Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Design of evaluation items of the security levels for suppliers in the manufacturing industry

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Owing to the fourth industrial revolution, collaborations between companies and various technologies have become indispensable, particularly in the manufacturing industry. However, technology leakage is likely to occur among cooperative partners where the ratio of small- and medium-sized enterprises is relatively high because of low-security resources. To address this security management problem, we analyzed existing literature and designed a reference model and questions to evaluate security levels reflecting partners’ characteristics to be managed by the manufacturing parent company. We conducted an expert survey to verify the designed model and calculated the weight of each evaluation area. Consequently, we designed a reference model to effectively evaluate, from the perspective of the parent company, partners in manufacturing. We anticipate that the results of this study will assist a parent company in securely sharing data and technologies with partners and being used as a self-diagnosis tool by partners to evaluate its security levels.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vimal S, Jesuva AS, Bharathiraja S, Guru S, Jackins V (2021) Reducing latency in smart manufacturing service system using edge computing. J Platform Technol 9(1):15–22

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gul MJ, Rehman A, Paul A, Rho S, Riaz R, Kim J (2020) Blockchain expansion to secure assets with fog node on special duty. Soft Comput 24(20):15209–15221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04857-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith R, Barry R (2019) America’s Electric grid has a vulnerable back door – and russia walked through it. Wall Street J. https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-electric-grid-has-a-vulnerable-back-doorand-russia-walked-through-it-11547137112?mod=article_inline, Accessed 2022/06/02.

  4. Deloitte, MAPI (2016) cyber risk in advanced manufacturing. United States of America

  5. WIPO https://www.wipo.int/tradesecrets/en/. last accessed 2022.06.04.

  6. Yu HR, Chang HB (2020) A meta-analysis of industrial security research for sustainable organizational growth. Sustainability 12(22):9526. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gul MJ, Rabia R, Jararweh Y, Rathore MM, and Paul A. (2019). Security flaws of operating system against live device attacks: a case study on live linux distribution device. In: 2019 Sixth International Conference on Software Defined Systems (SDS), IEEE, pp 154–159

  8. Khalil MI, Kim R, Seo CY (2020) Challenges and opportunities of big data. J Plat Tech 8(2):3–9

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lee JM (2013) Internal control management methodology designed for the industrial technology protection and leakage prevention: case studies on the improved security management system of the manufacturer's suppliers. Dissertation, Korea University

  10. Kim IH, Lee KH (2017) Evaluation model of the contracting company’s security management using the DEA model. J Korea Inst Inf Security Cryptol 27(3):687–704. https://doi.org/10.13089/JKIISC.2017.27.3.687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim JW, Lee CW, Chang HB (2020) The development of a security evaluation model focused on information leakage protection for sustainable growth. Sustainability 12(24):10639. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Noh SY, Lim JI (2017) A study for enterprise type realtime information security management system. J Korea Inst Inf Security Cryptol 27.3:617–636. https://doi.org/10.13089/JKIISC.2017.27.3.617

  13. Ahn BG, Yu HR, Chang HB (2020) A research on activating factor for cultivating a proactive organizational security culture. Converg Security J 20(2):3–13. https://doi.org/10.33778/kcsa.2020.20.2.003

  14. Bae ST, Kim JH (2013) A study on development of the evaluation model about level of security in national R&D program. J Korean Assoc Comput Educ 16(1):73–80

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wei YC, Wu WC, Chu YC (2018) Performance evaluation of the recommendation mechanism of information security risk identification. Neurocomputing 279:48–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2017.05.106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Korean Association for Industrial Technology Security (2017) Industrial technology protection guidelines and manuals. Korea.

  17. Small and Medium Business Administration of Korea (SMBA), Large & Small Business Cooperation Foundation Korea, Rural Affairs (2016) SME technology protection guidelines. Korea.

  18. Ministry of Science and ICT (2014). National R & D Business Security Management Standard Manual. Korea

  19. Korea Industrial Technology Association, Small and Medium Business Administration (SMBA), Korea Technology and Information Promotion Agency for SMEs (2007). Manual to respond to technology leakage for SMEs. Korea.

  20. Mullet V, Sondi P, Ramat E (2021) A review of cybersecurity guidelines for manufacturing factories in industry 4.0. IEEE Access 9:23235–23263. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3056650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johansson K, Paulsson T, Bergström E, Seigerroth U (2022) Improving Cybersecurity Awareness Among SMEs in the Manufacturing Industry. In: SPS2022. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 209–220. https://doi.org/10.3233/ATDE220140

  22. Corallo A, Lazoi M, Lezzi M, Pontrandolfo P (2021) Cybersecurity Challenges for Manufacturing Systems 4.0: Assessment of the Business Impact Level. IEEE Trans Eng Manage. 1109/TEM.2021.3084687

  23. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2012) The seven pillars of the analytic hierarchy process. In: Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 23–40

  24. Korea Development Institute (2008) Study on Modification and improvement of general guidelines to perform preliminary feasibility study, the 5th edn. Korea

  25. Kim DG, Park YW, Lee SM (2007) Assessment of tourism resource development by the analytic hierarchy process: focusing on the planning process. Int J Tour Hosp Res 21:5–18

    Google Scholar 

  26. Saaty TL (2008). Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors in the analytic hierarchy/network process. RACSAM-Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matematicas, 102(2):251–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03191825

  27. Chen X, Chen R, Yang C (2022) Research to key success factors of intelligent logistics based on IoT technology. J Supercomput 78(3):3905–3939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04009-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology (KIAT) grant funded by the Korea Government (MOTIE) (P0008703, The Competency Development Program for Industry Specialist).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Convergence Security, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea

    Yurim Choi

  2. Department of Industrial Security, College of Business and Economics, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea

    Hangbae Chang

Authors
  1. Yurim Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hangbae Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hangbae Chang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to this work.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choi, Y., Chang, H. Design of evaluation items of the security levels for suppliers in the manufacturing industry. J Supercomput 79, 11707–11742 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-023-05101-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-023-05101-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation