Skip to main content

Patterns for Integrating NIST 800-53 Controls into Security Assurance Cases

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2023 Workshops (SAFECOMP 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14182))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 716 Accesses

Abstract

It is sure that critical systems are appropriately secure and protected against malicious threats. In this paper, we present a novel pattern for Security Assurance Cases that integrates security controls from the NIST-800-53 cyber security standard into a comprehensive argument about system security. Our framework uses Eliminative Argumentation to increase confidence that these controls have been applied correctly by explicitly considering and addressing doubts in the argument.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. ISO 26262 - Road vehicles—Functional safety. Standard, International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  2. NIST 800-53 - Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations. Special Publication SP 800-53, National Institute of Standards and Technology (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  3. ISO 21434 - Road vehicles - Cybersecurity engineering. Standard, International Organization for Standardization (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Socrates - Assurance Case Editor (2023). https://safetycasepro.com

  5. Bloomfield, R., Bishop, P., Jones, C., Froome, P.: ASCAD – Adelard safety case development manual. Technical report, Adelard (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burton, S., Gauerhof, L., Heinzemann, C.: Making the case for safety of machine learning in highly automated driving. In: Tonetta, S., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10489, pp. 5–16. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66284-8_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Diemert, S., Joyce, J.: Eliminative argumentation for arguing system safety - a practitioner’s experience. In: 2020 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), pp. 1–7 (2020). iSSN 2472-9647

    Google Scholar 

  8. Diemert, S., Goodenough, J., Joyce, J., Weinstock, C.: Incremental assurance through eliminative argumentation. J. Syst. Saf. 58(1), 7–15 (2023)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Goodenough, J.B., Weinstock, C.B., Klein, A.Z.: Eliminative argumentation: a basis for arguing confidence in system properties. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University-Software Engineering Institute Pittsburgh United (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  10. ACW Group: Assurance Case Guidance - Challenges, Common Issues and Good Practice (Version 1.1). Technical report, Safety Critical Systems Club (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  11. ACW Group: Goal Structuring Notation Community Standard (Version 3). Technical report, Safety Critical Systems Club (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Holloway, C.M.: The Friendly Argument Notation (FAN). Technical report (2020). https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205002931, nTRS Author Affiliations: Langley Research Center NTRS Document ID: 20205002931 NTRS Research Center: Langley Research Center (LaRC)

  13. Jahan, S., et al.: MAPE-K/MAPE-SAC: an interaction framework for adaptive systems with security assurance cases. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 109, 197–209 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kelly, T.P.: Arguing safety - a systematic approach to safety case management. Ph.D. thesis, University of York (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Muckin, M., Fitch, S.C.: A Threat-Driven Approach to Cyber Security. Lockheed Martin Corporation (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Toulmin, S.E.: The Uses of Argument, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Wikipedia: Autonomous cargo ship—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (2023). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cargo_ship. Accessed 29 Apr 2023

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Torin Viger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Viger, T., Diemert, S., Foster, O. (2023). Patterns for Integrating NIST 800-53 Controls into Security Assurance Cases. In: Guiochet, J., Tonetta, S., Schoitsch, E., Roy, M., Bitsch, F. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2023 Workshops. SAFECOMP 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14182. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40953-0_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40953-0_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40952-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-40953-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics