Skip to main content
← All solutions

SOLUTIONS · AUTOMOTIVE TARA

Architecture-aware automotive TARA for ISO/SAE 21434

Move from vehicle architecture context to a structured TARA — assets, damage scenarios, threat scenarios, attack feasibility, and risk treatment — aligned with ISO/SAE 21434 Clause 15.

WHO THIS PAGE IS FOR

This page is for automotive cybersecurity engineers, TARA leads, and OEM or Tier-1 teams running Threat Analysis and Risk Assessment under ISO/SAE 21434.

THE PROBLEM

TARA is the core risk-assessment method defined in ISO/SAE 21434 Clause 15. It identifies assets, damage scenarios, threat scenarios, attack paths, attack feasibility, and risk-treatment decisions. Done well, it is the spine of the cybersecurity evidence chain. Done in spreadsheets, it is slow, inconsistent, and hard to keep traceable as the architecture changes.

WHERE THE MANUAL WORKFLOW STRUGGLES

Why spreadsheets stop scaling

  • A manual TARA in spreadsheets typically takes 4–8 weeks per system

  • Risk ratings drift between engineers and between programmes — there is no shared structure

  • It does not scale across vehicles with 100+ ECUs

  • Traceability from asset to threat to control to verification breaks under change

  • Threat coverage is uneven — engineers reference different sources for different programmes

HOW AGNILE AND KAVACH HELP

An engineering workflow designed to support this

  • KAVACH ingests vehicle architecture and builds a cybersecurity digital twin — assets, interfaces, data flows, and trust boundaries become the working surface

  • Architecture-aware threat identification draws on a curated automotive cybersecurity corpus, so coverage is consistent across programmes

  • Risk scoring is structured per ISO/SAE 21434 Clause 15 — damage scenarios, attack feasibility, risk determination, risk treatment

  • Engineer-in-the-loop review at every stage; AI-assisted acceleration can be configured or disabled per programme

  • Agnile engineering services support TARA delivery where the programme needs added capacity

REQUIRED INPUTS

  • Vehicle or system architecture description
  • ECU, interface, and network list with data flows
  • Trust boundaries and external exposure

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

  • Structured TARA — assets, damage scenarios, threats, attack paths, attack feasibility, risk determination, risk treatment
  • Control mapping aligned with ISO/SAE 21434 Clause 15
  • Reviewable work-product evidence

Actual programme outputs depend on scope, architecture, and the engineering review process.

FAQ

Automotive TARA FAQ

See the Automotive TARA workflow on your own architecture.

Bring a representative ECU, feature, or system architecture. We'll walk through how the workflow is structured — with honest answers on fit and integration effort.