Ditching Run-To-Failure as Part of a Winning ICS Strategy
summary
Argues that run-to-failure is far more expensive than proactive OT cyber maintenance and that incident response is roughly an order of magnitude costlier than prevention. Recommends combining passive network capture with active device querying using vendor protocols (safe, non-invasive) to pull PLC logic snapshots, compare against gold‑images, and detect unauthorized changes. Uses policy, anomaly and signature engines (example signature engine: Suricata), plus asset inventory and dedicated OT security headcount, to turn reactive repairs into scheduled, lower‑cost maintenance.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (12)
- 0:00Introduction
- 2:46Operational Technology
- 6:04Maintenance Styles
- 8:53RunToFailure
- 9:52Cyber Security
- 11:17Other Maintenance Methods
- 12:03Preventative Maintenance
- 14:27Proactive Maintenance
- 15:29Thermal Imaging
- 27:30Compare Configuration
- 28:29Summary
- 30:21Wrapup
related talks
39mTo Patch or Not to Patch OT— A Risk Management Decision
50mHarmonizing IT and OT Security in the Era of Convergence
48mYou Too Can Secure OT
47mField Guide to Building an Operational Technology Cybersecurity Capability
30mForced Digital Transformation and the Realities to ICS/OT Cybersecurity
45mNavigating Third-Party Risk in OT Environments
39mHow to cut the cost of continuous cyber compliance
52mPanel: Industrial Systems In The Crosshairs: What It Really Takes To Defend OT