Slashdot Log In
The World's Most Dangerous Password
Posted by
timothy
on Sat May 29, 2004 05:54 PM
from the harsh-consequences dept.
from the harsh-consequences dept.
NonNullSet writes "Minutemen ICBMs were deployed in the early 1960s, and grew to over 1000 in number. They were allegedly protected from a "rogue launch" by an approach known as PAL (Permissive Action Link). The PAL required that the correct 8-digit launch code be entered by the missiliers before the missile would establish ignition. What if all the PAL codes had been set to '00000000,' and 'everyone' in the Strategic Air Command knew it? That is unbelievably what happened, as described in this article from the Center for Defense Information. Not exactly a great example for getting people to choose difficult passwords!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Someone's gotta say it (Score:5, Funny)
Stupid David played with the WOPR again!
WOPR's 'guesses' (Score:5, Informative)
Now I realize that the movie wasn't nearly as stupid as reality.
Parent
Re:WOPR's 'guesses' (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:WOPR's 'guesses' (Score:5, Insightful)
I think a +5, Informative on a joke about posting a root password to the world is as funny as the joke itself. It's like the mods adding to the original joke: "Here everyone, r00t this guy."
Parent
Re:WOPR's 'guesses' (Score:5, Funny)
Finally, the fact that this alledged 'root password' does not contain punctuation or non-printable characters was not held against it. It still works for the purposes of this joke. Lets hope they remain safely anonymous by not responding to this thread to express their outrage and incredulity.
My thoughts, however, go out to all the sysadmins out there who really DID have their root password outed this evening.
Thank you for your time, and have a pleasent tomorrow.
Parent
Re:Someone's gotta say it (Score:5, Interesting)
One pilot I talked to used to copilot one of the two big planes (747s?) that they send up that can launch all the missiles remotely in case NORAD gets knocked out. He told a story about how they would run all these drills where they would scramble, get in the air immediately, and then get transmitted codes from the ground. They would unscramble the codes as "do not launch" and then return to base without transmitting anything to the silos, drill over.
According to him, on one of these sorties received the "launch" code in error. So they asked the ground to repeat the transmission. Which they did, and it was the same. So they took a chance and broke protocol and radio'd the ground and told them that they had just sent the "launch" codes, and did they really want them to transmit this along to the silos? Of course the ground told them to cease and return to base.
Scary truth or dunken bravado? Who knows.
Parent
Re:Someone's gotta say it (Score:5, Insightful)
You read about trying to cut people out of the loop to save costs, think about this and just pay the $40k/year salary, for goodness sake.
Parent
Re:Someone's gotta say it (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
At least they're default routers... (Score:5, Funny)
Username: cisco
password: cisco
'nuff said.
That's a really good password! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:That's a really good password! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Hilarious (Score:5, Funny)
Funniest thing I've read all day. Makes lots of seemingly 'implausible' films about unauthorised nuke launches and hacking, a lot less implausible.
'Hmm.. it's asking for a password ? Try zero zero zero'
At least it wasn't... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:At least it wasn't... (Score:5, Informative)
Damn, beat me to it. Here it is anyway since you left out Skroob's quote :)
Parent
I can just picture world war 3 starting. (Score:5, Funny)
Airman 2: Dunno. Try P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D or something.
Airman 1: Nah, it's just numerals. And it's not like the secret code could be 0000000. Nobody would be _that_ stupid.
*ATTENTION - PREPARE FOR GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR*
Airman 1: What you say!
Re:I can just picture world war 3 starting. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
If a hacker (Score:5, Funny)
Reminds me ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Reminds me ... (Score:5, Informative)
so 111-1111111 aswell as 111-2020201 would work. the first 3 numbers could be anything.
this was on a lot of pre-98 microsoft cds.
more info on microsoft cd-keys [omnitechdesign.com]
Parent
Re:Reminds me ... (Score:5, Funny)
No wait... no I didn't...
Parent
The world was different then (Score:5, Insightful)
For better or worse, the system seemed to have worked - there weren't any unauthorized missiles launched that I'm aware of.
No worries (Score:5, Funny)
Just enter the recall code. Mandrake has told us it's a variation of the letters POE, which probably stands for 'Purity Of Essence' or 'Peace On Earth'. Just try all the variations, and the launch will be aborted. Hooray!
Now stop fighting in the War Room!
I here have a scan of a manual (funny as hell) (Score:5, Funny)
It's even worse than you think... (Score:5, Funny)
maybe this is just the duress password (Score:5, Interesting)
Dammit (Score:5, Funny)
Combination locks (Score:5, Funny)
15 years later and 5000 miles away on a continent on the other side of the planet, I'm on the walking trails beside our hotel and come across a gate on the boundary fence which has the exact same combination lock. And yes, it had the exact same access code.
The writeup is misleading.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The story here, then, is not that a bad password was chosen, but that somebody decided to disobey orders by disabling the password, and that the higherups were completely in the dark about it.
Poor ICBM security ...who cares? Right? (Score:5, Insightful)
RTFA. Blair and Brewer point out that, at the time, the military wanted to improve their public relations and would give TOURS of LCC's! B&B repeatedly point out that virtually anyone who asked could get access! The physical security was crap and the codes weren't in place. IE, any moderately funded and motivated terrorist group could have had a field day if they'd know about this severe weakness.
"Four individuals (two persons in each of two separate LCCs in the same squadron) acting in concert could succeed in mechanically launching one or more missiles." In seconds. Not minutes or hours.
"[...] annually thousands of visitors holding no clearance whatsoever were permitted access to operational LCCs."
"Located in each LCC are two launch keys, one for each member of the crew, and the codes needed to authenticate presidential launch directives. Only the launch keys, not the codes, are physical prerequisites for generating valid launch commands, the purpose of the codes being exclusively that of authenticating an execution directive."
B&B make it sound as if you happened to be on a tour and decided to overpower the minimal security force (two crew members + a couple of guards at best (isolated locations, remember?) then it's good to go - you already know the launch codes because it's always all zero's. Or, even worse:
"Technically, crew members can launch a nuclear attack with or without approval from higher authority. Unless PAL or its equivalent forecloses this option, as many as 50 missiles could be illicitly fired. Moreover, unless adequate precautions were instituted, an even more drastic option would be available. Crew members could conspire in the formatting and transmittal of strategic strike directives, deceiving the full contingent of Strategic Air Command (SAC) LCCs, as well as higher authorities, into reacting to a spurious launch directive as if it were valid and authentic. Or they could render the U.S. strategic force virtually impotent by formatting and transmitting messages invalidating the active inventory of presidential execution codes. Finally, crew members could aid accomplices in stealing thermonuclear warheads from missiles on active alert."
Keep in mind that Blair was working in an LCC as a crew member in the mid-70's. He was obviously in a unique position (which virtually none of us were or are) to write this paper. His direct observation on how to subvert the access/security controls on the ICBM's trump anyone else's estimate on what might or might not happen. His letters and paper in 1977 are basically what got those locks activated in... 1977.
It is especially hypocritical that the majority of the Slashdot comments were fine with this poor use of a password mechanism. In your own place of business you most likely would NEVER allow this to happen and you just run some servers - as opposed to ICBM's capable turning your city into a big kitty litter box. Don't defend the actions of those in charge in the 60's and 70's. They were flat out wrong and frankly should have been thrown in military prison for such a massive security breach.
It's the same for Maniac Mansion! (Score:5, Funny)
Found this out the hard way when I was a kid- I was stuck and didn't know where to look for the code, so I figured I'd brute force it (yes, I was BORED), and.... surprise, it worked on the first go. Found out it was tied to the arcade machine when I inadvertently closed the door and tried to open it again later.
Man, that game kicked all of the ass.
My God.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:hmm (Score:5, Informative)
And damn good it is too.
Parent
Re:hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
I couldn't find this particular scene in the canon anywhere, although, "A Scandal in Bohemia" from The Adventures Of Sherlock Holmes [gutenberg.net] , seems to fit somewhat.
Parent
Re:Its only a bad password (Score:5, Insightful)
*zoom back three years* "the fact that noone has ever deliberately flown a jumbojet into a building shows it is perfectly secure" I hope the military has some better understanding of risk analysis
There were serious layers of physical security? How serious? Just as serious as their passwords? Besides, the brass may be tough but the grunts guarding it are not above blackmail or greed.
Good security is layered. That also means that breach of security shouldn't be caused by a single failure. But in reality it often turns out one or no layers of security are actually *working* because everybody assumes the other layers will cover for it.
Kjella
Parent
Re:Its only a bad password (Score:5, Informative)
What?? You thinking putting a bar on someone's shoulder makes them "tough?" And just because you call someone a "grunt" they're more suceptible to "blackmail or greed?" Newsflash -- EVERYBODY is suceptible to blackmail and greed. That's why the people who work with nukes are vetted by the security services -- officers and enlisted alike. You think the techs who worked on those missiles didn't know how to bypass those PALs regardless of what password was used?
My point is simple -- don't question someone's patriotism because I'm enlisted -- just because they don't get paid as much doesn't mean their values aren't just as strong as an officer's. The enlisted men and women in the military are the ones you have to trust -- we're the ones who make it all work.
Parent
Re:Its only a bad password (Score:5, Informative)
The physical security refers to someone trying to get in from the outside. The two guys inside the silo launch center would be able to get the launch off in time.
Insofar as a single deranged person trying to launch the missiles, both launch keys have to be turned at the same time. The keylocks are separated by a distance making it impossible for a single human being to turn both simultaneously.
Crews are rotated such that the same two are not on duty on any but one shift (to prevent conspiracy), and the crewmen are subjected to some excruciatingly serious background and psychological tests before, during, and after their tours of duty in the silos.
Great care was taken in designing a fail-safe mechanism, where if the protection mechanism fails, it fails into a safe mode (like a default-deny in IPTables).
It was determined that it was better that a few missiles not leave the silos during a nuclear exchange than a few leave a silo during peace-time.
Parent
RT()A (Score:5, Informative)
So assuming the article's correct: a) there wasn't even one password in the launch process at the time, only physical keys, b) four people in the right place could launch nuclear missiles, and no countermeasures would have been able to stop them, and c) given the lack of stringent security in allowing visitors access to those sites, it's not inconceivable that outsiders could have seized the opportunity to take control of two launch centers.
Parent
Re:Totally wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Now wait a minute, who has been misled here? One layer of security was complete and utter bullshit - and the Secretary of Defense who had it installed didn't know. How many other layers were complete and utter bullshit?
Not only that, but this was the moral equivalent of a military coup against the elected government. The PALs were there to prevent the military from launching without authorization from the National Command Authority (i.e. the President or his successor).
Parent
The article really is quite fascinating (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
In the current political establishment in the US, it is the politicians & Pentagon civilians who are promoting war, and the officers were generally very skeptical of what they were doing.
Basically one portion of the political elite has decided that we should start acting like Israel if we are to maintain political power in the world, and they have gone on the offensive, entering into many regional conflicts around the world. I would argue this goes back to the Clinton administration at least; Wolfowitz and Pearle have taken it to the logical extreme.
Remember how skeptical retired General Clark was of the war when he became a politician? So was Eisenhower; he warned us of the military-industrial complex, which becomes dangerous because the big money/corporate side of it has lots of influence on Washington politicians. Guys with military experience often know better than the politicians, and this is why Kerry or McCain would be much better leaders than the wide array of war cheerleaders in power now who avoided the draft in various ways [see last couple of weeks of doonesbury].
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
You, sir, are completely incorrect in your assertation. Once upon a time, you might have been largely correct--back in the days when those who had military power were the same people as those with political power (Napoleon for example) the warriors would be the ones to start the wars.
OTOH, looking at the history of 20th century US wars, not one was started by soldiers. Politicians are the ones who lead us into wars. Soldiers are the ones who die fighting them. Learn the difference.
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, announcing that you don't have significant weapons and appearing weak is a good idea when you have a powerful and belligerent Iran next door.
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
Given a choice of fighting Iran or the US, I'd take Iran every single time.
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
Then I guess we'll be taking out Israel next, for all the UN resolutions they've broken/ignored?
Parent
Re:trust (Score:5, Insightful)
Link me to the UN resolution that gives the US executive power and the ability to act as its security council without oversight or resolution.
Parent
Re:who modded that insightful? (Score:5, Funny)
From page 164 of The Glossary of Slashdot, 2003 Edition:
Parent
Re:Biopreparat (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't be. I'm a microbiologist and personally I think all this noise about bioweapons is a lot of nonsense. None of it has been shown to work in practice, while nuclear weapons have, and are a hell of a lot simpler, and thus scarier.
Alibek would just have been one of the numerous unemployable ex-Soviet scientists if he hadn't exaggerated the technology of a country that had little to no biological infrastructure (thanks to Trofim Lysenko, who managed to get nearly every competent Soviet biologist killed off from 1930-1960)
However, there's no question that all this hysteria has pumped money into microbiology -- the institute where I work has gotten quite deeply into anthrax research, despite B. anthracis basically being boring B. subtilis with a bad attitute.
Parent
Re:Biopreparat (Score:5, Interesting)
Mother Nature's bioweapons did a devastating job on the native populations of the Americas when the Europeans arrived.
If reports are true, an accidental release of weaponized Soviet smallpox killed several vaccinated people at Aralsk in 1971. The reports may not be true -- Dr. Donald Henderson(*) is skeptical and he knows smallpox well.
Bioweapons are bad candidates for military weapons because they're hard/impossible to control once released. Artillery shells go exactly where they're told and don't mutate in midair. Generals don't like *uncontrollable* destruction. Terrorists might.
(*)Leader of the worldwide effort that eradicated smallpox last century. Deserves a statue for winning the war against a virus which had killed more people than Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot put together.
Parent
Another conversation (Score:5, Funny)
Terrorist 1: "We have done it! We have infiltrated the missile silos! Death to the [insert appropriate derrogatory term for American]s! Victory is ours!"
Terrorist 2: "Mua-ha-ha-ha-ha! Let us hurry and launch the missiles! Wh... what is this?"
Terrorist 1: "It... it appears to be some sort of security mechanism... What do we do?!?"
Terrorist 2: "We have no choice. We must try every combination and hope to find the correct sequence before we are captured. We will start from '00000000' and count upwards."
Terrorist 1: "Are you insane? Even if we could test one sequence per second, it would take us tens of thousands of hours to find the code! Our fingers would be worn into nubs so short that we wouldn't be able to depress the launch button! We could even die of starvation first!"
Terrorist 2: "You're right. We've failed."
Parent