Ostermann Max, Mathias Rebecca, Jahed Fatemeh, Parker Mitchell B, Hudson Florence D, Harding William C, Gilbert Stephen, Freyer Oscar
Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Information Security and Compliance, Indiana University Health, Indiana University Health University Hospital, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2025 Jul 15;28:259-266. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2025.07.024. eCollection 2025.
The increasing use of connected medical devices has led to substantial cybersecurity challenges, putting patient safety and the integrity of healthcare infrastructures at risk. This study examines regulatory guidance on medical device cybersecurity in the European Union (guidance document of Medical Device Coordination Group MDCG 2019-16 revision 1) and the United States (US Food and Drug Administration Guidance on Cybersecurity) and identifies their strengths and weaknesses. First, the study compares these documents with a baseline requirements framework derived from international standards and best practices, revealing gaps in the thematic areas of "Cryptography," "Authentication & Access Control," and "Source Code/Software Development." Second, the guidance documents were compared with real-world cybersecurity incidents, showing that the current guidance documents would help to mitigate the weaknesses of important vulnerability examples, while recommendations are missing in both guidance documents, but more so in MDCG 2019-16, for the most important weaknesses. In conclusion, both guidance documents are inadequately formulated in certain aspects, have an unclear scope, inconsistent levels of detail, and contain thematic gaps. These gaps could result in manufacturers failing to sufficiently address cybersecurity concerns in their products, thereby creating vulnerabilities. This study highlights the need for future guidance documents to be clearer in scope and to close existing gaps to ultimately allow safer medical devices.
联网医疗设备的使用日益增加,带来了重大的网络安全挑战,使患者安全和医疗保健基础设施的完整性面临风险。本研究审视了欧盟(医疗器械协调小组MDCG 2019 - 16修订版1的指导文件)和美国(美国食品药品监督管理局网络安全指南)关于医疗器械网络安全的监管指导,并确定了它们的优点和缺点。首先,该研究将这些文件与源自国际标准和最佳实践的基线要求框架进行比较,揭示了“加密”、“认证与访问控制”以及“源代码/软件开发”等主题领域存在的差距。其次,将指导文件与实际网络安全事件进行比较,结果表明当前的指导文件有助于减轻重要漏洞示例的弱点,不过两份指导文件都缺少针对最重要弱点的建议,MDCG 2019 - 16中更是如此。总之,两份指导文件在某些方面的制定都不够完善,范围不明确,细节程度不一致,且存在主题空白。这些空白可能导致制造商未能充分解决其产品中的网络安全问题,从而产生漏洞。本研究强调,未来的指导文件需要在范围上更加清晰,并填补现有空白,以最终实现医疗设备更安全。