MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412927357 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.150604

Securing Smart Vehicles: A Bilateral TARA Approach for ISO 21434 and ASPICE for CS Compliance

2025· article· en· W4412927357 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSafety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)Computer securityPsychologyComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing connectivity in modern vehicles has opened the door to a surge of cyberattacks, posing significant risks to vehicle safety and potentially leading to substantial financial losses.To address this, our paper introduces an optimized approach to risk assessment and threat analysis (TARA), specifically tailored for secure smart vehicles.We've developed a bilateral model that meticulously adheres to the ISO/SAE 21434 automotive cybersecurity standard and the Automotive SPICE for Cybersecurity (ASPICE for CS) base practices.This unique bilateral model considers both standards simultaneously for each model side, incorporating new requirements to ensure practitioners can achieve full compliance.We've also simplified the categorization of requirements, making them more intuitive and industry-driven.Throughout this paper, we detail the analysis, mapping, and development steps of our proposed model.Our observations and lessons learned from applying this model across various projects have significantly improved its maturity, directly reducing the risks associated with recovery costs and financial losses.To further improve the practical application of this model, we have developed a capable cybersecurity TARA tool based on the model to achieve compliance with both standards.This tool could be used by automotive manufacturers and suppliers during the entire vehicle development lifecycle, from initial design to postproduction updates to help identify potential vulnerabilities in electronic control units (ECUs), communication networks, and software, allowing for proactive risk mitigation.The documented and analyzed results from utilizing our model and tool show a remarkable 40% to 60% decrease in operational costs due to the significant reduction in quality and compliance efforts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it