Latest
Industry News

Cyberspace Solarium Commission – A Public-Private Brainstorming Initiative

| vigilantops | | Leave a Comment

The United States Cybersecurity Solarium Commission (CSC) was formed in 2019 to “develop a consensus on a strategic approach to defending the United States in cyberspace against cyber-attacks of significant consequences.”

The CSC published their report to the public on March 11, 2020. The report consists of more than 80 recommendations and more than 50 legislative proposals. Vigilant Ops recently sponsored a webinar during which a summary of the report and potential impacts on the medical device industry was presented. The summary from that webinar can be found here.

The CSC report has been making an impact, with several cybersecurity proposals from the report advancing in both the US House of Representatives and Senate.  Some experts are optimistic that most of these legislative proposals will make it into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which sets the budget and expenditures for US military.

Since the publishing of the final report, the Cybersecurity Solarium Commission has released other material, including a white paper titled “Cybersecurity Lessons from the Pandemic.” The white paper reinforces the recommendations from the final report and adds a few new recommendations as well. Vigilant Ops has drafted a summary of that CSC white paper, which can be found here.

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

What medical device manufacturers need to know about the Cyberspace Solarium Commission’s Final Report and the reference to Software Bill Of Materials (SBOM)

Are you prepared for US cybersecurity legislation that could result in lawsuits and fines if not implemented according to prescription? Did you know that the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act chartered the US Cyberspace Solarium Commission (CSC) to define such cybersecurity policies and legislation? As a stakeholder in the healthcare industry, you should be aware of the CSC final report and the possible implications. This overview provides a brief summary of the report’s discussion of Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs) and the specific responsibilities of medical device manufacturers.

The final report from the CSC was made publicly available on March 11, 2020. The report is 182 pages in length and offers more than 80 recommendations to implement a “…strategic approach to defending the United States in cyberspace against cyberattacks of significant consequences.”

The Cyberspace Solarium Commission was tasked by the President and Congress to answer two questions:

  1. What strategic approach will defend the United States against cyberattacks of significant consequence?
  2. What policies and legislation are required to implement that strategy?

The Cyberspace Solarium Commission advocated layered cyber deterrence to be achieved by:

  1. Working with allies and partners to promote responsible cyber behavior
  2. Working with the private sector to increase security of ecosystem
  3. Imposing costs as a deterrent and motivator

Implementation of the layered cyber deterrence strategy is built upon six (6) policy pillars and more than eighty (80) recommendations. This summary will provide in-depth analysis of the specific pillar to enhance the security in the cyber ecosystem, which calls out the work being done with the Software Bill of Materials (SBOM). Here is a list of the pillars presented in the document, but please refer to the final report for details on all pillars and recommendations.​1​

6 Pillars of the CSC final report

  1. Reform the US government’s structure and organization for cyberspace
  2. Strengthen norms and non-military tools
  3. Promote national resilience
  4. Reshape the cyber ecosystem (focus of this summary)
  5. Operationalize cybersecurity collaboration with the private sector
  6. Preserve and employ the military instrument of national power

Pillar 4 –  Reshape the Cyber Ecosystem Toward Greater Security

“This pillar attempts to drive down vulnerability across the ecosystem by shifting the burden of security away from end users to owners, developers, and manufacturers who can more efficiently implement security solutions at the appropriate scale.”

Five Strategic Objectives of Pillar 4

  1. Promote the creation of more secure technology by
    • Incentivizing product manufacturers to adopt a “secure to market” strategy
    • Ensuring product manufacturers have access to trusted suppliers
  2. Encourage more secure practices through incentives and disincentives
  3. Leverage large-scale information and communications technology
  4. Reduce key supply chain risk
  5. Protect sensitive data

Strategic Objective #1 – Incentivizing Greater Security in the Markets for Technology

Key Recommendations – 4.1, 4.2 and 4.7 are detailed below

4.1 Congress should establish and fund a National Cybersecurity Certification and Labeling Authority empowered to establish and manage a program for voluntary security certifications and labeling of information and communications technology products.

4.2 Congress should pass a law establishing that final goods assemblers of software, hardware, and firmware are liable for damages from incidents that exploit known and unpatched vulnerabilities.

4.3 Congress should establish a Bureau of Cyber Statistics charged with collecting and providing statistical data on cybersecurity and the cyber ecosystem to inform policymaking and government programs.

4.4 Congress should resource and direct the Department of Homeland Security to resource a federally funded research and development center to work with state-level regulators in developing certifications for cybersecurity insurance products.

4.5 The National Cybersecurity Certification and Labeling Authority, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Department of Homeland Security, should develop a cloud security certification.

4.6 Congress should direct the US government to develop and implement an information and communications technology industrial base strategy to ensure more trusted supply chains and the availability of critical information and communications technologies.

4.7 Congress should pass a national data security and privacy protection law establishing and standardizing requirements for the collection, retention, and sharing of user data.

4.1 Congress should establish and fund a National Cybersecurity Certification and Labeling Authority empowered to establish and manage a program for voluntary security certifications and labeling of information and communications technology products.

Security standards and best practices can be employed more effectively, and certifications and labels can be used as a product differentiator for developers. The following are recommended:

  • Product Certification & Attestation – certify products meeting cybersecurity standards
  • Accredited Certifying Agents – accredit organizations to certify classes of products
  • Comparative Security Scoring – revise NIST scoring include product type, environment
  • Update Federal Procurement Regulations – require product certification and labeling
  • Integrate with Ongoing Efforts – build upon existing efforts at Department of Commerce to develop the SBOM (Software Bill of Materials)
  • Partnership on Product Labeling –  provide transparent information on the characteristics and constituent components (SBOM) of a software or hardware product, including those that contribute to the security of a product or service.

Product component lists, like the SBOM mentioned above, are being adopted as an industry security document in healthcare because they provide transparency into deployed device risk. For a more detailed discussion of Software Bill Of Materials, and how they support responsive patching programs, please see our article – The Impact of COVID-19 on Medical Device Cybersecurity.

4.1.1 Enabling Recommendation – Create or Designate Critical Technology Security Centers

Provide the US government with the capacity to test the security of critical technologies and, when appropriate, assist in identifying vulnerabilities, developing mitigation techniques with relevant original equipment manufacturers

4.1.2 Enabling Recommendation – Expand and Support the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Security Work

Congress should increase funding in support of NIST’s work on cybersecurity. Specifically, NIST should be appropriately resourced to:

  • Maintain cybersecurity frameworks and standards
  • Develop technology development standards
  • Develop standards for vulnerability and patch management
  • Support National Vulnerability Database (NVD)
  • Support Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) program
  • Support Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)

4.2 Congress should pass a law establishing that final goods assemblers of software, hardware, and firmware are liable for damages from incidents that exploit known and unpatched vulnerabilities.

Definitions

Final Goods Assembler – the entity that is most responsible for the placement of a product or service into the stream of commerce. In the case of medical devices, this could be assumed to be the medical device manufacturer.

Known Vulnerability – vulnerabilities disclosed through public sources such as the National Vulnerability Database (NVD) and Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) program, reported to the hardware/software developer by a third party, and discovered by the hardware/software developer themselves.

Vulnerability Disclosure and Retention – final goods assemblers, as well as software and hardware component developers, establish a process for vulnerability reporting, retain records documenting when a vulnerability was made known or discovered by the company, and maintain a vulnerability disclosure and patching policy that conforms to the requirements set out under this regulation.

4.2.1 Establish Liability for Final Goods Assemblers – Legislative Summary

Private Right of Action

  • End users may bring action against final goods assemblers not meeting standard of care
  • Damages up to 15% of annual revenue of preceding year of final goods assemblers

Standard of Care – final goods assembler

  • Meet the standard of care if, within 18 months of the enactment of this Act
    • Makes security patches available within 90 days of a vulnerability 

4.7 Congress should pass a national data security and privacy protection law establishing and standardizing requirements for the collection, retention, and sharing of user data.

  • Preempts the existing state, district, and territorial data breach notification laws
  • Establishes threshold for a covered breach
  • Requires notification and transmission of forensic data to cyber authorities
  • Sets standards and timelines for notifying victims
  • Sets criteria that determine when victims should receive free credit monitoring
  • Deconflicts with existing federal regulation for private-sector and other non-federal entities

Conclusion

The CSC final report is a call to action to the US government. Through the various strategic recommendations, the Commission is urging the United States Congress to act quickly and pass supportive legislative measures enabling private rights of action by end users harmed in cyber incidents. For medical device manufacturers, the CSC final report is also a call to action. It’s clear that the demands to provide concise, transparent information and timely responses to cyber incidents will continue to increase. Providing security documentation such as the SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) will be an expectation, and product insecurity will not be tolerated. Medical device manufacturers would be wise to begin preparing now for these sweeping reforms.

The InSight Platform uses advanced techniques to interrogate medical devices and automatically generate bills of materials. Using artificial intelligence and machine learning, the InSight Platform continuously monitors for vulnerabilities in discovered device components, enabling device manufacturers to respond proactively to the latest discovered threats.

Ken Zalevsky
CEO, Vigilant Ops
Former Head of Medical Device Cybersecurity, Bayer

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

  1. 1.
    The final report, along with additional information about the CSC can be found at . Cyberspace Solarium Commission. https://www.solarium.gov

Vigilant Ops Announces Availability of InSight Platform V1

On May 11 2020, Vigilant Ops, an innovator in medical device cybersecurity, announced the immediate availability of InSight Platform V1, enabling medical device manufacturers to begin automatically generating, updating, and monitoring device software bills of materials (SBOMs). FDA’s draft version of their premarket guidance refers to these as CBOMs (Cybersecurity Bill of Materials)​1​, given the original desire to include hardware components in device bills of materials. Since the original draft guidance, FDA and others have begun referring to the documents as SBOMs (Software Bill of Materials) and eliminating the hardware component inclusion. Vigilant Ops will also refer to these device software bills of materials as SBOMs.

“The Vigilant Ops InSight Platform V1 is a game-changer in medical device cybersecurity,” said Ken Zalevsky, CEO at Vigilant Ops and former Head of Medical Device Cybersecurity at Bayer. “Medical device manufacturers are under extreme pressure from customers, prospects, and regulatory bodies to prove the safety and security of their devices. SBOMs are an industry-accepted solution but are very labor-intensive to generate and require continuous monitoring and maintenance. The InSight Platform eliminates this manual generation effort, while providing real-time monitoring of various public vulnerability sources and continuous maintenance of device bills of materials.”

The InSight Platform uses advanced techniques to interrogate medical device and automatically generate SBOMs. Using artificial intelligence and machine learning, the InSight Platform continuously monitors for vulnerabilities in discovered device components, enabling device manufacturers to respond proactively to the latest discovered threats.

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

  1. 1.
    Content of Premarket Submissions for Management of Cybersecurity in Medical Devices. FDA. Published online October 2018.

Incident Response Plan Cyber Simulation Exercise

Executing effective simulation exercises and rigorously testing the organization’s incident response capability has been proven to positively impact the organization’s ability to recover. There is sufficient evidence to show that organizations can reduce the cost of a breach by more than 30%​1​ simply by having an Incident Response (IR) team following a thoroughly tested IR plan. In this document, we will explore the fundamentals of testing an organization’s IR plan using cyber simulation exercise.

The planning of cyber simulation exercises is fundamentally the same across all organizations, with the organizational objectives driving the details of scenario development and execution. Before getting into the details of the exercise, we’ll do some necessary preparation and define some important parameters for the exercise in order to maximize benefits.

Exercise Objective

To prepare for the undertaking of an effective cyber simulation exercise, there are several considerations necessary. The most important is the objective of the exercise. At a high level, the objective should convey the definition of a successful simulation. What does the organization want to accomplish through the exercise?

In this case, we are planning to test our IR plan, but our ultimate objective is to improve our organization’s ability to respond to a cyber incident by improving our IR plan. This improvement to our IR plan encompasses several lower-level objectives including identifying gaps in current policies and procedures, ensuring that team members are familiar with their particular role in the case of an incident, optimizing response processes for efficiencies, and others. But for clarity, the objective should be set at a level that enables crisp communication across the organization, so words like “improve” need to be quantified. We’ll attach our success to specific improvement in our customer communication of an incident. So, the final objective could look like this – Improve security incident response, as measured by the cycle time needed for the first external communication of security-related incidents, by 15%.

Exercise Lead/Planner

As part of exercise preparation, it’s also advisable to assign an exercise lead or planner role that will be responsible to implement and facilitate the exercise planning, execution and follow-up/reporting. This is usually an individual but can also be assigned to a team with various leadership responsibilities split among the team members. This depends on the size and complexity of the organization and the intended size and complexity of the cyber simulation exercise. In any case, the exercise planner will have the largest time commitment to the exercise, so should be prepared to devote the necessary time in order to make the exercise successful.

Exercise Team

Depending on the size and scope of the cyber simulation exercise and the objective set by the organization, it may be necessary to form an exercise team consisting of those in the organization in roles directly responsible for action in the case of an incident. The team size will vary depending on the size and complexity of the organization, but usually ranges from about 4 to 10 people. Some functional groups with members that might be considered for inclusion on the team could be:

  • Product Development
  • Product Security
  • Information Technology (IT)
  • Customer Support/Complaint Handling
  • Legal
  • Compliance/Regulatory
  • Human Resources
  • Senior Management/Executives

Exercise Scenario

The exercise scenario describes the scope and details of the exercise in a manner sufficient to communicate objectives and expectations. In other words, the scenario actually sets up the exercise and drives the associated exercise activity and planned events. For example, an exercise scenario could be that a former, disgruntled employee secretly modified commercial product source code, prior to leaving the organization. The modified source code that was injected with malware was being shipped to customers as new installations or upgrades, for several months prior to the malware being discovered.

Master Scenario Events List (MSEL)

The Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) is the list of planned exercise events, sometimes referred to as injects. The injects should be easily understood by exercise participants, so that they can respond appropriately. They should be defined sequentially with the timing of the injects simulating a real-world scenario as much as possible, providing the IR team with ample opportunity for realistic testing.

General Format of the MSEL

The MSEL should list the exercise injects in chronological order, for ease of tracking as the exercise progresses.

The MSEL could include the following details for each of the injects:

  • Date and time of occurrence (within the exercise)
  • Synopsis or description of the event
  • Responsible personnel
  • Expected action from responsible personnel
  • Attachments (for example, an email received from a customer)
  • And other details of the injects

NOTE: We have developed a Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) template available for you to download. Just click to download your MSEL template.

Execute

After developing the MSEL, reviewing the plan with the exercise team, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and making sure internal systems are ready to support, it’s time to execute the exercise! Be sure your team planner(s) monitor the exercise properly and record activity detail will be used to develop the Exercise Simulation Report (ESR). The ESR will summarize the exercise and provide details of identified gaps in processes/policies/procedures.

NOTE: We have developed a sample Exercise Simulation Report (ESR) available for you to download. Just click to download your sample ESR.

Report the Results

After developing the ESR, schedule a series of review meetings to discuss the results of the exercise. Schedule the initial meeting with the exercise team, review the ESR, develop exercise communication to be shared with the rest of the organization. Depending on the size and complexity of the organization, it could take several meetings to communicate to all stakeholders. Be consistent by sharing the same basic communication with all stakeholders, slightly modified for specific functions and responsibilities. For example, it would be beneficial to include some treatment of compliance effectiveness when meeting with your Regulatory team.

Cyber Simulation Exercise Summary

To summarize what we have done in our testing exercise, here are the ordered steps that we followed:

  1. Develop a clear, concise objective for the exercise that can be easily communicated
  2. Identify exercise lead(s) with the responsibility to manage the exercise
  3. Assemble the exercise team – usually cross-functional representatives from the organization
  4. Develop the exercise scenario – have fun with it, but make it realistic for believability
  5. Based on the exercise scenario, develop the exercise activities, known as events or injects
  6. Compile developed events into the MSEL (Master Simulation Events List)
  7. Distribute and review the MSEL with the team, make sure everyone understands their roles!
  8. EXECUTE THE EXERCISE
  9. Develop the Exercise Simulation Report
  10. Share the results of the exercise with the organization

Ken Zalevsky
CEO, Vigilant Ops
Former Head of Medical Device Cybersecurity, Bayer

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

  1. 1.
    2019 Cost of a Data Breach Report. Ponemon Institute. IBM Security

Three Reasons You Need to Use AI Software for Generating and Maintaining Medical Device SBOMs/CBOMs

What if you found out there was a way to interrogate medical devices and automatically generate cybersecurity bill of materials (CBOM)? Although you may initially miss the manual effort, you and fellow MDMs can now use artificial intelligence to begin automatically generating, maintaining, and monitoring medical device SBOMs/CBOMs.

The Solution

Utilizing the cloud, the Vigilant Ops InSight platform introduces a solution for generating, updating, and monitoring device software bills of materials. The InSight CBOM Generator automatically detects the Operating System of the medical device and executes the appropriate commands to interrogate the device and inventory all of the software components.

How It Works

  • The generated cybersecurity bill of materials is uploaded to the InSight Platform, where it can be reviewed and approved before publication.
  • An approved CBOM is automatically sent for certification by Vigilant Ops trained security specialists.
  • Once certified, the cybersecurity bill of materials (CBOM) can be published and shared with confidence.

Your Biggest Pain Points Solved

The general consensus is that the Cybersecurity Bill of Materials (CBOM) is a valuable document that can help improve healthcare security, but it comes at a cost. And, if you are not utilizing a tool to help automate the CBOM generation process, then that cost is substantially higher.

  • Manually generating and maintaining a single medical device SBOM takes hours of effort plus hardware and software tools.
  • If your organization is on a quarterly release cycle, you will have to generate four cybersecurity bill of materials annually per device, in addition to continuously monitoring sources for vulnerability updates.
  • Every cybersecurity bill of materials is a snapshot in time, so manually generating a CBOM is taking the risk that the information is not already obsolete.
  • Manual generation and maintenance of medical device CBOMs is not practical or scalable, and is possibly misleading, in that it could contain outdated information.

The Stats

As a medical device manufacturer, the FDA is clear that you “are responsible for remaining vigilant about identifying risks and hazards associated with your medical devices, including risks related to cybersecurity.”

According to Health IT Security, 70% of medical devices have vulnerable software components, and with an average of 40 new CVEs being received daily at the National Vulnerability Database, disaster is looming. It is evident that the manual CBOM process can’t keep up, challenging even the most tenured security experts, without the introduction of CBOM monitoring and automation.

Why You Cannot Afford To Go Without The Vigilant Ops CBOM Generator

  1. Using manual effort to generate a medical device CBOM always leaves you asking – “Did I get all of the components?”
  2. Monitoring CBOM component vulnerabilities using public data sources requires time and patience. Do you really have hours to spend trying to match components to CPEs just so you can try to find them in the NVD?
  3. How are you planning to respond to your sales team’s onslaught of emails asking for CBOM documentation to send to their demanding hot prospect who happens to be contemplating a million-dollar deal?

CBOMs are all about managing medical device cybersecurity risk and providing actionable insight in order to create a safer, more secure healthcare environment. The use of a cloud-based platform to securely generate and maintain CBOMs is a vigilant and efficient way to enable compliance, improve organizational awareness, and implement a proactive approach to medical device security within your organization.

Ken Zalevsky
CEO, Vigilant Ops
Former Head of Medical Device Cybersecurity, Bayer

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

The Impact of COVID-19 on Medical Device Cybersecurity

Hackers are opportunists. Not long after the first case of COVID-19, possibly as early as November 17, 2019, hackers, bad actors and cyberpunks sensed an opportunity. They could be heard echoing the battle cry to never let a crisis go to waste! Long before you heard of Coronavirus, there were plans being formulated to leverage the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) that would inevitably follow. Since the initial outbreaks of COVID-19 in January 2020 over 16,000 new coronavirus-related domains have been registered, about 10 times the average number of new domains over the same time period pre-coronavirus. No doubt, some percentage of these domains have been registered for legitimate business activity, but close to 20% were already deemed to be suspicious or malicious. ​1​ In this article, we will take a look at COVID-19 impact on the healthcare industry.

Given the general increase in nefarious activity, and the fact that the healthcare industry is currently distracted with this COVID-19 global pandemic, it’s not surprising that hospitals are seeing more suspicious activity, such as phishing emails. By leveraging the urge to act quickly, particularly during a crisis, hackers are counting on human mistakes to enable the spread of misinformation or for a foothold on the hospital network through the inadvertent downloading of malware. Once lodged inside the hospital network, malware can quickly spread, either through additional responses to the phishing attempts or through self-propagation, without additional human interaction.

One of the best defenses against the onslaught of security attacks is system patching. Unfortunately, the lack of system patching, has been implicated in some of the largest data breaches ever recorded. But, to be fair, system patching is difficult to keep up with. Software developers like Microsoft, release software patches in a steady torrent, and IT resources are stretched to stay current. This means that some systems won’t get patched immediately, and some don’t get patched at all. In most healthcare industry, IT staff are at capacity during normal operations, and during a crisis like COVID-19 are dangerously overburdened. Worse than the lack of bandwidth, however, is the lack of visibility.

Medical devices deployed in hospitals are black boxes. In other words, the devices are closed and, for the most part, can’t be modified by the end user. This is for good reason, given the obvious patient safety concerns and regulations. The problem with a closed system that is running software from various manufacturers is that vulnerabilities in any of the installed software components are not easily identified. If you don’t know what software you’re running, you don’t know if you’re vulnerable.

The good news is that this lack of visibility is changing. FDA is working on an update to their Premarket guidance (Content of Premarket Submissions for Management of Cybersecurity in Medical Devices – Docket Number – FDA-2018-D-3443), which introduces the concept of a medical device bill of materials. FDA refers to this security document as Cybersecurity Bill of Materials (CBOM), however, the nomenclature is currently shifting to SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) as FDA, and others, have de-prioritized device hardware components in favor of a focus on the software components.

For the most part, the SBOM is being widely accepted as a good step forward for medical device cybersecurity but will require medical device manufacturers to apply resources to generate and maintain. In addition, the continuous monitoring of vulnerabilities in installed software components, especially for a device manufacturer with multiple products and multiple versions of each, can be challenging.

Nonetheless, an updated SBOM enables medical device manufacturers to take a more proactive approach to security patches. By tracking and monitoring the installed software components and associated vulnerabilities, device manufacturers can more quickly prioritize patches and updates. Quicker identification leads to quicker remediation supporting improved release cycles. Automated SBOM solutions enable these more efficient software development lifecycles, which support stronger security profiles of deployed medical devices at hospitals.

In crisis situations, like we are all facing now with COVID-19, having a solid cybersecurity risk mitigation plan, including automated generation, maintenance and sharing of SBOMs, provides much needed peace of mind. So, instead of worrying about the security of their hospital’s medical devices, those on the front lines can focus their energy on treating patients.  

Ken Zalevsky
CEO, Vigilant Ops
Former Head of Medical Device Cybersecurity, Bayer

Founded in 2019, Vigilant Ops is an innovator in the medical device cybersecurity industry. Led by seasoned medical device cybersecurity experts with more than forty years of combined experience, Vigilant Ops provides medical device manufacturers and hospitals with unprecedented insight into device risk profiles, enabling proactive management of threats before they impact the quality of patient care.

For more information about Vigilant Ops or the InSight Platform, please visit our website at www.vigilant-ops.com
Or drop us an email at: [email protected]

  1. 1.
    COVID-19 Impact: As Retailers Close their Doors, Hackers Open for Business. Check Point. https://blog.checkpoint.com/2020/03/19/covid-19-impact-as-retailers-close-their-doors-hackers-open-for-business/.

Vigilant Ops

WANT TO LEARN MORE?

Fill out the form to contact us and learn more about the Vigilant Ops Insight platform and receive information about the product benefits offered to healthcare delivery organizations and medical device manufacturers.


Vigilant Ops
8085 Saltsburg Rd., Pittsburgh, PA 15239

Copyright © 2021 Vigilant Ops. All rights reserved.