Skip to main content

Modelling Attack-defense Trees Using Timed Automata

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Formal Modeling and Analysis of Timed Systems (FORMATS 2016)

Abstract

Performing a thorough security risk assessment of an organisation has always been challenging, but with the increased reliance on outsourced and off-site third-party services, i.e., “cloud services”, combined with internal (legacy) IT-infrastructure and -services, it has become a very difficult and time-consuming task. One of the traditional tools available to ease the burden of performing a security risk assessment and structure security analyses in general is attack trees [19, 23, 24], a tree-based formalism inspired by fault trees, a well-known formalism used in safety engineering.

In this paper we study an extension of traditional attack trees, called attack-defense trees, in which not only the attacker’s actions are modelled, but also the defensive actions taken by the attacked party [15]. In this work we use the attack-defense tree as a goal an attacker wants to achieve, and separate the behaviour of the attacker and defender from the attack-defense-tree. We give a fully stochastic timed semantics for the behaviour of the attacker by introducing attacker profiles that choose actions probabilistically and execute these according to a probability density. Lastly, the stochastic semantics provides success probabilitites for individual actions. Furthermore, we show how to introduce costs of attacker actions. Finally, we show how to automatically encode it all with a network of timed automata, an encoding that enables us to apply state-of-the-art model checking tools and techniques to perform fully automated quantitative and qualitative analyses of the modelled system.

Research leading to these results was partially supported by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement no. 318003 (TREsPASS).

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 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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.opm.gov/cybersecurity/cybersecurity-incidents/.

  2. 2.

    http://usa.kaspersky.com/about-us/press-center/press-releases/duqu-back-kaspersky-lab-reveals-cyberattack-its-corporate-netwo.

References

  1. Alur, R., Dill, D.: Automata for modeling real-time systems. In: Paterson, M.S. (ed.) Automata, Languages and Programming. LNCS, vol. 443, pp. 322–335. Springer, Heidelberg (1990). ISBN: 3-540-52826-1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Arnold, F., Guck, D., Kumar, R., Stoelinga, M.: Sequential and parallel attack tree modelling. In: Koornneef, F., van Gulijk, C. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. LNCS, vol. 9338, pp. 291–299. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Aslanyan, Z., Nielson, F.: Pareto efficient solutions of attack-defence trees. In: Focardi, R., Myers, A. (eds.) POST 2015. LNCS, vol. 9036, pp. 95–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46666-7_6

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bagnato, A., Kordy, B., Meland, P.H., Schweitzer, P.: Attribute decoration of attack-defense trees. Int. J. Secure Softw. Eng. (IJSSE) 3(2), 1 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Behrmann, G., David, A., Larsen, K.G.: A tutorial on Uppaal. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 200–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30080-9_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Buldas, A., Laud, P., Priisalu, J., Saarepera, M., Willemson, J.: Rational choice of security measures via multi-parameter attack trees. In: López, J. (ed.) CRITIS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4347, pp. 235–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Dalton, G.C., Mills, R.F., Colombi, J.M., Raines, R.A., et al.: Analyzing attack trees using generalized stochastic petri nets. In: 2006 IEEE Information Assurance Workshop, pp. 116–123. IEEE (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. David, A., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Mikučionis, M., Poulsen, D.B., van Vliet, J., Wang, Z.: Statistical model checking for networks of priced timed automata. In: Fahrenberg, U., Tripakis, S. (eds.) FORMATS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6919, pp. 80–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. David, A., Jensen, P.G., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Lime, D., Sørensen, M.G., Taankvist, J.H.: On time with minimal expected cost!. In: Cassez, F., Raskin, J.-F. (eds.) ATVA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8837, pp. 129–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_10. ISBN: 978-3-319-11935-9

    Google Scholar 

  10. David, A., Jensen, P.G., Larsen, K.G., Mikucionis, M., Taankvist, J.H.: Uppaal stratego. In: Baier, C., Tinelli, C. (eds.) Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. LNCS, vol. 9035, pp. 206–211. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46681-0_16. ISBN: 978-3-662-46680-3

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gadyatskaya, O.: How to generate security cameras: towards defence generation for socio-technical systems. In: Mauw, S., et al. (eds.) GraMSec 2015. LNCS, vol. 9390, pp. 50–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-29968-6_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Hermanns, H., Krämer, J., Krcál, J., Stoelinga, M.: The value of attack-defence diagrams. In: Piessens, F., et al. (eds.) POST 2016. LNCS, vol. 9635, pp. 163–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49635-0_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Ivanova, M.G., Probst, C.W., Hansen, R.R., Kammüller, F.: Transforming graphical system models to graphical attack models. In: Mauw, S., et al. (eds.) GraMSec 2015. LNCS, vol. 9390, pp. 82–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-29968-6_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Jürgenson, A., Willemson, J.: Computing exact outcomes of multi-parameter attack trees. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2008, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5332, pp. 1036–1051. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Kordy, B., Mauw, S., Radomirović, S., Schweitzer, P.: Attack-defense trees. J. Logic Comput. 24(1), 55–87 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Kordy, B., Piètre-Cambacédès, L., Schweitzer, P.: DAG-based attack and defense modeling: don’t miss the forest for the attack trees. Comput. Sci. Rev. 13–14, 1–38 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2014.07.001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar, R., Ruijters, E., Stoelinga, M.: Quantitative attack tree analysis via priced timed automata. In: Sankaranarayanan, S., Vicario, E. (eds.) FORMATS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9268, pp. 156–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Larsen, K.G., Pettersson, P., Yi, W.: UPPAAL in a nutshell. STTT 1(1–2), 134–152 (1997). doi:10.1007/s100090050010

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Mauw, S., Oostdijk, M.: Foundations of attack trees. In: Won, D.H., Kim, S. (eds.) ICISC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3935, pp. 186–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. NATO Research and Technology Organisation (RTO). Improving Common Security Risk Analysis. Technical report AC/323(ISP-049)TP/193, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, University of California, Berkeley (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nielson, F., Aslanyan, Z., Parker, D.: Quantitative verification and synthesis of attack-defense scenarios. In: CSF 2016 (2016, to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  22. OWASP. CISO AppSec Guide: Criteria for managing application security risks (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Salter, C., Saydjari, O.S., Schneier, B., Wallner, J.: Toward a secure system engineering methodology. In: Proceedings of the 1998 New Security Paradigms Workshop (NSPW 1998), pp. 2–10, Charlottesville, Virginia, US, September 1998

    Google Scholar 

  24. Schneier, B.: Attack trees: modeling security threats. Dr. Dobb’s J. (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  25. SITEC. Burglar resistance. https://www.sitec.de/en/information-and-advice/burglar-resistance/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danny Bøgsted Poulsen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gadyatskaya, O., Hansen, R.R., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Olesen, M.C., Poulsen, D.B. (2016). Modelling Attack-defense Trees Using Timed Automata. In: Fränzle, M., Markey, N. (eds) Formal Modeling and Analysis of Timed Systems. FORMATS 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9884. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44878-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44878-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44877-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44878-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics