Skip to main content

An Integrated Framework for Innovation Management in Cyber Security and Privacy

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 470))

Abstract

This paper is concerned with increasing the impact of publicly funded research and development (R&D) in cyber security and privacy. In the context of a high level of threat, there is a pressing need for firms and institutions to implement innovative and robust cyber security and privacy technologies. This particular challenge requires a systematic coordinated approach across both the public and private sectors. The innovation ecosystem involves complex interactions between key actors such as policy makers, incumbent service providers, and new innovators, each with their own view of how to increase the impact of R&D in cyber security and privacy. Drawing on R&D literature and roadmapping theory, this paper presents a framework and research tool for establishing an integrated view of innovation management in cyber security and privacy.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/security/projects_en.html

References

  1. Maughan, D., Balenson, D., Lindqvist, U., Tudor, Z.: Crossing the “Valley of Death”: transitioning cybersecurity research into practice. IEEE Secur. Priv. 11(2), 14–23 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, R., Boehme, R., Clayton, R. Moore, T.: Security Economics and the Internal Market. ENISA (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Downey, F.: Bridging the “valley of death”: Response to the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee Bridging the “valley of death”: Improving the Commercialisation of Research Inquiry from Engineering the Future. The Royal Academy of Engineering, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Auerswald, P.E., Branscomb, L.M.: Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: financing the invention to innovation transition in the United States. J. Technol. Transf. 28(3–4), 227–239 (2003). (Kluwer Academic Publishers)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Benzel, T.V., Lipner, S.: Crossing the great divide: transferring security technology from research to the market. IEEE Secur. Priv. 11(2), 12–13 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. D’Amico, A., O’Brien, B., Larkin, M.: building a bridge across the transition chasm. IEEE Secur. Priv. 11(2), 24–33 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mankins, J.C.: Technology readiness levels: a white paper. NASA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  8. NASA: HRST technology assessments technology readiness levels, chart

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mankins, J.C.: Research & Development degree of difficulty (R&D3): a white paper. NASA (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. ENISA: Security economics and the internal market: evaluation of stakeholder replies (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. ENISA: Security economics and the internal market: ENISA conclusions on follow-up activities (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. EUROCONTROL: European operational concept validation methodology, E-OCVM version 3.0, volume I (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. EUROCONTROL: European operational concept validation methodology, E-OCVM version 3.0, volume II annexes (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  14. INSEAD: The global innovation index 2012: stronger innovation linkages for global growth. INSEAD and WIPO (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. ENISA: EP3R 2012 activity report. European Public+Private Partnership for Resilience (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. ENISA: EP3R 2013 work objectives. European Public+Private Partnership for Resilience (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  17. NIST: Between invention and innovation: an analysis of funding for early-stage technology development. NIST GCR 02–841, November 2002

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hartmann, G.C., Myers, M.B.: Technical risk, product specifications, and market risk. In: Branscomb, L.M., Auerswald, P.E. (eds.) Taking Technical Risks: How Innovators, Executives, and Investors Manage High-Tech Risks. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  19. European Commission: Pre-commercial procurement: driving innovation to ensure high public services in Europe. European Communities (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. European Commission: Opportunities for public technology procurement in the ICT-related sectors in Europe, final report (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. European Commission: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Pre-commercial Procurement: Driving innovation to ensure sustainable high quality public services in Europe, SEC(2007) 1668, COM(2007) 799 final, Brussels (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Felici, M., Wainwright, N.: Deliverable 6.4 – Future Internet Initiatives Year 1. SecCord Project No. 316622, November 2013

    Google Scholar 

  23. Probert, D., Radnor, M.: Frontier experiences from industry-academia consortia. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 31(3), 28 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Groenveld, P.: Roadmapping integrates business and technology. Res. Technol. Manag. 50(6), 49–58 (2007). (Industrial Research Institute)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cosner, R.R., Hynds, E.J., Fusfeld, A.R., Loweth, C.V., Scouten, C., Albright, R.: Integrating roadmapping into technical planning. Res. Technol. Manag. 50(6), 31–48 (2007). (Industrial Research Institute)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Department for Homeland Security: A roadmap for cybersecurity research. United States Government (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Industrial Control Systems Joint Working Group: Cross-sector roadmap for cybersecurity of control systems. Department for Homeland Security, United States Government (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dissel, M.C., Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J., Probert, D.R.: Value roadmapping. Res. Technol. Manag. 52(6), 45–53 (2009). (Industrial Research Institute)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Petrick, I.J., Martinelli, R.: Driving disruptive innovation: problem finding and strategy setting in an uncertain world. Res. Technol. Manag. 55(6), 49–57 (2012). (Industrial Research Institute)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Radnor, M., Probert, D.R.: Viewing the future. Res. Technol. Manag. 47(2), 25–26 (2004). (Industrial Research Institute)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., Probert, D.: Customizing roadmapping. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 32(3), 80–91 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R.: Developing a technology roadmapping system. In: Technology Management: A Unifying Discipline for Melting the Boundaries, Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology (PICMET), pp. 99–111 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  33. European Commission: High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Joint Communication to the European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union: An Open, Safe and Secure Cyberspace, JOIN (2013) 1 final, Brussels (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology Directorate: A roadmap for cybersecurity research, November 2009

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cybersecurity R&D priorities, United States Homeland Security (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Trustworthy cyberspace: strategic plan for the federal cybersecurity research and development program. Executive Office of the President National Science and Technology Council (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  37. NITRD: Cybersecurity game-change research & development recommendations. The Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) Program (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  38. White House: cyberspace policy review: assuring a trusted and resilient information and communications infrastructure. United States Whitehouse publication (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  39. ESCSWG: Roadmap to achieve energy delivery systems cybersecurity. The Energy Sector Control Systems Working Group (ESCSWG), Sept (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Space Foundation: U.S. non-military cybersecurity research & development and related policies, Cybersecurity, Federal Research and Development Strategic Plan. Space Foundation (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been partly funded by the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) of the European Commission, Security and Trust Coordination and Enhanced Collaboration (SecCord) – http://www.seccord.eu/ – grant agreement 316622.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dharm Kapletia .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

Increasing the impact of publicly funded R&D in the United States – Desk-based roadmapping

Source

Roadmap label

Documented evidence

A roadmap for cybersecurity research [34]

1.1

Stakeholder collaboration

Public-private collaboration among government, industry, and academia, + extraordinary economic, social, and technological forcing functions

1.2

Metrics and benefits (large scale systems)

Metrics need to be experimentally evaluated and benefits to large scale systems clearly demonstrated

1.3

Proven demonstrations

Proven demonstrations of effectiveness are required, this would help roll-out adoption in practice

1.4

Preparation for test evaluation

Design mechanisms, policies, and plans for test evaluation that can be incrementally deployed

1.5

New ways of managing IPR (Intellectual Property Rights)

Innovative approaches to licensing and sharing intellectual properties for global scale technologies

1.6

Committed to system trustworthiness

Overarching commitment to system trustworthiness, going beyond past approaches

1.7

Monitoring and accountability

Recognition of the pervasive needs for monitoring and accountability

1.8

Critical areas for technology application

Understanding critical areas suitable for technology application

Cross sector roadmap for cybersecurity of control systems [27]

2.1

Bridging new and legacy systems

Encourage R&D into tying legacy systems into upcoming security solutions

Homeland Security – cybersecurity R&D priorities [35]

3.1

Address critical weaknesses

Driving security improvements to address critical weaknesses

3.2

Solutions to emerging threats

Discovering new solutions for emerging cyber security threats

3.3

New, tested technologies

Delivering new, tested technologies to defend against cyber security threats

Trustworthy cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal Cybersecurity R&D Program [36]

4.1

Early stage transition plan

Early stage transition plan in place, that includes commercialization pathways, tech transfer coordination, proactive program management, and resources to reward success in transitioning

4.2

Shifting risk to the private sector

Private sector is willing to take on significant risk-taking and shepherd research through the commercialization process

4.3

Create cross-agency forums

Participation in cross-agency security entrepreneur forums, PI meetings, laboratory expos, and defense venture catalyst initiative

4.4

Leverage networked environments for test and evaluation

Cross-agency activities designed to leverage available operational and next generation networked environments to support experimental deployment, test and evaluation in public and private environments

4.5

Develop partnerships for mature technologies

Cross-agency activities designed to develop partnerships for mature technologies, through open system integrator forums (VCs, SIs, government), and small business innovative research conferences

4.6

Rewards for program managers

Government funded R&D to build-in rewards for government program managers and principal investigators for commercial success

Cybersecurity game-change R&D recommendations [37]

5.1

Incubators for radical R&D

Support game-changing R&D using incubators and Federal start-up funding

5.2

Seed funding for industry led R&D

Support industry-based research consortia to lead and direct focused R&D using seed funding

5.3

University and industry partnering

Support universities to create industrial partner programs designed to stimulate pre-competitive cooperation among industrial partners

5.4

Quality talent in public sector roles

Recruit experienced high quality talent into government program manager roles, supporting technology transfer

Cyberspace policy review: assuring a trusted and resilient information and communications infrastructure [38]

6.1

Rapid adoption of R&T (Research and Technology)

Federal government to work with industry to develop migration paths and incentives for rapid adoption of research and technology development, including collaboration between academic and industrial laboratories

6.2

Define goals for standards bodies

Federal government, in collaboration with private sector and other stakeholders, should use the infrastructure objectives and R&D framework to help define goals for national and international standards bodies

Roadmap to achieve energy delivery systems cybersecurity [39]

7.1

Industry forum for commercialization

Develop a matchmaking forum to connect researchers, vendors, and asset owners to accelerate research from concept to commercialization

7.2

Industry need and evidence based investment

Develop mechanisms for utility and vendor engagement for pilot research studies to address the business case up front. Create a forum for industry to detail and request R&D topics

7.3

Focus funding on multi-disciplinary projects

Require diverse (academic, lab, industry) participation to receive funding

7.4

Data protection for vulnerability data

Support legislation that protects entities who disclose vulnerabilities in good faith to the appropriate parties

Federal R&D strategic plan [40]

8.1

Departments report R&D requirements

Required to provide Congress with a strategic plan based on an assessment of cyber security risk to guide the overall direction of Federal cyber security and information assurance R&D for IT and networking systems

8.2

Departments create scientific foundation

Through existing programs and activities, support research that will lead to the development of a scientific foundation for the field of cyber security, including research that increases understanding of the underlying principles of securing complex networked systems, enables repeatable experimentation, and creates quantifiable security metrics

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kapletia, D., Felici, M., Wainwright, N. (2014). An Integrated Framework for Innovation Management in Cyber Security and Privacy. In: Cleary, F., Felici, M. (eds) Cyber Security and Privacy. CSP 2014. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 470. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12574-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12574-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-12573-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-12574-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics