment indicator obtained;

[0175] An importance determination unit, which determines the importance corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the comparison matrix;

[0176] The first weight parameter determination unit determines the first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator according to the importance corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator itself and a preset optimal transfer matrix.

[0177] In another embodiment, another system security assessment device is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the second determining module 13 may further include:

[0178] The safety assessment result determination unit is configured to perform weighted sum processing on each safety assessment parameter according to the first weight parameter corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator to determine the safety assessment result.

[0179] In another embodiment, another system security assessment device is provided. Based on the above embodiment, the system security assessment device may further include:

[0180] The target security level determination module is configured to match the security assessment value with a plurality of preset security assessment ranges to determine the target security level corresponding to the security assessment value; wherein each security assessment range corresponds to a different security level.

[0181] Each module in the system security assessment device described above can be implemented in whole or in part through software, hardware, or a combination thereof. Each module can be embedded in or independent of a processor in a computer device in hardware form, or can be stored in a memory in the computer device in software form, so that the processor can call and execute the corresponding operations of each module.

[0182] In one embodiment, a computer device is further provided, including a memory and a processor. The memory stores a computer program, and the processor implements the steps in the above method embodiments when executing the computer program.

[0183] In one embodiment, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps in the above-mentioned method embodiments are implemented.

[0184] In one embodiment, a computer program product is provided, including a computer program, which implements the steps in the above method embodiments when executed by a processor.

[0185] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that all or part of the processes in the above-mentioned embodiments can be implemented by instructing the relevant hardware through a computer program, and the computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When the computer program is executed, it can include the processes of the embodiments of the above-mentioned methods. Among them, any reference to memory, database or other media used in the embodiments provided in this application may include at least one of non-volatile and volatile memory. Non-volatile memory may include read-only memory (ROM), magnetic tape, floppy disk, flash memory, optical memory, high-density embedded non-volatile memory, resistive random access memory (ReRAM), magnetic random access memory (MRAM), ferroelectric random access memory (FRAM), phase change memory (PCM), graphene memory, etc. Volatile memory may include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory, etc. By way of illustration and not limitation, RAM can be in various forms, such as static random access memory (SRAM) or dynamic random access memory (DRAM). The database involved in the various embodiments provided herein may include at least one of a relational database and a non-relational database. Non-relational databases may include, but are not limited to, distributed databases based on blockchains. The processor involved in the various embodiments provided herein may be, but are not limited to, a general-purpose processor, a central processing unit, a graphics processing unit, a digital signal processor, a programmable logic unit, a data processing logic unit based on quantum computing, and the like.

[0186] The technical features of the above-mentioned embodiments can be combined arbitrarily. In order to make the description concise, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above-mentioned embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this specification.

[0187] The above-described embodiments merely represent several implementation methods of the present application. While the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the patent application. It should be noted that a person of ordinary skill in the art may make various modifications and improvements without departing from the spirit of the present application, and these modifications and improvements fall within the scope of protection of the present application. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present patent application shall be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A system security assessment method, wherein: The method comprises: Obtaining a first security assessment indicator corresponding to an industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer; Determine the security assessment parameters corresponding to each of the first security assessment indicators according to each of the first security assessment indicators and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each of the first security assessment indicators; each of the indicator assessment models is used to calculate the security assessment parameters for the corresponding first security assessment indicators; wherein the first security assessment indicators include system availability, system credibility and system inherent security capability; the indicator assessment models corresponding to the first security assessment indicators include a system availability assessment model, a system credibility assessment model and a system inherent security capability assessment model; A security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system is determined according to each of the security assessment parameters.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein: Before determining the safety assessment parameters corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators according to each of the first safety assessment indicators and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators, the method further includes: Obtaining each lower-level second safety assessment indicator corresponding to each first safety assessment indicator; each second safety assessment indicator of each first safety assessment indicator is an indicator of the same level and / or different levels; Determine a first weight parameter corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators according to a preset analytic hierarchy process and each of the first safety assessment indicators; According to the analytic hierarchy process and each of the second safety assessment indicators at the same level, a second weight parameter corresponding to each of the second safety assessment indicators at the same level is determined.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein: The determining, according to each of the first safety assessment indicators and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators, the safety assessment parameter corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators comprises: Inputting each of the second safety assessment indicators into the indicator assessment model corresponding to the first safety assessment indicator, and determining the sub-assessment parameter corresponding to each of the second safety assessment indicators; The second weight parameters are respectively input into the corresponding indicator evaluation model, and mathematical operations are performed on the sub-evaluation parameters and the corresponding second weight parameters to determine the safety evaluation parameters corresponding to the first safety evaluation indicators.

4. The method according to claim 2, wherein: The determining, according to the preset analytic hierarchy process and each of the first safety assessment indicators, a first weight parameter corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators comprises: Determining a comparison matrix corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators according to the obtained relative importance of each of the first safety assessment indicators; Determine the importance of each of the first safety assessment indicators according to the comparison matrix; According to the importance corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators and a preset optimal transfer matrix, a first weight parameter corresponding to each of the first safety assessment indicators is determined.

5. The method according to any one of claims 2 to 4, wherein: Determining the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system according to each of the security assessment parameters includes: According to the first weight parameters corresponding to the first safety assessment indicators, weighted sum processing is performed on the safety assessment parameters to determine the safety assessment result.

6. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein: The safety assessment result includes a safety assessment value, and the method further includes: The security assessment value is matched with a plurality of preset security assessment ranges to determine a target security level corresponding to the security assessment value; wherein each of the security assessment ranges corresponds to a different security level.

7. A system security assessment device, wherein: The device comprises: An acquisition module is configured to acquire a first security assessment indicator corresponding to each layer in an industrial control system; the industrial control system includes at least a cloud platform layer, an edge control platform layer, and a terminal device layer; A first determination module is configured to determine the security assessment parameters corresponding to each of the first security assessment indicators according to each of the first security assessment indicators and the indicator assessment model corresponding to each of the first security assessment indicators; each of the indicator assessment models is used to calculate the security assessment parameters for the corresponding first security assessment indicators; The second determination module is configured to determine the security assessment result corresponding to the industrial control system according to each of the security assessment parameters.

8. A computer device comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, wherein: When the processor executes the computer program, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 are implemented.

9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 are implemented.

10. A computer program product comprising a computer program, wherein: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 are implemented.

Images