NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS

Ozan Batmaz; Barış Kuleyin; Nergis Özispa

doi:10.18613/deudfd.1826081

EN TR

NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS

Abstract

Considering the hazards posed by Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) vessels, their operations on critical infrastructure, and integrated digital systems, a successful cyber-attack against LNG ships could have severe consequences. The cyber risk perception of deck officers will influence decision-making mechanisms in the face of potential threats. Therefore, identifying and examining the factors affecting the cyber risk perception of deck officers working on LNG vessels will be beneficial in shaping their perception and strengthening decision-making mechanisms against potential cyber threats. The purpose of this research is to decide the factors influencing the cyber risk perception of deck officers working on LNG vessels. To achieve this goal, semi-structured face-to-face interview questions were directed to voluntary experts involved in LNG vessel operations. The obtained data were coded using a constant comparative analysis method. The contextual model developed within the results of the research includes factors such as "technical support", "software measures", "company's approach to cybersecurity", "company-ship communication", "company training", "insufficient knowledge", "lack of awareness of danger", "excessive optimistic approach", "onboard discipline", and "past incidents".

Keywords

Cyber security, Cyber threats, Cyber risk perception, Maritime transportation, LNG

Supporting Institution

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Ethical Statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

SİBER TEHDİTLERDE SEYİR: LNG GEMİLERİNDEKİ GÜVERTE ZABİTLERİNİN SİBER RİSK ALGISINI ŞEKİLLENDİREN FAKTÖRLER

Abstract

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) tankerlerinin oluşturduğu tehlikeler, kritik altyapı üzerindeki operasyonları ve entegre dijital sistemleri göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, LNG gemilerine yönelik başarılı bir siber saldırı ciddi sonuçlara yol açabilir. Güverte zabitlerinin siber risk algısı, olası tehditler karşısında karar alma mekanizmalarını etkileyecektir. Bu nedenle, LNG gemilerinde çalışan güverte zabitlerinin siber risk algısını etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi ve incelenmesi, algılarını şekillendirmede ve olası siber tehditlere karşı karar alma mekanizmalarını güçlendirmede faydalı olacaktır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, LNG gemilerinde çalışan güverte zabitlerinin siber risk algısını etkileyen faktörleri belirlemektir. Bu hedefe ulaşmak için, LNG gemi operasyonlarında görev alan gönüllü uzmanlara yarı yapılandırılmış yüz yüze görüşme soruları yöneltilmiştir. Elde edilen veriler, sürekli karşılaştırmalı analiz yöntemi kullanılarak kodlanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda geliştirilen bağlamsal modelde; “teknik destek”, “yazılım önlemleri”, “şirketin siber güvenliğe yaklaşımı”, “şirket-gemi iletişimi”, “şirket eğitimi”, “yetersiz bilgi”, “tehlike farkındalığının eksikliği”, “aşırı iyimser yaklaşım”, “gemi içi disiplin” ve “geçmiş olaylar” gibi faktörler ortaya çıkmıştır.

Keywords

Siber güvenlik, Siber tehditler, Siber risk algısı, Deniz taşımacılığı, LNG

Supporting Institution

Bu araştırma kamu, ticari veya kâr amacı gütmeyen sektörlerdeki fon sağlayıcı kuruluşlardan herhangi bir özel hibe almamıştır.

Ethical Statement

Yazarlar, bu makalede bildirilen çalışmayı etkileyebilecek bilinen herhangi bir mali çıkarlarının veya kişisel ilişkilerinin olmadığını beyan etmektedirler.

References

Abroshan, H., Devos, J., Poels, G. and Laermans, E. (2021). COVID-19 and phishing: effects of human emotions, behavior, and demographics on the success of phishing attempts during the pandemic. IEEE Access. 9: 121916–121929.
Ahvenjärvi, S., Czarnowski, I., Kála, J., Kyster, A., Meyer, I., Mogensen, J. and Szyman, P. (2019). Safe information exchange on board of the ship. TransNav. 13(1): 165–171.
Aiello, G., Giallanza, A. and Mascarella, G. (2020). Towards shipping 4.0. A preliminary gap analysis. Procedia Manufacturing. Elsevier B.V.: 24– 29.
Albakri, A., Alabdullah, B. and Alhayan, F. (2023). Blockchain-assisted machine learning with hybrid metaheuristics-empowered cyber attack detection and classification model. Sustainability. 15(18): 13887.
Aldawood, H. and Skinner, G. (2019). Reviewing cyber security social engineering training and awareness programs-pitfalls and ongoing issues. Future Internet. MDPI AG.
Alop, A. (2019). the main challenges and barriers to the successful “Smart Shipping.” TransNav. 13(3): 521–528.
Alqahtani, A. and Sheldon, F.T. (2022). A survey of crypto ransomware attack detection methodologies: an evolving outlook. Sensors. MDPI.
Androjna, A. and Perkovič, M. (2021). Impact of spoofing of navigation systems on maritime situational awareness. Transactions on Maritime Science. 10(2): 361–373.
Astya, P.N. (2016). International conference on computing, communication and automation. Proceeding of ICCCA, (ss. 29-30).
Balduzzi, M., Pasta, A. and Wilhoit, K. (2014). A security evaluation of AIS automated identification system. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. (ss. 436 445). ACM. December 2014.

Barnett, M., Samori, I., Griffin, B., Palmer, X. and Potter, L. (2023). A commentary and exploration of maritime applications of biosecurity and cybersecurity intersections. Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security. 22(1).
Beg, O.A., Johnson, T.T. and Davoudi, A. (2017). Detection of False-data injection attacks in cyber-physical DC microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics. 13(5): 2693–2703.
Bekkali, A. El, Essaaidi, M. and Boulmalf, M. (2023). A blockchain-based architecture and framework for cybersecure smart cities. IEEE Access. 11: 76359–76370.
Bellekens, X., Hamilton, A., Seeam, P., Nieradzinska, K., Franssen, Q. and Seeam, A. (2016). Pervasive ehealth services a security and privacy risk awareness survey. 2016 international conference on cyber situational awareness, Data Analytics and Assessment. Düzenleyen: CyberSA. 2016.
Ben Farah, Ukwandu, E., Hindy, H., Brosset, D., Bures, M., Andonovic, I. and Bellekens, X. (2022). Cyber security in the maritime industry: a systematic survey of recent advances and future trends. Information (Switzerland). MDPI.
Boeije, H. (2002). a purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality and Quantity. 36(4): 391–409.
Bolat, P. and Kayişoǧlu, G. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of cybersecurity awareness: a case study for turkish maritime sector. Journal of Eta Maritime Science. 7(4): 344–360.
Bolbot, V., Kulkarni, K., Brunou, P., Banda, O. V. and Musharraf, M. (2022). Developments and research directions in maritime cybersecurity: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection. 39.
Bolbot, V., Theotokatos, G., Boulougouris, E. and Vassalos, D. (2020). A novel cyber risk assessment method for ship systems. Safety Science. 131.
Butt, J. (2020). A conceptual framework to support digital transformation in manufacturing using an integrated business process management approach. Designs. 4(3): 1–39.
Caruso, L. (2018). Digital innovation and the fourth industrial revolution: epochal social changes. AI and Society. 33(3): 379–392.
Chatziamanetoglou, D. and Rantos, K. (2023). Blockchain-Based security configuration management for ICT systems. Electronics. 12(8).
Corradini, I. and Nardelli, E. (2016). A case study in information security awareness improvement: a short description. IMCIC – ICSIT.
Dugan, S. A., Skjetne, R., Wróbel, K., Montewka, J., Gil, M. and Utne, I. B. (2023). Integration test procedures for a collision avoidance decision support system using STPA. TransNav. 17(2): 375–381.
Penera, E. and Chasaki, D. (2015). Packet scheduling attacks on shipboard networked control systems. 2015 Resilience Week (RWS), Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2015, pp. 1-6.
Erstad, E., Ostnes, R. and Lund, M.S. (2021). An operational approach to maritime cyber resilience. TransNav. 15(1): 27–34.
Fitton, M.O., Prince, D. and Lacy, M. (2015). The Future of Maritime Cyber Security: Science and Technology. Lancaster University.
Hareide, O.S., Jøsok, Ø., Lund, M. S. and Ostnes, R. (2018). Enhancing navigator competence by demonstrating maritime cyber security. Journal of Navigation. 71(5): 1025–1039.
Hatmi, A., Manteghi, M. and Khamseh, A. (2024). Identification of influencing factors on the informal advanced technology transfer using a qualitative approach in the industry LNG. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 16(3), 63-78.
Heering, D., Maennel, O. M. and Venables, A. N. (2021). Shortcomings in cybersecurity education for seafarers. developments in maritime technology and engineering. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Maritime Technology and Engineering. 1: 49–61. Düzenleyen: MARTECH 2020.
Hemminghaus, C., Bauer, J. and Padilla, E. (2021). Brat: A bridge attack tool for cyber security assessments of maritime systems. TransNav. 15(1): 35–44.
Herr, T. (2014). PrEP: A framework for malware and cyber weapons. Journal of Information Warfare.
Hopcraft, R., Harish, A. V., Tam, K. and Jones, K. (2023). Raising the standard of maritime voyage data recorder security. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 11(2).
Ibrahim, R.F., Abu Al-Haija, Q. and Ahmad, A. (2022). DDoS attack prevention for internet of thing devices using ethereum blockchain technology. Sensors. 22(18).
Kampourakis, V., Gkioulos, V. and Katsikas, S. (2023). A systematic literature review on wireless security testbeds in the cyber-physical realm. Computers and Security. Elsevier Ltd.
Kanwal, K., Shi, W., Kontovas, C., Yang, Z. and Chang, C. H. (2022). Maritime cybersecurity: are onboard systems ready? Maritime Policy and Management.
Kaur, R., Gabrijelčič, D. and Klobučar, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence for cybersecurity: literature review and future research directions. Information Fusion. 97.
Kolb, S.M. (2012). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: valid research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies.
Kushal, T.R.B., Lai, K. and Illindala, M.S. (2018). Risk-Based mitigation of load curtailment cyber attack using intelligent agents in a shipboard power system. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 10(5): 4741–4750.
Kustanto, A. (2023). Recommended LNG Commercialization Strategy to Maintain Business Sustainability in the Global LNG Market. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Larsen, M.H. and Lund, M.S. (2021). Cyber risk perception in the maritime domain: a systematic literature review. IEEE Access. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. ss. 144895–144905.
Larsen, M.H., Lund, M.S. and Bjørneseth, F.B. (2022). A model of factors influencing deck officers’ cyber risk perception in offshore operations. Maritime Transport Research. 3.
Leong, P., Joseph, S.R.H. and Boulay, R. (2010). Applying constant comparative and discourse analyses to virtual worlds research. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research. 3(1).
Liu, Y., Ning, P. and Reiter, M.K. (2011). False data injection attacks against state estimation in electric power grids. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security.
Longo, G., Orlich, A., Musante, S., Merlo, A. and Russo, E. (2023). MaCySTe: A virtual testbed for maritime cybersecurity. SoftwareX. 23.
Lutzhoft, M., Hynnekleiv, A., Earthy, J. V. and Petersen, E. S. (2019). Human-Centred maritime autonomy-an ethnography of the future. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 1357(1).
Magsamen-Conrad K. and Dillon J. M. (2020). Mobile technology adoption across the lifespan: A mixed methods investigation to clarify adoption stages, and the influence of diffusion attributes, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 112, 106456, ISSN 0747-5632
Meland, P.H., Bernsmed, K., Wille, E., Rødseth, Ø. J. and Nesheim, D. A. (2021). A retrospective analysis of maritime cyber security incidents. TransNav. 15(3): 519 530.
Meng, Y., Khan, A., Bibi, S., Wu, H., Lee, Y. and Chen, W. (2021). The effects of COVID-19 risk perception on travel intention: evidence from chinese travelers. Frontiers in Psychology. 12.
Mittal, S. and Ilavarasan, P. V. (2019). Demographic factors in cyber security: an empirical study. Lecture Notes. Computer Science. 11701 LNCS, ss. 667–676.
Młody, M., Ratajczak-Mrozek, M. and Sajdak, M. (2023). Industry 4.0 technologies and managers’ decision-making across value chain. evidence from the manufacturing industry. Engineering Management in Production and Services. 15(3): 69–83.
Mohan, V.S., Vinayakumar, R., Soman, K.P. and Poornachandran, P. (2018). S.P.O.O.F net: syntactic patterns for identification of ominous online factors. Proceedings - 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops. (ss. 258–263). Düzenleyen: SPW 2018. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Mudra, G., Cui, H. and Johnstone, M.N. (2023). Survey: an overview of lightweight RFID authentication protocols suitable for the maritime internet of things. Electronics (Switzerland). 12(13).
Norton. (2018). What is a Trojan?. https://asia.norton.com/blog/malware/what is-a-trojan, Access Date: 22.10.2018.
Nurse, J. R. C., Creese, S. and De Roure, D. (2017). Trusting the internet of things security risk assessment in internet of things systems. IEEE Computer Society.
Odeh, A., Keshta, I. and Abdelfattah, E. (2020). Efficient detection of phishing websites using multilayer perception. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies. 14(11): 22–31.
Onyeaka, H.K., Romero, P., Healy, B. C. and Celano, C. M. (2021). Age differences in the use of health information technology among adults in the united states: an analysis of the health information national trends survey. Journal of Aging and Health. 33(1–2): 147–154.
Oruc, A., Gkioulos, V. and Katsikas, S. (2022). Towards a cyber-physical range for the integrated navigation system (INS). Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 10(1).
Paolucci, F., Civerchia, F., Sgambelluri, A., Giorgetti, A., Cugini, F. and Castoldi, P. (2019). P4 edge node enabling stateful traffic engineering and cyber security. Journal of Optical Communications and Networking. 11(1): 84-95.
Piccinelli, M. and Gubian, P. (2013). Modern ships voyage data recorders: a forensics perspective on the costa concordia shipwreck. Proceedings of the Digital Forensic Research Conference. (ss. 41–49). Düzenleyen: DFRWS 2013.
Progoulakis, I., Rohmeyer, P. and Nikitakos, N. (2021). Cyber physical systems security for maritime assets. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 9(12).
Sahay, R., Meng, W., Estay, D. A. S., Jensen, C. D. and Barfod, M. B. (2019). CyberShip-IoT: a dynamic and adaptive sdn-based security policy enforcement framework for ships. Future Generation Computer Systems. 100: 736–750.
Sarker, I.H. (2021). Deep cybersecurity: a comprehensive overview from neural network and deep learning perspective. SN Computer Science. 2(3).
Silverajan, B., Ocak, M. and Nagel, B. (2018). Cybersecurity attacks and defences for unmanned smart ships. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings) and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData). (ss. 15–20). IEEE.
Skobelev, P., Skobelev, P.O. and Borovik, S.Y. (2017). On the way from industry 4.0 to industry 5.0: from digital manufacturing to digital society. International Scientific Journal "Industry 4.0”. 307-311.
Slovic, P. (2016). The perception of risk. scientists making a difference: one hundred eminent behavioral and brain scientists talk about their most important contributions. Cambridge University Press. ss. 179–182.
Smith, A., Papadaki, M. and Furnell, S.M. (2013). IFIP AICT 406 - improving awareness of social engineering attacks. IFIP AICT.
Tam, K., Jones, K.D. and Papadaki, M. (2012). Threats and impacts in maritime cyber security. Engineering and Technology Reference. 1(1).
Voinson, M., Billiard, S. and Alvergne, A. (2015). Beyond rational decisionmaking: modelling the influence of cognitive biases on the dynamics of vaccination coverage. PLoS ONE. 10(11).
Wang, C. N., Yang, F. C., Vo, N. T. M. and Nguyen, V. T. T. (2022). Wireless communications for data security: efficiency assessment of cybersecurity industry, a promising application for UAVs. Drones. 6(11).
Yeboah-Ofori, A. and Islam, S. (2019). Cyber security threat modeling for supply chain organizational environments. Future Internet. 11(3).
Yoo, J. and Jo, Y. (2023). Formulating cybersecurity requirements for autonomous ships using the square methodology. Sensors. 23(11).
Zagan, R., Raicu, G. and Sabau, A. (2022). Studies and research regarding vulnerabilities of marine autonomous surface systems (mass) and remotely operated vessels (rovs) from point of view of cybersecurity. International Journal of Modern Manufacturing Technologies. 14(3): 310–318.
Zeng, H., Zhao, Y., Wang, T. and Zhang, J. (2022). defense strategy against false data injection attacks in ship DC microgrids. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 10(12).
Zong, Y. and Zhao, X. (2018). Application discussion of source coding standard in voyage data recorder. AIP Conference Proceedings. (ss. 1955). AIP.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Maritime Transportation Engineering, Marine Electronics, Control and Automation, Business Systems in Context (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Ozan Batmaz
0000-0002-3599-3140
Türkiye

Barış Kuleyin
0000-0001-6485-5591
Türkiye

Nergis Özispa ^*
0000-0002-2467-5286
Türkiye

Publication Date

June 29, 2026

Submission Date

November 18, 2025

Acceptance Date

March 1, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 18 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18613/deudfd.1826081

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA86KC52WP

APA

Batmaz, O., Kuleyin, B., & Özispa, N. (2026). NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18613/deudfd.1826081

AMA

1.Batmaz O, Kuleyin B, Özispa N. NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi. 2026;18(1):1-33. doi:10.18613/deudfd.1826081

Chicago

Batmaz, Ozan, Barış Kuleyin, and Nergis Özispa. 2026. “NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi 18 (1): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18613/deudfd.1826081.

EndNote

Batmaz O, Kuleyin B, Özispa N (June 1, 2026) NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi 18 1 1–33.

IEEE

[1]O. Batmaz, B. Kuleyin, and N. Özispa, “NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–33, June 2026, doi: 10.18613/deudfd.1826081.

ISNAD

Batmaz, Ozan - Kuleyin, Barış - Özispa, Nergis. “NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi 18/1 (June 1, 2026): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18613/deudfd.1826081.

JAMA

1.Batmaz O, Kuleyin B, Özispa N. NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi. 2026;18:1–33.

MLA

Batmaz, Ozan, et al. “NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 18, no. 1, June 2026, pp. 1-33, doi:10.18613/deudfd.1826081.

Vancouver

1.Ozan Batmaz, Barış Kuleyin, Nergis Özispa. NAVIGATING CYBER THREATS: FACTORS SHAPING LNG VESSEL DECK OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF CYBER RISKS. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi. 2026 Jun. 1;18(1):1-33. doi:10.18613/deudfd.1826081