Skip to main content

Where threat modeling can shine - an example from the EU MDCG-2019

From the  EU MDCG 2019-16 Guidance on Cybersecurity for medical devices, December 2019, this is the guidance on foreseeable risks. Medical device manufacturers should ensure that a medical device is designed and manufactured in a way that ensures that the risks associated with reasonably foreseeable environmental conditions are removed or minimised. This may include the infield monitoring of the software’s vulnerabilities and the possibility to perform a device update (outside the context of a field safety corrective action) through, for example delivering patches to ensure the continued security of the device.

During the risk management process, the manufacturer should foresee or evaluate the potential exploitation of those vulnerabilities that may be a result of reasonably foreseeable misuse. This, however, may depend on the specific situation. For example, using an unsecured memory-stick to enter data into a medical IT system can be considered “reasonably foreseeable misuse”, while the input of x-ray images via a CD may be considered “intended use”. Due to the huge variety of use environments, this decision may even depend on the specific installation and use environment.
During the product security risk management process, the manufacturers need to distinguish two important areas:
 Safety risk management normally covered in the overall product risk management, and

 Security risk, which is not associated to safety.

This relates back to the process and tools for threat monitoring as the example given is a perfect fit for the type of scenario that threat modeling is able to bring forth. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Unit Testing - What to Test

This I wrote to answer a question that came up when we were discussing our software process and I was training developers on how to unit test. It seems a simple enough question, but I kept pondering it and delving deeper until I realized I needed to write this monograph. What unit tests should we write? How do we know what to test? Ideally, unit tests should cover every path through the code. It should be your chance to see every path through your code works as expected and as needed. If you are practicing Test Driven Development then it's implied everything gets a test. In the real world, you might not be allowed to test everything - for instance, if the testing suite ends up taking a week to run, then the world will have changed by the time it finishes and the test results will be obsolete. Unit testing at it's basic is testing an object, a method - the smallest unit of your code that it can test independently. It should test the inputs "goes into" an...

Risk Mitigations for Custom Applications

  In many healthcare applications, often due to the cloistered nature of the use cases – e.g. it will only be accessed by users authorized in a particular facility, such as an operating room suite – the needs for Authentication and Authorization are minimized when the system is designed and implemented. This presents a risk as soon as you allow for the possibility of users with ill-intent or that otherwise want to operate outside their given roles. Custom applications need to consider these possibilities and implement the following measure to ensure the integrity of the system. 1.   Authentication and Authorization Controls: Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Implement MFA for all user logins. This adds an extra layer of security beyond just a username and password. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC): Grant users access only to the data and functionalities they need for their specific role. This minimizes the potential for unauthorized access. Strong Password Policies: ...

You don't really know who you're talking to online...

The following is a story that I think highlights the assumptions that get you into trouble online... https://www.proofpoint.com/us/blog/threat-insight/i-knew-you-were-trouble-ta456-targets-defense-contractor-alluring-social-media This is particularly scary since we found so much utility in online connections during the pandemic and out of necessity, started trusting more online. Please note the timeline for this breach - it was a long, slow process, a key factor in many 'cons'. "Build trust" is a key first step, once someone has identified you as a party. You think...you're convinced you know who your talking to, but if you don't triangulate the identity with some non-online, ideally in-person information, you shouldn't trust. And even if you do get what seems like real-life confirmations of identity, you must look at questioning motives, needs, and keeping danger at arms-length. Online includes email, texting (sms), application chatbots, voice communicati...