Cyberbiosecurity Challenges of Pathogen Genome Databases - PubMed (original) (raw)

Review

Cyberbiosecurity Challenges of Pathogen Genome Databases

Boris A Vinatzer et al. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019.

Abstract

Pathogen detection, identification, and tracking is shifting from non-molecular methods, DNA fingerprinting methods, and single gene methods to methods relying on whole genomes. Viral Ebola and influenza genome data are being used for real-time tracking, while food-borne bacterial pathogen outbreaks and hospital outbreaks are investigated using whole genomes in the UK, Canada, the USA and the other countries. Also, plant pathogen genomes are starting to be used to investigate plant disease epidemics such as the wheat blast outbreak in Bangladesh. While these genome-based approaches provide never-seen advantages over all previous approaches with regard to public health and biosecurity, they also come with new vulnerabilities and risks with regard to cybersecurity. The more we rely on genome databases, the more likely these databases will become targets for cyber-attacks to interfere with public health and biosecurity systems by compromising their integrity, taking them hostage, or manipulating the data they contain. Also, while there is the potential to collect pathogen genomic data from infected individuals or agricultural and food products during disease outbreaks to improve disease modeling and forecast, how to protect the privacy of individuals, growers, and retailers is another major cyberbiosecurity challenge. As data become linkable to other data sources, individuals and groups become identifiable and potential malicious activities targeting those identified become feasible. Here, we define a number of potential cybersecurity weaknesses in today's pathogen genome databases to raise awareness, and we provide potential solutions to strengthen cyberbiosecurity during the development of the next generation of pathogen genome databases.

Keywords: cyberbiosecurity; cybersecurity; genome databases; pathogen; plant and animal health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aken B. L., Ayling S., Barrell D., Clarke L., Curwen V., Fairley S., et al. . (2016). The Ensembl gene annotation system. Database 2016:baw093. 10.1093/database/baw093 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allard M. W. (2016). The future of whole-genome sequencing for public health and the clinic. J. Clin. Microbiol. 54, 1946–1948. 10.1128/JCM.01082-16 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Almeida N. F., Yan S., Cai R., Clarke C. R., Morris C. E., Schaad N. W., et al. . (2010). PAMDB, A Multilocus Sequence Typing and Analysis Database and Website for plant-associated microbes. Phytopathology 100, 208–215. 10.1094/PHYTO-100-3-0208 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aurrecoechea C., Barreto A., Basenko E. Y., Brestelli J., Brunk B. P., Cade S., et al. . (2017). Eupathdb: the eukaryotic pathogen genomics database resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D581–D591. 10.1093/nar/gkw1105 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bajaj S., Sion R. (2014). Trusteddb: a trusted hardware-based database with privacy and data confidentiality. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 26, 752–765. 10.1109/TKDE.2013.38 - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources