Table 11.

Comparison of cybersecurity testbeds.

Testbeds	Network Protocol	Type	Cost	Functionality and Features
A cyber assurance testbed for heavy vehicle electronic controls [81]	J1939, J1708, CAN	H	Low	Supports remote experimentation, Key exchange strength and IDS assessment
A testbed for security analysis of modern vehicle systems [82]	CAN, Ethernet	H	Low	A testbed integrating CAN simulator and IVI system with flexible configuration for efficient security analysis
A testbed for automotive cybersecurity [83]	CAN	S	Low	A testbed consisting of a real-time CAN simulator and supporting reverse-engineering
ATG: An Attack Traffic Generation Tool for Security Testing of In-vehicle CAN Bus [84]	CAN	S	Low	Automatic generation of CAN attack traffic
PASTA: Portable Automotive Security Testbed with Adaptability [85]	CAN	H	Low	An open, safe, adaptable, and portable testbed against automotive attacks
A hardware-in-loop based testbed for automotive embedded systems cybersecurity evaluation [86]	V2X, CAN	H	Low	A hardware-in-the-loop testbed that can simulate V2X communication and perform GPS spoofing
A Connected Vehicle System (CVS) prototype testbed [87]	ETSI ITS-G5, 3G/4G, LTE, Ethernet, CAN, Wi-Fi	H	Medium	Support V2I communication test and security assurance evaluation
Ori: A Greybox Fuzzer for SOME/IP Protocols in Automotive Ethernet [52]	Ethernet, SOME/IP	S	Low	Fuzz SOME/IP protocols to find vulnerabilities
A novel testbed for automotive security analysis [88]	CAN	H	Medium	Data collected are analyzed visually and replayed through a test environment similar to a vehicle
SEPAD: Security Evaluation Platform for Autonomous Driving [89]	CAN/CAN FD, PLC, Bluetooth, WLAN, cellular, Ethernet	H	Medium	A novel testbed for autonomous driving, supporting security mechanisms testing
HybridgeCAN: a hybrid bridged CAN platform for automotive security testing [90]	CAN	H	Low	A low-cost testbed connecting physical ECUs with virtual components

S = Software, H = Hardware and software.