Industrial OT & ICS

Industrial cybersecurity decisions that respect engineering reality.

CYNAPSE connects plants, production areas, SCADA, DCS, PLCs, safety systems, engineering workstations, and historians to IEC 62443 risk, validation, and exposure decisions.

The challenge

What sets Industrial OT & ICS apart.

IEC 62443 zones, conduits, and security levels for real plants, with treatment that respects safety, uptime, and patch windows.

IT answers do not fit

Patching windows, legacy controllers, and vendor certification mean many vulnerabilities cannot simply be fixed. Compensating controls have to be justified.

Security levels without the spreadsheets

IEC 62443 programmes stall in spreadsheets of zones, requirements, and SL gaps that are out of date the day they are finished.

Engineering and security disagree

Without a shared model, cyber teams and plant engineers argue about urgency instead of agreeing on consequence.

In scope

The systems you can model.

Each system becomes assets, zones, and interfaces in one project, so risk, exposure, and evidence stay connected to what actually runs.

  • PLCs and RTUs
  • DCS and SCADA servers
  • Safety instrumented systems
  • Engineering workstations
  • Historians and MES
  • Industrial DMZ
  • Remote access gateways
  • Industrial switches and firewalls
How CYNAPSE helps

Build an IEC 62443-ready assurance model for industrial OT.

RABUILD GRC carries the risk, controls, and security case. Exposure Engine ranks vulnerabilities by what the asset does. Navai Assistant guides each step.

Model the real operating environment

Organize facilities, processes, systems, assets, interfaces, zones, conduits, DMZs, and communication paths as they exist in the plant.

Determine required security levels

Evaluate scenario consequences, SL-T and SL-A posture, foundational requirements, and control sufficiency without treating every asset the same.

Respect safety and availability

Design treatment and validation around process integrity, safe-state behaviour, maintenance windows, uptime, and stop conditions.

Validate implementation

Generate scoped security validation matrices and authorized procedures from applied hardening and actual project assets.

Standards

The standards your assessors will ask about.

Built in: control libraries ship with RABUILD GRC. Traced: captured as project requirements and linked to the same controls, evidence, and reports.

IEC 62443-3-2 / 3-3Risk assessment, zones and conduits, system security levelsBuilt in
CIS Controls v8Prioritized hardening safeguardsBuilt in
NIST CSF 2.0Cyber risk outcomes for leadershipBuilt in
ISO/IEC 27001Information security managementBuilt in
NIST SP 800-82r3Guide to operational technology securityTraced
MITRE ATT&CK for ICSAdversary techniques for coverage analysisTraced
Example

Closing the gap between SL-T and SL-A

An illustrative engagement showing how the work flows through CYNAPSE.

The situation

A process plant set target security levels per zone two years ago. Nobody can say which zones meet them today or what to fund next.

    In CYNAPSE
  1. 1Import assets, then group them into zones and conduits with consequence-based SL-T.
  2. 2Record applied controls and let RABUILD calculate SL-A gaps per foundational requirement.
  3. 3Rank treatments by risk reduction per zone and plan validation within maintenance windows.
What you get

A zone-by-zone SL gap report and treatment roadmap that engineering, security, and plant management sign together.

See report types

See CYNAPSE on a scenario like yours.

We walk through your systems, standards, and reporting needs, using the example above as a starting point.

Book an OT demo