Journals / International Journal of Automotive Science and Technology / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 3

Assessment of Cyber Security Attacks in the Automotive Industry and Development of Strategies in a Fuzzy Environment

Özge Doğan(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0000-8792-9944
Ahmet Mesut Özer(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0001-9487-3798
Yusuf Bera Sanlı(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0003-7577-6671
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-02
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, this research provides industry stakeholders with a quantitative and systematic decision support framework for optimizing cybersecurity investments and ensuring operational continuity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The rapid digitalization of the automotive industry, accelerated by the integration of Industry 4.0 technologies and connected vehicle systems, has significantly expanded the sector's attack surface.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aims to systematically assess these threats and to prioritize the most effective cybersecurity strategies under conditions of uncertainty.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, this research provides industry stakeholders with a quantitative and systematic decision support framework for optimizing cybersecurity investments and ensuring operational continuity.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cyber Threat · Automotive Industry · Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP

Abstract

The rapid digitalization of the automotive industry, accelerated by the integration of Industry 4.0 technologies and connected vehicle systems, has significantly expanded the sector's attack surface. This transformation has rendered the automotive ecosystem increasingly vulnerable to complex and multidimensional cyber threats, including ransomware attacks, data breaches, production disruptions, and supply chain infiltrations. This study aims to systematically assess these threats and to prioritize the most effective cybersecurity strategies under conditions of uncertainty. Given the lack of quantitative prioritization models in the existing literature, a comprehensive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) framework integrating Pythagorean Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Pythagorean Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods was employed. This fuzzy-based approach was adopted to minimize the subjectivity and ambiguity inherent in expert judgments and to yield more realistic outcomes. Within the scope of the study, six major cyber attack types prevalent in the sector were examined, and nine distinct defense strategies were evaluated against eight critical criteria. The Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP results revealed that "Supply Chain and Third-Party Risk Mitigation" and "Coverage Scope" constitute the most decisive factors in strategy selection. The subsequent Pythagorean Fuzzy TOPSIS ranking demonstrated that "Advanced Endpoint and Network Security" is the closest alternative to the positive ideal solution and thus the most effective strategy. Furthermore, "Real-Time Monitoring and Anomaly Detection Systems" emerged as a high-priority approach. The findings underscore the necessity of adopting proactive and holistic security architectures in the automotive sector, rather than relying on reactive measures. In conclusion, this research provides industry stakeholders with a quantitative and systematic decision support framework for optimizing cybersecurity investments and ensuring operational continuity. The findings obtained provide decision-makers with a quantitative and systematic decision support infrastructure for the prioritization of cybersecurity investments, both within the context of the Turkish automotive sector and at the global scale.

🔖

Cite This Article

Doğan, Ö., Özer, A. M., Sanlı, Y. B., Eren, T. (2026). Assessment of Cyber Security Attacks in the Automotive Industry and Development of Strategies in a Fuzzy Environment. International Journal of Automotive Science and Technology, Volume: 10 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.30939/ijastech..1880476

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (73)

  1. Yeniman Yıldırım E. Cyber attacks targeting information systems and ensuring cyber security. Journal of Vocational Sciences. 2018;7(2):24-33.
  2. Yılmaz H. Establishment of information security management system within the scope of TS ISO/IEC 27001 information security management standard and information security risk analysis. Denetişim. 2014;(15):45-59.
  3. Karagöz K. The effect of automotive sector on economy in Turkey: an econometric analysis. The Journal of Van Yuzuncu Yil University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences. 2021;6(12):126-143.
  4. Taştan NS, Taştan K. Automotive sector 2017-2023: a global analysis and Türkiye. Journal of Strategic Management Research. 2023;6(2):120-143. https://doi.org/10.54993/syad.1326969
  5. Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Strategy and Budget Office. Twelfth development plan (2024-2028). Ankara: Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Strategy and Budget Office; 2023. https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Twelfth-Development-Plan_2024-2028.pdf
  6. Özarpa C, Avcı İ. Industry 4.0 and cybersecurity at automobile manufacturing in smart factories. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology. 2022;10(4):2120-2132. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1027236
  7. Bakioğlu G, Atahan AO. AHP integrated TOPSIS and VIKOR methods with Pythagorean fuzzy sets to prioritize risks in self-driving vehicles. Appl Soft Comput. 2021;99:106948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106948
  8. Ayhan MB. A fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection problem: a case study in a gearmotor company. Int J Manag Value Supply Chains. 2013;4(3):11-23. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijmvsc.2013.4302
  9. Ayyıldız E, Gümüş AT. Pythagorean fuzzy AHP based risk assessment methodology for hazardous material transportation: an application in Istanbul. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021;28(27):35798-35810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13223-y
  10. Demiralay E, Çopur EH, Paksoy T. Spaceport selection using a novel hybrid Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & TOPSIS methodology: a case study of Turkey. J Aeronaut Space Technol. 2022;15(1):1-17.
  11. Muğan Ertuğral S. Automotive sector and developments after Customs Union. Journal of Social Sciences. 2011;(2):75-83.
  12. Ekizoğlu Uİ, Çetin G. The effect of foreign trade in the automotive sector on the Turkish economy: an econometric model. Istanbul Ticaret University Journal of Foreign Trade. 2025;3(5):95-114. https://doi.org/10.62101/iticudisticaretdergisi.1668897
  13. Kara İ. Interpol ransomware attack and analysis. Journal of Advanced Technology Sciences. 2019;8(2):117-128.
  14. Çelik S, Çeliktaş B. Current cyber security threats: ransomwares. Cyberpolitik Journal. 2018;3(5):105-132.
  15. Çıkmak S, Ungan MC. A research on supply chain risks in the automotive sector. Ataturk University Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences. 2021;25(4):1710-1737. https://doi.org/10.53487/ataunisosbil.948617
  16. Boyson S, Corsi TM, Paraskevas JP. Defending digital supply chains: evidence from a decade-long research program. Technovation. 2022;118:102380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102380
  17. Pandey S, Singh RK, Gunasekaran A, Kaushik A. Cyber security risks in globalized supply chains: conceptual framework. J Glob Oper Strateg Sourcing. 2020;13(1):103-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-05-2019-0042
  18. Ayık E. Research on the concept of modularity in automotive design. Halic University Journal of Science. 2019;2(1):77-101.
  19. Akbaş B, Kaya D, Eyidoğan M. Energy consumption analysis and evaluation of energy saving potential of an automobile assembly plant. Engineer and Machinery. 2018;59(691):85-100.
  20. Dikkaya M, Kutval Y. Search engine or car engine? Political economy of industrial and technology policies in Turkey. Aksaray University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences. 2016;8(4):153-167.
  21. Kızıltaş MÇ. Investigation of the features, current status and future place of autonomous vehicles in the context of impact on transportation and traffic. Dicle University Journal of Engineering. 2020;11(3):1251-1259. https://doi.org/10.24012/dumf.655830
  22. Özçam A, Özçam DS. A literature review on the estimation of consumer demand for automobiles and country of origin effects. Dokuz Eylul University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences. 2012;27(1):97-132.
  23. Özdemir-Öztürk N. Evaluation of Turkish automotive sector with Five Forces Model. Yeni Fikir Journal. 2022;14(28):19-27.
  24. Şimşek A. A review on Internet of Things applications in automotive sector. BSJ Eng Sci. 2019;2(2):66-72.
  25. Çevik Aka D. Industry 5.0 challenges: analyzing with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP. Gumushane University Journal of Social Sciences. 2025;16(2):491-510.
  26. Yiğit E, Öner AE, Yöntem O. Effects of autonomous vehicles on the automotive sector and innovations brought with it. European Journal of Science and Technology. 2020;(Special Issue):181-186. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.820722
  27. Yılmazoğlu Y, Sakarya U. Which digital data bus for future automotives? Nigde Omer Halisdemir University Journal of Engineering Sciences. 2025;14(2):812-826. https://doi.org/10.28948/ngumuh.1588278
  28. Avşar İİ. Countries by export performance: G7, China and Türkiye. Trends in Business and Economics. 2025;39(2):158-180. https://doi.org/10.16951/trendbusecon.1536037
  29. Sözüer A. A literature review on export incentives in Turkey. In: Kutlu HA, Çubukcu Mİ, Aydemir AF, Karabacak E, editors. Current approaches and evaluations in international trade and logistics 3. Istanbul: Efe Akademik Yayıncılık; 2022. p. 83-106.
  30. Doğan A, Birol YE. An investigation on the main characteristics of Japanese industrial policy in the 1950-2000 period. Journal of International Economic and Administrative Studies. 2025;3(1):72-86.
  31. Gürbüz C, Türkoğlu K, Bekci İ. Turkish foreign trade in the Republican era and a future projection. Suleyman Demirel University Visionary Journal. 2023;14(100th Year Special Issue):360-381. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1320151
  32. Seyhan M, Bayram G, Togay A. Discussion of current situation in sectoral production processes of rapid prototyping and industrial design relationship. International Journal of 3D Printing Technologies and Digital Industry. 2021;5(2):326-338. https://doi.org/10.46519/ij3dptdi.837607
  33. Akdeniz E. Decision making with AHP method for individual car purchasing problem: an investigation on a car company basis. Journal of Yasar University. 2021;16(64):1551-1574. https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.932276
  34. İşen E, Tarlak H. Electric vehicles and battery charging systems. Kirklareli University Journal of Engineering and Science. 2018;4(1):124-141.
  35. Günşen İ. Automotive industry: economic effects of foreign direct investments in Turkey. Uludag University Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences. 2015;34(2):19-34.
  36. Karaşahin M, Kızıltaş MÇ. Investigation of technological development process and traffic cruise characteristics of autonomous vehicles. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology. 2021;9(4):1374-1381. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.908525
  37. Uluskan M. Integration of process capability analysis into extended Kaizen method: an application in automotive sector. Eskisehir Osmangazi University Journal of Engineering and Architecture. 2019;27(3):165-183. https://doi.org/10.31796/ogummf.581278
  38. Sağıroğlu Ş, Alkan M, editors. Cyber security and defense: awareness and deterrence. Ankara: Grafiker; 2018.
  39. Hekim H, Başıbüyük O. Siber suçlar ve Türkiye'nin siber güvenlik politikaları. Uluslararası Güvenlik ve Terörizm Dergisi. 2013;4(2):135-158.
  40. Tuğal İ, Almaz C, Sevi M. Cyber security problems and awareness trainings in universities. Journal of Information Technologies. 2021;14(3):229-238. https://doi.org/10.17671/gazibtd.754458
  41. Çalışkan T. Cyber security awareness in the digital transformation process: a research on SMEs operating in the IT sector in Konya [master's thesis]. Konya: Necmettin Erbakan University; 2025.
  42. Öztürk Z, Pekkaya M, Temli M. The effects of cyber attacks on firms: the case of Zonguldak. International Journal of Management Economics and Business. 2017;13(13):534-546. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2017icmeb1735470
  43. Altan F, Aydın A. Cyber security in the health sector. In: Baş M, editor. Technological approaches in health management-I. Istanbul: Eğitim Yayınevi; 2024. p. 59-72.
  44. Beaman C, Barkworth A, Akande TD, Hakak S, Khan MK. Ransomware: recent advances, analysis, challenges and future research directions. Comput Secur. 2021;111:102490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102490
  45. Bozömeroğlu H, Gürkaş Aydın Z. Cybersecurity of electric vehicle charging stations: performance analysis of IDS systems with CIC-EVSE 2024 dataset. In: 2024 17th International Conference on Information Security and Cryptology (ISCTurkey); Ankara, Türkiye. IEEE; 2024. p. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCTrkiye64784.2024.10779263
  46. Yalçın N, Çakır S, Ünaldı S. Cyber attack detection using various recurrent neural networks. Karaelmas Science and Engineering Journal. 2024;14(3):136-143. https://doi.org/10.7212/karaelmasfen.1516627
  47. Alaybeyoğlu A, Çakır S, editors. 5th International Artificial Intelligence and Data Science Congress (ICADA 2025): full papers and abstracts. Izmir: İzmir Kâtip Çelebi University Publications; 2025.
  48. Sanlı YB, Baltacı F, Güven E, Eren T. Bibliometric analysis on cyber security studies. Journal of Information Technologies. 2024;17(3):223-229. https://doi.org/10.17671/gazibtd.1473206
  49. Acar S, Ulutaş A. Content analysis of graduate theses on cyber security in Turkey. International Journal of Social Sciences in Turkish Culture Geography. 2021;6(1):93-113.
  50. Çelik MT, Yıldız A. Evaluation of factors affecting innovation productivity with Pythagorean fuzzy AHP method. Journal of Productivity. 2024:89-106. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1319522
  51. Kara M, Eren T. Evaluation of drones to be assigned in damage assessment studies with fuzzy decision making methods. Politeknik Journal. 2024;27(5):2029-2041. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.1238267
  52. Bhat SA, Singh A, Al-Qudaimi AA. A new Pythagorean fuzzy analytic hierarchy process based on interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Optimization and Modeling Journal. 2021;2(4):38-51. https://doi.org/10.30495/fomj.2021.1940078.1037
  53. Ilbahar E, Karasan A, Cebi S, Kahraman C. A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Saf Sci. 2018;103:124-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.025
  54. Yazar Y, Bayram B, Coşkun ŞG, Eren T. Ergonomic kiosk device design and location selection working with decision support system using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methods. International Journal of Management Information Systems and Computer Science. 2023;7(1):68-84. https://doi.org/10.33461/uybisbbd.1240463
  55. Ölç Y, Göçer F. Renewable energy source selection in Pythagorean fuzzy set environment. ALKU Journal of Science. 2024;6(2):96-115. https://doi.org/10.46740/alku.1420828
  56. Zulqarnain RM, Xin XL, Siddique I, Khan WA, Yousif MA. TOPSIS method based on correlation coefficient under Pythagorean fuzzy soft environment and its application towards green supply chain management. Sustainability. 2021;13(4):1642. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041642
  57. Su L, Li H, Cao Y, Lv L. Project delivery system decision making using Pythagorean fuzzy TOPSIS. Eng Econ. 2019;30(4):461-471. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.30.4.22041
  58. Öztürk S, Taş BS, Keskin S, Çoruk EN, Sanlı YB, Güven E, et al. Evaluation of digital hospital transformation criteria and strategies with fuzzy logic. Selcuk Health Journal. 2025;6(3):432-445. https://doi.org/10.70813/ssd.1696374
  59. Baki S, Tutkun N. A hybrid attack prevention application for Controller Area Network in automotive communication. Anadolu Bil Vocational School of Higher Education Journal. 2021;16(61):51-72. https://doi.org/10.17932/IAU.ABMYOD.2006.005/abmyod_v16i61003
  60. Lezzi M, Lazoi M, Corallo A. Cybersecurity for Industry 4.0 in the current literature: a reference framework. Comput Ind. 2018;103:97-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.09.004
  61. Luo F, Zhang X, Yang Z, Jiang Y, Wang J, Wu M, et al. Cybersecurity testing for automotive domain: a survey. Sensors. 2022;22(23):9211. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22239211
  62. Hasani T, O'Reilly N, Dehghantanha A, Rezania D, Levallet N. Evaluating the adoption of cybersecurity and its influence on organizational performance. SN Bus Econ. 2023;3(5):97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-023-00477-6
  63. Kifor CV, Popescu A. Automotive cybersecurity: a survey on frameworks, standards, and testing and monitoring technologies. Sensors. 2024;24(18):6139. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24186139
  64. Colabianchi S, Costantino F, Nonino F, Palombi G. Transforming threats into opportunities: the role of human factors in enhancing cybersecurity. J Innov Knowl. 2025;10(3):100695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2025.100695
  65. Ghadge A, Weiß M, Caldwell ND, Wilding R. Managing cyber risk in supply chains: a review and research agenda. Supply Chain Manag. 2020;25(2):223-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-10-2018-0357
  66. Connolly LY, Wall DS. The rise of crypto-ransomware in a changing cybercrime landscape: taxonomising countermeasures. Comput Secur. 2019;87:101568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2019.101568
  67. Bulut A, Aydın MA, Zaim AH. Ensuring user security in zero trust network access architecture. Istanbul Ticaret University Journal of Science. 2023;22(43):215-232. https://doi.org/10.55071/ticaretfbd.1102276
  68. Ceylan MF, Kavut S. Penetration testing: a review on standards, processes and deception techniques. Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering. 2025;18(1):64-85. https://doi.org/10.54525/bbmd.1652127
  69. Özçakmak B. Ransomware analysis and protection methods [master's thesis]. Ankara: Gazi University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences; 2018.
  70. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Agency, Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center. #StopRansomware guide. Washington (DC): Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; 2023 Oct 19 https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/stopransomware-guide
  71. Kılınç Ç, Can Ö. Implementation of T-Pot honeypot in cyber security: a case study on corporate network. Journal of Computer Science. 2023;IDAP-2023:24-30. https://doi.org/10.53070/bbd.1347019
  72. González-Granadillo G, González-Zarzosa S, Diaz R. Security information and event management (SIEM): analysis, trends, and usage in critical infrastructures. Sensors. 2021;21(14):4759. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144759
  73. Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Strategy and Budget Office. Twelfth development plan (2024-2028). Ankara: Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Strategy and Budget Office; 2023. https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Twelfth-Development-Plan_2024-2028.pdf