LILEE Systems Announces the 49 CFR § 236.1033-compliant Solution for Positive Train Control Wireless Security

LILEE Systems Announces the 49 CFR § 236.1033-compliant Solution for Positive Train Control Wireless Security

SAN JOSE, Calif., July 14, 2020 — LILEE Systems, the leading provider of advanced wireless connectivity solutions for the transportation industry, today announced the Next Generation Communications Management Unit solution that enables wireless communications security and interoperable key exchange for the ACSES II Positive Train Control system, a form of PTC implemented by Northeast Corridor railroads. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) requires wireless communications security for PTC messages as stated in 49 CFR § 236.1033. The LILEE Systems Next Generation Communications Management Unit solution is the first FRA-compliant solution on the market helping railroads meet the requirement before the end-of-year PTC deadline. It is a new addition to LILEE’s extensive portfolio of PTC solutions, with security software for wayside and onboard systems, Key Management System (KMS) for inter-rail key exchange, and a ruggedized gateway—TransAir™ STS-2025—for remote management. Field-tested for system reliability, compatibility, and scalability following FRA-approved specifications, the solution ensures that wireless communications on the ACSES II PTC network are resistant and resilient to cyber attacks. The Northeast Corridor serves 80,000 travelers daily and are shared among several passenger and freight railroads. Interoperability is the top consideration when it comes to wireless security solutions due to its complex host-tenant relationships. By centrally managing and distributing cryptography-based keys, the LILEE Systems Next Generation Communications Management Unit solution ensures wireless security while achieving the required interoperability. It has also been selected by one of the largest passenger rail systems on the Corridor. “LILEE Systems is committed to supporting railroads and public transit authorities with PTC system development and implementations,” said Yale Lee, Co-founder and Vice President of Technology at LILEE Systems. “By delivering the interoperable...
Wireless Security and Key Management for Positive Train Control Systems

Wireless Security and Key Management for Positive Train Control Systems

The first 49 CFR 236.1033-compliant solution on the market: LILEE Systems Solution for Wireless Security and Key Management  In 2008, the United States Congress mandated Positive Train Control (PTC) for most passenger and freight trains. Forty-two railroads are subject to the statutory mandate to implement PTC. Railroads are required to have PTC fully implemented by December 31, 2020. The Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES) is a vital overlay system which, in combination with automatic train control (ATC), constitutes one of two major PTC systems and has been implemented by the Northeast Corridor (NEC) passenger rail operators. As of today, all NEC operators face major challenges associated with obtaining viable solutions for secure wireless communication to comply with the PTC requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Originally, the NEC implementation of PTC lacked two major requirements—wireless link security and interoperability. The FRA reports that software issues related to these two requirements are the biggest roadblock. Fulfilling these mandates requires research and development, implementation, integration, and testing and commissioning (T&C) of an authentication and integrity check method and an interoperable key management technique. LILEE Systems is the first vendor to offer a complete solution that meets and exceeds all the security and interoperability requirements and that provides the best path to meeting the December 2020 PTC deadline. Security challenges that must be addressed From the regulatory perspective, the challenge is how to comply with requirements for wireless security as defined in 49 CFR 236.1033. This regulation requires that all wireless communications between the office, wayside, and onboard components in a PTC system provide cryptographic message integrity and authentication. The problem,...
Autonomous Rapid Transit (ART) will be the first step in autonomous driving

Autonomous Rapid Transit (ART) will be the first step in autonomous driving

In 2018, the Taiwanese government started to test the autonomous rapid transit (ART) concept through proof-of-service trials. Thousands of people experienced a 9-meter autonomous bus on a fixed bus route in Taichung, the second largest city in Taiwan, with a speed of up to 30 km/h. ART opens a new possibility of autonomous driving and will enable the first commercial use of the automated transit. Beginnings The early-stage business case for autonomous cars was based on a belief that computer-controlled cars will reduce traffic congestion and accidents by eliminating human errors. Unfortunately, technology has yet to demonstrate driverless cars’ ability to respond to a real-world traffic challenge. Technology giants and automotive industry continue to promise solutions, and the availability target is moving further and further into the future. At the beginning, unmanned personal cars on the road would likely do more harm than good to the already worsening urban traffic. Besides, building an autonomous vehicle from scratch is expensive. When required sensors and autonomous driving systems are added to a new $30,000 car, the final price can easily reach $130,000.  Purchasing an autonomous car might not be realistic until required technology cost can be lower. In the end, city governments and the public still struggle to justify the real benefits of driverless cars, resulting in the delay of adoption. Safety LILEE Systems’  ART concept comes from the railway industry and is based upon rail-safety principles. Autonomous buses run on a virtual track, monitored by a centralized operational control center in real time with a fail-safe system. That means, each action taken by the autonomous bus has to be confirmed...
5G: Hype or Reality?

5G: Hype or Reality?

5G: Hype or Reality? The Super Bowl is the biggest U.S. sporting event of the year, but it’s also the biggest advertising event. This year, Verizon and T-Mobile launched their 5G offerings at the Super Bowl. While Verizon explained 5G capabilities, T-Mobile joked about a nation-wide 5G network. With other carriers (AT&T and Sprint) being absent, the takeaway is that U.S. 5G rollouts are underwhelming and there is no point investing in 5G devices at this point.   5G promises It’s believed that 5G will be a huge boost for the economy — bigger even than 4G LTE and the mobile app economy that it enabled 10 years ago. Yes, 10 years ago. It takes time to achieve availability and maturity, and the cellular cycle we observe is about 10 years. Countries around the world are competing for 5G global leadership. In order to deliver on promises, massive amounts of new radio spectrum (5G NR)  must be allocated. For example, the FCC is pursuing a comprehensive strategy to Facilitate America’s Superiority in 5G Technology (the 5G FAST Plan).   What do you get with 5G? The answer is that it really depends on the spectrum used. It may get too technical for the typical consumer at this point, but for IT professionals this knowledge is essential. They are three different radio frequency (RF) spectrum ranges that could be used, and every range has different advantages and disadvantages. Low-band, sometimes called Sub-1GHz band, is the band formerly used for television broadcast but now primarily used for 3G and LTE in the U.S. This low-band spectrum affords a very wide coverage...
Why Video-Based Safety? 

Why Video-Based Safety? 

Why Video-Based Safety?  This year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reported a 2.4% decrease in fatal motor vehicle crashes, extending an overall downward trend in road fatalities in 2018, even with more recorded miles driven. On the other hand, when the data are broken out, it’s clear that the trend is not universal across all transportation modes.  Road fatalities involving large trucks, defined by the NHTSA as vehicles with gross vehicle weight over ten thousand pounds and including buses, increased. We can point to at least three reasons that could contribute to the divergence:  Vehicles themselves – Compared to cars, the absolute number of bus accidents is extremely low; however, buses do not always have the same level of protection (e.g. seat belts) that passenger cars do. Buses are more prone to rollover risk. If a serious accident does occur, injuries tend to be more severe.  Drivers – For transportation providers and public transit agencies, the driver is still the first and perhaps only line of defense. Despite stringent training programs, research still points to human error as a primary cause of accidents in public transit. Common reasons for motor vehicle safety issues include distracted driving, alcohol-impaired driving, speeding, improper vehicle operations and road rages. Increasingly, cabin distractions, including direct threats on drivers are also a factor. Once buses leave the terminal, operators do not have tools to understand conditions affecting safety.  Technology differences – The NHTSA points out that vehicle improvements, like electronic stability control, have contributed to overall declines in road fatalities in cars. More recently, “automated technologies” such as automatic lane departure, collision avoidance alerts, adaptive cruise control and automatic braking have become widely available on cars. These technologies are designed to counteract distracted driving and errors in judgement and may account for continuing declines in fatal accidents in automobiles.  Preliminary...