As contemporary manufacturing has become progressively digitized, the possibilities that have traditionally confronted financial institutions are bound to target manufacturers. The manufacturing sector presents security challenges of a singular nature thanks to customized industrial control systems, supervisory control and data acquisition systems, and networked machines, sensors, data, and software. The multi-organizational dependencies and under-protected Internet of Things devices that are related to modern manufacturing and international supply chains increase the opportunities for existing vulnerabilities to be exploited.

Cybersecurity Ventures [1] reports how costs related to protecting companies from cyberattacks are growing at rates that exceed linear growth. Their estimation of costs related to cybercrime includes potential damage of knowledge, stolen money, lost productivity, theft of property, theft of private and financial data, embezzlement, fraud, post-attack disruption to the traditional course of forensic investigation, business, restoration and deletion of hacked data and systems, and reputational distress.

Financial industry leaders are prepared to extend the resources that they use to guard against these threats so as to supply sufficient levels of trust for his or her customers and stockholders. for instance, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. has increased annual cybersecurity budgets from $250 million to $500 million. Bank of America has gone on record stating that it's prepared to spend unlimited resources to combating cybercrime. This analysis by Cybersecurity Ventures includes predictions on how global costs related to combating cybercrime will continue rising to quite $6 trillion annually by 2021.

For manufacturers, support from the federal comes from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework Manufacturing Profile [2]. With this resource, manufacturers can 1) look for scopes to increase the cybersecurity posture of their manufacturing system, 2) evaluate the power to work the control environment at their acceptable risk level, and 3) implement a uniform approach to organize a cybersecurity plan for ongoing assurance of their manufacturing system’s security.

The NIST Framework Core of the profile contains 5 functional activities:

1) identify those systems, assets, data, and capabilities that need management of cybersecurity risk,

2) protect the delivery of critical infrastructure services,

3) detect the occurrence of a cybersecurity event,

4) respond with appropriate activities to require action regarding a detected cybersecurity event, and

5) recover any capabilities or services that were impaired thanks to a cybersecurity event.

Organizations can assess strengths and opportunities to enhance the management of cybersecurity by implementing the Baldrige Cybersecurity Excellence Builder [3]. This cost-effective, self-assessment tool consists of open-ended questions, and is adaptable and scalable to your organization’s needs, goals, capabilities, and environment.

A first self-assessment can frequently be accomplished during a one-day meeting. the utilization of the Excellence Builder within your organization can create a standard language for assessment, identify topics that conflicting, little, or no information which is out there and conduct a full self-evaluation of your cybersecurity risk-management system. The finished evaluation often results in an action plan for implementing improvements.