Security Evaluation Framework Quantifies System Risk
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current system security evaluation methods are subjective and lack objective measurement, making it difficult to compare designs across different engineers, manufacturers, or industries, and fail to provide actionable information for improving security, leading to potential security risks due to incomplete or inadequate security architectures.
Innovation Solution
A quantitative methodology for calculating the relative risk of a system security architecture using a Security Evaluation Framework that includes a System Security Model, which receives security reports, vendor component errata, design guidance, and bill of materials to produce a Security Score, enabling objective analysis and comparison of security designs.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If subjective SME analysis is used for security evaluation, then expert knowledge can be applied, but objectivity and comparability of designs are lost
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces the subjective human expert analysis system with an automated computational system that uses algorithms, data structures, and processing rules to evaluate security designs. This substitution eliminates human bias while maintaining the analytical depth previously provided by experts, thereby improving both objectivity and measurement precision simultaneously.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent transforms security evaluation from qualitative expert judgments into quantitative measurements by defining specific parameters, metrics, and scoring criteria. This parameterization allows for precise, comparable, and objective assessment of security designs across different engineers and manufacturers.
2Reliability
If multiple iterations of design evaluation are performed to converge on evaluator expectation, then security robustness can be assessed, but time consumption and evaluation efficiency decrease
Solution Approach 1:
The patent performs preliminary actions by pre-defining security criteria, attack models, and evaluation rules before the actual design assessment. This preparation enables the system to evaluate designs in a single pass or minimal iterations, eliminating the need for repeated evaluations to converge on evaluator expectations and significantly improving productivity while maintaining reliability.
3Reliability
If comprehensive security analysis is performed across all attack vectors, then security coverage is improved, but analysis complexity and resource requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the comprehensive security analysis into modular components including attack models, vulnerability assessments, and countermeasure evaluations. Each segment can be independently configured and executed, allowing comprehensive coverage without overwhelming complexity. The modular structure enables selective activation of analysis components based on specific design needs.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates a universal security evaluation framework that can assess multiple attack vectors, design types, and security domains through a single integrated system. This multi-functional approach provides comprehensive security coverage while reducing overall system complexity by consolidating diverse analysis capabilities into one unified platform.
Data Source
AI summary
A method for a system for security evaluation includes working one state at a time; identifying primitives of interest and systematically applying relevant attacks for the system; starting at chip level, working through states, and then expanding a system boundary and repeating; following a sequence of: chip>circuit card>subsystem>system>platform for a product solution under analysis; determining if a system definition has sufficient detail, or is too abstract; for a chip with a native secure boot protocol, determining if all players are represented; representing attacks as vectors made up of measurements of the following attributes: Dollars, days, Probability of success, Probability of destruction, technology node, and number of samples; and representing countermeasures as vectors made up of scaling factors for each of attack attributes.