1. SRS Architecture Study Partha Pal Franklin Webber

2. 2 Level of service w/o attack undefended Survivable (OASIS Dem/Val) Regenerative time Level of service Start of focused attack Self-Regenerative System But, the new technological features alone or by themselves cannot make a system “self-regenerative” SRS program is developing new capabilities, services and mechanisms that will help to slow down (and hopefully reverse) the loss of system’s resources and capabilities under attack “Self-regenerative” Systems are “Survivable Systems” enhanced with the next wave of new capabilities, mechanisms and services Study purpose: develop an understanding of the architecture of self-regenerative (distributed information) system

3. 3 Balances pros and cons of both approaches If the high watermark is implemented then it provides a concrete context, but “grand fathering” may impact choice and Integration of new capabilities This is study in the abstract..leading to an abstract architecture that will need a concrete context to realize.. 3 rd generation assumptions are still valid- Absolute prevention, and accurate and on time detection are impossible to achieve Study Plan Understand how to incorporate the new technologies in a distributed information system that not only tolerates the effects of cyber-attacks, but also attempts to stop and reverse the loss of resources and capabilities Start with the new (SRS) capabilities, build a partial architectural framework, and then see what other capabilities, mechanisms and services are needed to complete the architecture– offers a high level of resistance to attacks (protection), improves visibility of attacker activity/attack effects (detection), and is able to adapt to changes caused by the attacker (react) Start with a high watermark survivability architecture, identify where SRS capabilities could benefit, re-organize the architecture to integrate the selected capabilities, mechanisms and services Combine and contrast the abstract architecture with the more concrete case to create a Strawman Self-regenerative System Architecture

4. 4 network host1 host2 host3 Software components running on hosts inputoutput System Abstract representation of a distributed information system Abstract representation of a survivable distributed System Starting With Abstract Representation: An Example What will the abstract (partial) architecture look like if key capabilities from “scalable redundancy” and “biologically inspired diversity” are combined? What kind of control loop can be built using “cognitive” and “insider detection” techniques? What other features and capabilities are needed to make that partial architecture “survivable”?

5. 5 Starting With a Concrete Context: An Example DPASA Architecture applied to the JBI Exemplar used in OASIS Dem/Val SRS capabilities add more diverse redundancy, more choices in adaptive response, better decision making, wider geographic distribution How do the new capabilities impact the existing architecture? The architecture is undergoing multiple levels of evaluation, and will be a good jump off point for the next round of enhancements (I.e., introduction of “self- regenerative” capabilities)

6. 6 Expected Outcome Understanding of the issues and challenges that will be faced if an exemplar “self-regenerative” system is to be designed, implemented and evaluated –Creating the next high watermark in survivable system design and implementation Understanding of if and how SRS-developed capabilities/services/mechanisms can be implanted into other security/survivability constructs –Enhancing existing constructs into more complete solutions Assessment of the SRS technologies New research problems (potentially)