Security threats risks

The 2007 Lithuanian Energy Strategy observes that the pressures of Lithuanian electricity security in the coming years are such that the new NPP must enter service by 2015 at the latest (Miskinis et al., 2008, p. 41). As the reactor type has not yet been selected, and some financial issues still remain unresolved, this author is skeptical that this requirement will indeed be met in time, in which case there is presumably the risk of a serious electricity security threat looming for Lithuania in the second half of the coming decade. 

The terrorism threat as a change stimulus for the mandate of PST after 9/11 The 9/11 terrorist attacks shocked the whole Western world, and gave renewal to terrorism as a security threat in Norway. The terrorism risk against Norway subsequent the attack on the US, was strengthened because it was seen as an attack on the western way of Uving and democracy. Suddenly there was a need for expertise on terrorism and the terrorist threat, and in this POT had a role to play 9/11 caused that the public woke up. We have been working with terrorism for many years, but most people have not been aware of the scale (Per Sefland, Director of POT in Aftenposten 16.12.2001). 

While supply chain risk and information technology risk have been studied in isolation, little has been done to define the impact of information security threats within highly integrated... 

Awareness of security risks associated with hazmat transport, ways to enhance transport security, how to recognize and respond to possible security threats, and in-depth security training and... 

Malevolent and unauthorized actions have to be addressed during the hazard and risk analysis. If a security threat is seen as being reasonably foreseeable, then a security threats analysis should be carried out and if security threats have been identified then a vulnerability analysis should be undertaken in order to specify security requirements. 

In Section 5 we propose and discuss the concept of security modules a security software layer, to retrofit security in PROFINET lO and PROFIsafe without any changes in the transmission system or standards. If the risk of security threats is not negligible, security modules can be used to add a security layer between PROFINET lO and PROFIsafe to reduce the possibihties of security attacks, and increase the overall availability. In addition for the studied system, the security modules will not forward safety containers that indicate compromised integrity, thus not putting the system in fail-safe mode due to spurious attacks on safety containers. 

Figure 21.2. Categorizing risks into risk famiiies exampie of security threats...

The second key parameter within the risk assessment methodology is the consequence (or impact), measured on a qualitative scale of 1-4 (sometimes 5) strong, medium, weak, no consequence. It too has to be applied to daily and severe security threats. 

In one sense, security management can be treated like any other type of risk analysis. Each security threat is a hazard which has consequences and likelihoods, and that calls for the installation of safeguards and the development of emergency response plans. However, there are differences between normal risk analysis and security work. In particular, security analysis requires that everyone at a process facility be imaginative and to think the unthinkable. ... 

Introduction Priorto September 11, 2001, known as 9/11, chemical process safety activities primarily focused on accidental release risks and excluded most considerations of intentional releases. Security was provided mostly for lesser threats than such extreme acts of violence, and terrorism was generally not provided for except in high-security areas of the world. Exceptions to this included general concerns for sabotage. This was due to a perception that these risks were managed adequately, and that the threat of a terrorist attack, particularly on U.S. chemical manufacturing facilities or transportation system, was remote. 

Threats of Concern Terrorist acts can be the most problematic to defend against since they may be more extreme or malevolent than other crimes focused on monetary gains or outcomes with less malicious intent. Plus terrorists may use military tactics not often provided for in base chemical facility design. Chemical facility security must be considered in context with local and national homeland security and law enforcement activities, as well as with emergency response capabilities. There is a practical limit to the ability of a chemical site to prevent or mitigate a terrorist act. Above a certain level of threat, the facility needs to rely on law enforcement and military services to provide physical security against extreme acts of intentional harm. The security posture must be risk-based, and so extremely robust security measures are not always applicable or necessary. 

Security Vulnerability Assessment A security vulnerability assessment is intended to identify security vulnerabilities from a wide range of threats ranging from vandalism to terrorism. With the recognition of threats, consequences, and vulnerabilities, the risk of security events can be evaluated, and a security management system can be organized that will effectively mitigate those risks. 

Bolton s opinion was bolstered in June 2005 by Senator Richard Lu-gar s survey of 85 non-proliferation and national security analysts from the United States and other nations. It was designed in part to characterize the risks related to the terrorist use of CBRN. The survey revealed that experts believe the probability of an attack somewhere in the world with a CBRN weapon was 50% over the next five years and 70% over the next ten. An attack with a radiological weapon was seen as the most probable with the likelihood of an attack with a nuclear or biological weapon considered about half as plausible [37]. The average probability of a nuclear attack in the next ten years was nearly 30%, with experts almost evenly divided between terrorist acquisitions of a working nuclear weapon versus self-construction [37]. The average risk estimate over ten years for major chemical and biological attacks was 20%. Senator Lu-gar concluded The bottom line is this for the foreseeable future, the United States and other nations will face an existential threat from the intersection of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. ... 

---