College Students Hijack $80 Million Yacht With GPS Signal Spoofing 140
colinneagle writes "A team of students at the University of Texas at Austin built and successfully tested a custom GPS spoofing device to remotely redirect an $80 million yacht onto a different route. The project was completed with the permission of the yacht's owners in the Mediterranean Sea this past June. Because the yacht's crew relies entirely on GPS signal for direction, the students were able to lead the yacht onto a different course without the knowledge of anyone on-board. The GPS spoofing device essentially over-powered all other GPS signals using until the spoofed signal was the only one that the yacht followed. The team then used the GPS spoofing device to convince the ship's crew to redirect onto a different route voluntarily. By changing the signal on the spoofing device, the students led the crew to believe that the ship was drifting off-course to the left. In response, the crew steered the ship to the right, thinking that it would get the ship back on course, when it actually brought the ship off the course entirely."
Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07/26/2344215/gps-spoofing-with-3000-worth-of-equipment-and-a-laptop [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:3)
I was about to post that myself. A duplicate from Friday. Come on folks, if a couple of casual readers can immediately spot a duplicate post, can't the editors? This has gotten ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Editors?
Are you new here?
slashdot has never had any editors, they have people that click on things randomly. Think million monkeys on a million keyboards.
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Interesting)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07/26/2344215/gps-spoofing-with-3000-worth-of-equipment-and-a-laptop [slashdot.org]
It may be a dupe, but I distinctly remember reading post after post on that article from apparently knowledgeable people explaining in great detail how this whole "GPS spoofing" thing was supposedly nearly impossible or at least highly impractical. I am very much interested in having someone explain how these people have managed to accomplish something that is supposedly not doable.
Seems to me this represents a valid threat to the safety of using civil GPS navigation systems, on land or at sea. Most of the posts on the previous article seemed to indicate that GPS is NOT threatened at all. I am unable to rectify these two opposing points of view without further input from knowledgeable people.
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
It is taking advantage of a poor GPS antenna design. IF the GPS antenna was shielded from ground signals (it would also create a smaller circle of sky to see, but that is not a problem with the number of birds up there) this spoof would have failed unless they were in an aircraft above the yacht.
Re: (Score:2)
The need for a balloon to accomplish the task isn't that much of a comfort really.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Shielding is an easy answer but very complicated to implement without degrading the signal under certain circumstances. It will take more serious spoofing threats to redesign the common shipboard GPS antennas.
Re: (Score:2)
IF the GPS antenna was shielded from ground signals (it would also create a smaller circle of sky to see, but that is not a problem with the number of birds up there)
Sure it is. If you're surrounded by several massive bad weather formations you might not be able to see all the satellites. You might only be able to see a few of them. If some of them are close to the horizon, your magical antenna just blew your chances to see them underneath a storm.
If you had three antennas, one fore, one aft, and one up high, it would substantially increase the difficulty of mounting a spoofing attack without detection. This would increase the cost but not decrease utility.
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
Except well, you have to override the receiver of all satellites it can see. Like here, they had to overpower the GPS satellites (it's not hard), but they also had to maintain the lock.
It's a lot more difficult If you want to misdirect a whole fleet of vehicles because the satellite signal has to follow everyone and in a sensible fashion. If you really wanted to take down GPS, it's far easier to just do a blanket jamming of it than to try to follow each and every vehicle you want to misdirect and aim the antenna at them.
GPS works by sending a timing pulse from the satellite to the ground - the receiver gets 3 or 4 of these timing pulses, correlates them to figure out how far each satellite is and then uses the spheres to find its location. Each receiver should generally come to a unique solution for position (because well, no two objects can occupy the same space).
If you broadcast this fake signal out, eventually someone will notice when their GPS suddenly gets a fix hundreds of meters away from them (each unit gets a slightly different signal from the satellite - when they all get the same signal, they all show the same location,). So it works great if you're in a fleet of trucks following some route, but if you're a bit further spaced out, the solution doesn't work so well and each will need its own antenna and transmitter to come up with plausible location information.
And that's the problem - it doesn't scale. The technique works if you want to misdirect a ship, a drone, a plane, or whatever, but to misdirect multiple requires multiple transmitters in order to send plausible yet fake data to each individual unit. It still is far easier to simply broadcast garbage on the GPS band so no GPS receiver can get a lock.
Re: (Score:2)
No.
Protip: They do already 'get the same signal(s)'
Re: (Score:1)
The story was that a single vanilla GPS receiver could be spoofed by providing it with a louder signal which overrides the real signal from the satellite constellation.
Such a signal can be provided by GPS test equipment which is designed to create such a signal for use in a lab.
There is probably no reason the change the GPS system to 'fix' this.
Instead, when it matters, there are ways to harden the GPS receiver to prevent this from causing harm.
Use directional ant
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here, let me help you by offering a spoof of knowledgeable input in an effort to misguide you and hijack your POV rectification.
What this really amounts to is terrorism. See, if it can be done then terrorists can and will do it -- specifically, they'll do it to you, straight at you. Like KAPOW!
So we'll need to police the high seas with constant vigilance. But we can't allow the enemy (that's the terrorists) to identify the anti-terrorism force. Or they'll use the terrorism on the anti-terrorists and it'll b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Dangerous? It is not dangerous to redirect a yacht, provided you don't trick it into dangerous waters. Which they did not. The owner's permission means there were no problems with wasted time/fuel either.
And what crime? They disturbed only one ship - with the owner's permission. The gps frequencies may be protected in many jurisdictions - but not all. And then there are international waters where you can do such things anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
And then there are international waters where you can do such things anyway.
Um, if the ship was flagged in the US, I believe that the FCC still has a say about what goes on even in international waters. At the very least the ITU might think it has some jurisdiction over the jamming/changing of GPS frequencies. Nobody may care, but they could legally do something if they did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd call it something else. Reliance on GPS alone is more than just unsafe, it's foolish and stupid.
I thought that ships "captains" where licensed, and as part of that was a demonstration of basic navigation techniques using maps, a watch, sextant and some charts. Consider even your EYES as a navigation tool if you are following a series of markers out of port.
Hooking up the auto pilot to the GPS and hitting "go" while you head off to the aft deck for a party is just plain dumb.... Trusting your GPS to g
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding the sextant; it's not really used any longer. It's like a slide rule, it's a niche thing that a small group still make use of, but most just don't bother to learn let alone make use of.
Re: (Score:2)
If you intend to venture out beyond sight of land, you really should take some means of navigation along. My minimum navigation equipment would depend on how far I was planning to go, but it would start with a compass, a watch and maps of the local coast. If you are crossing the ocean, you need to take along more and a sextant is a good idea.
Personally, I think that it would be good practice to require that mariners crossing international waters be required to fix their positions using non-electronic me
Re: (Score:3)
Care to name a few? Specifically?
Keep in mind they didn't physically disable the ship's controls, they just lied to it about its current location. The crew on board still had every possible means available to them to maneuver the ship away from any threats that may have appeared.
"permission from the owner" (who apparently was not even aboard) does nothing to mitigate this.
Of course it does! He, and only he, g
Re: (Score:2)
"He, and only he, gets to decide where his boat should go next. "
Wrong. 100% wrong. The owner has no say in it at all. the CAPTAIN of the boat does. In international waters the owner of that ship has no say what so ever. The captain has 100% say.
Re: (Score:2)
You've seen a few too many cheesy movies.
In theory, that sounds great - Only the captain knows the real conditions affecting his vessel at any given moment; and it romantically hearkens back to an era when they didn't have things like "global weather reports" at least reasonably accurate for the next few hours.
In practice,
Re:dangerous and illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps more to the point - You can't trust GPS to get you to your destination. Period. This story demonstrates an active attack on that, but the crew of any vehicle always needs to have a backup plan available at a moment's notice. If you really want to point fingers here, try the ship's navigator who somehow failed to notice that reality didn't match his charts.
The scary bit is whether the navigator even knows how to read charts any more. Or do dead reckoning or celestial navigation.
The transportation industry is relying more and more on technology and less on human knowlege to get from point A to point B. GPS, Airline Autopilots and Instrument Landing Systems, train automation are all making significant in-roads to the point that the humans on board are just blindly trusting it.
I foresee the auto industry going in the same direction. I tease my kids that their kids will not know how to drive a car. Indeed my kids have never looked at a paper map.
Re: (Score:2)
I tease my kids that their kids will not know how to drive a car. .
Yep, bet they have never seen a manual transmission too.
You know the best theft protection these days is a clutch..
Re: (Score:2)
I tease my kids that their kids will not know how to drive a car. .
Yep, bet they have never seen a manual transmission too.
You know the best theft protection these days is a clutch..
That's pretty region-specific... mainly North America, where manuals made up only 7% of sales in early 2012 [cnn.com]. And anyone targeting cars specifically would know how to drive stick, unlike say robbers trying to commandeer a running car as part of their escape (happened locally a few years ago).
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how many folks have actually driven a manual transmission if they only make up 7% of sales. My guess is that the younger the driver is, the less likely they are to have actually driven one.
Re: (Score:2)
The article notes that in that particular quarter, manual sales actually increased from the usual 3-4%. I bought one myself 5 years ago... when I drove it off the lot I'd driven stick only 4 times (2 recent lessons, 2 test drives).
I'm sure you're right that the younger the driver is in North America, the less likely they know how to drive stick, but I'd say the percentage of North Americans who know how is around 10-15%, since there are many who for whatever reason (family, etc) just drive auto at the momen
Celestial navigation is already gone (Score:2)
The US Navy stopped teaching it a few years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me what crimes were committed in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.
What earth laws? because no country has any jurisdiction at all so what laws you are thinking of are silly ramblings of an uneducated person.
Re: (Score:2)
What earth laws? because no country has any jurisdiction at all so what laws you are thinking of are silly ramblings of an uneducated person.
Pot, meet kettle. The waters are international, the ships are the territory of the flag they're sailing under and the flag state laws apply. This is for example true for all crimes committed on board, but also the usual rules of "What if you stand on the Canadian/Mexican border and shoot someone in the US?", short answer they'll need to extradite you but you'll be trialed under US law. Same thing if you shoot at a vessel under US flag in international waters and kill someone, you just committed a crime unde
Re: (Score:2)
Let's take look at these so-called "nations".
Spain - busy torturing cows, otherwise asleep.
France - on strike.
Italy - might as well be on strike or asleep, it's difficult to tell.
Greece - Same as Italy, alternating with riots.
Israel - not interested unless there's some profit in it. Don't get mistaken for an aid convoy, though.
Entire Southern coast - Same as Greece, bu
They did this in tomorrow never dies (Score:3)
and that was a step up to the military ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Was just about to post this *shakes tiny fist*
Re: (Score:1)
Inventor: "I've invented a teleporter capable of sending living humans thousands of miles at the speed of light!"
Slashdot: "phht, Star Trek did that in the 60's"
reality != fiction.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Duh! (Score:5, Funny)
Of course you can spoof wireless signals, that is why I ran cat6 to my GPS sats. Even if a solar EMP thing destroys the circuitry I can get a pretty good approximation from the slack in the cable.
Re: (Score:2)
Moral: learn basic seamanship (Score:2)
kinda like how the Asiana pilots should've learned basic flying skills and not rely on auto-throttle all the time.
Or like how our school districts want to buy an iPad for every student even though they can't read or memorize a basic multiplication table.
Re: (Score:1)
or just do it in your head, you don't need tables.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks, yes, this is how I do math.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Here's a hint. The usa does not have a good education system. They don't teach you how to learn because they don't understand learning. Memorization is always a symptom of not understanding the why of anything. Another hint, other cultures have developed answers to life that are better than what the west has come
Re: (Score:1)
Because i'm not a fucking idiot.
You can work out pretty much anything pretty quickly with multiplication and division by two and ten with a little addition/subtraction plus a few other tricks. I'm shitty at remembering vast amounts of data, though extremely good at working things out on the fly. I rarely remembered equations either for my physics undergrad degree, just the relationships and grasp of dimensional analysis to get there myself.
I never learned long division either, until it was required for poly
Re: (Score:2)
What about 11x11?
Why in the name of jiggery pokery would you need to memorise 110 + 11?
I hope autodrive cars can be messed with like this (Score:2)
Right turn ahead to an dead end.
It's okay, this is illegal (Score:1)
I think we're going to be okay because this is illegal. It doesn't matter that it was done far away from Texas, US laws apply everywhere.
yacht, yach (Score:2)
$80 million (Score:2)
We have seen that over reliance on GPS is a problem. I have lead astray following Google maps using GPS. Although I can imagine some applications in hijacking oil tankers and the like, I would hope that such vessels would have secondary systems.
I can see this as a countermeasure against drones.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this only works against high dollar boats because their GPS gear is diamond encrusted and plated in gold.
The gold plating is the key to the whole thing.
Good thing you can't fool a compass! (Score:2)
Oh wait.
If you spend $80M, buy a sextant. (Score:2)
And spend the money on it BEFORE you install the jacuzzi.
Always use multiple sources of information (Score:3)
There are many different GPS-like systems available now. Glonass is the Russian version and has been available for a long time. Also the EU has Galileo coming on line real soon now. Also heard about both China and India developing their own. Units that can rely on multiple sources would definitely be harder to spoof.
If you feared that you were under GPS spoof attack while using the GPS on your phone, you could fairly easily detect this by writing an app that compares the GPS heading with your magnetic heading.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a skipper, but I do fly. If I was on the bridge, at some point I would have noticed that the Magnetic compass heading was not matching the GPS heading.
With currents and winds pushing yer ship around it rarely does. If done subtly enough it may well have been difficult to catch even if someone had been paying attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as a long time sailor, you can average a heading when the seas are rough. Basically I know I want to be on a 20 heading, but waves are tossing me around between 260 and 280, but I keep a general course in mind. Even a GPS system (non-spoofed) will move a bit in rougher seas. Bear in mind this relates to smaller boats. Yachts, large vessels tend to not swing so much so matching compass heading to GPS as a cross check works.
I commented on the other post a similar thought, that spoofing a GPS for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And while they did not point it out, they still had a compass somewhere on the panel. Lucky to get that view. Just once I had a chance to sit up front in a DC-8 and it was amazing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Niantic@Google is screwed (Score:2)
Not only are (some) rooted people spoofing in the Ingress game, now you can do it with overriding the GPS signals.
wouldn't the spoofer be piloting blind? (Score:2)
Presumably the person doing the spoofing would be piloting blind since their GPS would be effected just as much as the target's GPS?
If so then it seems like GPS spoofing would be of limited usefulness unless you just wanted a ship or plane or whatever to get lost and expend all it's fuel in the process.
Re: (Score:2)
GPS is not the only way of navigating at sea. Compass, for instance, would be a quick and easy way of making sure you are on course yourself.
There is also a difference between GPS blocking and GPS spoofing. If you are spoofing, and you know that you are shifting the signal by, say 30 degrees west, then you can make corrections to your own course based on that knowledge.
Time for a revision to L2C, L1C & L5 messages (Score:3)
I think it's time for a revision to the L2C, L1C and L5 civilian GPS specifications. Right now all signals, if/when present (some are at demo stage only), transmit a default message with no navigational data. It seems to me that messages on those signals should use public cryptography techniques to verify the authenticity and integrity of navigational data. It is feasible to do so, since L2C, L5 and L1C all use a packetized format and to-spec receivers must ignore unknown packets. Thus a cryptographic signature packet can be added in a fully backwards-compatible fashion. Properly done, this prevents spoofing of the navigational data, including preventing replay attacks. It should be sufficient to pretty much end spoofing once and for all.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's time for a revision to the L2C, L1C and L5 civilian GPS specifications. ...
It seems to me that messages on those signals should use public cryptography techniques to verify the authenticity and integrity of navigational data.
It should be sufficient to pretty much end spoofing once and for all.
You don't need to be able to generate false signals to defeat GPS. Fixes are based on time of flight of signals. Simply altering propogation delay is sufficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that when you're seeing more than the minimum amount of satellites, there are simple feasibility checks that will trigger if you push the target too far off. In open space, like on sea, you can detect such spoofing if it's off by merely 50m or so. Remember that the ephemerides tell you where the satellites are supposed to be at any time. If you've got redundant signals, like you most often do, there are no solutions to changes in the signals that will still be self-consistent, IIRC. Some solutions, i
Re: (Score:2)
The GPS satellites are dumb relays with local timebases, roughly speaking. You don't need to modify anything on the satellites to transmit arbitrary NAV data. The changes are to the ground segment software only.
Re: (Score:2)
Due to the rather arbitrary phasing of the satellites, replay attacks are pretty much infeasible. Even if they were feasible, GPS receivers know what the time is - they have pretty decent timebases. Time rolling back is a big no-no. If you've got your timebase synced up to crypto-validated time source "up there", the time won't ever roll back. Even "tiny" rollbacks, just a few ms worth, are not only detectable, but can't happen with the real GPS system. If you detect it, it only will due to spoofing or seri
Re: (Score:2)
Also remember that whatever position fix you get automatically validates the location of satellites in space, especially once you've got more than the minimum number of satellites needed for a fix. Since the receivers would keep unspoofable ephemerides, you can't really make the satellites "appear" to be somewhere else. The most you could spoof things is within a rather narrow position window, +/-100m or so.
Piracy (Score:2)
Lends a whole new meaning to the term computer piracy. Yarr.
Aren't cruise missiles guided by GPS? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Poor seamanship (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Arrrr! Keelhaul the lubbers!
Or, to put it less excitingly... (Score:1)
GPS spoofing is interesting, sure. But it ain't new, and the application here isn't exactly a mind-blowing revelation of the technique's potential...
Wow.. (Score:1)
Ground breaking..
Shiver me timbers... (Score:1)
Fat chance trying such a trick with Long John Silver aboard!
Avast Ye!! Come to me Horn!! (Score:1)
This has been done before... (Score:2)
The bridge crew should be replaced (Score:3)
Yes, the crew followed the GPS, like good little auomatons. But being a sailor, especially a navigator or quartermaster is more than just reading a GPS.
If the bridge crew is not competent enough to read a compass nor experienced enough to look at the sky and realize that something was wrong, they shouldn't be entrusted to control anything more experienced than a dinghy. There's this really cool gadget that, with a little work, tells you almost exactly where you are at. It's called a sextant. Put that together with a decent clock and there's no reason to be sailing in the wrong direction.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
sure you can they clearly state the crew was unaware that its course was being altered by them, by that logic no controlled experiment can ever be considered a success
also this is a re-post from last week c'mon /. pay attention
Re: (Score:2)
I'd imagine there's a difference between the owner and the crew when it's an 80 million dollar yacht...
under maritime law the crew can have power (Score:1)
They have the power to due stuff with out the owner saying so.
also this gps hack may of been braking some maritime laws as well.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is that? If the crew were under orders to stay on a course, and this test was able to cause the crew to change course while attempting to stay on their intended course, and even to believe they were following that course.... then I would say they were redirected. Consensually redirected but, its clear, they were not in control.
Re: (Score:1)
Nor were they intended to be in control. If I'm driving a car and no one told you, and let you believe you were driving the car, that isn't me misdirecting the vehicle, It's you being ignorant of who is in control. The yacht was going on its intended course controled by the people who were given control. The crew were just patsies pressing
buttons and turning wheels.
If you have control of the vehicle, you can't misdirect it is my point. Just because their control was obfuscated doesn't mean misdirection.
Prob
Re: (Score:2)
I think the UK is planning an upgrade to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Pah! Astrolabe and a cross-staff. Home-made. If we were lucky.
You kids today...