3 ms·
This is negligence on behalf of the water authority. 10+ years ago I used to do demonstrations of this specific attack for govt and other critical infrastructu
by motohagiography 6y ago
This is negligence on behalf of the water authority.
10+ years ago I used to do demonstrations of this specific attack for govt and other critical infrastructure owners.
In our demo, we had a two small vats of coloured "chemicals," with pumps controlled by a bank of PLCs, an HMI and a network of a bunch of vulnerable VMs. We would walk people through how to exploit trivial web vulnerabilities that would get them to the HMI and cause the pumps to reverse and cause a chemical spill from the vats. The look on their faces when they caused a vat to overflow themselves with very little skill, was their "scared-straight" moment.
It was 90's, even 80's level hacking. There is no way the managers didn't know this was possible and likely. They're only acting surprised. What this really looks like to me is a test run for something more coordinated and worse.
- suifbwish 6y agoWhy would you ever hook that shit up to computers that are online? The purpose of the utility fees is to employ people at those sites to govern the operation of those resources.
- motohagiography 6y ago"Online," being operative term. The demo showed a standard vulnerable web app whose back-end provided access to the corporate network, which had a network link to the HMI workstation, which controlled the PLCs that actuated the pumps. You didn't even need to do stuxnet level PLC code injection, you just logged in and worked the HMI. Not sure what kind of filters protect against this kind of thing, but a pH sensor with an alarm might mitigate the family level risk somewhat.