Ukraine and Poland commit to cybersecurity collaboration.

The Ukrainian State Service of Special Communication and Information Protection, along with the Ministry of Digital Transformation, has announced they have signed a cybersecurity memorandum of understanding with the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Poland. In the midst of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Poland has come to Ukraine’s aid to defend against Russian cyberaggression, and the agreement solidifies this partnership, as well as a commitment to sharing cyberintelligence. Mykhailo Fedorov, Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation of Ukraine, stated, “The first world cyberwar is ongoing. Therefore, joining efforts and exchanging practices is a logical step in this area. With Poland, we have not only a common physical border, but also a joint problem in cyberspace, where we experience the same kind of attacks. I am sure that together we will become stronger and more effective.”

Togo at center of cybersecurity in Africa.

The new African Centre for Coordination and Research in Cybersecurity has been established in Lomé, the capital city of Togo, with the goal of unifying the cybersecurity efforts of individual African governments. Quartz notes that cybercrime on the continent is growing exponentially, signaled by a 438% increase in phishing scams in Kenya last quarter and a total of 81 million cyber attacks in three months in Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya combined. Created as a partnership between the Togolese government and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (Uneca), the Centre will allow the countries’ lawmakers, police, and security agencies to share cyber intelligence and monitor malicious cyberactivity. With its National Cybersecurity Agency and a Personal Data Protection Authority, and as one of the few countries to ratify the African Union Convention on Cybersecurity and Personal Data Protection of 2014, Togo has demonstrated it’s ahead of the curve when it comes to securing African cyberspace. Cina Lawson, Togo’s digital economy and transformation minister, explained, “We aim to become a significant digital hub in Africa. Our partnership model with the private sector is an innovative approach that we want to showcase to inspire other countries for safer cyberspace on the continent.”

Cybersecurity at sea.

The US Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) released a report detailing the challenges posed by the ever-changing threat landscape, and Safety4Sea provides an overview of their findings. The COVID-19 pandemic increased reliance on virtual meeting spaces and platforms, exposing the intel shared via these methods to new potential security threats. Other challenges include the high demand for experienced cybersecurity professionals, insufficient incident reporting requirements (and enforcement capability), a flood of cybersecurity alerts and warnings from multiple agencies, and the unique threat posed by Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs). AMSC recommended the CG Cyber Command and the Office of Port and Facility Compliance implement a unified communication standard for the distribution of cyber alerts. Other suggestions include establishing cybersecurity training for AMSC members, clarifying the role of the Coast Guard in cyberincident response, and developing mitigation strategies for emerging tech like 5G. A revamp of the Coast Guard’s internet portal Homeport 2.0, as well as improved training and a comprehensive user guide, were suggested to make the portal easier to navigate. And regarding UASs, AMSCs recommended the Coast Guard and Department of Homeland Security support the development of legislation to provide law enforcement the tools necessary to prosecute cases where maritime infrastructure and assets are at risk.

Source: https://thecyberwire.com/newsletters/policy-briefing/4/162

Switzerland-based commodity and energy trader Mercuria has invested US$1.5 million into Australian start-up rise-x, a provider of blockchain-based marine fuel management systems.

Mercuria subsidiary Minerva Bunkering has previously used rise-x’s DIANA platform to digitally track refuelling of ships at global ports, with the two firms announcing a partnership last summer to establish a spin off business that combines Minerva’s Advanced Delivery Platform (ADP) with DIANA to create an end-to-end bunker management service.

“We have been working with rise-x for some time now and have been impressed with the team and the technology,” said Mercuria’s Chief Operations Officer Alistair Cross.

“The software system has proven its potential to improve productivity and to increase transparency and traceability across the global commodities ecosystem.”

rise-x recently exceeded its initial US$2.5 million funding target by securing US$2.77 million in total private investment, including Mercuria’s support. The company was also named as a recipient of AU$895,000 under the Australian government’s Accelerating Commercialization Grant Programme.

“We can use blockchain and the interconnectivity of the world to bring customers, suppliers, financers, accountants and others onto a common platform that can be accessed from anywhere,” said Rise-x co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Rowan Fenn.

“All parties can access a common truth to observe and manage transactions such as commodity exchanges, goods movements and service deliveries with immutable records created in real time. Every step along the way has been recorded securely in a common, transparent place.”

“We can create smart contracts that will record carbon emissions from everyday activities so companies can offset those emissions in an open and transparent way. But more importantly, we can use the same technology for carbon offset companies to prove that they are credible and delivering what they have promised.”

Source: https://smartmaritimenetwork.com/2022/08/17/mercuria-makes-1-5m-investment-in-rise-x/

Maritime transport helps facilitate worldwide trade, where an estimated 90% of traded goods are transported by sea and is depended on by many different industries. Being the backbone of global trade and supply chain, any disruption can lead to grave consequences – daily necessities may not reach store shelves and connected industries could suffer significant losses from an unpredictable supply chain and the inability to produce essential goods.

The maritime industry has been under immense pressure from the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The other element straining the system is the ever-escalating wave of cyber threats globally. They include threat actors collaborating to carry out malicious attacks, structural challenges such as a high volume of vulnerabilities affecting operational technology (OT) and firmware, weakness in patching management, and the lack of OT cybersecurity talent and matured practices for cyber defence.

According to the Ensign Cyber Threat Landscape 2022 report, the maritime sector is one of the top targeted sectors in Singapore when it comes to Ransomware cyber-attacks. Whether it is the critical infrastructure, or the shipbuilding and logistics subsectors, Singapore’s maritime industry is facing increasing interest from cyber adversaries due to its critical role as a maritime hub port.

For example, the Death Kitty ransomware disrupted TransNet’s container and trucking operations in July 2021. Other impacts detected by Ensign throughout 2021 include the theft of data that could be sold by threat actors, as well as serious disruptions to companies involved in logistics and supply chains.

The rising tide of cyber threats against the maritime sector

The maritime industry has gone through accelerated digitalisation, making technology vital to the operation and management of the safety and security of ships, port operations and logistics. Gone are the days when OT and IT systems could function separately in silos. The need for greater connectivity between technologies such as IT, OT and IoT as well as vendors have propelled the maritime industry to new heights of fleet efficiency, route optimisation, and profit margins.

However, the increased interconnectivity has also heightened cyber threat exposures and corresponding risks for organisations. The ramifications of a cyber-attack can be wide-ranging. Ship collisions, for example, could occur because of e-navigation and other systems being hacked, resulting in physical loss or damage to ships, bodily injury to personnel, cargo loss, pollution, and business interruption. It is also possible that the port’s operations may be disrupted, resulting in significant losses due to business disruption for the port and other dependent businesses operations.

In addition to losses sustained because of physical asset damage or destruction, significant expenditures may be incurred when responding to an adverse cyber incident. If the personal data of employees or customers are compromised, for example, large legal expenditures may be required to respond to the breach, pay the penalties, notify the data protection regulator and data subjects, as well as to defend potential legal proceedings.

Shoring up the maritime cyber defences

While it is impossible to keep out all cyber-attacks, maritime organisations should strengthen their defences to manage the growing threats they now face.

Here are six cyber defensive actions maritime organisations can take to strengthen their cyber defences:​​​

1. Maritime organisations should leverage the cybersecurity community for cyber threat information and foster greater intelligence sharing to build early warning systems and protocols.

2. They should bolster their cybersecurity hygiene. This includes establishing security baselines and implementing system and application architectures for rapid patching and virtual patching to reduce mean time to mitigation.

3. To defend against new or unknown threats, organisations should establish continuous monitoring across the ecosystem through reviews, cyber monitoring, threat hunting, behavioural analytics, and horizon scanning.

4. Maritime companies can mitigate the impact of disruptive cyber-attacks, such as Ransomware, by reviewing and revising incident and crisis management plans and playbooks. They can also run exercises to validate the organisation’s confidence in business recovery.

5. To manage cyber risk exposure from their vendor and partner ecosystem, maritime organisations need to mandate incident reporting from vendors. This includes allowing access to audit cybersecurity controls, and monitoring vendors for dynamic cyber risk context.

6. Lastly, cyber security awareness and training is important. Maritime organisations should invest in upgrading their cybersecurity teams’ skills and prioritise engineers and technicians to learn about cybersecurity and defensive actions.

Cybersecurity is an ongoing operation, and organisations need to maintain cyber hygiene and vigilance regardless of the increasing intensity of conflict, incidents, or crisis. With Singapore being a key international transportation and logistics hub, maritime organisations’ efforts in protecting their operations from cyber threats will go a long way to reducing the risk of disruption to a global supply chain that is already under considerable stress.

Source: https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/opinions-analysis/bracing-rising-tide-cyber-threats-against-maritime-industry

Five years ago, the largest maritime container shipping company in the world was hit with a cyberattack that crippled its booking system, stalled tracking of its containers and disrupted operations at container terminals all over the world operated by its APM Terminals subsidiary.

The financial cost to A.P. Møller-Mærsk was later estimated at US$300 million.

The cost to its reputation is harder to distill into dollars and cents. Suffice it to say that it was significant.

It was also a four-alarm cybersecurity wakeup call for Maersk.

But, five years later, that alarm has yet to prompt widespread co-ordinated cybersecurity initiatives in the global shipping sector.

As Lloyd’s List editor Richard Meade noted in introductory remarks for the U.K.-based shipping journal’s 2022 webinar on shipping sector cyber threats, industry surveys show now that cyberattacks and data theft “are routinely in the top three risks perceived by maritime businesses, but those same surveys routinely report that the industry is not fully prepared to tackle that risk.”

It’s a risk that is escalating up and down the global supply chain.

BlueVoyant’s second annual survey of cyber risk management in sectors ranging from financial services and health care to utilities and energy found “a fractured landscape, with different industries and regions responding differently to the challenges posed by another year of damaging, costly cyber events.”

Those 2021 events included the SolarWinds cyberattack, which cost an estimated US$100 billion, according to the global cybersecurity company.

BlueVoyant’s survey of 1,200 senior executives in Canada, the U.S., Germany, the Netherlands, the U.K. and Singapore found that 93% had suffered a cybersecurity breach and that the number of those breaches had increased 37% in the past 12 months.

Meanwhile, PwC’s Canada Cyber Threat Intelligence report estimates that the average cost of a data breach in Canada is now $6.35 million, and that supply-chain-related cyberattacks are becoming more frequent and more complex.

Globally, the annual cost of cyber crime to the world economy ranges anywhere from US$1 trillion to US$3 trillion.

“The prospect of a major cyberattack has loomed large over the [shipping] industry for many years,” Meade said, “but right now, the risk rates are flashing red.”

Cyberattacks on major shipping lines and within the maritime goods movement supply chain have cost the sector hundreds of millions of dollars thus far. But that bill pales in comparison to the costs of a catastrophic physical loss of ships or environmental disasters from oil or chemical spills or supply chain chokepoints snarled as the result of a cybersecurity breach on a major shipping line.

Shipping lines are especially vulnerable to cyberattacks because of the wide range of entry points to their navigation technologies and cargo handling, communications and management systems.

This is in part because of the complexity of global goods movement and the number of different connections needed to co-ordinate that movement, and the regular crew changes and human resources ebb and flow it requires.

But also, because, as Meade pointed out, the industry continues to be unwilling to “go public and share data, and partly because this remains steadfastly a reactive industry where safety improvements are only ever borne out of casualties.”

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine accelerated the danger of cyberattacks for major shipping companies and infrastructure.

And not necessarily as prime targets, but as collateral damage, says Bill Egerton, chief cyber officer with cyber insurance and risk management company Astaara.

Egerton says the war in Ukraine is providing cover for other groups to ramp up spam and hacking attacks “to make hay while the sun shines under cover of something else.” He estimates that those attacks have increased by 25% since the Russian invasion began.

Egerton adds that the danger to shipping is more on the office side of the equation than on the vessel side, and points out that the attack on Maersk five years ago resulted from a 2017 Russian cyberattack on Ukraine.

So, the problem for shipping is growing, Egerton says, “because [the] sheer volume of attacks is growing as well.”

“We’re not just talking about the occasional ransomware attack.… What I’m saying is that the attacks that have happened and have come into the public domain have either been through nation states or their proxies or groups that have worked for these people in the past.”

He adds that sharing data and experiences about cyberattacks and ransomware threats is a vital first line of defence for the shipping industry.

Without that mutual cooperation in an industry that is extremely competitive and therefore notoriously averse to sharing data, it will lose “the ability to be able to learn from those areas and strengthen collectively.”

Developing a mutual understanding of terms and language when it comes to managing cybersecurity risks and threats is fundamental to reducing those risks for major ports and shipping lines. As the International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH) notes in its Port Community Cyber Security report, “we take what is by nature a hard problem – that of understanding and managing organizational cyber risk – and make it more difficult and problematic when people neither perceive of, nor speak about, cyber risk management in the same way.”

But sharing data and a common communication language is only one initiative needed to fill the many holes in shipping lines’ cybersecurity.

Julian Clark, global senior partner at Ince, an international law and professional services company, told the Lloyd’s List webinar that educating and training ship crews, shipping company staff and management is critical.

And that means providing much more than instruction in basic cybersecurity hygiene.

He says there needs to be a game plan and training for what happens when a ship or a shipping line is hit with a cybersecurity breach or ransomware demand.

Ships’ crews and shipping lines know immediately what to do if there is a collision or other shipping disaster. But when it comes to a cyberattack, Clark said, all bets are off.

“Another thing that came out of the Lloyd’s List survey [of its shipping industry readers] was you’ve still got this issue of … what would happen if the company got hit by a major cyberattack this afternoon?”

The answer, Clark added, would be confusion and uncertainty.

Investing in cybersecurity safety training in the shipping sector is a fundamental first line of defence, and, to be effective, that investment cannot be a piecemeal nickel-and-dime approach.

“The important thing is you need to recognize that this is an ongoing cost of doing business,” Egerton says. “It’s not about a one-off hit and everything will be fine.”

He adds that much of the training material being used by shipping lines today is ineffective because it is dated and generic.

“It talks about stuff in the abstract rather than relevant to the vessel somebody is on or a company somebody’s working for. I think that sheep-dipping people for half an hour doing ‘mandatory training’ doesn’t help them do their jobs better. And you need much more role-specific training to make sure people understand how an attack can hurt their bit of the business.”

Shipping also shares a fundamental human resources challenge faced by other industries: recruiting and retaining cybersecurity talent. The World Economic Forum’s 2021 Cyber Outlook Survey of 120 top executives from private and public companies in 20 countries found that 59% of respondents “would find it challenging to respond to a cybersecurity incident due to the shortage of skills within their team.”

Again, data for different ships and different shipping operations is vital for any cybersecurity defence investment to be effective.

“Understand what you need,” Egerton says, “and do this proportionately. Because … if you go and spend a lot of money, you may end up with a product that you can’t use, because it’s producing too much data in the form you can’t cognitively understand. So, I think it’s proportionality. It has got to be people and leadership focused. If the board don’t take this seriously it is not going to work.”

He adds that there needs to be a clear line of sight and communication “from the board to the shop floor, so that everybody understands their role and their place in this, should [a cybersecurity breach] happen.

“Cybersecurity is a risk that won’t go away. You cannot just do it once and then forget it.”

Many major Vancouver-based shipping companies agree that there is a rising concern about the seriousness of cybersecurity threats in their industry, but declined comment for this article, citing an “abundance of caution” over concerns about raising their profiles and the potential for their businesses to become targets for international cybercriminals.

Source: https://biv.com/article/2022/08/cybersecurity-threat-looms-large-over-global-supply-chain?amp

The new Memorandum of Understanding will specifically look at harnessing the capabilities of the University’s recently opened £3.2 million Cyber-SHIP Lab. This world-leading facility is dedicated to simulating and understanding maritime cyber threats and facilitating future secure maritime operations through cyber resilience research, tools and training. The facility forms part of the University’s Marine Navigation Centre, which includes a physical ship’s bridge used to simulate attacks and test equipment.

BMT was a founding industry supporter of the Cyber-SHIP Lab when it was launched in 2019, based on the firm belief that through the development of these new tools and lab the UK can become a leading power in maritime cyber security.

Professor Kevin Jones, Executive Dean of Science and Engineering at the University and Principal Investigator on the Cyber-SHIP Lab project, added:

“With our ever-increasing dependence on the global maritime sector, ensuring ships and port operations are cyber secure has never been more critical. Advances in cyber technology, and the emergence of new threats, mean this is a constantly evolving area that needs an innovative and joined-up approach. The partnership between the University and BMT is a perfect example of that, uniting our collective expertise in both identifying potential issues and solutions and finding the means for them to be applied in maritime engineering and design.”

Jake Rigby, Research and Development Lead at BMT, added:

“BMT is delighted to be working with the University of Plymouth in this important work in helping the UK drive the highest possible standards in maritime security. With this knowledge and experience in place, the UK can then offer the benefits of the insights, operational practices and training to the global shipping and marine community. Through combining our expertise and our knowledge, we are confident great strides will be made in enhancing security and cyber protection across maritime.”

Source: https://seawanderer.org/university-of-plymouth-and-bmt-join-forces-to-improve-cyber-security-in-the-maritime-sector

The new agreement will look at harnessing the capabilities of the University’s recently opened £3.2 million Cyber-SHIP Lab. This facility is dedicated to simulating and understanding maritime cyber threats and facilitating future secure maritime operations through cyber resilience research, tools, and training. The facility forms part of the University’s Marine Navigation Centre, which includes a physical ship’s bridge used to simulate attacks and test equipment.

BMT was a founding industry supporter of the Cyber-SHIP Lab when it was launched in 2019, based on the firm belief that through the development of these new tools and lab, the UK can become a leading power in maritime cyber security.

Jake Rigby, research and development lead, BMT, said: “BMT is delighted to be working with the University of Plymouth in helping the UK drive the highest possible standards in maritime security. With this knowledge and experience in place, the UK can then offer the benefits of the insights, operational practices and training to the global shipping and marine community. Through combining our expertise and our knowledge, we are confident great strides will be made in enhancing security and cyber protection across maritime.”

Professor Kevin Jones, executive dean of science and engineering at the University and principal investigator on the Cyber-SHIP Lab project, added: “With our ever-increasing dependence on the global maritime sector, ensuring ships and port operations are cyber secure has never been more critical. Advances in cyber technology, and the emergence of new threats, mean this is a constantly evolving area that needs an innovative and joined-up approach. The partnership between the University and BMT is a perfect example of that, uniting our collective expertise in both identifying potential issues and solutions and finding the means for them to be applied in maritime engineering and design.”

The MoU was signed by professor Judith Petts CBE, vice-chancellor of the University of Plymouth, and Sarah Kenny, CEO of BMT, and will kick-start a range of collaboration opportunities from student engagement and employee development to collaborative research and joint consultancy.

Source: https://thedigitalship.com/news/maritime-satellite-communications/item/7977-university-of-plymouth-and-bmt-team-up-on-maritime-cyber-security

Zero Trust has become a well-recognized framework in the cybersecurity world. SecOps teams are championing this ‘trust no-one’ strategy to support the fight against the escalating risk of cybercrime, and in helping to monitor threat actors across their network. In fact, research from Gigamon found that 70% of IT leaders agree that Zero Trust would enhance their IT strategy.

In short, this approach to cybersecurity eradicates the implicit trust often given to internal traffic within a network. This security-first mindset also benefits business efficiency; 87% of IT teams believe productivity has increased since the start of their Zero Trust journey, as systems run faster and downtime is reduced due to fewer breaches.

However, the threatscape is evolving. Ransomware now represents one of the biggest threats to businesses across the world and many are falling victim to catastrophic attacks. This type of malware surged by 82% in 2021 and it shows no signs of stopping, especially as 82% of British firms which have been victims of ransomware attacks reportedly paid the hackers to get back their data.

So, can Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) help organizations protect themselves from one of the biggest threats in today’s cyber landscape?

What does Zero Trust mean today?

When putting trust into something, we should always have a rational reason for doing so. However, this has not always been the case in IT. Instead, for years, IT teams have used approximations for trustability, often because mechanisms to support trust-measurement were not practical in the past. This could be because an organization owns a system, if a user is an employee or if the network has previously been secure.

Yet these are not actual trustability measurements, they are instead gross approximations often based on assumptions. When that trust assumption fails, risk is introduced. And when a threat actor recognizes those assumptions are part of an organization’s security strategy, they can use them to evade network controls and cause problems for cybersecurity.

Zero trust changes this. It dynamically measures whether something is trustworthy by analyzing how it works and assessing whether an organization has a rational basis for trusting it and allowing the connection. This is not only the case for entire systems, but also, for individual devices, security mechanisms and users.

Given the prominence of BYOD policies and remote working, it is essential that trust is earned rather than given freely, and all users should be considered threats until proven otherwise.

In a world where the workforce has shifted significantly to a “work anywhere, work anytime” model, embracing a ZTA simply makes sense.

By introducing micro-segmentation – which separates data, assets and applications and represents a key pillar to ZTA – organizations can stop one compromised device becoming an entirely disrupted network.

One famous instance is the Las Vegas casino that was hacked through its IoT thermometer in an aquarium in the foyer. From here, the attacker was able to access the casino’s entire network.

How can businesses protect themselves from this level of threat? With IoT expanding, and adversaries clearly using more innovative tactics and techniques to breach a system, Zero Trust has to be part of the security strategy.

Ransomware and deep observability

The cornerstone of ZTA is visibility. A clear view across all data in motion – from the cloud to the core – means IT teams can best understand any threat to their network. From here they can authorize safe activity, as well as detect undesirable application behavior and analyze the metadata that will detail the origin and movement of an attack.

In other words, you cannot protect against what you cannot see. The deeper the level of observability into a network, the more insight an IT team can gather and then action to improve their entire security posture. This is actually explicitly required by NIST SP 800-207, the gold standard of zero trust.

The very nature of ZTA is deep and thorough inspection of all users and all data, including encrypted traffic. With this architecture and micro-segmentation in place, it will also stop cybercriminals moving laterally within a network – meaning adversaries looking to traverse an IT infrastructure and deploy ransomware across more critical data will be unable to do so.

Over recent years, cybercriminals have become far more savvy and sophisticated, in how they deploy this kind of malware. An attack in today’s climate will typically be carefully considered and strategically targeted against known vulnerable organizations that store critical data. It is also common for bad actors to penetrate a network and lay dormant for months at a time.

Visibility is central in the fight against ransomware; by eradicating blind-spots across the network, adversaries will no longer be able to exist on a network undetected. With Zero Trust and deeper observability into all data, criminal dwell time can be cut dramatically from the current average of 285 days.

It is important to remember that Zero Trust is not the singular silver bullet to ransomware protection. However, paired with visibility, it will be essential for bolstering a company’s cyber posture. By prioritizing deep observability, ZTA becomes far easier to introduce and ransomware threats will become far easier to detect.

Source:https://maritimefairtrade.org/trust-no-one-in-fight-against-ransomware/