Robot Immune System for Network Security

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Robotic systems lack effective security measures, particularly at the network level, making them vulnerable to attacks that can lead to system failures and significant losses, with existing cybersecurity methods not adequately addressing the unique challenges of robotic systems.

Innovation Solution

A biologically-inspired security method based on the Human Immune System (HIS) is integrated into robotic systems to create a Robot Immune System (RIS), utilizing immune flows that combine various immunological principles to provide a flexible and adaptive security architecture for network-level communications, including configuration, training, anomaly detection, and response mechanisms.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional robotic software and hardware are used without security-conscious design, then device complexity and ease of manufacture are maintained, but security reliability is severely compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity reliabilityVSAvoidsecurity architecture complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The security system is divided into multiple functional modules including immune flow configuration module, training module, anomaly detection module, and response module. Each module handles specific security tasks independently, allowing the complex security function to be managed through modular components rather than a monolithic structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

An immune flow is introduced as an intermediary component that sits between network traffic and the robotic system. The immune flow processes and filters network communications, acting as a security mediator that protects the robotic system from malicious inputs without requiring modifications to the core robotic software and hardware.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If comprehensive security measures are implemented at the network level, then security reliability improves, but device complexity and processing requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenetwork-level securityVSAvoidsecurity system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The training module performs preliminary learning during a training phase where the immune flow observes and learns normal network traffic patterns before actual security operations begin. This preliminary action allows the system to pre-establish baseline behavior patterns, reducing the complexity of real-time security decision-making.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where the anomaly detection module continuously monitors network traffic, compares it against learned patterns, and adjusts its detection thresholds based on observed behavior. This feedback loop enables the system to adapt to new threats while maintaining manageable complexity through dynamic adjustment rather than static complex rules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If real-time anomaly detection and response mechanisms are implemented, then security response time improves, but processing power and system complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereal-time security responseVSAvoidprocessing power requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSPower

Solution Approach 1:

The immune flow focuses its processing on specific critical aspects of network traffic such as packet headers, communication patterns, and protocol compliance rather than analyzing every byte of data in detail. This partial action approach enables real-time detection by concentrating computational resources on the most security-relevant features of network communications.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3657373A1Method and system for securing robotic systems
Publication Date: 2020.05.27 ALIAS ROBOTICS SL
  • EP3657373A1 patent drawingFigure 1A~1B
  • EP3657373A1 patent drawingFigure 2~2A
  • EP3657373A1 patent drawingFigure 2B~2C

AI summary

The present invention provides a method and system for securing robotic systems. Embodiments of the present invention may include the employment of improved bio-inspired techniques for protecting the network-level communications of a given robotic system. The invention further provides different means of response against the detection of illegitimate traffic. The method and system may be implemented in robotic systems and devices of any kind.