New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cyberwarfare

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
So I was flipping through my channels last night and nothing was on. Then I came across PBS and Frontline, and according to the info screen it looked pretty interesting. So I stayed, and it was, but it was also kinda scary what could be done by terrorists using the internet:

A: And largely the concept of the Pearl Harbor info-war is that terrorist group X or rogue nation Y will decide to attack the United States using an all-out onslaught against the infrastructure. And the targets will be anything from water to power, anything with SCADA control systems, which are generally running off of Windows NT or Windows 2000, which essentially means that you can cut through them like a hot knife through butter...

Q: So if you and a group of friends decided to do it, which you wouldn't, but if you decided to do it, would you be able to take down the electrical grid of the United States?

A: I don't know if you'd be able to take down the whole grid, but I know that you could take down significant pieces of it for, let's say, operationally useful periods of time. Right now, the length of time that the effect of an IO operation would last I don't think is that long. So you buy yourself 20 minutes, four hours, who knows how long until they can solve the problem. The question is: What do you do during that 20 minutes or four hours?

A: Yes, it is possible to do physical damage through the Internet. ... But again, for example, in the power grid situation, the reason that you had a knowledgeable insider telling you that a knowledgeable insider could do this is, again, because they have the same sort of inside track that I do. I know that breaking into arbitrary company X, that I could destroy arbitrary company X's intellectual property assets, I could destroy their databases, their corporate communications, I could destroy everything that that corporation relied upon in terms of its virtual functions as opposed to its physical functions.

Would I be able to cross over into the physical world? It depends on the industry. If you have a knowledgeable insider in the power industry who sits there and says if you did it right and you created surges, then you confuse certain kinds of circuits or destroy other kinds of equipment. That's certainly true, because you can blow off the engineering tolerances that systems will normally require in proper functioning. But again, that requires a knowledgeable insider working with you to do that


<a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cyberwar/interviews/" target="_blank">Frontline Interviews</a>
The above site has all the interviews from the program last night.

Any thoughts?
post #2 of 16
There are a lot of problems with the way our computer systems are run. That being said, this is mostly "scare the general public for fun and profit" type stuff. Yes, if you know what you're doing, you can use a computer take down a city's power, but you can do the same thing with a .22 rifle.
post #3 of 16
This is complete bullshit.

Remember y2k?
post #4 of 16
Quote:
Boomstick:
This is complete bullshit.

Remember y2k?
it is not b.s.

the hype is b.s.
post #5 of 16
Y2K was theoretical at best. This is actually quite real.
post #6 of 16
Get into one wireless SCADA(Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system and change it's characteristics by say, one switch command. You've now got a power grid that won't respond properly and will soon be in chaos.

It's like this: Take two radio controlled airplanes -both receiving on the same frequency- and fly them both. Eventually one will be blown a bit to the side or up or down or whatever. Yet they both respond to the same radio transmitter and accept the same exact control inputs. Without a doubt you'd eventually lose control of both while trying desperately to maintain control.

SCADA systems are much like remote power grid control systems. If you electronically convince one to do precisely what another one does at the same time...in no time at all a significant portion of the power grid would be in chaos and most likely down.

And many SCADA's are wireless. BlueBox, anyone?
post #7 of 16
I don't think terrorists spend too much time watching TV just to get juicy ideas. If those who are charged with finding, detecting, and defending against all this have been working for years and years on the problem and have case after case of actual attempts and attacks I think that by the time we've heard about it the terrorists have moved on to more insidious plans.

After all, the experts have all said that the real threat has not been quantified yet. But there have been tests of defenses on a routine basis.
post #8 of 16
"Get into one wireless SCADA(Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system and change it's characteristics by say, one switch command. You've now got a power grid that won't respond properly and will soon be in chaos."

Now, think of it another way...data corruption happens on its own.
post #9 of 16
Then the terrorists have won!
post #10 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Coyote Chow, now with Flavor:
"Get into one wireless SCADA(Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system and change it's characteristics by say, one switch command. You've now got a power grid that won't respond properly and will soon be in chaos."

Now, think of it another way...data corruption happens on its own.
Especially with the Windows systems they run on.
post #11 of 16
No doubt about that. Windows is the worst operating system yet devised as far as security issues are concerned.
post #12 of 16
If Matthew Broderick could do it with a modem the size of a housebrick, I'm pretty sure any terrorist could do it after a trip to PC World.
post #13 of 16
Quote:
Kronos, Last of the Barbary Pirates:
No doubt about that. Windows is the worst operating system yet devised as far as security issues are concerned.
It's actually quite the opposite. Linux has zero security and is probably the easiest. The difference is, that people don't care to hack most other operating systems. Hackers love hacking Windows operating systems partially because it's the most widely used, and it's also the whole "I beat Bill Gates" bullshit.
post #14 of 16
Quote:
Kronos, Last of the Barbary Pirates:
No doubt about that. Windows is the worst operating system yet devised as far as security issues are concerned.
Not quite true. An unpatched Windows is pretty horrendous, but then again, so is an out of the box copy of Linux. And seriously, I've found that once both systems are completly patched, they are about the same. However, Windows does actually have a fairly high rating in the Orange Book, which basically describes the measures an application/operating system should have regarding security.

Many people should realize that not everything is connected to the world's biggest network, the Internet. There are many network which are completely separate from the Internet, or even other networks connected to the Internet. It is professional people that set these networks up, and I'm sure that for very important networks, they only hire the best. Besides, afterwards, other professionals are brought in to test out network security, all the way from hacking, to the cabling, and even the structure of the room where the servers reside. Like all parts of security though, it all resides on our trust of these people handling the network.
post #15 of 16
Isn't the Sun/Solaris flavor of UNIX in fact more secure than all of the above?

post #16 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
captain supermarket:
Many people should realize that not everything is connected to the world's biggest network, the Internet. There are many network which are completely separate from the Internet, or even other networks connected to the Internet. It is professional people that set these networks up, and I'm sure that for very important networks, they only hire the best. Besides, afterwards, other professionals are brought in to test out network security, all the way from hacking, to the cabling, and even the structure of the room where the servers reside. Like all parts of security though, it all resides on our trust of these people handling the network.
In addition, anything made by men can be hacked by other men, it's just a matter of time and energy. On the original program, they talked about a bunch of US military types who worked as part of the red team, and they basically went around creating as much havoc in war games as possible. Doing things like that will help, especially when you are up against really smart people, but it seems like some companies, especially those that aren't really internet-centric just set up a Windows system, slap a Cisco firewall on it, and call it a day. I read somewhere in PC Magazine or one of it's ilk that something like 75% of all Wi-Fi networks don't have the built in encryption set up because the end user doesn't bother to do it. I'd say a lot of networks are the same way. Of course, people are getting better, but how quickly will things improve?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse