Constructive Assurance Cases for Cybersecurity
summary
Argues a concrete method: start assurance cases at project start, use eliminative argumentation to turn TAR outputs into top-level claims, then drive requirements, design and tests; example shows a headlamp attack tree with four attack vectors and defenses (message authentication, keys in a hardware security module, hardware root of trust, static code analysis results as evidence). Recommends codifying templates and tools (mentions Socrates), requires tool validation per ISO/SAE 21434, and promotes reusable modular subcases across supply chains.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (8)
- 0:00Cybersecurity assurance intro
- 3:25Problem statement and challenges
- 6:40Method for constructive assurance
- 12:20Eliminative argumentation structure
- 16:34Dynamic checklists and assurance
- 18:59Headlamp use case analysis
- 26:07Modularity and supply chain
- 28:37Summary and Q&A
related talks
38mBuilding a Security Assurance Program
51mSecure Applications, By Design
50mAdaptive Assurance: Implementing an Automated Control Testing Program
45mSecurity Architecture, An Adventure?
17mAttestation Framework & Objectives
32mResilient Secure Software Development Through Insights Learned from Adversarial Attack Campaigns
40mTool Time: Building Your Cybersecurity Architecture Planning Toolbox
01h 04mShifting Security Everywhere