6 ms·

I don't have enough domain knowledge to provide a reality check, but wouldn't the ship or loading staff notice something isn't correct and stop the load? It's

I don't have enough domain knowledge to provide a reality check, but wouldn't the ship or loading staff notice something isn't correct and stop the load? It's not like these systems have never had bugs and should be trusted wholeheartedly. Pentest companies like to put up bogeymen to scare people into using their services.

Cthulhu_ 9y ago
They might, but at the same time, loading / unloading is a high pressure, high speed and stressful job; when you've got 5000 containers aboard, you can't expect most people to keep track of the weight distribution themselves. Of course I'm sure the ship would start to list and the ballast / balance system give alerts at some point, but maybe it would be too late by then. The article also talks about more subtle things like changing the position of containers; wouldn't cause safety issues, would be hard to detect (gotta trust the software), but would cause delays and (by extension) costs.
- supahfly_remix 9y ago
  Sounds like the "easy" answer is to use software from a different vendor to check the output of the CSV file. Calculating center of mass is straightforward, and much easier than solving the problem of container placement.
  - bkor 9y ago
    Normally at least two different companies already look at it. One, the container shipping company creates a plan where the containers should go (stowage plan). They then send it to the terminal who will look at it again. The article talks about USB/floppy disks and suggests they are 1) used 2) insecure 3) easily can be attacked. This without ever explaining how. They also suggest that the someone on the vessel themselves creates this stowage plan. This is utterly strange. Stowage plans aren't normally made by people on the vessel for the companies I know. Loads of details in this article make no sense at all. That said, container shipping should be hugely improved is true :-P The main bit is true as well: if you mess up the stowage plan you'd easily cause a lot of damage: yeah. Plus there's probably enough ways to do this. PS: It's not a CSV file.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
yardie 9y ago
More and more ports are going automated. Since the containers are uniform in size the CV required is pretty basic and very fast. Most container ships are only in port for a few hours and they can load and unload a lot of containers. I think by the time anyone realizes things are off it could be too late.
- supahfly_remix 9y ago
  Are you saying that the automation of cranes is faster than that of humans and results in a much shorter load/unload time? I would think the unload time would be dominated by the time for the crane to move the container physically rather than the CV problem of identifying a container. Automation could just result in labor cost savings rather than decrease load/unload time significantly.
  - yardie 9y ago
    In a port there the big ship to shore cranes and there are the smaller mobile gantry cranes. The smaller gantry cranes look like this [0] and 1 operator may be controlling half dozen simultaneously. There are huge cost savings involved because 1 person can move multiple containers, simultaneously. These systems aren't cheap and it requires more skill closer to IT than your typical stevedore. So it can take years to recoup any savings in labor. Recouping time costs are almost immediate. [0] http://www.konecranes.com/equipment/container-handling-equipment/automated-rmg-armg-system http://www.konecranes.com/equipment/container-handling-equip...
  - londons_explore 9y ago
    If load/unload time were a big $$ problem, I can imagine one could design a system which effectively threw containers on and off the ship. ie. acceleration at 1G upwards on the way out, and freefall on the way in. The same acceleration rates can be used for the automated clamps which lock onto the corners of the containers for movement. Assuming a dockside + ship is 100 yards wide, a one second lock/unlock time for clamps, that should work out at 14 seconds per container. Assume we have a grid of cranes over the ship, able to pick up every container on top at once. Assume the worst-case complete unload of the whole ships capacity (10,000 40 ft containers on the largest vessels), and reload of another complete load. That comes out as 8 minutes! Current loading times are multiple hours for even a partial unload of a much smaller ship. That tells me that there isn't enough $$$ involved to get serious engineering efforts to make it quicker.
danielvf 9y ago
Simply making it so that heavy containers go high and light ones low would likely not affect the ship until it it hits bad weather. The load is still centered on the ship at the dock, so it would not list. The total weight is still correct, so the ship is the right depth in the water. However, the loading crew might not even notice a modest list. The EL FARO, while loading before its fatal trip into a hurricane, had a bit of a list. The loading crew didn’t notice, but someone else at the port took a photo[1], emailed it to the relevant people, and got it fixed. [1] http://3kbo302xo3lg2i1rj8450xje.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/EL-Faro-Final-photo.jpg http://3kbo302xo3lg2i1rj8450xje.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-c...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- kwillets 9y ago
  The Saewol used a tactic of overloading with cargo and compensating by emptying ballast tanks so that the hull depth would be the same for inspection. There's already a need to overcome malicious actors.
- dzhiurgis 9y ago
  Isn't there a watch on the ship to monitor the key information at pretty much any time? I think most ships over 30 meters or so have constant staff there. Plus there must be a checklist when departing, ship balance info, etc.

Cthulhu_ 9y ago

They might, but at the same time, loading / unloading is a high pressure, high speed and stressful job; when you've got 5000 containers aboard, you can't expect most people to keep track of the weight distribution themselves. Of course I'm sure the ship would start to list and the ballast / balance system give alerts at some point, but maybe it would be too late by then. The article also talks about more subtle things like changing the position of containers; wouldn't cause safety issues, would be hard to detect (gotta trust the software), but would cause delays and (by extension) costs.

supahfly_remix 9y ago
Sounds like the "easy" answer is to use software from a different vendor to check the output of the CSV file. Calculating center of mass is straightforward, and much easier than solving the problem of container placement.
- bkor 9y ago
  Normally at least two different companies already look at it. One, the container shipping company creates a plan where the containers should go (stowage plan). They then send it to the terminal who will look at it again. The article talks about USB/floppy disks and suggests they are 1) used 2) insecure 3) easily can be attacked. This without ever explaining how. They also suggest that the someone on the vessel themselves creates this stowage plan. This is utterly strange. Stowage plans aren't normally made by people on the vessel for the companies I know. Loads of details in this article make no sense at all. That said, container shipping should be hugely improved is true :-P The main bit is true as well: if you mess up the stowage plan you'd easily cause a lot of damage: yeah. Plus there's probably enough ways to do this. PS: It's not a CSV file.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

yardie 9y ago

More and more ports are going automated. Since the containers are uniform in size the CV required is pretty basic and very fast. Most container ships are only in port for a few hours and they can load and unload a lot of containers. I think by the time anyone realizes things are off it could be too late.

supahfly_remix 9y ago
Are you saying that the automation of cranes is faster than that of humans and results in a much shorter load/unload time? I would think the unload time would be dominated by the time for the crane to move the container physically rather than the CV problem of identifying a container. Automation could just result in labor cost savings rather than decrease load/unload time significantly.
- yardie 9y ago
  In a port there the big ship to shore cranes and there are the smaller mobile gantry cranes. The smaller gantry cranes look like this [0] and 1 operator may be controlling half dozen simultaneously. There are huge cost savings involved because 1 person can move multiple containers, simultaneously. These systems aren't cheap and it requires more skill closer to IT than your typical stevedore. So it can take years to recoup any savings in labor. Recouping time costs are almost immediate. [0] http://www.konecranes.com/equipment/container-handling-equipment/automated-rmg-armg-system http://www.konecranes.com/equipment/container-handling-equip...
- londons_explore 9y ago
  If load/unload time were a big $$ problem, I can imagine one could design a system which effectively threw containers on and off the ship. ie. acceleration at 1G upwards on the way out, and freefall on the way in. The same acceleration rates can be used for the automated clamps which lock onto the corners of the containers for movement. Assuming a dockside + ship is 100 yards wide, a one second lock/unlock time for clamps, that should work out at 14 seconds per container. Assume we have a grid of cranes over the ship, able to pick up every container on top at once. Assume the worst-case complete unload of the whole ships capacity (10,000 40 ft containers on the largest vessels), and reload of another complete load. That comes out as 8 minutes! Current loading times are multiple hours for even a partial unload of a much smaller ship. That tells me that there isn't enough $$$ involved to get serious engineering efforts to make it quicker.

danielvf 9y ago

Simply making it so that heavy containers go high and light ones low would likely not affect the ship until it it hits bad weather. The load is still centered on the ship at the dock, so it would not list. The total weight is still correct, so the ship is the right depth in the water. However, the loading crew might not even notice a modest list. The EL FARO, while loading before its fatal trip into a hurricane, had a bit of a list. The loading crew didn’t notice, but someone else at the port took a photo[1], emailed it to the relevant people, and got it fixed. [1] http://3kbo302xo3lg2i1rj8450xje.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/EL-Faro-Final-photo.jpg http://3kbo302xo3lg2i1rj8450xje.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-c...

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
kwillets 9y ago
The Saewol used a tactic of overloading with cargo and compensating by emptying ballast tanks so that the hull depth would be the same for inspection. There's already a need to overcome malicious actors.
dzhiurgis 9y ago
Isn't there a watch on the ship to monitor the key information at pretty much any time? I think most ships over 30 meters or so have constant staff there. Plus there must be a checklist when departing, ship balance info, etc.