Conclusion and Outlook on Security and Quality of Complex Cyber-Physical Systems Engineering

  • Stefan BifflEmail author
  • Matthias Eckhart
  • Arndt Lüder
  • Edgar Weippl


Typical assumptions for research in quality and security assurance and improvement for small software-intensive systems may not hold for long-running technical systems, such as critical infrastructure or industrial production systems. Therefore, researchers in quality and security assurance and improvement can benefit from better understanding challenges on quality and security assurance and quality improvement coming from the engineering of Complex Cyber-Physical Systems based on the use cases and requirements presented. This chapter summarizes and reflects on the material presented in this book regarding challenges and solutions for Security and Quality of Complex Cyber-Physical Systems (C-CPS) Engineering. Contributions in this book consider requirements, risks, and solutions to improve the security and quality of C-CPS. Engineers and project managers will be enabled to identify quality and security challenges they should consider. In addition, the chapter describes measures to assist the involved staff in handling the identified challenges. The chapter discusses the contributions of the chapters to the Research Questions raised in Chap.  1 of this book.


Complex cyber-physical systems Engineering process Multidisciplinary engineering AutomationML Information security 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The financial support by the Christian Doppler Research Association, the Austrian Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs and the National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. Biffl, S., Gerhard, D., & Lüder, A. (2017). Multi-disciplinary engineering for cyber-physical production systems. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Eckhart, M., & Ekelhart, A. (2018a, May). Towards security-aware virtual environments for digital twins. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM workshop on cyber-physical system security (pp. 61–72). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  3. Eckhart, M., & Ekelhart, A. (2018b). Securing cyber-physical systems through digital twins. ERCIM NEWS, 115, 22–23, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics.Google Scholar
  4. Kieseberg, P., Malle, B., Frühwirt, P., Weippl, E., & Holzinger, A. (2016). A tamper-proof audit and control system for the doctor in the loop. Brain Informatics, 3(4), 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lüder, A., Foehr, M., Köhlein, A., & Böhm, B. (2012). Application of engineering processes analysis to evaluate benefits of mechatronic engineering. In Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA), 2012 IEEE 17th Conference (pp. 1–4). IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Biffl
    • 1
    Email author
  • Matthias Eckhart
    • 2
    • 3
  • Arndt Lüder
    • 4
  • Edgar Weippl
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Information Systems EngineeringTechnische Universität WienViennaAustria
  2. 2.Christian Doppler Laboratory for Security and Quality Improvement in the Production System Lifecycle (CDL-SQI), Institute of Information Systems EngineeringTechnische Universität WienViennaAustria
  3. 3.SBA ResearchViennaAustria
  4. 4.Otto-v.-Guericke University/IAFMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations