Let's see how we can help you!
Leave a message and our dedicated advisor will contact you.
Send us a message
0/10000
6 Surprising Truths About Industrial Cybersecurity You Need to Know
Published: 18:21 12/22/2025
Cyberbezpieczeństwo
When we think of a factory, a power plant, or a water treatment facility, we often imagine a physical, isolated fortress protected by walls and guards. For decades, this isolation—known as "security by obscurity"—served as the primary defense mechanism for industrial control systems. It was a world where digital threats seemed distant and irrelevant.
However, this image is now a relic of the past. The reality of Industry 4.0 is an unprecedented convergence of Operational Technology (OT) and Information Technology (IT). The need for real-time data analysis has caused that old isolation to vanish. Consequently, the attack surface for critical industrial processes has grown dramatically. The traditional IT approach, focused on data protection, has proven inadequate for a world where a digital error can cause a physical catastrophe.
In response to these challenges, the ISA/IEC 62443 standard was created—the only global standard dedicated to the security of Industrial Automation and Control Systems (IACS). Here are six game-changing takeaways from this standard.
Priority #1: Not data, but the physical safety of people and the environment
In the OT world, the most valuable asset isn't a database; it’s the integrity of the laws of physics. The IEC 62443 standard forces a radical change in perspective: the primary goal is not to prevent email leaks, but to avoid explosions, chemical poisoning, and downtime. Here, the hierarchy is inverted—system availability and integrity are paramount, and above all, safety.
It is fascinating how much this differs from the corporate world. In IT, a "leak" is a PR and legal problem. In industry, an "incident" can mean a poisoned river or a real threat to life. The standard makes it clear: we protect the physical realm using digital barriers.
Security is a team sport, not a single department's problem
One of the biggest mistakes is thinking that cybersecurity is solely the responsibility of the "IT guy." IEC 62443 introduces the concept of the "Shared Responsibility Model." It divides tasks between the Asset Owner, the Product Supplier, and the System Integrator.
Why does this matter? Because security cannot be "bought" and added at the end like a cherry on top. It must be built into every stage—from the design of the controller and its configuration to daily operations. If any one of these links fails, the entire system becomes vulnerable.
Instead of one wall, build a system of intelligent fences
Traditional perimeter defense—one strong firewall at the entrance—is an invitation for trouble in an industrial setting. If an attacker bypasses this wall (for example, via an infected USB drive), they have total freedom. The standard promotes a "defense-in-depth" architecture based on Zones and Conduits.
Imagine it like a system of bulkheads on a ship. Even if one compartment is flooded, the rest of the vessel remains dry. Segmentation into zones ensures that an attack does not spread across the entire factory, drastically limiting potential damage.
The security level is measured by the opponent's strength, not your own
Instead of asking "Are we secure?", IEC 62443 asks: "Who are we defending against?". It introduces Security Levels (SL), defined by the attacker's profile—ranging from accidental employee error (SL 1) to professional cybercriminals (SL 3) and nation-state sponsored attacks (SL 4).
This approach is incredibly pragmatic. It allows companies to optimize costs. Not every pump station needs protection against military-grade hackers, but every station must be resilient against operator error.
The best technology is useless without good habits
You can have the most expensive firewalls in the world, but if the processes to manage them don't exist, they are just expensive decorations. Alongside technical levels (SL), the standard introduces Maturity Levels (ML).
"...the 62443 standard emphasizes system availability and integrity, and above all, the physical safety of people and the environment, recognizing that a cyber incident in the physical world can lead to catastrophic material consequences."
Cybersecurity is not a product; it is a process. If you have great hardware but your update procedures are non-existent (ML 1), your security will simply evaporate over time.
The clock is ticking: From best practice to legal obligation
This is no longer just theory for enthusiasts. This standard is becoming the legal foundation in Poland and the EU. The Act on the National Cybersecurity System (KSC), the NIS2 Directive, and the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA)—all these regulations draw heavily from IEC 62443.
Ignoring these principles is no longer just an engineering risk. It is becoming a real business risk that can lead to massive financial penalties or market exclusion.
Conclusion
The ISA/IEC 62443 standard is not a boring checklist; it is an integrated operating system for cyber-resilience. Implementing it represents a transition from the illusion of total security to the conscious management of acceptable risk. In a world where code controls steel and fire, the key question is not "if hackers will attack us," but: Is your organization ready for security to become part of its operational DNA?
Aleksander
Źródła:
FAQ
How exactly does IEC 62443 differ from ISO 27001?
ISO 27001 is a general standard focused on Information Security (IT) and data protection. IEC 62443 is dedicated to industrial environments (OT) and prioritizes the continuity of physical processes and human safety.
Is implementing this standard mandatory for every company?
Legally, the obligation mainly applies to operators of essential services (energy sector, water utilities, etc.) under the KSC Act and the NIS2 Directive. However, in practice, it is becoming a market standard—contractors increasingly require compliance with IEC 62443 from their suppliers.
What is a "zone" in the context of an industrial network?
A zone is a logical grouping of devices with similar security requirements. By separating zones, an eventual attack is "locked" within a small area and does not paralyze the entire infrastructure of the plant.
Is Security Level 4 (SL 4) always the best choice?
Not necessarily. SL 4 protects against the most advanced nation-state attacks, which involves enormous costs. The key is risk analysis—the SL level should be chosen appropriately based on the real threats to that specific part of the system.
About the Author
Aleksander Zębrowski
Chief Technology Officer at SecurHub.pl
PhD candidate in neuroscience. Psychologist and IT expert specializing in cybersecurity.
Related Articles
Cyberbezpieczeństwo
NIS2 in Poland 2025: 5 Truths That Will Change Everything in Your Company - Complete Guide
The NIS2 Directive is not just another GDPR - it`s a cybersecurity revolution with personal board liability and penalties up to 100 million PLN. Discover if your company is covered and how to avoid severe sanctions.
03.11.2025
31 min
Cyberbezpieczeństwo
mObywatel and Facade Transparency
The release of the mObywatel source code was supposed to be a celebration of transparency. Instead, we got a lesson in "malicious compliance," right-click blockers, and proof that the Polish administration still confuses security with secrecy.
17:43 31.12.2025
9 min
Cyberbezpieczeństwo
WormGPT and KawaiiGPT: 5 Facts About the Dark Side of AI You Need to Know
Artificial intelligence is not just about medicine and productivity. It also involves specialized, malicious LLMs that democratize cybercrime and create perfect scams.
20:21 22.12.2025
9 min
Comments
Loading comments...