Why Cybersecurity Matters for Cyber-Physical Systems Like BMS

The Threat Landscape Has Shifted — But Building Systems Haven’t

Ransomware reshaped the cybersecurity landscape by creating a powerful economic incentive for attackers. Locking down IT systems and data proved profitable — and organizations responded with serious investment in IT security.

Today, most enterprises understand the risks to their IT environments. They’ve implemented MFA, endpoint protection, centralized identity systems, and active monitoring.

But one critical area often remains exposed: Building Management Systems (BMS) and other cyber-physical systems.

Unlike IT infrastructure, BMS environments were not designed for modern cyber threats. They operate differently. They are secured differently. And they are targeted differently.

With the rise of AI-enabled threat actors, the attack surface is expanding beyond data — into operations.

From Data Disruption to Operational Disruption

Historically, attackers focused on encrypting data and demanding ransom. Now, AI-assisted tools are enabling adversaries to identify facilities that cannot tolerate operational downtime, target buildings critical to manufacturing, healthcare, data centers, or defense, and scale attacks across similar OT deployments.

Instead of locking files, attackers can disrupt physical operations. For many organizations, shutting down a facility is far more damaging than encrypting email.

Local Device Admin Credentials — A Hidden Systemic Risk

In IT environments, MFA protects administrative access and centralized identity systems manage credentials.

In BMS environments, devices must maintain a local administrator account for hardware resets. This is true even for systems that provide users their individual account and establish policies that the admin password is only available in a “break-the-glass” emergency. These passwords often remain static, are not protected by MFA, and are frequently shared across devices.

If one device password is compromised, attackers can gain root-level access across the entire deployment.

Zuul mitigates this risk by automatically generating strong, unique admin passwords, rotating these passwords frequently, securing password access behind MFA-protected identity systems, logging password access events, and alerting on local admin credential use.

Broadcast & Discovery Protocols Enable Lateral Movement

Most BMS networks rely on broadcast-based protocols such as BACnet and mDNS. These protocols are often unauthenticated and unencrypted, enabling reconnaissance and lateral movement.

Zuul enables migration to secure protocols like BACnet Secure Connect (BACnet/SC), automates certificate lifecycle management, disables insecure legacy protocols, monitors network traffic for unauthorized activity, and restores devices if insecure configurations are detected.

Preparing for the Future: Certificate Lifespans & Quantum Readiness

Building systems often have 10–20 year lifespans, yet the cybersecurity industry is moving toward shorter certificate lifetimes and rapid cryptographic agility.

Industry trends are pushing toward certificate lifespans as short as 47 days, requiring large-scale automation.

Zuul’s architecture supports automated certificate lifecycle management, including short lifespans, automated rotations, early failure alerts, and continuous identity verification.

The scary part, these examples are just the tip of the iceberg.

AI Is Changing the Threat Model

The above examples are just a small subset of the issues facing BMS and Cyber Physical systems. AI empowers attackers to rapidly scan, classify, and target vulnerable OT deployments at scale.

Security must therefore be policy-driven, continuously enforced, identity-centric, and automated. Manual configuration and periodic audits are no longer sufficient.

A New Model for BMS Security

Modern OT security must address device identity, local account protection, certificate lifecycle automation, whitelisted network communication, configuration drift detection, and continuous compliance validation.

Zuul was developed to address the full range of risks at the controller level, aligning with NIST 800-802r3, ISA/IEC 62443, and Zero-Trust architecture principles.

The Bottom Line

Cybersecurity for BMS is no longer optional — and it cannot be treated as an extension of IT security.

Operational disruption is business disruption. Organizations that modernize their BMS security posture reduce operational risk, improve compliance readiness, limit lateral movement, prepare for future cryptographic changes, and protect mission-critical facilities.

The question is no longer whether cyber-physical systems will be targeted — but whether they are designed to withstand it.