Navigating the Mandate: Automating IACS UR E26/E27 Compliance through the Cyber Anchor Technical Framework
The maritime industry stands at a pivotal inflection point. With IACS Unified Requirements E26 and E27 becoming mandatory for all newbuilds contracted on or after July 1, 2024, shipyards worldwide face an unprecedented compliance challenge.
Cyber Anchor introduces a paradigm shift: Compliance-as-Code. By encoding the technical requirements of UR E27 (System-Level Security) directly into an automated validation engine, we create what we call the "Digital Bulkhead"—a technical barrier that prevents non-compliance from ever reaching the shipyard floor.
The IACS UR E26/E27 unified requirements represent the most significant cybersecurity mandate in maritime history. Yet the industry's response has been largely reactive—relying on consultants, spreadsheets, and manual documentation processes designed for a simpler era.
With global newbuild orders exceeding 2,000 vessels annually and a limited pool of qualified maritime cybersecurity consultants, the manual model simply cannot scale.
Consider the compliance burden for a single LNG carrier:
| Requirement | Manual Effort | Duration |
|---|---|---|
| CBS Asset Inventory (E27 3.1.1) | 200+ hardware components | 2-4 weeks |
| System Classification (E26 4.1.1.3.1) | Cat II/III determination | 1-2 weeks |
| Zone/Conduit Diagrams (E26 4.2.1) | Network topology mapping | 2-3 weeks |
| CSDD Documentation (E26 4.1.2) | Design description | 3-4 weeks |
| SCRTP Generation (E26 4.1.3) | Test procedures | 2-3 weeks |
| Total Manual Effort | — | 10-16 weeks |
The maritime industry requires a solution that:
Cyber Anchor delivers all five.
At the heart of Cyber Anchor lies the Guardian Grid—an interactive visual modeler that transforms complex IACS requirements into intuitive, real-time validation.
Figure 1: Guardian Grid detecting a Cat III asset (Gas Detection) improperly placed in an Untrusted Zone
| Rule ID | E26/E27 Reference | Validation Logic |
|---|---|---|
| SAFETY_UNTRUSTED_NO_BOUNDARY | E26 4.2.1 | Safety systems in untrusted zones require boundary devices |
| WIRELESS_NOT_DEDICATED_ZONE | E26 4.2.5.3 | Wireless devices must reside in dedicated security zones |
| CAT_III_IN_SHARED_ZONE | E26 4.1.1.3.1 | Category III systems cannot share zones with lower categories |
| UNTRUSTED_DIRECT_TO_SAFETY | E26 4.2.1 | Direct connections from untrusted to safety prohibited |
UR E27 Section 4.1 mandates that CBS suppliers (Wärtsilä, ABB, Kongsberg, etc.) attest to 26 specific security capabilities. Cyber Anchor's Supplier Portal streamlines this process:
System integrators spend less time on paperwork and more time on delivery. Attestations are digitally verified, reducing back-and-forth with shipyards and eliminating lost documentation.
Cyber Anchor orchestrates the entire compliance journey from initial asset inventory through surveyor certification:
Figure 2: The Compliance Lifecycle - automated flow from asset inventory to surveyor certification
Our Classification Engine implements the logic defined in UR E22 and UR E26 4.1.1.3.1 to automatically categorize Computer Based Systems:
Systems whose failure could result in hazardous or catastrophic consequences:
Systems whose failure could result in major consequences:
Cyber Anchor's Document Stitching Engine automatically aggregates all compliance artifacts into a unified Vessel Technical File—the master compliance document required by Classification Societies:
The stitching engine calculates E27 coverage percentage and flags any gaps in supplier attestations, ensuring shipyards know exactly what's missing before surveyor review.
Ship designs represent highly sensitive intellectual property. Network topology diagrams, system configurations, and vulnerability assessments could be catastrophic in the wrong hands. Cyber Anchor implements a defense-in-depth architecture that protects data at every layer.
Figure 3: Security Stack - Defense-in-Depth from Application to Infrastructure
| Approach | Key Rotation Complexity | Data Re-encryption |
|---|---|---|
| Direct Encryption | O(records) | All data must be re-encrypted |
| Envelope Encryption | O(vessels) | Only DEKs re-encrypted |
To prevent cross-tenant data leakage, we implement strict Row-Level Security (RLS) policies at the database level:
Key Guarantee: A user can ONLY access vessels where their JWT shipyard_id
claim matches the vessel's shipyard_id. This enforcement happens at the PostgreSQL
level—it cannot be bypassed by application code.
Cyber Anchor is architected for SOC 2 Type II compliance, implementing controls across all Trust Service Criteria:
| SOC 2 Control | Implementation |
|---|---|
| CC 6.1 - Logical Access | Immutable security logs with hash chain verification |
| CC 7.2 - Backup & Recovery | Automated weekly backup restore drills with audit logging |
| CC 7.4 - Change Management | MoC Impact Engine tracks all topology changes |
Database triggers enforce immutability of security event logs—DELETE and UPDATE operations are blocked at the database level. A cryptographic hash chain ensures integrity verification for audit purposes.
Classification Society surveyors (DNV, Lloyd's, ABS, Bureau Veritas) require more than documentation—they need evidence of process. When a surveyor asks "How do I know this Cat III system was properly validated?", the answer must be traceable, immutable, and cryptographically verifiable.
Cyber Anchor provides a dedicated Evidence Vault that aggregates all compliance artifacts into a single, audit-ready package:
Figure 4: Surveyor Evidence Vault - Immutable compliance records with Golden Thread traceability
| Source | Event Types Captured |
|---|---|
| Asset Inventory | Created, Updated, Deleted, Moved, Encrypted |
| Network Topology | Zone/Conduit Created, Modified, Security Level Changed |
| Compliance | Patch Applied, Alert Raised, Alert Resolved |
| Documents | SCRTP Generated, Approved, Marked Outdated |
| Security | Key Rotated, DEK Created, Access Granted |
Compliance is not a point-in-time achievement—it requires continuous monitoring. The Management of Change (MoC) Impact Engine automatically detects topology changes and assesses their compliance impact:
The Compliance Decay Monitor implements "active risk management"—tracking patch status and alerting when systems fall behind:
| Category | Warning | HIGH RISK | CRITICAL |
|---|---|---|---|
| CAT III (Safety-Critical) | 90 days | 180 days | 365 days |
| CAT II (Important) | 60 days | 120 days | 240 days |
| CAT I (General) | 30 days | 60 days | 90 days |
If a Category III safety-critical system has no patch logged for 6 months, a HIGH RISK alert is prominently displayed on the dashboard—ensuring no compliance gap goes unnoticed.
Cyber Anchor transforms IACS UR E26/E27 compliance from a bottleneck into a competitive advantage:
| Metric | Traditional Approach | With Cyber Anchor |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance Timeline | 10-16 weeks | Days |
| Documentation Errors | High (manual) | Near-zero (automated) |
| Surveyor Prep Time | Weeks | Hours |
| Key Rotation Downtime | Hours | Zero |
| Cross-Tenant Data Risk | Application-dependent | Database-enforced |
"Preventing non-compliance from reaching the shipyard floor."
⚓ ⚓ ⚓
CYBER ANCHOR | Maritime Cyber Resilience Platform