FPSOs are becoming increasingly digital, connected, and automated. Distributed Control Systems (DCS), Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS), Fire & Gas systems, marine control systems, and remote monitoring platforms are now integral to safe offshore operations.
However, this digital transformation introduces a new category of risk: cyber-physical risk.
A cyber incident affecting safety-critical control systems can lead directly to loss of containment, fire, explosion, or loss of control offshore. Traditional process safety studies alone are no longer sufficient.
This is where Cyber Process Hazard Analysis (Cyber PHA) becomes essential.
This article explains what Cyber PHA is, why it is critical for FPSO safety systems, and how it is applied in practice to protect offshore assets, people, and the environment.
What Is Cyber PHA?
Cyber Process Hazard Analysis (Cyber PHA) is a structured risk assessment method that identifies how cyber threats can impact physical process safety outcomes.
Cyber PHA focuses on:
- Cyber threats to operational technology (OT)
- Vulnerabilities in control and safety systems
- Potential safety consequences of cyber compromise
- Adequacy of existing safeguards and controls
Unlike traditional IT cybersecurity assessments, Cyber PHA is process safety-driven, not data-driven.
Why Cyber PHA Is Critical for FPSOs
FPSOs are particularly vulnerable to cyber-physical risks due to:
- Highly integrated control systems
- Remote access and vendor connectivity
- Aging offshore infrastructure
- Limited on-site cybersecurity expertise
- Dependence on automation for safety
- Continuous operations with minimal downtime
On an FPSO, a cyber event can escalate rapidly into a Major Accident Hazard (MAH) if safety systems are compromised.
Understanding Cyber-Physical Risk on FPSOs
Cyber-physical risk arises when a cyber event directly affects the physical behavior of a process or system.
FPSO Examples Include:
- Manipulation of process parameters causing overpressure
- Disabling safety instrumented trips
- Suppression of alarms in the control room
- Interference with Fire & Gas detection
- Loss of communication between control systems
- Unauthorized changes to logic or setpoints
Cyber PHA explicitly links cyber threats to real safety consequences.
Cyber PHA vs Traditional Cybersecurity Assessments
| Aspect | Traditional Cybersecurity | Cyber PHA |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Data & IT assets | Process safety outcomes |
| Systems | IT networks | OT, DCS, SIS |
| Method | Vulnerability scanning | Hazard-based analysis |
| Output | Security controls | Safety-driven risk controls |
| Audience | IT teams | Engineering & HSSE teams |
Cyber PHA complements, not replaces, conventional cybersecurity programs.
FPSO Systems Typically Covered in Cyber PHA
Cyber PHA should include all safety-relevant OT systems, such as:
- Distributed Control Systems (DCS)
- Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS)
- Fire & Gas detection systems
- Emergency Shutdown (ESD) systems
- Marine and turret control systems
- Power management systems
- Communication networks between systems
Any system capable of influencing process conditions or safety barriers must be included.
Cyber PHA and Major Accident Hazards (MAHs)
Cyber PHA is closely linked to MAH management.
Typical FPSO MAHs impacted by cyber risk include:
- Loss of containment of hydrocarbons
- Fire and explosion
- Loss of emergency shutdown capability
- Failure of fire and gas detection
- Loss of propulsion or station keeping
Cyber PHA helps demonstrate that cyber threats are considered as credible initiating events.
Step-by-Step Cyber PHA Process for FPSOs
Step 1: Define Scope and Objectives
Identify systems, interfaces, and safety functions to be assessed.
Step 2: Assemble a Multidisciplinary Team
Include:
- Process engineers
- Control & automation engineers
- IT/OT cybersecurity specialists
- HSSE professionals
- Operations representatives
Cyber PHA is not an IT-only exercise.
Step 3: Identify Cyber Threat Scenarios
Examples:
- Unauthorized remote access
- Malware infection
- Insider threats
- Loss of network integrity
- Supply chain vulnerabilities
Step 4: Identify Vulnerabilities
Assess weaknesses such as:
- Legacy systems
- Poor network segmentation
- Weak access control
- Inadequate monitoring
- Lack of patch management
Step 5: Assess Safety Consequences
Evaluate what could happen if the cyber threat succeeds:
- Loss of alarms
- Failure of trips
- Incorrect control actions
- Delayed emergency response
Step 6: Identify Existing Safeguards
Examples:
- Network segmentation
- Firewalls and intrusion detection
- Access control and authentication
- Manual backups and procedures
- Physical security
Step 7: Identify Gaps and Recommendations
Develop risk-based actions to strengthen protection of safety systems.
Cyber PHA and Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS)
SIS are critical cyber-physical assets.
Cyber PHA helps ensure:
- SIS logic cannot be modified without authorization
- SIS independence is preserved
- Cyber threats do not compromise SIL integrity
- Maintenance and testing activities are secure
Cyber compromise of SIS can nullify multiple layers of protection.
Cyber PHA, HAZOP, LOPA, and Bow-Tie
Cyber PHA integrates naturally with existing FPSO risk tools:
- HAZOP: Cyber threats considered as initiating causes
- LOPA: Cyber events assessed as contributors to risk frequency
- Bow-Tie: Cyber threats mapped as threats to barriers
- SCE Management: Cyber-dependent SCEs identified and assured
This integration strengthens overall barrier management.
Common Cyber PHA Pitfalls on FPSOs
- Treating cyber risk as purely an IT issue
- Excluding SIS and safety systems from scope
- Poor communication between IT and engineering
- Lack of offshore operational input
- One-time assessments with no follow-up
- Weak ownership of recommendations
Best Practices for Effective Cyber PHA on FPSOs
- Align Cyber PHA with MAH scenarios
- Integrate cyber risk into Safety Case updates
- Treat cyber threats as credible initiating events
- Protect SIS and Fire & Gas systems as SCEs
- Regularly revalidate Cyber PHA
- Train offshore personnel on cyber awareness
- Coordinate IT, OT, and HSSE governance
Regulatory and Industry Expectations
Regulators increasingly expect FPSO operators to:
- Consider cyber threats to safety systems
- Demonstrate protection of safety-critical control systems
- Include cyber risk in Safety Cases
- Align with standards such as IEC 62443 and offshore safety frameworks
Cyber PHA supports ALARP demonstrations and regulatory confidence.
Conclusion
As FPSOs become more automated and connected, cyber risk is no longer separate from process safety. Cyber Process Hazard Analysis provides a structured, safety-focused method to identify and control cyber-physical threats that could lead to major offshore accidents.
By integrating Cyber PHA with HAZOP, LOPA, Bow-Tie analysis, and SCE management, FPSO operators can ensure that digital transformation does not compromise offshore safety.
Related Articles & Further Reading
To strengthen your understanding of FPSO process safety and risk management, explore these related guides:
- FPSO Hazard & Operability Studies (HAZOP): Step-by-Step Guide
- Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) for FPSO Systems
- Bow-Tie Risk Analysis for FPSO Major Accident Hazards
- Safety Critical Elements (SCEs) on FPSOs
- Process Safety and Barrier Management on FPSOs
- Human Factors and Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) in FPSO Safety
Pingback: FPSO Risk Assessment Techniques Beyond HAZOP: A Practical Offshore Safety Guide - HSSE Tips