| Literature DB >> 33198160 |
Konstantinos Demestichas1, Nikolaos Peppes1, Theodoros Alexakis1.
Abstract
The agriculture sector has held a major role in human societies across the planet throughout history. The rapid evolution in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) strongly affects the structure and the procedures of modern agriculture. Despite the advantages gained from this evolution, there are several existing as well as emerging security threats that can severely impact the agricultural domain. The present paper provides an overview of the main existing and potential threats for agriculture. Initially, the paper presents an overview of the evolution of ICT solutions and how these may be utilized and affect the agriculture sector. It then conducts an extensive literature review on the use of ICT in agriculture, as well as on the associated emerging threats and vulnerabilities. The authors highlight the main ICT innovations, techniques, benefits, threats and mitigation measures by studying the literature on them and by providing a concise discussion on the possible impacts these could have on the agri-sector.Entities:
Keywords: IoT; agriculture; cybersecurity; precision agriculture; security; smart farming; threats
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33198160 PMCID: PMC7697696 DOI: 10.3390/s20226458
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Overview of Internet of Things (IoT) usage and integration areas and corresponding studies.
| Area | Studies |
|---|---|
| Continuous land monitoring | [ |
| Water management | [ |
| Monitoring and reporting of crop growth | [ |
| Identification and management of soil characteristics | [ |
| Detection and recognition of diseases in crops and/or plants | [ |
| Enhanced food preservation and quality control | [ |
| Smart livestock | [ |
Overview of possible attacks per security aspect in agricultural cybersecurity.
| Security Aspect | Examples of Attacks | Agriculture Consequences | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Privacy | Physical Attack | The collection of information regarding the type and possible usage of devices concerning agriculture projects. These security leaks can be used in order to get access to infrastructure and production standards as well as getting privacy data and compromising the privacy of the system. Theft and vandalism purposes can be the outcome of a possible violation of privacy. | [ |
| Confidentiality | Tracing Attack | The usage of various communication devices in a smart farming or an agriculture system based on ICT can outcome into data travelling through several interconnected devices and protocols from source to destination. Possible confidentiality problems can lead to the persistence, on many occasions, of loss of privacy and data or information breaches. The unauthorized access to important data as a result of the confidentiality loss could lead to theft of key information and also cause serious threats over the involved agriculture system users’ confidential information. | [ |
| Integrity | Forgery Attack | As a result of possible unauthorized or improper changes in the trustworthiness of data or resources, information between agriculture ICT or smart farming systems can be no longer reliable or accurate. The transmitted information data between the devices and/or the people/farmers/stakeholders that are involved in an agriculture business or even a process can lead to possible financial or authentication frauds due to the lack of the assurance that the information is sufficiently accurate for its purpose. | [ |
| Availability | Denial of Service (DoS) attacks | A smart farming environment is meant for real or near-real time operations in order to keep a real-world impact. An attacker can suspend the activities of the installed smart farming network or even establish the services unavailable to the farmers. The lack of availability of the provided services can lead to business disruption, possible loss of customer’s confidence and revenue. | [ |
| Authenticity | Attacks against Authentication (Dictionary attack, Session Hijacking, Spoofing) | Authenticity ensures the authentication of certain information provided from a valid/authorized source. Forged attackers’ identities can mimic legal/authorized persons and gain access to the smart farming system. Possible results can be the data breach/loss and/or alternation, service unavailability, loss of devices connectivity or even smart farming agriculture system corruption and/or destruction. | [ |
| Non-Repudiation | Malicious Code | During the authentication process, a commonly known service that provides proof of the integrity as well as the origin of data, both in an unforgeable relationship, and can be verified by any third party at any time with high assurance and genuineness, is non-repudiation. The repudiation of information allows an attacker to repudiate all the power consumption, generated information and production processes of an agriculture ICT system, which can lead to a situation of refusing services, authentication information or data transmissions, through the nodes of the system. | [ |
Overview of security threats in agriculture across different IoT layers.
| Layer | Security Threats | Smart Farming Effects | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application | Data Thefts | The top of the stack in the already mentioned IoT layer architecture. Possible effects or problems could be considered the lack of the delivery of services between the respective users from various domains such as farmers, retailers and/or other stakeholders. Accessibility problems for the involved users and lack of security and privacy are also major issues. | [ |
| Middleware | Man-In-the Middle Attack (MITM) | This layer operates in two-way mode. More specifically, this layer stands between (in the middle) of the application and the hardware layer and also acts as an interface between them. Major problems that come as a result of attacks on this layer can affect data and/or device (nodes installed into the agriculture infrastructure) management and other types of issues such as device information discovery, access control by the users and data analysis as well. | [ |
| Internet | Phishing Site Attack | The most crucial layer concerning the establishment of the communication between two distinct endpoints, such as device-to-device, device-to-cloud, device-to-gateway and back end data-sharing. In case of a failure the communication is being disrupted and the ICT system is, practically, out of service. Improper communication services and/or lack of automatic updates could lead to privacy concerns among the users’ private information (e.g., access credentials) | [ |
| Access Gateway | Secure on-Boarding | Access GW layer contributes to the handling of the very first data as well as to bridging the gap between the client (farmers, stakeholders, retailers) and the end point (node or device). Messages routing, identification and subscribing problems between the smart farming nodes could be possible outcomes to the client side concerning the final form of the received message. This message may also include the desired information as well as lack of transport encryption/integrity verification, so sensitive data could easily then be intercepted. | [ |
| Edge Technology | Node Capturing | This layer is consisted of the majority of hardware parts (e.g., sensors, Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) tags) and has a significant role for the communication between the involved devices as well as the data collection within the network and the servers that are deployed on the installed ICT smart farming system. Possible attacks on the entities of this layer could lead to important problems of monitoring or sensing various phenomena. Additionally, information theft and/or tampering could also be possible results. | [ |
Mitigation countermeasures against cybersecurity threats and attacks.
| Mitigation Measures | Short Description | Security Aspect Threat | IoT Layer Threat | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firmware Update | It is important to be checked if an update mechanism is installed or even turned on in the device, in order to prevent various online and offline attacks. | Privacy, Confidentially, Availability | Application | [ |
| Block Unnecessary Ports | Block unnecessary, vulnerable or overlooked ports, so to prevent a possible cyberattack or device exploitation. | Privacy, Authenticity, Non-Repudiation | Internet | [ |
| Disable Telnet | Telnet is a great security risk due the fact of sending passwords and usernames in clear text. It should be ensured that is turned off. | Privacy, Authenticity, Non-Repudiation | Internet | [ |
| Encrypted Communication Usage (SSL/TLS) | Using a secure protocol such as SSL/TLS consists an essential step towards a device security through transport encryption. | Confidentially, Integrity, Authenticity | Access Gateway | [ |
| Strong Passwords | A token could be used to increase the security level of the device. | Privacy, Confidentially, Authenticity | Middleware | [ |
| Encryption of Drives | Keep the data inaccessible in case of a device theft. | Privacy, Integrity | Middleware, Edge Technology | [ |
| Accounts Lockout | Account lockout mechanism(s) should be incorporated in the device so as to allow a legitimate user to access and retrieve information. | Privacy, Confidentially, Authenticity | Edge Technology | [ |
| Periodic Assessment of Devices | Devices need periodic cybersecurity assessments in order to check and avoid possible new vulnerabilities of any type. | Privacy, Availability | Edge Technology | [ |
| Secure Password Recovery | Helps to retrieve back missed credentials in a secure way. | Privacy, Confidentially, Authenticity | Middleware | [ |
| Two-Factor Authentication | Keep data encrypted and protected as well. | Privacy, Confidentially, Authenticity | Middleware | [ |
| Disable UPnP | In order to avoid possible exposure of the network to aspiring attackers, the UPnP must be disabled as it does not require any authentication, which renders it an important security flaw. | Privacy, Confidentially, Availability | Internet | [ |