Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>I have no idea how you would get a dam to collapse with only a laptop and a network connection.

In a world where Stuxnet took out uranium centrifuges, and we've had actual PoC's of exploits that resulted in generators fragging themselves, I find your statement to be of the most shocking form of naivete I've heard in a while.

And in point of fact, the network connection would probably be for disabling alarms and control systems in order to mask work done to weaken the integrity of the structure itself. Physical and digital is inextricably linked.



A decently powerful generator is a massive machine. There is simply no way that it can destroy itself without causing abnormal behavior that will be noticed by on site personnel - noise, vibrations etc.


And yet, deadly disasters do happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayano-Shushenskaya_power_stat...

Key: "It seems they were used to the high levels of vibration" - Diane Vaughan wrote an important book that introduced the term "normalisation of deviance" as a factor in the Challenger Launch Decision, a more famous complex accident.

Another way of putting it is that "all complex systems operate in a degraded mode all the time", paraphrasing Adrian Colyer: https://blog.acolyer.org/2016/02/10/how-complex-systems-fail


I vaguely recall seeing a video years ago of the demonstrated hack on a generator causing it to suffer a rapid unscheduled disassembly event.

It happened very fast, and was very unsubtle. Probably not enough time for site personnel to respond before damage was done.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: