Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. adipiscing eli maximus massa sit amet

Cyberattacks targeting Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and Industrial Control Systems (ICS) environments are becoming more frequent and harder to detect. As operational technology (OT) environments continue to digitize and connect with broader IT ecosystems, they are also being exposed to a wave of new risks.

From AI-powered attacks and sophisticated phishing to supply chain vulnerabilities and growing regulatory pressure, it’s clear that OT cybersecurity needs more focused attention.

Attackers are evolving rapidly, using automation and evasion techniques that overwhelm traditional defenses. And yet, many organizations are flooded with alerts but lack the ability to filter real threats from noise.

Assessing the threat: Where to start?

No golden rules exist for how to assess the threat. However, one of the most common questions security teams face is: “where should organizations begin assessing the threat”? 

At CPX, we follow a domain-based approach to assess and respond to ICS/SCADA cybersecurity threats.

Filtering the noise in SCADA security

One of the main challenges for SCADA-based organizations is the inability to filter the noise by dissecting incidents through a combination of threat hunting, intelligence gathering, and incident attribution. They often lack a proactive, customized use case library that is required to detect specific and tailored threats targeted at the company. One of the suggested strategies could be a hunt-and-response strategy.

1. Develop custom use cases 

1. Create tailored use cases based on theory, practice, and experience to detect the top, imminent, perceived or previously detected threats affecting the company. 
2. For example, ICS – UseCase #1 “Unusual/Unplanned OPC Scan”, ICS – UseCase#2 “Suspected C2 communication”, IDS via Emerging Threats
   • Analysts respond to the alerts generated from the new use cases.
   • The Intelligence teams add context and if possible attribution to the detected threats.
   • The Content Engineering teams tune use cases from analysis, attribution, and context.
     • Analysts respond to the alerts generated from the tuned use cases.

2. Engineering and Intelligence: Detect and Collect threat data to support additional use case development

• Develop tailored metrics/reports to detect current threats based on real world network data.

Report 1: Critical Anomaly

1. Develop metric reports to display anomalous traffic patterns occurring on critical systems via whitelisting expected traffic and displaying the remaining traffic from these devices on a pre-developed reporting template.
2. Collect log, packet and net-flow data for 30 days or more , analyze and condense the report data into a data analysis and metric report in order to highlight and add context to suspected suspicious traffic patterns.
3. Present and discuss the findings to assist in identifying the suspicious, anomalous traffic which may be used to develop additional use cases. (Fringe benefit: Engage and seed relationships with infrastructure teams, especially those related to critical systems)
4. Investigate and consolidate threat intel from perceived anomalous traffic and create custom use cases from this data along with perceived attack scenarios.

5. 3. Hunt: Implement the hunting development process

6. Hunters find new threats on the network and raise incidents for investigation.
7. Intelligence teams add context and if possible attribution to the detected threats.
8. Content Engineering teams create use cases from the newly acquired indicators.
9. Analysts respond to the alerts generated from the new use cases.
10. Intelligence teams add context and if possible attribution to the detected threats.
11. Content Engineering teams tune use cases from analysis, attribution and context.
12. Analysts respond to the alerts generated from the tuned use cases.

3) Enhance: Review the use case library

Analyze reports on the number of times each use case has triggered alongside the appearance of indicators present in the logic of the use cases. Identify false positives or outdated uses cases that are no longer valid.

Submit findings to the Content Management team to repair erroneous use cases and archive use cases that are no longer useful or relevant to the SOC.

●        Removing unnecessary defunct use cases will help keep the use case library current and in line with the current threat landscape. It also assists in optimizing production appliances and maintaining good hygiene.

4) Respond: Optimize and advance roles

1. Expand hunting and attribution capabilities to include dark net operations.
2. Expand L2 analyst capabilities to include malware analysis and basic remote forensic collection and analysis of forensic images.
3. Expand L1 analyst capabilities to triage, analysis, response, and closure of low priority incidents.

4. Enhance: Management reporting and Success factors

In ICS environments, structured reporting and measurement are critical to driving continuous improvement.

1. Review cadence: Bi-annual reviews should be conducted to evaluate program success, surface knowledge gaps, and refine training needs.
2. Outcome reporting: Bi-annual and annual reports should capture cost savings realized through breach prevention and disruption activities.
3. Resource alignment: These findings should be used to justify investment in SOC advancement, including analyst training, appliance modernization, and awareness initiatives.

This process is only one element of a larger mitigation framework. To remain effective, organizations must avoid siloed operations and the “not in my backyard” mindset, instead embracing a collaborative, holistic approach. Such alignment is essential to staying ahead of a threat landscape that grows more sophisticated each day.

Move beyond reactive defense. Embrace a smarter-threat-aware approach that keeps your ICS environment secure, reliable, and ahead of attackers.

If you need help with fortifying your OT environment, get in touch with our experts at ContactUs@cpx.net.