## 5 Discussion
### Challenges of Perceived Ease of Use in Cybersecurity Maintenance  
Among the challenges stemming from perceived ease of use, the first challenge arises from the complexity of adopting cybersecurity is the capacity of a vehicle, which has implications in the design phase and involves suppliers and manufacturers, and it refers to the physical space and weight that the vehicle can support, with implications for cybersecurity. When developing cybersecurity for road cars, it is important to take into account that a car will have the minimum technology possible and, whenever feasible, also be as simple as it can be (so it will be easier to maintain). As mentioned by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2016), the biggest warranty claim on cars relates to technology issues (especially software and infotainment issues). Technology on vehicles has two limiting factors, space and weight, and at \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Factors TAM**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Factors of Cybersecurity**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Supply Chain Automotive Sector**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Original Equipment** & & & & \\  & & **Manufacturer (OEM)** & **Suppliers** & **Dealers** & **Consumers** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Perceived Ease of \\ Use \\ \end{tabular} } & Vehicle’s capacity to adopt cybersecurity systems & **High** & & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Heterogeneity of devices, components and vehicle variants. & **High** & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Increasing connectivity of vehicles, such as V2V, V2I and V2X. & **High** & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Lifecycle of vehicle. & **High** & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Costs of cybersecurity technology & **High** & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Diversity and intensity of attacks. & **High** & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Vehicle Security requirements & **High** & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} Absorptive Capacity \\ \end{tabular} } & Dealers’ and Suppliers’ capability to follow procedures and processes of cybersecurity. & & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Standards & **High** & & & Medium & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Collaborations & Medium & & & Medium & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} Interorganisational \\ Relations \\ \end{tabular} } & High Priority & **High** & & & & Medium & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Medium Priority & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & Low Priority & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Ranking Map of Cybersecurity Maintenance. the end of the day, a car needs to fulfill its primary function of being a drivable object that will take a passenger safely from A to B. Because of these two constraints, vehicles cannot be treated as 'computers on wheels', as they have much less computational capacity than a computer, which in terms of security, means that we cannot adapt all classical cybersecurity technology to them. In addition, because vehicles have actuators, sensors and embedded technology, things lacking on a computer, the security mechanisms cannot be transposed to the automotive space (if it has to be compared, the automotive industry will fall under the category of robotics). Additionally, another constraint in terms of implementing technology and cybersecurity in vehicles is speed. A vehicle cannot take two minutes to boot up similar to how a computer can, and when a vehicle is in movement, actions have to be as quick as possible, especially with safety-critical elements (such as lights, indicators, wipers, brakes or almost any element of the vehicle), but even in non-safety-critical processes (if not, they could lead to the distraction of the driver). This will harm the performance of the vehicle [64], as cybersecurity slows down processes. The second challenge in adopting cybersecurity is the complexity due to the heterogeneity of cybersecurity components. The application of software, firmware and hardware in automotive companies has different challenges to other sectors such as IT [2; 5; 65; 33].