Slashdot Mirror


Attackers Drain CPU Power From Water Utility Plant In Cryptojacking Attack (eweek.com)

darthcamaro writes: Apparently YouTube isn't the only site that is draining CPU power with unauthorized cryptocurrency miners. A water utility provider in Europe is literally being drained of its CPU power via an cryptojacking attack that was undetected for three weeks. eWeek reports: "At this point, Radiflow's (the security firm that discovered the cryptocurrency mining malware) investigation indicates that the cryptocurrency mining malware was likely downloaded from a malicious advertising site. As such, the theory that Radiflow CTO Yehonatan Kfir has is that an operator at the water utility was able to open a web browser and clicked on an advertising link that led the mining code being installed on the system. The actual system that first got infected is what is known as a Human Machine Interface (HMI) to the SCADA network and it was running the Microsoft Windows XP operating system. Radiflow's CEO, Ilan Barda, noted that many SCADA environments still have Windows XP systems deployed as operators tend to be very slow to update their operating systems." Radiflow doesn't know how much Monero (XMR) cryptocurrency was mined by the malware, but a recent report from Cisco's Talos research group revealed that some of the top un-authorized cryptocurrency campaigns generate over a million dollars per year. The average system would generate nearly $200,000 per year.

76 comments

  1. If only... by fisted · · Score: 3, Funny

    If only there was some sort of readily available monitoring software to catch this sort of crap sooner than after 3 weeks.

  2. Need for separate browsing and operations by ArtemaOne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on. Don't run your operational systems on the internet, even if they need to be internet connected. Provide your employees with a separate system connected outside the LAN so that such issues are isolated. Another solution in non-sensitive areas is simply giving them Wi-Fi and access to their phones. All of these solutions present fewer problems than having employees on the operational system infecting the operational network.

    1. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If no one runs operational systems on the internet in what sense do we have an internet?

      While these particular systems being on the internet might be questionable, an intranet might have been favorable, ultimately a system monitor being in place should have caught that CPUs were at 100% usage and notified some one... because even the production systems on the internet that need to be there can easily be protected against this with the smallest amount of administrative effort.

    2. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      All of these solutions present fewer problems than having employees on the operational system infecting the operational network.

      All of these solutions costs money that employers don't want to pay.

      Shortsightedness is the gift bestowed upon middle management.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      Sorry you can't read. I said "even if they need to be internet connected" so that humans above fundamental reading levels could understand that the operational systems could be on the internet, but that users would not click on ads while using them, that they would have isolated systems for browsing.

    4. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Simpler, and probably as effective given modern attack vectors, don't let Javascript run in your browsers. If you must accept data over the web, use http commands, like post.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    5. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      If a system got infected with malware that did mining, which is a relatively minor problem, it means they are susceptible to serious damaging malware. Anti malware or tracking that detects intrusions after the fact don't help much if the damage is already done.

      It does feels odd that these sorts of simple and basic preventative measure (disconnecting from internet, restricted access to web sites) aren't being taken. Organizations using SCADA systems should presumably know all about security issues and know that SCADA systems are common targets.

    6. Re:Need for separate browsing and operations by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      This should be basic training everywhere. I can certainly understand someone sneaking around the rules and browsing the net using their normal work computer, but it's a severe lapse of responsibility to use a critical production computer to do this browsing.

  3. I have some past in this strange SCADA world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To me, this juxtaposition is downright scary "Windows XP", "SCADA", "Internet", "browser" (although it corresponds to my overall experience, unfortunately: how many times have I seen the Siemens engineers with their SCADA "programmers", some funny semi-customized boxes running some unspecified, but invariably old version of Windows).

    It's fascinating to watch how this "industry" refuses to move, even after having witnessed the train wreck that was Stuxnet and Natanz.

    Waiting for something fat to happen?

    1. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by jonwil · · Score: 1

      As long as the cost of replacing all that software with something new (and probably a lot of hardware too in cases where the existing hardware can't support the new software) is higher than the estimated cost (to the business, not to society at large) that would arise should the worst happen, they wont replace it.

      Heck, it may well be that there is no new software that can be used and they would need to not just replace the PCs but the gear they talk to (I doubt the companies that make that kind of gear would want to spend money upgrading software for old obsolete hardware so it can run on more modern systems, not when they have more modern hardware to sell you :)

    2. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, it may well be that there is no new software that can be used and they would need to not just replace the PCs but the gear they talk to (I doubt the companies that make that kind of gear would want to spend money upgrading software for old obsolete hardware so it can run on more modern systems, not when they have more modern hardware to sell you :)

      Which is exactly the problem.

      This is likely to not be a case where "upgrade their operating system" would be replacing WinXP with a newer Windows, it is likely replacing XP as well as thousands if not tens of thousands of PLC devices around the entire plant.

      If one has Xilink PLCs that don't support Ethernet, then XP is likely the newest Windows OS that will function at all, since there are unsigned 32-bit Windows drivers to emulate serial port connections to the PLCs and nothing newer from the manufacturer.

      Even something like Honeywell PLCs that do support Ethernet semi-directly, the software to monitor them requires full admin access to the PC to even run, and doesn't work with UAC much at all.
      I found after much screwing around on a devel system running Vista with UAC off and the system put into "allowed to run unsigned drivers" mode, the software at least works although you can't script it to launch upon a boot/reboot automatically.

      However even with all that work, we can't run this setup in production as it will void our support contract.
      Even installing XP hotfixes will void our support contract. We basically can't touch the OS on that system at all.
      The best we are allowed to do is put a Cisco ASA type firewall between the HMI and operational LAN, which means we can lessen the risk of a worm attack but not prevent one. Instead of any system on the LAN being an attack launch point, only certain peoples desktops are an attack point.

      Honeywell only just recently (December 2017) released a Windows 7 compatible version of their software, which isn't a free upgrade by the way.
      Note that Win 7 is basically EOL already, and they are just now supporting it on newly purchased systems!

    3. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      One of my brothers manages the local water facility, he bitched and complained about a system with win xp which was already eol until they finally replaced it with of course windows 7 a little over a year ago. They now have a little less than two years before win 7 extended support ends.

    4. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of my brothers manages the local water facility, he bitched and complained about a system with win xp which was already eol until they finally replaced it with of course windows 7 a little over a year ago. They now have a little less than two years before win 7 extended support ends.

      Moral of the story - stick with Windows 3.11 for Workgroups.

    5. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by skids · · Score: 1

      ...and this situation will just continue until either 1) operators realize they need in-house coders and are willing to pay them or 2) Some equipment supplier starts offering contractual guarantees to support future OSes and PHBs start to view that as a product feature and demand it for future purchases or 3) Some sort of OpenSource SCADA movement starts. Personally I don't see #3 as likely, don't think #2 has even entered the minds of the involved parties, and #1 would require a really smart PHB willing to compete in a tight labor market... which is kinda oxymoronic.

    6. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      The modus operandi of privately owned utility companies: Socialize losses, privatize profit.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    7. Re:I have some past in this strange SCADA world by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The issue with Windows XP, or 7, or 10, is to disconnect these critical infrastructure maachines from the internet. If they are on the internet, then train users to not use a web browser on this critical machines. Upgrading the OS does not magically fix a poor security set up.

  4. hard to lockdown XP IE web apps by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    hard to lockdown XP IE web apps. Hell they may need admin rights to run the day to day software.

  5. $200.000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make that $80.000 after last check on coinmarketcap.

    1. Re:$200.000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr, sorry make that $85.000

  6. WINDOWS XP on the INTERNET...???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No patches for YEARS NOW.

    1. Re:WINDOWS XP on the INTERNET...???? by jfdavis668 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's why I stayed with Windows 2000.

    2. Re:WINDOWS XP on the INTERNET...???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No patches for YEARS NOW.

      Think of it like a manual transmission on a car: "millennial anti-theft device"

      "WTF is THIS?!?!!"

  7. Not XP by kackle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to the summary, web ads (why aren't those blocked?!) are suspect. Windows XP is mentioned, though, as it's to blame somehow. To me, XP (or any older OS) is the devil you know versus the devil you don't - you can plan for the devil you know. Don't assume XP is automatically worse because we haven't discovered everything about 10, etc. For the technically smug, look at the surprise of Meltdown and Spectre.

    As to why they aren't upgrading everything all the time, I work in water too, and like other such "invisible" industries, it is big and more complex than you may think. Since these sites must function, NO MATTER WHAT, screwing around with one that is working fine is discouraged since each new "project" requires much planning, thought, approval and budgeting.

    In my younger days, in an instant, I brought down a medium-sized city's water supply just by plugging in a serial cable, the large pumps shutting down next to me. The controlling PLC's serial port powered pin #9 (not commonly done) as did the new radio transceiver that I just plugged in. "Did I do that?!!"

    I was fortunate in that shutting pumps off ungracefully can cause severe "water hammer" on the main pipes underground - broken pipes sometimes result. ...From plugging in a serial cable. Desktop jockies don't understand such things.

    1. Re:Not XP by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      This. As a fellow developer on the "this MUST work" industry, I also have trouble trying to explain to the newbies why they should not do certain things that they are accustomed to do when you are dealing with systems controlling millions of dollars worth of equipment.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:Not XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also work in a "this MUST work" industry and everyone always harps on using Windows XP. Yes I hate using it, and yes I want to upgrade it. Upgrades like this are better suited for direct run-in-tandem replacement since there is literally zero opportunity for downtime. The real problem here is how the HMI can access the internet, removing that capability that is step #1. If you need to pass data in and out of the system use a DMZ with dual firewalls at the minimum.

      There is nothing quite like causing millions of dollars of damage and downtime by messing with the systems needlessly.

    3. Re:Not XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


        To me, XP (or any older OS) is the devil you know versus the devil you don't

      This is a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE analogy. XP is related to all the other Windows OS's, and share code with it. When we find bugs in the newer OSes, we patch them . When that same bug in the old, unsupported OS, it isn't patched.

      You're right that we "know more" about XP. But that doesn't make it more secure, it makes it LESS secure, since we know more about it, and it isn't patched. You think IE is patched on XP? Of course not, it's full of unpatched exploits.


        I work in water too, and like other such "invisible" industries, it is big and more complex than you may think. Since these sites must function, NO MATTER WHAT, screwing around with one that is working fine is discouraged since each new "project" requires much planning, thought, approval and budgeting.

      I used to work with (not in) the utility industry too. You're using planning and risk as an excuse for laziness, and ineptitude. Windows XP has been out of support for almost 4 years now. They should have been planning on moving on to something else years before that. Instead, they chose to do NOTHING. In my former job we had a word for utility guys. DOUG. It stood for Dumb Old Utility Guy. This is a prime example of that. As an example, we had to interact with the utility via web browser (Natural Gas), and just 2 years ago they REQUIRED you to use IE6 to do so. The site refused to function if you were using anything but IE6. That, and this isn't planning and being cautious, it's incompetence.

      The problem with utilities is they have a monopoly, and little incentive to actually upgrade or change anything even when there's other large risks at play like this. That's the real issue here. Business in generally is TERRIBLE when it comes to security, but this is a while other level. Running your backend system on Windows XP almost 4 years AFTER the OS has gone out of support just takes the cake.

    4. Re:Not XP by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      XP is worse for one single key reason: That there ARE known security risks that will NEVER get patched. Can this be mitigated? Yes. But it also HAS to be mitigated.

      I work in a "must work no matter what" environment as well. We also suffer from XP machines we don't dare to touch because ... reasons. We did manage to get them secured by shielding those parts of them that are endangered by machines we put between them and potential attackers.

      It is possible. It's pretty ugly and of course not the best solution from a security perspective, but it can be done in a way that lets your CISO sleep at night.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Not XP by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      I know that. To be more clear, I am just stressing the point for a lot of "new guys" who think they can just drop on any powerplant and change everything to their shiny new (javascript) framework fad without end up killing someone (literally!) in the process.

      Some things need to be updated? No doubt. The problem is that this "new guys" does not stop to think first about what they can upgrade without causing problems later, they are too arrogant to first analyze why the process they intend to upgrade is done in the current way (see what is happening with the GUI development these days).

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    6. Re:Not XP by kackle · · Score: 1

      You kind of made my point: If everybody knows XP shouldn't be directly connected to the Internet (the largest risk these days), then do some sort of blocking to mitigate the known issue(s). Whereas with a newer OS, everyone will assume it's fine connected the way it is and only the determined nation states know certain flaws. In fact, one could argue that the hackers are more focused on the newer stuff.

      I also agree with the above poster that much thought should be given before such systems are needlessly connected to the Internet.

    7. Re:Not XP by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Well for any system of importance, you should be doing *all of the above*...

      You shouldn't be connecting it to the internet, irrespective of how up to date it is.
      You shouldn't be running software which isn't receiving security fixes.
      You shouldn't be using general purpose software for a single purpose device.
      You shouldn't be running software which receives anything other than security fixes (ie you should only fix the bugs, not introduce any other changes).

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    8. Re:Not XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody in their right mind connects anything on the SCADA network to the internet. These machines are designed to run months, sometimes years without a reboot much less any updates.

      Somebody screwed up and didn't listen to IT.

      Remote monitoring is possible with networked KVMs behind 2FA VPN. Win911 is also great at sending alerts via dialogic and dialup modem.

    9. Re:Not XP by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Sorry you're an idiot if you run XP unpatched in an internet enabled device for a mission critical infrastructure.

      Why people make excuses for running 17 year old software saying well uh 10 is not great either look! ... alot of advances in security from Microsoft has come in since 2001. Since 2004 when Bill Gates wrote the security memo MS now requires a security buddy to approve each product release.

      The result is both 7/10 are vastly more secure by default and more importantly ARE REGULARLY UPDATED. The spectre you mentioned is a classic example why running supported hardware/software is essential so when something DOES occur the vendors are quick at work to release a fix.

      Just because you took something done 20 years ago with a serial cable does not mean keeping XP is a good idea for such a critical function.

      Someone should be fired. Both the IT manager and the super cheap CFO for not keeping up with the times assuming the SCADA required internet access. If it does you need a supported PC attached even if it costs $$$$.

  8. Can't we just illegalize monero? by lucasnate1 · · Score: 1

    Can't we just illegalize monero?

    1. Re:Can't we just illegalize monero? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Great idea!

      While we're at it, maybe we can outlaw malware as well?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Can't we just illegalize monero? by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      Well the major exchanges could blacklist the coin and refuse to accept it. That will pretty effectively kill it I would imagine, if people can't easily trade it for fiat.

    3. Re:Can't we just illegalize monero? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Sure you can. And instantly somewhere in Generistan an exchange will open that takes a huge cut but accepts it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. The CPU Power Has Been Drained! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hurry! Fill it back up again!

  10. Re:At least the idiot employee will be fired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think European workers can't get fired? BWAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

    We just *tend* not to fire people because the boss didn't get his coffee that morning and even then only when the union doesn't kick up a stink about it. What's it like living like a corporate serf where the law applies only to the mighty?

  11. Why is any SCADA system still Internet-accessible? by adosch · · Score: 2

    I remember hearing the SCADA and industrial hacking news as far back as early 2000's from when I got into the tech world, and even then, always the same take-away: Why are these systems even accessible outside the intranet they exist on? I'd even take it a step further and wonder why there isn't much tamer form of a secured, air gap datacenter approach to this? Anyone who's done or worked with building automation systems or even went to a tech school for SCADA operation knows this shit doesn't have to exist and be set up that way.

    I actually wondered what the hit-rate of SCADA attacks was, and I had no idea there was an online database of them that goes way back into the early 90's. And exposure to the internet is harder to hide from, shoot, most don't even have to try if they are using Shodan.

    I think that's the real issue and always has been. That really-old-Windows-OS-and-the-word-crypto-buzzword phrasing is just a tech journalism shock-jock plug to lighten the heat from the real problem.

  12. No, not it is not by drinkypoo · · Score: 0, Troll

    It is not being literally drained of its CPU power. CPU power is not a liquid which can run out of a drain. Asshole.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:No, not it is not by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      CPU power is not a liquid which can run out of a drain.

      But hopefully with some advances in microfluidics it can be! ;)

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:No, not it is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you operating under the delusion that 'drained' only has one definition?

    3. Re:No, not it is not by tsqr · · Score: 1

      It is not being literally drained of its CPU power. CPU power is not a liquid which can run out of a drain. Asshole.

      metaphor (noun): a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”.

      Or maybe your problem is not drained, but the use of literally.
      literally (adverb): in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually, as in "I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume."

    4. Re:No, not it is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always suspected you were a very unpleasant person based on a lot of your posts. Calling someone an "asshole" for saying "literally being drained of its CPU power" rather confirms it.

    5. Re:No, not it is not by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Several APIs involving Queues and pipelining have a "drain" function call which clears it.

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    6. Re:No, not it is not by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It can actually be an appropriate metaphor, though it's not clear that it is being used in that way in this case.

      One can say that a system can only provide so many computations, so if some application is consuming them to the detriment of other applications also trying to be computed, then it is appropriate to say the first application drained the system of it's power.

      Or one can be talking about electrical power usage and figure that each computation consumes a certain amount of electrical power, so the application was draining the system of it's power (in this case the computer system is acting as a combination transformer and conduit).

      So the headline could be appropriate. The summary, however, didn't seem to justify that particular use, and that jarred on me, also. But perhaps the original story *did* justify the use, so a harsh judgment is probably rather unwarranted.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    7. Re:No, not it is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called a metaphor, and as metaphors go this one works perfectly well for the intended purpose of making people aware that crypto hype is causing the world far more harm than its proponents, who seem incapable of grasping the concept of externality cost, care to admit. CPU power is a draw on limited capital and operational resources which are paid for by people who are being DRAINED of their money thanks to shithead cryptocurrency charlatans trying to steal from them with schemes like this, aided by a squad of greedy, feckless and frequently sociopathic crypto fanboys running social media interference like you're doing here.

    8. Re:No, not it is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Standard behavior for the typical toxic cryptocurrency avenger. It's unfortunate that someone with a relatively low slashdot ID (who would have been on here when Bitcoin first showed up as a /. article) would be supporting this stuff to the point of acidic shitposting in response to someone using an unflattering metaphor to describe the behavior of thieves stealing money (if not causing worse problems) from a vital public resource. But since said theft depends on cryptocurrency to work, particularly a crypto which has been thoughtfully designed so as to engender such forms of theft better than most others, the claws come out quick.

  13. Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seriously, stop connecting SCADA systems to computers running Windows. It really doesn't matter what you connect it to as long as it's not running an operating system that is well known for being vulnerable to attack!

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Windows is no more insecure than other systems. It just makes the news more as it is the preferred OS of morons. If the morons of the world were using Linux, the hackers would be targetting Linux and we would hear of new Linux hacks every day. Most hacks are due to something stupid a Windows user did which a Linux user would not.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    2. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Windows is no more insecure than other systems.

      Those Windows systems *are*. You haven't seen the old and creaky things SCADA providers request for compatibility with their product.

    3. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re: "Most hacks are due to something stupid a Windows user did which a Linux user would not."

      That shows an excess of confidence in Linux users. And even if Linux users were, on average, wiser than Windows users, so what? Is it good security policy to rely on users to do the right thing, every time?

      I imagine your security plan looks like this:

      The Security Plan
      1). Don't do stupid things;
      2). Return to 1).

    4. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately the industrial controls world decided in the late 90's to standardize on the Windows stack. OPC-DA is the standard method for getting data between the "frontend" UI's (HMI) and the "backend" (controllers), and it runs on COM/DCOM. Alas, by the time Linux and BSD were ready to take on the commercial Unix vendors (~2000), the horse was already out of the barn.

      It gets much worse once you are on the SCADA network. The protocols that speak to PLCs are unsecured by design: get anything on the network and it can just tell the PLCs to power down or worse and they would obey. Industrial cybergeddon is now only a matter of when not if.

      The more I see of this stuff, the less impressed I am by Stuxnet. Turns out Windows is actually the most secure part of the controls networks, crossing the air gap was far more difficult than reprogramming the PLCs.

    5. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Users can't be trusted. The security plan should be: admins make it impossible for users to do stupid things. If that includes physically disabling every USB port, then so be it. You definitely don't connect important equipment to the internet, as least without an up-to-date firewall.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    6. Re:Stop connecting SCADA stuff to Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much only the oil refineries and bigger chemical plants have the money and care enough to have more sophisticated and secure systems. I was at a client site today and didn't see a single workstation running anything older than Windows 7 and there were firewalls everywhere, even between process units on the same intranet as to contain potential infections/intrusions.

  14. Get rich quick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The machine in question earned earned about 1 dollar in 3 weeks

    I would be amazed if the CPU was able to break 20 hash per second

    1. Re:Get rich quick by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Which is fine if the machines aren't yours and you don't have to pay for the power they use.
      A single machine may generate a trivial amount, but there are many thousands of insecure machines out there. Add them all up and you've got a lucrative earner.
      You don't even have to spend your own time collecting the machines, you can use automated scripts to scan for and infect machines.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  15. Dumb Firewall by JBMcB · · Score: 2

    Seems simple to me. SCADA systems shouldn't be controllable over the internet, or by anything connected to the internet. For remote control used leased lines. Hardly anyone uses ISDN or leased 56k lines anymore, so there's an easy solution.

    For monitoring, you can have an internet connected data logger wired into the SCADA system with a serial port. Even if someone manages to hack into the data logger, you can't take over the SCADA system if it's not designed to accept commands over serial.

    I worked for a broadcast company that operated this way. The broadcast equipment could only be controlled by standing in front of the machine, or via a single hardwired remote terminal in the operations room that wans't connected to anything else. It spit out a bunch of system status data over a serial port to an network connected machine, but you couldn't control it that way.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
  16. Did they use a bucket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they use a bucket to literally drain that power out of the cpu spigot? People who don't know the correct meaning of "literally" have no business writing anything for public consumption.

  17. This isn't unusual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked in Industrial Automation for over 10 years, and mostly in water / waste water. Many of these utilities, at least in the US, are municipal. Many do not have and IT person or department, usually due to little need or no budget. These systems are not designed with security in mind. Most HMI software providers assume security is not their problem and that its the utilities job to lock down everything, which never happens because there is no IT department.
    Many of these systems are installed as part of a single contract. The installers install the system and then leave without any obligation to maintain anything (sometimes there is a limited support contract as well). The installers will end up opening the windows firewall and defaulting the operators PC (usually also the main server computer) to auto login as admin. All this has been the normal for years, and for a long time, this wasn't an issue because the industrial communication standards were either not over Ethernet or just in a closed system with no outside access. I later years, the utility wanted the newer technology which is all Ethernet based and ended up opening their system to the general internet. Unfortunately, there still is no IT department and the installers are still up to the same tricks. In the end this same operator is now logged into the same server PC, as admin, but now also surfing the web.
    This my experience with smaller utilities. Larger ones are more on top of security and do have audits.

  18. Jesus, really? Idiots ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the theory that Radiflow CTO Yehonatan Kfir has is that an operator at the water utility was able to open a web browser and clicked on an advertising link that led the mining code being installed on the system. The actual system that first got infected is what is known as a Human Machine Interface (HMI) to the SCADA network and it was running the Microsoft Windows XP operating system. Radiflow's CEO, Ilan Barda, noted that many SCADA environments still have Windows XP systems deployed as operators tend to be very slow to update their operating systems

    OK, fine, you're lazy and stupid, and the interface to your SCADA system is an ancient turd which has been terribly insecure forever.

    Whatever.

    But holy fuck, people, keep the ancient insecure turd connected ONLY to your SCADA system and nothing else, and make damned sure your people aren't using that machine to connect to the internet and click goddamned ads.

    This is really a self inflicted bit of stupid. Everywhere I've ever been which has SCADA has that on a separate locked down network, and the machines which access it are locked down and not connected to anything else. It's a hard-line connection with absolutely NO other connectivity, and it's treated like one of the most secure systems you have -- because it better be.

    This is beyond stupid, and beyond inexcusable .. especially after StuxNet.

    Any organization which gets impacted by something like this deserves what they get, because they're pretty much incompetent to run that kind of infrastructure. Mining cryptocurrency is stupid, but you could have FAR more reaching problems from this kind of breach.

    Fucking morons.

  19. Stupid is as stupid does by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    If you don't have an air gap between your critical infrastructure equipment and the internet, then you're an idiot. Why was it possible to open a browser on these machines in the first place?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  20. Re:DIY Cryptocurrency Mining... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    You also need to wait several years to amortize the cost of each GPU...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  21. lol ... too much porn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    factoid for you, rarbg and limetorrents routinely insert cryptomining code into your pages!

    i run htop and you can always tell when they are doing it! quad cores all hit 100% almost instantly when they are!

    and it's not just porn anymore!

  22. Re:Why is any SCADA system still Internet-accessib by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps because staffing the graveyard shift with full time experienced SCADA technicians is expensive (or impossible, if your facilities are in a remote or rural area), so you either cut back staff, hire and train alert, competent people who also happen to be willing to sit around in the plant watching gauges until 5am for 99% of their working career, or else make the system partially manageable over the internet (hopefully with some minimal security like a VPN), so the actual people you can realistically hire for this kind of specialized work only need to be woken up if something is going sideways one day out of a hundred, or a thousand.

    Obviously basic infrastructure like water and power demands having hands on site at all times, but the vast bulk of SCADA systems are running bubble wrap packing machines or stamping silverware or filling catfood tins. It's an entrenched structural tradeoff problem.

  23. Re:Why is any SCADA system still Internet-accessib by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

    For piracy and to prevent used SCADA sales. They must be on the internet all day to re-activate themselves.

    They also on purpose refuse to support anything after XP on purpose to force repurchases of perfectly good working systems with 7 support. So CFOs buckle and keep XP on instead as a firm of giving them the finger.

    THen the I.T. guy gets blamed when they get hacked because the CFO doesn't want to pay the extortion to throw out a good SCADA controller because the vendor wants more money and you can't be used just to ensure the PC attached gets security updates. Ridiculous.

    There are should be laws as this is part of infrastructure and something both China and RUssia know too well if they want to hurt another country.

  24. Re:No need for LUDDITE monitoring software. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apk did a job on lying trolls yesterday who tried hiding he cleaned their clocks with their abused downmods https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11715333&cid=56091145/

  25. The problem was their SCADA system was on Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they had their SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) system directly connected to the Internet? Really - that is the problem. One should never, never do that!

    There is guidance and standards on how to do design SCADA and industrial control architecture. IEC/ISA-624443, ISA-99, NIST cyber security framework, AWWA-GW430, etc.

    The fact they were using Windows XP in their SCADA control system is a red herring. There are still many, many industrial control systems (and water/electricity/gas utility control systems) that still use Windows XP-based computers - but the organizations that run them on isolated networks that are completely disconnected from the internet and subject to physical access controls. Upgrading systems that control critical infrastructure and have hundreds of years of programming effort/testing in them is not a simple manner. The lifecycles of these systems are very long, and any upgrades must be done very carefully.

     

  26. No retard APK didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No retard Alexander Peter Kowalski, you didn't.
    I looked at that thread and you were never able to refute the original statements because they are true.
    Instead you went and wandered off in the woods on one of your usual rants trying to deflect real valid criticism of your ineffective, unoriginal, slow, bloated, and overly complex work.
    Then after that you start whining that others down mod you for acting like the retard you are, maybe that AC actually had an account and wasted their mod points but given how often that happens to you I doubt it.
    If I had an account I wouldn't waste mod points down modding you as I want everyone to see how much of a retard you are.
    If everyone had used your software the attack would have still happened.
    It wasn't until someone else did the real work of identifying the threat that it could even have been stopped by you BS little toy.
    As always you offer too little too late.
    Yet no script would have prevented this attack because it actually stops an entire category of threats unlike your work.
    Don't worry APK I'm sure someday your parents will stop regretting not aborting your but today isn't that day, and the rest of the century isn't looking so good either.
    I might have to get in on that whole thread and point out all the places were you provide further evidence that you are a total retard.

    1. Re:No retard APK didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just read the link and post parent to it. You say apk's program and hosts couldn't stop the threat but it did. He proved it did. That link also links to a post of his you downmod hid showing noscript does not do as fast or as good a job as hosts do on far more threats online. You lost badly even trying to hide it with unjustifiable downmods and that says worlds about you right there. He is right about you and your type. You are unidentifiable anonymous losers. You have to hide against him as you harass him and you could care less if you lose. You are used to losing your entire life loser.

    2. Re:No retard APK didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You put his work down? Many here use it. You ran when asked if you do a better tool than his https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11715333&cid=56084615/ and it is clear you have not though I recall you saying you write real securityware. Where is it then? It's not. It seems you are jealous of apk and his success. He puts in the work and it works. Your talk and lies do not work. Especially when he exposes you are an unidentifiable troll do nothing liar windbag blowhard chatter he annihilated with fact https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11715333&cid=56091145/ and you can't stand it. It made me laugh. Seeing your reaction here as you try stalk apk is even funnier. I can see you seething in rage at your mistakes and your lack of skills in this science he exposed in the top first link I posted and with facts he cut your lies up with in that last link apk crushed you with.

    3. Re:No retard APK didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bitch apk posts ac (unlike you he signs his posts) yet you stalk him unidentifiable anonymous constantly hypocrite? No wonder he wipes you out. You are really dumb.