I find this article very exciting as it concludes there is presently no current solution and does not know about AKIDA technology.

To be an exciting read however you need to first go to the Brainchip web site and read under Applications what AKD1000 offers to cyber security.

Secondly you need to keep in mind the papers by Professor Iliadis regarding how their spiking neural cyber security works with AKIDA and how Brainchip and NASA and in consequence how DARPA is involved.

And Thirdly of course don’t mention the Cold War.

My opinion only DYOR
FF.

AKIDA Ballista:

Robotics cyber security: vulnerabilities, attacks, countermeasures, and recommendations

• Jean-Paul A. Yaacoub,
• Hassan N. Noura,
• […]
• Ali Chehab

International Journal of Information Security(2021)Cite this article

• 891 Accesses

• Metrics details

Abstract

The recent digital revolution led robots to become integrated more than ever into different domains such as agricultural, medical, industrial, military, police (law enforcement), and logistics. Robots are devoted to serve, facilitate, and enhance the human life. However, many incidents have been occurring, leading to serious injuries and devastating impacts such as the unnecessary loss of human lives. Unintended accidents will always take place, but the ones caused by malicious attacks represent a very challenging issue. This includes maliciously hijacking and controlling robots and causing serious economic and financial losses. This paper reviews the main security vulnerabilities, threats, risks, and their impacts, and the main security attacks within the robotics domain. In this context, different approaches and recommendations are presented in order to enhance and improve the security level of robotic systems such as multi-factor device/user authentication schemes, in addition to multi-factor cryptographic algorithms. We also review the recently presented security solutions for robotic systems.

Conclusion

Nowadays, robotic systems are being deployed and used in different domains that are based on critical infrastructures. However, robotic systems suffer from several security vulnerabilities that can be exploited to launch dangerous attacks, which may have drastic consequences on these infrastructures escalating from economical losses all the way to the loss of human lives. Such attacks are possible due to the lack of security by design of robotic systems and the reliance on open wireless communication channels. As such, it is highly recommended to protect robots from any possible attack and by all means necessary. This includes detecting and preventing attackers from breaching into these systems to inject malicious malware or/and data to cause either chaos and havoc in the robots’ operation, or to leak sensitive information (industrial espionage). Therefore, the authentication process should be designed to reach the highest possible security level by employing mutual multi-factor authentication scheme. This helps in reducing the illegal access to robots/users. On the other hand, lightweight cryptographic algorithms and protocols at the network and/or at the physical layer are mandatory to ensure secure wireless communication with minimal overhead in terms of delay and required resources. Moreover, privacy-preserving techniques should be used to ensure the privacy of legal entities. Moreover, non-cryptographic solutions such as lightweight intrusion detection or prevention systems should be designed to better protect the robotics applications. At the end of this paper, we have discussed the security requirements and have presented several recommendations for such requirements within robotic systems. As part of future work, we plan to shed more light over the main topics that are yet to be covered, including the design of anti-forensic solutions to maintain the integrity of availability of evidences.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10207-021-00545-8

I: