Cyber-Attacks? 373
Galahad2 writes "The Washington Post has a lengthy article about the Bush administration's fears of an Al Qaeda cyber attack on the nation's infrastructure. Though we have all seen this sort of attack as a possiblity for a long time, I'm having a hard time believing that Al Qaeda is capable of anything along these lines." You're not the only one. The article does cite an example of the only known infrastructure attack, a case in Australia where a consultant used his inside knowledge of a local sewage treatment system to dump raw sewage, hoping for a contract to solve the problem he created.
Re:The Obvious Question (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sure there are people who have a Web interface set up for some seemingly non-critical facet (though there probably aren't many cases of "Look Honey, I can manage the dam's intake system from my iBook in the backyard!"), but there is probably a greater number of people who use the Internet for some communication/reporting feature ("Hey, I'm encrypting all transmissions, I'm using port 18937, I'm not publishing this info on a Web site and I'm not controlling the infrastructure in any way through this interface, so I should be safe."). Should such people be running infrastructure control systems? No. Does that mean they're not running these systems? No.
I think the article's primary purpose is to send a "Hey, infrastructure engineers, this means YOU" (or "does that guy who works for you have infrastructure controls connected to the Internet? Ask him.") message to people who think they're already covered.
Re:the real terrorists are governments and media (Score:2, Informative)
The cyber-attacks that should be taking place are ones that alert the public to articles such as this one and encourage them to question the official line of everything they think they know. Imagine how enlightening it could be for a link to the above article to mysteriously appear on the front page of CNN.com....
Utter shite (Score:4, Informative)
The idea that critical systems of a power-plant of any kind would be on-line and accessible via the web or dial-up is so preposterous as to defy reason. The idea is surely suggested by ignorant kooks, and snatched up and carried into daylight by "journalists" who would rather see their name in a byline than verify the information in the stories they rush to press. In short, someone has seen one to many USA Channel Sunday Night Movies.
Having worked on nuclear plant monitoring systems software, I can tell you for a fact that the critical systems not only can not be tripped from off-site, but also can not be accessed from anything but specific, highly secure and redundant systems.
These systems have physical switches that often require two hands to operate. They are designed to prevent insider sabotage, so no wanker with a laptop, sitting in a cave or boardroom half a world a way can do anything. The only action that can be caused by any local anomaly is a controlled, safe shut-down. The only thing that a remote action will result in is a line-item in the logs, period. A plant shutdown may be costly and greatly inconvenient, but hardly lethal, and absolutely not catastrophic. The "terrorists" will have better luck flying a 747 into the Hoover Dam.
The notion that someone with access from outside could trip a plant or cause anything but the generation of a non-critical statistics report to be generated is lunacy. Yes, some aspects of some systems may be monitored from outside, but this is only for informational purposes only.
Rise in UNIX Targetted Attacks (Score:5, Informative)
The usual attack pattern goes:
Re:the real terrorists are governments and media (Score:2, Informative)
Well put. My browser just made the sound of a nail being hit squarely on the head.
A conference I was to attend got cancelled in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. Since I had the plane ticket, I flew anyway and spent the weekend kayaking around Washington D.C.
Being acclimatised to European media, I found the propaganda pouring from my car radio stunning and repulsive. The real dissonance in the whole experience, though, was the refreshingly critical and well informed views of my fellow kayakers (most of whom, contrary to popular image, are healthy, intelligent, independant-minded folks).
My compliments to you and all such Americans who are displaying an ability to think, something you would hardly guess from your media or your government spokesmen.
because it needs to be? (Score:4, Informative)
The major US backbones of the Internet itself could be considered part of our national infrastructure. I hope you're not going to ask why the backbones are on the Internet!
happened East Timor (Score:1, Informative)
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/technology/
Re:Have you learned nothing? (Score:4, Informative)
The (approximately) 9,000 km border with Canada is completely uncontrolled except at major highways and urban areas. The 3,300 km border with Mexico is somewhat more controlled, but is readily penetrated in remote areas. Add in the lightly patrolled coastlines, and the immense and basically uninhabited border of Alaska, and one has what is essentially unimpeded access to the US. (Pre 9-11, anyway; things may have changed.)
Re:Smart Move... (Score:4, Informative)
jon
More plausible than you might think (Score:1, Informative)
BE AFFRAID, BE VERY AFFRAID.
Re:Inconceivable? (Score:2, Informative)
It's a water cooled 3000+ round/minute gatling cannon commonly referred to as R2-D2.
The distinctive white dome is a radar tracking system that tracks every out-going projectile as well as the incoming missile, making minute modifications to it's aim to insure total destruction of the incoming threat.
The system is so sensitive (unless they've dumbed it down) that it will continute firing until there is no piece of the incoming threat larger than a small sparrow.
At that fire rate, the weapon would run out of ammo long before a Kamikaze plane were to disintegrate.