US 12,238,120 B1
Embedded intrusion prevention system for industrial controllers
Aaron W. Werth, New Market, AL (US); and Thomas H. Morris, Huntsville, AL (US)
Assigned to Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama, for and on behalf of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL (US)
Filed by Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama, for and on behalf of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL (US)
Filed on Dec. 10, 2021, as Appl. No. 17/548,115.
Claims priority of provisional application 63/123,831, filed on Dec. 10, 2020.
Int. Cl. H04L 9/40 (2022.01)
CPC H04L 63/1416 (2013.01) 20 Claims
OG exemplary drawing
 
1. An industrial controller for an industrial control system, the industrial controller comprising:
a processor;
a memory device connected to the processor, the memory device including process logic configured to control and monitor a physical system connected to the industrial controller;
a communication interface configured to permit communications with a node of the industrial control system; and
an intrusion prevention system connected to the communication interface and the processor, the intrusion prevention system comprising:
a first submodule, the first submodule including communication logic configured to receive and evaluate a packet received at the communication interface from the node and to determine whether the packet includes a command for execution by the process logic that, when executed by the process logic, changes one or more settings in the process logic;
a second submodule connected to the first submodule to receive the command for the process logic from the first submodule, the second submodule including a model of the physical system, wherein the second submodule is configured to predict a future state of the physical system by simulating execution of the command with the model of the physical system; and
the communication logic is configured to evaluate the predicted future state of the physical system from the second submodule to determine whether the future state is indicative of a safety violation and to control whether the process logic is permitted to execute the command based on evaluation of the future state by the communication logic, wherein the communication logic is configured to prevent execution of the command by the process logic if the future state is indicative of the safety violation.