Paper detail

A New Methodology for Information Security Risk Assessment for Medical Devices and Its Evaluation

As technology advances towards more connected and digital environments, medical devices are becoming increasingly connected to hospital networks and to the Internet, which exposes them, and thus the patients using them, to new cybersecurity threats. Currently, there is a lack of a methodology dedicated to information security risk assessment for medical devices. In this study, we present the Threat identification, ontology-based Likelihood, severity Decomposition, and Risk integration (TLDR) methodology for information security risk assessment for medical devices. The TLDR methodology uses the following steps: (1) identifying the potentially vulnerable components of medical devices, in this case, four different medical imaging devices (MIDs); (2) identifying the potential attacks, in this case, 23 potential attacks on MIDs; (3) mapping the discovered attacks into a known attack ontology - in this case, the Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classifications (CAPECs); (4) estimating the likelihood of the mapped CAPECs in the medical domain with the assistance of a panel of senior healthcare Information Security Experts (ISEs); (5) computing the CAPEC-based likelihood estimates of each attack; (6) decomposing each attack into several severity aspects and assigning them weights; (7) assessing the magnitude of the impact of each of the severity aspects for each attack with the assistance of a panel of senior Medical Experts (MEs); (8) computing the composite severity assessments for each attack; and finally, (9) integrating the likelihood and severity of each attack into its risk, and thus prioritizing it. The details of steps six to eight are beyond the scope of the current study; in the current study, we had replaced them by a single step that included asking the panel of MEs [in this case, radiologists], to assess the overall severity for each attack and use it as its severity...

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.