![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
US created stuxnet TED TALKS
- Thread starter THOMO
- Start date
Honestly, I am proud we still have this level of sophistication. As long as they don't use something like this domestically i have no problem what the US created the Stuxnet. I don't think it could have caused a new Chernobyl as new reactors are designed much better and have much better safeguards then they did when Chernobyl happened.
Captain Colonoscopy
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Messages
- 3,861
I for one welcome our new stuxnet overlords!
I honestly don't get why people immediately assume there has be a big entity behind an attack of such sophistication.
I highly doubt the best minds behind hacking work for governments or even legit security firms. They could make too much money on their own as being nearly an internet mercenary.
I highly doubt the best minds behind hacking work for governments or even legit security firms. They could make too much money on their own as being nearly an internet mercenary.
If a plant designer is enough of an idiot not to put simple, electromechanical failsafes on critical systems, then they deserve to have their plant fried.
The NRC _heavily_ regulates use of computerized systems in nuclear reactor control applications. Furthermore, there are pre-existing failsafes designed to shut down the reactor in the event of a bad command being executed (say, an operator jamming a pencil under a control rod raise switch).
The reactor design used at Chernobyl is illegal in the United States.
While its true that the overwhelming majority of industrial control protocols have absolutely zero security functionality (and that's at best, hell, Modbus/TCP doesn't even require a sequence number, making it possible to send old data to the control system), critical systems like nuclear reactors use low-tech failsafe systems that are not vulnerable to computer attacks.
The problem is that much of the news reports about this are just baseless scaremongering. The Iranian facility attacked by Stuxnet was a gas centrifuge enrichment facility. Centrifuges were damaged, not a reactor.
Writing the worm isn't necessarily the major implementation problem -- almost all industrial vendors use 0 security. The hard part is figuring out all of the in-field I/O configuration. At one site, digital output #83 might control part of a cooling system. At another site, it controls a pump for a reagant storage tank. The amount of espionage required to get the details on the controls for the centrifuges (to execute an attack) is immense.
The NRC _heavily_ regulates use of computerized systems in nuclear reactor control applications. Furthermore, there are pre-existing failsafes designed to shut down the reactor in the event of a bad command being executed (say, an operator jamming a pencil under a control rod raise switch).
The reactor design used at Chernobyl is illegal in the United States.
While its true that the overwhelming majority of industrial control protocols have absolutely zero security functionality (and that's at best, hell, Modbus/TCP doesn't even require a sequence number, making it possible to send old data to the control system), critical systems like nuclear reactors use low-tech failsafe systems that are not vulnerable to computer attacks.
The problem is that much of the news reports about this are just baseless scaremongering. The Iranian facility attacked by Stuxnet was a gas centrifuge enrichment facility. Centrifuges were damaged, not a reactor.
Writing the worm isn't necessarily the major implementation problem -- almost all industrial vendors use 0 security. The hard part is figuring out all of the in-field I/O configuration. At one site, digital output #83 might control part of a cooling system. At another site, it controls a pump for a reagant storage tank. The amount of espionage required to get the details on the controls for the centrifuges (to execute an attack) is immense.
The Obama administration is now using this stuxnet worm as a platform to launch the cyber-security bill/internet kill-switch which people like Sen J Rockefeller have been calling/lobbying for.
I'm afraid this is another problem/reaction/solution situation where the US govt pretends there is a cyber threat in order to force their bills through.
He's been calling for the end of the net for more than 2years, then america just happen to create stuxnet then call for internet killswitch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct9xzXUQLuY
I'm afraid this is another problem/reaction/solution situation where the US govt pretends there is a cyber threat in order to force their bills through.
He's been calling for the end of the net for more than 2years, then america just happen to create stuxnet then call for internet killswitch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct9xzXUQLuY
thefreeaccount
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Messages
- 832
My understanding is that Suxnet damaged both the centrifuges and the steam turbine at the reactor.The problem is that much of the news reports about this are just baseless scaremongering. The Iranian facility attacked by Stuxnet was a gas centrifuge enrichment facility. Centrifuges were damaged, not a reactor.
Comments like this one seem to keep reinforcing the fact that the choice is between a rational, if self-interested Obama on one hand, and a bunch of gibbering semi-suicidal morons on the other.I'm afraid this is another problem/reaction/solution situation where the US govt pretends there is a cyber threat in order to force their bills through.
Anything we use can be used against us. And probably will be used, if it's cheap enough and stealthy enough for plausible deniability. This is homeland defense, not empire expansion.
Last edited:
WTF are you slavouring about?
1. America & Isreal created stuxnet, confirmed.
2. America now running scared of "cyber threat"
3. America pass internet kill-switch, we all lose.
The reality is only AMERICA & ISREAL are threats to AMERICA.
Just like the gulf of tonkin and 9-11, stuxnet is a false flag operation, created by whichever administration is in power at the time to further their politcal agenda.
Simple really.
1. America & Isreal created stuxnet, confirmed.
2. America now running scared of "cyber threat"
3. America pass internet kill-switch, we all lose.
The reality is only AMERICA & ISREAL are threats to AMERICA.
Just like the gulf of tonkin and 9-11, stuxnet is a false flag operation, created by whichever administration is in power at the time to further their politcal agenda.
Simple really.