1. IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN: MuGM Title: Availability Requirement Discussion Date Submitted: Presented at IEEE d TG Authors or Source(s): Stephen Chasko (Landis+Gyr), Yoshihiro Ohba (Toshiba) Abstract: This contribution is to lead a discussion regarding the Availability requirements for secure multicast
MuGM

2. IEEE 802.21 presentation release statements
This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE Working Group. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.
The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE
The contributor is familiar with IEEE patent policy, as stated in Section 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board bylaws < and in Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE Standards Development
MuGM

3. Availability
“Ensuring timely and reliable access to and use of information.” source: NISTIR 7298 “A loss of availability is the disruption of access to or use of information or an information system.” source: FIPS 199
MuGM

4. Availability – Potential Impact
LOW – loss of availability could be expected to have a limited adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets or individuals. For example, degradation in mission capability to the extent and duration that the organization is able to perform its primary functions, minor damage to assets, minor financial loss or minor harm to individuals. MEDIUM – Loss of availability could be expected to have a serious adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets or individuals. For example, significant degradation in mission capability, significant damage to assets, significant financial loss, harm to individuals that does not involve loss of life or serious life threatening injuries.. HIGH – Loss of availability could be expected to have a severe or catastrophic adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets or individuals. For example, loss of mission capability, major damage to assets, major financial loss, loss or serious life threatening injuries.
source: FIPS 199
MuGM

5. Availability – illustrative use case
Firmware Download for a large group of smart meters
Critical configuration change to a group of SCADA equipment
Information Update to home area network displays
Certificate Update to a large group of smart meters
MuGM

6. Availability Attacks
Man in the middle attack Denial of service Flooding attack - Flood the network with traffic. Permanent Denial of Service - Phlashing - A buffer overflow bug or firmware download so that the hardware is no longer functional. Draining battery powered resources Smurf /Fraggle Attack - Flooding the victim's bandiwdth by spoofing the source address so that reply messages are sent to the target.
MuGM

7. Availability Requirement
We need to choose one of the following:
Mandatory
Optional
Not Needed
MuGM