Our Industry
Navigating Challenges & Mitigating Risks in a BMS
In Part I, we reviewed the basic elements of a properly designed Building Management System (BMS) and smart building platform. This blog looks at the controls backbone and how to mitigate the associated risks. In particular, the cyber security and maintenance aspects of modern systems and possible approaches to managing those vulnerabilities.
CYBERSECURITY RISKS
As building automation systems become more connected and integrated with IT networks (to facilitate communications) and applications (to allow for more analytical capability), the controls and the building backbone can become more vulnerable to cyber-attacks. Securing these systems is critical to protecting sensitive data and ensuring the safety of building occupants.
The industry is evolving methods for protecting campuses and BMS systems at every level – from the network to the applications. The techniques can include hardware approaches (such as data diodes and segmentation of the wiring) and software approaches (like SSL/certificate requirements or remote mirroring of the entire system). Since the expectation is when and not if, the approach taken must match the business model and the disruption risk faced in any given instance of a BMS-mediated smart system.
When BMS design is completed in collaboration with the IT department and other stakeholders, this challenge can be met, system security improved, and disruptions anticipated. By addressing risk to the business or client, we can strike a balance between security and system capability. This is particularly important as system design for buildings increase in complexity while budgets remain tight.
SYSTEM COMPLEXITY & INTEROPERABILITY ISSUES
The complexity of BMS and the need for interoperability between different manufacturers’ products can lead to integration challenges. These incompatibilities can complicate system upgrades, maintenance, and the addition of new technologies. Ultimately, the overarching strategy is to replace proprietary equipment with equipment that can work with many other brands – open communications, if not open source.
Equally important, system designs are moving from integrated verticals to modular systems, and from proprietary enterprise systems and associated maintenance contracts to suites of equipment with multiple available maintenance contractors. The most critical aspect of this strategic shift is system design: the design team must build the system with modularity, replaceability, interchangeability, and some measure of redundancy in mind. In other words, the design must be executable with multiple equipment suites and multiple software deployments and not dependent upon specific equipment or manufacturers. In practice, this means open protocols, universal designs for wiring layouts and equipment linking, relative simplicity in operational parameters, and system compartmentalization.
MAINTENANCE & SKILL GAPS
In engineering design firms, an old saying around HVAC improvements goes something like, “a BMS can only function properly if the equipment is in good repair and is connected to the BMS. You can’t run a rooftop unit with a broken fan unplugged from the BMS.” This scenario happens often and is caused by a mix of overly complex design, incomplete training, inconsistent monitoring, and tight budgets. Exacerbating that stress, rapid technology evolution is accelerating the need for training and personnel development to ensure that staff can manage and maintain these systems. BMS system creation must include these realities and put them at the center of the design, above energy efficiency and perhaps even above first cost. Why?
Looking at the historical data, we can see that buildings that do not operate per design and those that are not in good working order consume 20-30% more energy than necessary and approach unmanageability. A good BMS/smart buildings system is designed to recognize the constant pull of entropy and prevent that common outcome through a mix of early detection, visualization, and communication.
DEPENDENCE ON VENDOR SUPPORT
Many BMS deployments rely heavily on vendor support for maintenance, upgrades, and troubleshooting. This is the other side of uneven skills and training for management personnel. Dependence on outside vendors for the routine operational management of a BMS can pose risks if vendors discontinue support for certain products, go out of business, or, most commonly, have difficulty providing maintenance personnel familiar with the campus systems. The vendor needs to operate efficiently and provide a high level of customer service. Since we often hear it is difficult to find, an alternative solution built around redundancy and/or vendor independence must be considered. In that sense, the approach reflects larger trends in the marketplace: open-source applications with wide vendor support and client-focused data ownership, providing flexibility in choosing analytics and service suppliers. Ease of transfer of data and operations when buildings are sold or repositioned.
Focusing on cybersecurity risks from IT integration and the importance of security measures is a cornerstone of a robust BMS and smart buildings deployment. Here, we touched on the challenges of system complexity and the need for interoperable, modular designs that simplify maintenance and upgrades. These, in turn, depend on skilled maintenance personnel and designs that prioritize ease of operation to prevent inefficiencies. Lastly, we highlighted the risks of dependency on vendor support, advocating for systems that provide flexibility in vendor choice and data management. This recap sets the stage for the final discussion in our series, where we delve into the costs and returns to the significant investments in controls and smart buildings.
