Critical Day

Critical Day 2018 | Knowledge and experience in a lively exchange

The Critical Day

On 25 April 2018 the first Critical Day took place at the SRC Conference Centre. This was the premiere of a series of events that offers a top-class platform for exchange. This is primarily aimed at repre­sen­ta­tives of companies that operate a critical infra­structure (KRITIS). The Critical Day serves above all to establish personal contacts and to exchange experi­ences and best practices on IT and physical security of critical infra­struc­tures.

The Schedule

After the arrival of the first partic­i­pants, a lively exchange on the topics began. At the start of the Critical Day, the fully booked hall documented the partic­i­pants’ need for infor­mation.

Top-class speakers gave an overview of the topic KRITIS. Isabel Münch, Head of CK3 and repre­sen­tative of the Federal Office for Infor­mation Security (BSI), explained the proce­dures and processes in the super­visory authority. Randolf Skerka, Head of SRC and respon­sible for the topic of auditing according to §8a (3) BSIG, described the first experi­ences from the perspective of the auditing body. The Klinikum Lünen was the first to provide proof of the audit according to §8a (3) BSIG. Ralf Plomann, Head of IT at Klinikum Lünen, gave impressive insights into the devel­opment of hospital organ­i­sation in prepa­ration for the audit. Prof. Dr. med. Andreas Becker, who made it clear that sound industry expertise is an essential and indis­pensable corner­stone of a meaningful exami­nation, rounded off the morning.

The expert presen­ta­tions gave the partic­i­pants a 360° view of the require­ments of the BSI audits, which were largely and with good reason vaguely formu­lated.

At the end of the morning the visual artist Frank Rogge described his view on the questions of criti­cality in the field of artistic creation.

The afternoon was completely dedicated to the main interests of the partic­i­pants. Under the moder­ation of Jochen Schumacher, co-organiser at SRC, the afternoon was arranged.

The partic­i­pants indepen­dently organized the various contents for nine sessions.

The most signif­icant results of the afternoon

From the session ” Submitting certi­fi­cation findings to the BSI ” it became clear that the BSI does not expect, for example, any “classical” findings or devia­tions formu­lated down to the last technical detail. A roughly described framework of devia­tions and a description of a course of action in the test report is useful. Never­theless, an appro­priate measure must be in place for each risk within a critical infra­structure. This is of enormous impor­tance for the BSI.

The BSI wishes to cooperate closely with the various Kritis companies. The aim is to strengthen the security of IT in Germany.

In the session ” IT Security Awareness in the company ” Ralf Plomann presented the method and imple­men­tation of measures at the Lünen Hospital. The individual approach would be very important here. Every individual in the company would be respon­sible for IT security. In the individual address, every employee would have to be picked up where he is at the moment. According to Plomann, this is especially the case because almost no one would read guide­lines any more. Therefore, more creative approaches should be chosen. Ralf Plomann’s wish for the future: “Awareness for IT security should start at school from upper secondary level”. In the course of the next session, a clear trend towards e‑learning platforms for improving awareness emerged.

In another session, the partic­i­pants focused on the safe and simple defin­ition of the scope. The pyramid model was partic­u­larly favoured in the discussion. The service classified as critical is the best starting point for defining the scope. For example, when it comes to the critical infra­structure of a sewage treatment plant, the defin­ition of the scope requires identi­fying and deter­mining which systems clarify the water, what effects a failure would have and how this failure can be compen­sated by other methods to maintain the critical service.

With this method you system­at­i­cally move to the outer perimeter. If you get to systems that are no longer critical, the limit of the scope is reached.

Conclusion of the first “Critical Day” from SRC’s point of view

An example of the fasci­nating atmos­phere was the contin­u­ation of the bilateral commu­ni­cation of the partic­i­pants between the individual sessions. The feedback proved that the partic­i­pants were able to make many new contacts and gain insights from other KRITIS projects.

The overall positive response of the partic­i­pants shows us as SRC that the Critical Day is a useful hub for the exchange of infor­mation on KRITIS projects between the partic­i­pants. Our thanks goes to all partic­i­pants who contributed funda­men­tally to the success of the Critical Day with their open-mindedness and commitment.

We regard the Critical Day as a successful exper­iment. This motivates us to start preparing for a follow-up event.