Webinar – From Legacy Systems to AI-Powered Compliance
Stop managing requirements manually. Start delivering smarter, with AI built...
Nowadays, security has become a primary challenge for modern aircraft systems, and the reason is straightforward: Modern aircraft and aviation networks are widely connected with the internet and private networks, regularly exchange data with the ground stations, and have maintenance laptops that plug directly into the avionics buses. Every one of these connections expands the attack surface.
Furthermore, cyber attacks rose by 131% between 2022 and 2023 across the aviation industry, with the highest proportion of attacks focused on airspace users. This increases concerns related to aircraft security.
On the other hand, safety standards like DO-178C and DO-254 provide rules and regulations for building aircraft software and hardware and handling accidental failures, but do not offer anything to secure the digital systems of aircraft from intentional attacks. DO-326A fills that gap.
In this blog, you will cover what DO-326A is, what it covers, and why traceability is important while implementing DO-326.
The DO-326A, also known as the Airworthiness Security Process Specification, is a regulatory standard published jointly by RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) and EUROCAE (European Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment). It defines how aircraft developers should identify, assess, and mitigate international cybersecurity threats as a part of the certification process.
It was published in 2007, and the latest revision was done in 2014. According to DO-326A, anyone deploying new digital systems into the aircraft is obligated to demonstrate the safety measures that are in place. It is not just for companies that are developing Boeing and Airbus, but if your company makes any of the components of an aircraft system, then you need to comply with DO-326A:
However, DO-326A does not offer any guidance on physical attacks (e.g., bomb threats, someone breaking into an aircraft hangar, etc.).
DO-326A contains multiple documents, and each of them covers different phases of aircraft security. Most certification programs reference at least three of them, so here we have covered a few documents from them:
| Document | Título | What It Covers |
|---|---|---|
| DO-326A / ED-202A | Airworthiness Security Process Specification |
It is a top-level framework that defines the 7-step security process, which covers the following steps:
This is the “what to do” document. |
| DO-356A / ED-203A | Airworthiness Security Methods and Considerations | It provides exact methods, risk assessment, and security architecture needed to protect aircraft airworthiness from intentional and unauthorized electronic interactions that could compromise safety. |
| DO-355 / ED-204 | Information Security Guidance for Continuing Airworthiness | Takes over after entry into service. Covers software updates, maintenance access, vulnerability response, and operator security obligations throughout the aircraft’s operational life. |
| DO-392 / ED-206 | Security Event Management | Governs incident detection, reporting, and response when a security event occurs on an in-service aircraft or system. |
DO-178C, DO-254, and ARP4754A are a must to follow while developing aircraft. DO-178C covers rules and regulations about how software development should be done for aircraft systems. DO-254 covers how airborne electronic hardware should be developed and tested. On the other hand, ARP4754A sits on top of these two, which covers how to manage safety requirements for any aircraft at the system level. All three regulations are built around one core assumption, that is, failure happens by accident.
These 3 safety standards require teams to determine the probability of component failure and, based on its consequences, develop an aviation plan. But DO-326A also forces teams to think about what a capable, motivated attacker could do and whether the system withstands it. Probability alone is not enough when the threat is intentional.
In 2015, one of the cybersecurity researchers used his laptop to successfully hack the network of a commercial flight and make it fly higher than the pilot intended by accessing the thrust system. Similarly, they can hack the whole commercial flight system and take control, and it could be very risky.
That’s why cybersecurity guidance was deliberately separated from DO-178C and DO-254, keeping in mind that security requires its own discipline, its own risk assessment process, and its own certification evidence.
During the regulatory submission, auditors expect the specific chain and linkage between: threat condition -> security objective -> security requirement -> design mitigation -> verification evidence. That’s why it becomes important to manage security risk assessment traceability, and here is why maintaining that chain is genuinely difficult:
Modern Requirements4DevOps is a requirement management tool that works directly within Azure DevOps and is widely used by aerospace teams working inside Azure DevOps. Here is how it helps in managing DO-326A compliance traceability:
✅ Defina, gestione y realice un seguimiento de los requisitos en Azure DevOps
✅ Colabore sin problemas entre equipos regulados
✅ Empiece GRATIS, sin necesidad de tarjeta de crédito
Stop managing requirements manually. Start delivering smarter, with AI built...
Explore top IBM DOORS alternatives, its weaknesses, how to select...
A practical breakdown of all six BABOK knowledge areas: what...
End-to-end requirements management in Azure DevOps.
AI-powered assistance for DevOps workflows.
Autonomous AI agents for DevOps execution.
Real-time data sync across tools and systems.