Extension of the approach to the communications within the whole supply chain of the Microfactory

Coordinated by

Once the secure communication with a vehicle has been demonstrated for remote FW update, it is straightforward to extend it to a general Service-Over-the-Air architecture and even further.
One of the key points in I-FEVS view is to propose the Microfactory concept to attract funding interest and provide the possibility to offer turn-key low investment facilities for
a flexible production of urban mobility solutions based on electric vehicles with the collaboration of Comau and Magnetto Automotive.
The Microfactory itself, together with its supply chain and the fleets of manufactured vehicles represents a Cyber-Physical Production System (CPPS) that can be seen as a network of linked nodes to which secure communication perfectly fits.
Thus, I-FEVS perspective is to extend the previous result on secure communication to cloud CPPSs, especially to the Microfactory one.


Describe the innovation content of the result:
I-FEVS aims at extending secure remote communications to a cloud CPPS such as the Microfactory, intended as an automotive manufacturing supply chain.
Who will be the customer?
Automotive manufacturers and users.
What benefit will it bring to the customers?
Privacy and safety protection thanks to cyber security, while keeping extreme flexibility given by a cloud environment.
When is the expected date of achievement in the project (Mth/yr)?
4 yr.
When is the time to market (Mth/yr)?
6 yr.
What are the costs to be incurred after the project and before exploitation?
Engineering costs to adapt to specific locations (countries) where the Microfactory will be deployed.
What is the approximate price range of this result/price of licences?
50 k€.
What are the market size in Millions € for this result and relevant trend?
1 M €.
How will this result rank against competing products in terms of price/performance?
It optimizes costs versus performance ratio; no available alternatives are known at the moment.
Who are the competitors for this result?
How fast and in what ways will the competition respond to this result?
Possibly, competitors will develop alternative implementations of similar architectures after the result will be presented to public.
Who are the partners involved in the result?
Not defined yet.
Who are the industrial partners interested in the result (partners, sponsors, etc.)?
Not defined yet.
Have you protected or will you protect this result? How? When?
Patents will be filed for original ideas and solutions adopted in the designs and implementations.

Other results


This exploitation result consists in cybersecurity consultancy services supported by ResilBlockly (former Blockly4SoS), a Model-Driven Engineering tool that has been developed in the context of BIECO.

Security evaluation methodology

Security evaluation methodology to evaluate the security of an ICT system. The methodology is based on standards such as ISO 31000 standard for Risk Management, the ISO 29119 standard for Security Testing or the MUD standard…

Monitoring Tool

The monitoring tool is an infrastructure in charge of setting up and managing a monitoring component. It is based on event messages and enables the collection of complex events.

Extended MUD file

The extended Manufacturer Usage Description (MUD) file is an extension of the MUD Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) standard…

BIECO Project

SUBSCRIBE and become part of the BIECO community!

We don’t spam!

Share This