Assessing Cyber Challenges of Maritime Navigation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I may have overlooked it in your paper but I did not see reference to the IMO Cyber Security Guidelines for 2021 and some of the issues regarding their adoption: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Security/Guide_to_Maritime_Security/Pages/Cyber-security.aspx
Other than that it looks like you covered all of the salient aspects of the issue.
Per your questions on Page 12.....you are not the only ones asking those questions.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper provides a comprehensive literature review of the relatively new area of maritime cyber-security. It provides a good bibliography ranging from general overviews to very specific areas of focus.
Much of the information has been seen before but this a good effort to summarise and analyse disperite literature. There is some unevenness in the depth of coverage of the large range of topics, with GNNS being given specific attention, due to the previous experience of the authors.
Overall, this is a valuable survey of the "state of the art" and will be very useful to a particular class of reader.
There are some minor phrases that need polishing to read more naturally in English.
The terminology suggested at line 54 is not standard in my experience and the more usual "cyber" and "cyber-physical" is used later.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much, indeed for your valuable and positive comments. Please allow me to provide you with some comments about changes made:
- It has been mentioned that the terminology in line 54 is not standard. Maybe we do not see the same numbers on the article. On ours, there is a word about IMS Code. May I kindly ask you to which term you actually refer so that we could make some changes as required? I tried to guess but I didn't see it.
- In relation to the English used I would like to mention that this article was proof-read by a professional. Mr Rick Harsh (Master in Fine Arts, in English) is a professional editor, author and has edited hundreds of papers written in the maritime field. He reviewed this paper and some changes were made before it was submitted. We cannot, of course, presume that any paper is perfect, but if there are any mistakes in this one or awkward sentences, he would be very happy to revise them if they could be specified.
Once again, thank you for your time and your work in reviewing our article.
Very respectfully,
Andrej
Reviewer 3 Report
The submitted manuscript presents an overview of the literature in the topic of maritime cybersecurity. I find the study well-written and almost ready for publication except two minor issues:
- Authors shall verify their statements that m/v Stena Impero was somehow re-directed to Iranian waters. There is no evidence in the referenced document [111] that such thing actually happened;
- In Introduction, authors only refer to GPS while there are different GNSS that are only mentioned later. Please consider mentioning them earlier along with GPS.
Once this is completed, I consider the manuscript ready for publication.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much, indeed for your valuable and positive comments. Please allow me to provide you with some comments about changes made:
- reference document regarding m/v Stena Impero has been replaced with a valid referenced document.
- Regarding GPS and other GNSS systems, we have made a slight reformulation in the Introduction (please, see changes in lines 79 – 86 and in List of Acronyms), but we propose to maintain the mention of other GNSS systems besides GPS to section 3.3.5 on Jamming which has the focus on this topic.
Once again, thank you for your time and your work in reviewing our article.
Very respectfully,
