skip to main content
10.1145/3384419.3430775acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessensysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Detecting replay attacks against industrial robots via power fingerprinting

Published:16 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Industrial robots have been shown to suffer from replay attacks, via which adversaries not only manipulate the robot operation by downloading malicious code, but also prevent the detection of this manipulation by replaying recorded (and normal) movement data to the monitoring system. To protect industrial robots from replay attacks, we design a novel intrusion detection system using the power fingerprint of robots, called PIDS (<u>Po</u>wer-based <u>I</u>ntrusion <u>D</u>etection <u>S</u>ystem), and deliver PIDS as a bump-in-the-wire module installed at the powerline of commodity robots. The foundation of PIDS is the physically-induced dependency between the robot movement and the concomitant electrical power consumption, which PIDS captures via joint physical analysis and (cyber) data-driven modeling. PIDS then fingerprints the robot movements observed by the monitoring system using their expected power consumption, and cross-validates the fingerprints with empirically collected power information --- a mismatch thereof flags anomalies of the observed movements (i.e., evidence of replay attack). We have evaluated PIDS using three models of robots from different vendors --- i.e., ABB IRB120, KUKA KR6 R700, and Universal Robots UR5 robots --- with over 2, 000 operation cycles. The experimental results show that PIDS detects replay attacks with an average rate of 96.5% (up to 99.9%) and a 0.1s latency.

References

  1. Ros anomaly detector package. https://github.com/narayave/mh5_anomaly_detector.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Lucas Apa. Exploiting industrial collaborative robots. https://ioactive.com/exploiting-industrial-collaborative-robots/, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Michèle Basseville, Igor V Nikiforov, et al. Detection of abrupt changes: theory and application, volume 104. Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Christian Bayens, Tuan Le, Luis Garcia, Raheem Beyah, Mehdi Javanmard, and Saman Zonouz. See no evil, hear no evil, feel no evil, print no evil? malicious fill patterns detection in additive manufacturing. In USENIX Security Symposium, pages 1181--1198, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Christopher M Bishop. Pattern recognition and machine learning. springer, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. André Carvalho Bittencourt. Friction change detection in industrial robot arms, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Defense Use Case. Analysis of the cyber attack on the ukrainian power grid. Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Cesar Cerrudo and Lucas Apa. Hacking robots before skynet. IOActive Website, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Cesar Cerrudo and Lucas Apa. Hacking robots before skynet: Technical appendix. Technical report, https://ioactive.com/pdfs/Hacking-Robots-Before-Skynet-Technical-Appendix.pdf, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Rita Chattopadhyay, Mruthunjaya (Jay) Chetty, Eric XiaozhongJi, Stephanie Cope, and Jeffrey E Davis. Real time remote monitoring and anomaly detection in industrial robots based on vibration signals, enabling large scale deployment of condition based maintenance. International Journal of Nanotechnology & Nanomedicine, 2(1):1--4, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Davide Chicco. Ten quick tips for machine learning in computational biology. BioData mining, 10(1):35, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jui-Sheng Chou and Abdi Suryadinata Telaga. Real-time detection of anomalous power consumption. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 33:400--411, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Keywhan Chung, Xiao Li, Peicheng Tang, Zeran Zhu, Zbigniew T Kalbarczyk, Ravishankar K Iyer, and Thenkurussi Kesavadas. Smart malware that uses leaked control data of robotic applications: The case of raven-ii surgical robots. In International Symposium on Research in Attacks, Intrusions and Defenses (RAID), pages 337--351, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Shane S Clark, Benjamin Ransford, Amir Rahmati, Shane Guineau, Jacob Sorber, Wenyuan Xu, and Kevin Fu. Wattsupdoc: Power side channels to nonintrusively discover untargeted malware on embedded medical devices. In HealthTech, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Siobhan Climer and Mishaal Khan. Ransomware targets manufacturing industry: A cybersecurity report. https://gomindsight.com/insights/blog/ransomware-targets-manufacturing-industry-cybersecurity-report/, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Thomas Eisenbarth, Christof Paar, and Björn Weghenkel. Building a side channel based disassembler. In Transactions on computational science X, pages 78--99. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Nicolas Falliere, Liam O Murchu, and Eric Chien. W32. stuxnet dossier. White paper, Symantec Corp., Security Response, 5(6):29, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. FANUC. Introduction of robots for the electrical and electronic industry. https://www.fanuc.co.jp/en/product/robot/application/elec/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Damodar N Gujarati. Basic econometrics. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Benjamin R Hamilton, Xiaoli Ma, Qi Zhao, and Jun Xu. Aces: adaptive clock estimation and synchronization using kalman filtering. In International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pages 152--162. ACM, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Carsten Heer. Robots double worldwide by 2020. https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/robots-double-worldwide-by-2020, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. RW Herschy. The uncertainty in a current meter measurement. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 13(5--6):281--284, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Rachel Hornung, Holger Urbanek, Julian Klodmann, Christian Osendorfer, and Patrick Van Der Smagt. Model-free robot anomaly detection. In International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pages 3676--3683. IEEE, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Stephen Kent and Randall Atkinson. Rfc2401: Security architecture for the internet protocol, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Lei Liu, Guanhua Yan, Xinwen Zhang, and Songqing Chen. Virusmeter: Preventing your cellphone from spies. In International Workshop on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, pages 244--264. Springer, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Yannan Liu, Lingxiao Wei, Zhe Zhou, Kehuan Zhang, Wenyuan Xu, and Qiang Xu. On code execution tracking via power side-channel. In SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), pages 1019--1031. ACM, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Maja Lutovac Banduka. Remote monitoring and control of industrial robot based on android device and wi-fi communication. Automatika: časopis za automatiku, mjerenje, elektroniku, računarstvo i komunikacije, 56(3):281--291, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Michael L McIntyre, Warren E Dixon, Darren M Dawson, and Ian D Walker. Fault detection and identification for robot manipulators. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), volume 5, pages 4981--4986. IEEE, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Douglas C Montgomery. Introduction to statistical quality control. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Samuel B Moore, Jacob Gatlin, Sofia Belikovetsky, Mark Yampolskiy, Wayne E King, and Yuval Elovici. Power consumption-based detection of sabotage attacks in additive manufacturing. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.01822, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Mehari Msgna, Konstantinos Markantonakis, and Keith Mayes. The b-side of side channel leakage: Control flow security in embedded systems. In International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Systems, pages 288--304. Springer, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Asim Munawar, Phongtharin Vinayavekhin, and Giovanni De Magistris. Spatiotemporal anomaly detection for industrial robots through prediction in unsupervised feature space. In Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), pages 1017--1025. IEEE, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Vedanth Narayanan and Rakesh B Bobba. Learning based anomaly detection for industrial arm applications. In Proceedings of Workshop on Cyber-Physical Systems Security and PrivaCy (CPS-SPC), pages 13--23. ACM, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Robotics Online. Top 6 future trends in robotic automation. https://www.robotics.org/blog-article.cfm/Top-6-Future-Trends-in-Robotic-Automation/101, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Marcello Pogliani, Davide Quarta, Mario Polino, Martino Vittone, Federico Maggi, and Stefano Zanero. Security of controlled manufacturing systems in the connected factory: the case of industrial robots. Springer Journal of Computer Virology and Hacking Techniques, pages 1--15, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. IFR Press. Industrial robots: Robot investment reaches record 16.5 billion usd. https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/robot-investment-reaches-record-16.5-billion-usd, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Hongyi Pu. Demo: Mounting replay attacks on industrial robots. https://youtu.be/HAeHg34146M.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Davide Quarta, Marcello Pogliani, Mario Polino, Federico Maggi, Andrea Maria Zanchettin, and Stefano Zanero. Breaking the laws of robotics attacking industrial robots. https://www.blackhat.com/us-17/briefings/schedule, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Davide Quarta, Marcello Pogliani, Mario Polino, Federico Maggi, Andrea Maria Zanchettin, and Stefano Zanero. An experimental security analysis of an industrial robot controller. In Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P), pages 268--286. IEEE, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Ahmad H Sabry, Farah Hani Nordin, Ameer H Sabry, and Mohd Zainal Abidin Ab Kadir. Fault detection and diagnosis of industrial robot based on power consumption modeling. Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 67(9):7929--7940, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. BN Saeed. Introduction to Robotics: Analysis, Control, Applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Michael Sharp. Observations on developing reliability information utilization in a manufacturing environment with case study: robotic arm manipulators. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 102(9--12):3243--3264, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Yoni Shohet. Ransomware attacks hit manufacturing - are you vulnerable? https://www.industryweek.com/technology-and-iiot/article/22027363/ransomware-attacks-hit-manufacturing-are-you-vulnerable, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Bruno Siciliano, Lorenzo Sciavicco, Luigi Villani, and Giuseppe Oriolo. Robotics: modelling, planning and control. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Keith Stouffer, Joe Falco, and Karen Scarfone. Guide to industrial control systems (ics) security. NIST special publication, 800(82):16--16, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Genesis Systems. Robots in automotive manufacturing: Top 6 applications. https://www.genesis-systems.com/blog/robots-automotive-manufacturing-top-6-applications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Jieyu Tao, Bosheng Ye, Yuanlong Xie, Xiaoqi Tang, and Bao Song. Dynamic modeling and load identification of industrial robot using improved particle swarm optimization. In International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, pages 75--80. IEEE/ASME, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Technavio. Robotics engineering: 10 trends shaping the industrial robotics for 2019. https://blog.technavio.com/blog/robotics-engineering-trends-shaping-industrial-robotics, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. David I Urbina, Jairo A Giraldo, Alvaro A Cardenas, Nils Ole Tippenhauer, Junia Valente, Mustafa Faisal, Justin Ruths, Richard Candell, and Henrik Sandberg. Limiting the impact of stealthy attacks on industrial control systems. In SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), pages 1092--1105. ACM, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Mien Van, Hee-Jun Kang, Young-Soo Suh, and Kyoo-Sik Shin. A robust fault diagnosis and accommodation scheme for robot manipulators. International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, 11(2):377--388, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Detecting replay attacks against industrial robots via power fingerprinting

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SenSys '20: Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems
      November 2020
      852 pages
      ISBN:9781450375900
      DOI:10.1145/3384419

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 16 November 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate174of867submissions,20%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader