The ThunderBird's Blog

On Bills, Presidents, and Kill Switches

2010-06-25T16:41:00.000+02:00

The United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs approved a bill yesterday that would give the President emergency powers to shut down any civilian or government network in case of a cyber-attack. If you're asking me, this is a stop-gap measure instead of a fix.

The first question to be asked is "Why are crucial networks even connected to the Internet?". That's a very good question, probably one nobody can answer with 100% certainty. While an Internet-connection does make administering the system easier and more comfortable, it also presents a gigantic security risk, no matter how well you cover any holes you find, there will always be vulnerabilities you missed. There is a reason why the most secure systems are 'air-gapped' from any others. Air-gapping, or air-gap means that there is no connection of any sort between the system in question and any other computer in the world. No UTP, no wireless, no serial, nothing, the only connection to the outside world is through a screen and a keyboard (or similar peripherals). To access this system, physical access is required. And if that is granted, any security measures you have can be thrown out the window, because as the saying goes "If I have physical access to the system, I can do anything", which is true, with the proper knowledge.
Computers and servers controlling power grids and telecommunication systems should be air-gapped the same way, in order to eliminate the possibility of an outside attack.

The second question that must be posed is "How is this doing any good in case of an attack?". Will it prevent further intrusions? Yes. Will it bring the power grid back online? No. Will it hinder recovery operations? Yes. It seems to me that this bill will only do more damage than good.
So why approve it? The United States government has recently been under pressure to do something about cyberattacks, both real and imagined. The general image of the US populace of such an event is a maniacally grinning hacker somewhere in a dark room (possibly in Russia, China, or Eastern Europe) hitting Enter, and suddenly, everything in the US goes dark, phones are no longer functioning, etc. Or even worse, HVAC systems start to cook people alive inside buildings as the struggle against the electronically locked doors.
But what the public doesn't realize is that this image is wrong by a long shot. Yes, cyberattacks function by disrupting production and creating mayhem in the target country. No, people won't likely die as a direct result of a cyberattack. There will most likely be indirect casualties, such as ambulances not being notified, or not being able to move out due to a blackout, but in general, these will be minor compared to the yearly averages. The real power of a cyberattack comes when coupled with a land invasion, as the attackers can exploit the fact that the target nation is without telecommunications or power facilities, making the invasion that much easier. But I think it will be a long time before anyone will be bold enough to attempt an invasion against the United States.

There is also a more sinister application for this bill, one that conspiracy theorists will undoubtedly pounce upon: it gives the president the ability to kill any network, including private ones, so he can silence dissent by simply killing the appropriate networks. While I highly doubt that president Obama would resort to such measures, there will be those who say that this was the original purpose of the bill, and I wish to cut them off, if possible.

Overall, I think this bill is most likely a stop-gap measure to appease public opinion, as any application of the bill would do more to hinder recovery operations than to prevent an attack in the first place, as cyberattacks do not telegraph themselves the way physical attacks do.

I will leave you with this thought, and the hope that your networks are secure, so noone can get in and conduct an attack on you!

On Minerals, War, and Afghanistan

2010-06-19T00:14:00.002+02:00

A geological survey in Afghanistan recently uncovered a great wealth in the country: approximately one trillion dollars worth of iron, cobalt, nickel, molybdenum, niobium, lithium and other rare earths. Enough, in fact, to transform the country into 'The Saudi Arabia of lithium', according to a Pentagon memo. But will this mineral wealth actually save the country, or plunge it further into war?

The minerals discovered are vital to the tech industry of the world, there's no denying that. Laptops and phones alike run on lithium polymer batteries, with cobalt, nickel and gold being crucial components in the circuit boards, and the prevalence of electronics in today's devices guarantee a high demand, while the other resources are important in the research and generation of renewable energy. But can this demand actually make the extraction profitable?

There are a lot of factors to take into account here: first and foremost, even if operations are started now, it may be a decade or more before they actually return the initial investment, and start producing profits. This is the most crucial factor, as not many investors are willing to risk investments with such a long return.

The second most important factor is security. While analysts are adept at assessing and pricing the risk inherent in, say, an offshore oil platform in Brazil, or a mine in Nevada, neither investors, nor companies have a lot of experience or daring to start an operation in the middle of an active insurgency. After all, who can guarantee that the US Army in the area can secure their sites and supply lines, and that they will actually be there in ten years? While the US now has an interest in the country, in order to secure the sites for themselves, and enable their own industries ready and cheap access to the raw materials, the costs of extraction combined with stationing the troops there for another decade at the very least might seem a bit daunting a task, one that they are unwilling to undertake.
Just to put this into perspective: not only does the Army have to defend several scattered mining sites around the country, but also build, maintain, and defend a thousand-plus miles of road network, which has to cross borders that are being disputed and are anything, but sure to remain open and friendly even next year or five years from now.

Third, one must take into account that the Talibans are fighting for their country, and so far, even if they're not exactly winning, they certainly aren't losing. The Army is fighting a politically motivated enemy in unfamiliar terrain, and are undermanned and under-equipped for the job at hand, plus their hands are more or less tied: they can't go blasting the whole country to kingdom come, not only because it will lead to even more troubles and having to repopulate in addition to installing a new government and rebuilding, but also because of the backlash they would receive from the international community. Thus, they must take the slow road, slowly weeding out the insurgents, which is a hard task indeed.
Meanwhile, Mr. Karzai is receiving more and more heat from Washington because of his corrupt and favoritistic government, and becoming increasingly embittered. This might easily lead to him shutting out the investments that have the potential to shore up the Afghan economy (which is currently supported by opium trade and international aids) many times over.

And lastly, one must also look at the geopolitics of the area. Last year, Afghanistan was a backwater country with a lot of goats, terrorists and soldiers. Now, overnight, it transformed into the greatest deposit of rare minerals in sight. Suddenly, it's a valuable target. And its neighbors might not possess the restraint of the USA. Thus, what is currently set to save the country may end up dooming it just as easily.
Just to list a few ways this 'miracle' may backfire:

It may become another source of financing for the insurrection currently in progress, either in the form of them exploiting it themselves, charging protection fees for the caravans on their road networks, or through corruption.
The export routes will have to pass through several countries, which may be destabilized by the fact that this means the protection rackets currently only profitable in Afghanistan will suddenly become good business outside it too.
Chinese or Russian state-owned companies are more willing to tolerate the risks such an operation carries. This, combined with their propensity for locking down long-term supplies may lead to the escalation of the mercantilistic conflict between the US and China/Russia.
The Afghan government is, arguably, the most corrupt one in the world, and it won't be any less corrupt after finding out they're sitting on the biggest pile of resources the tech industry need anywhere in sight. This will render any incentive to stabilize the government insignificant compared to what officials may rake in by exploiting their power over these resources.

Of course, all these factors exist in a feedback loop, and not by themselves. Increasing security costs or lower production alters the global supply and demand picture, which increases prices, which in turn increases the incentive to further disrupt production, and the cycle begins anew. And there's a rather good chance that this development produces not one, but several interconnected feedback loops, each influencing the other, and if they are allowed to form, or not curbed fast, the situation, and with it, the (formerly) low price of the resources, may very well spiral out of hand.

In conclusion, the US may have to act fast, and Obama may have to forfeit his promise to withdraw, in order to secure a steady and cheap supply of raw materials for the American industries to work with. But will these resources really be that cheap, and will their extraction be worth the trouble companies have to go through to get at them? Only time will tell...

On Cars, Traffic, and Networks

2010-06-13T10:09:00.001+02:00

European researchers are developing an ubiquitous wireless network for use in traffic management. Lights, signs, cars, etc would communicate wirelessly, in order to minimize jams, smooth traffic flow, and improve safety. But is the system all the good it seems?

While CVIS (Cooperative Vehicle-Infrastructure Systems) certainly does have its merits, it also has a lot to be concerned about, not just on the hardware side, but also on the privacy and security sides too.

On the one hand, smoother traffic is always welcome, and this system will certainly help achieve that. By tracking vehicles, it becomes easy to pinpoint jams, and have the city route traffic around them to avoid exacerbating the situation, while lights can adaptively change their red/green duration to minimize wait, or even achieve the perfectly synchronized green wave. Emergency vehicles can now gain priority much faster on the road, as drivers ahead of them are warned of their approach, long before they may even hear the sirens, and the vehicles themselves are routed along not only the most direct route, but also the fastest, with the minimum amount of cars and lights, which also trigger themselves green for the oncoming ER vehicle (this system is already in use in the US, where IR-sensors mounted on the lights give priority if a corresponding signal is detected from the ER vehicle's emitter).

On the other hand, there are also significant hardware and security concerns. For one, are cars going to be retrofitted with the system, or when this comes online, only those who bought the latest, compliant car will benefit from its abilities? Because the system will find it hard to spread if everyone must buy a new car to enjoy the benefits.
Also, how integrated will the system be in the car? As I once covered, cars' internal controllers are surprisingly easy to hack, and can cause surprising events to occur. If this system is not isolated from the CAN-bus, there's a rather good chance that someone will find an exploit, and be able to insert data onto the bus from the outside. And at this point, we have to consider that this is a point-to-point wireless network, so anyone with a laptop and a transmitter may wreak havoc on unsuspecting motorists.
In addition, privacy activists will probably resent the fact that their movements (or rather, their cars') are being tracked, even if only to prevent traffic jams, and they will be (should be) powerless to turn it off, because if they could/did, it would defeat one of the major points of the system. While the system can be used to track stolen cars instantly, and have the police come down on car thieves like a ton of bricks, it can also be used for nefarious purposes, should someone gain access to the tracking system, or even jury-rig a setup to force cars to report their positions to them too. Not only will this feature minimize jams, it will possibly also maximize terrorist attack yields, should terrorists figure out a way to access the information on the network.

While the CVIS certainly does have promise, execution lacks details so far, and needs to be very good if the system is about the become a success. Let's just hope that security will be a major focus, for all our sake.

On Oil Wells, Kills, and Nukes

2010-06-02T18:22:00.001+02:00

BP has admitted that 'Operation Top Kill' has failed, after pumping 30,000 barrels of drilling mud and other materials. The worst spill in the history of the United States is still continuing, and it's time to look for other measures.

The damage control valve has already been lowered to the sea floor beside the damaged riser, which continues to spew oil at 12,000 to 100,000 barrels per day, but repeated pumpings of drilling mud and assorted junk have failed to stop the flow, so the valve cannot be fitted yet. BP says the best option now would be to drill relief wells around the main one to reduce the pressure, but the relief wells won't be completed until August.

In the meantime, the ecology of the Gulf of Mexico is going to hell on the freeway. The Louisiana marshlands and isles around the Mississippi inlet are home to over 400 species, including the endangered Kemp's Ridley turtle, and these areas have already been contaminated, and enclosed with a quarantine, so oil is continuing to be washed ashore. Microbes used to break up the oil into droplets are depleting oxygen in the bay area, so fish are dying out by the schools, only exacerbated by the film of oil cutting off the replenishing oxygen. Even worse, the Loop Current in the bay is carrying the spill counterclockwise, towards the source of the Gulf Stream. Should the oil reach that, there will be no way to stop its spread diagonally across the Atlantic, exporting at least a part of the problem to the UK, and by extension Europe, and the Arctic.
The dark oil coating the icebergs would lower the albedo of the area, furthering the melting. The melt water, being composed of fresh water, which is lighter than salt water, would serve to further disrupt the Gulf Stream, which is already decelerating, and in danger of stopping. Granted, so far that would probably not happen in our lifetimes, being some fifty years off, but this might bring it much closer.

To me, the next most attractive solution would be the Russian one: "Nuke 'Em!". That is, detonate a nuclear warhead beside the well, and hope that the shock and heat of the explosion would seal the well shut. Granted, BP would have to sink it again, but hey, it's their fault this happened in the first place. This, however, would possibly create an even greater catastrophe: aside from the fact that the ground there is mainly mud, while these explosion were previously done in solid rock, the Gulf area is chock full of methane hydrate. For those unfamiliar with the substance, it is formed from methane and water under extreme pressures, whereupon water spontaneously solidifies, and traps methane in the crystal lattice. One liter of such 'burning ice' can contain, on average, 168 liters of methane gas, which is the worst greenhouse gas. At 1,500 meters, the hydrostatic pressure is approximately 15,000 kPa, at which pressure methane hydrate starts releasing its payload at about 17°C. A nuclear bomb detonates at several thousand degrees, plus the shockwave propagating in the mud is powerful enough to (hopefully) fuse rock, more than enough to destabilize the hydrate at long ranges. If the worst case scenario comes to pass, and the nuking does trigger a release of methane from the hydrate on the floor, the entire Gulf, or at least a rather large part of it, will turn into a boiling hell-hole where ships practically fall in the water (since it loses density, it will no longer support them due to the law of Archimedes), probably along with several more platforms, any open flame might trigger the resulting fuel-air explosive into a devastating fireball over the bay which would flatten anything not already sinking, and catapult the global warming process forward several decades (admittedly, I'm a bit fuzzy on the actual amount released, so latter two may not come to pass). Even so, the fact that 80 kms from the inhabited shore of the (arguably still) greatest power of the world a nuclear weapon will be detonated is more than enough to send shivers down one's spine.

To sum it up: Nuking might save us, or might doom us, and there's a 50% chance of both. Not exactly life insurance, but right now, it's the best anyone has to offer.

I'll leave you with that thought, and the hope that if worse comes to worst, damage can still be controlled somehow, and they empty the gulf before pressing the proverbial Doomsday Button.

On Ships, Torpedoes, and Koreas

2010-05-25T11:52:00.001+02:00

North and South Korea are at it again. A South Korean ship, allegedly in poor state of repair, sinks rather close to Northern shores, but still in Southern territorial waters. The official report concludes the ship was torpedoed by a mini-sub. This can only mean one thing! Or can it...?

Baengnyeong Island is a small island only 16 km off the North Korean coast, yet 160 km from Southern territory, north of the Armistice Line, making it technically Northern territory. This, coupled with the presence of rich fishing grounds in the area, has been a source of continuous tension between the two states, resulting in frequent clashes around the island, dubbed the Crab Wars.

The corvette, Cheonan, was on a patrol mission on March 26, when an explosion occurred near the ship's stern, which resulted in the ship rapidly breaking up, and going down at 1230 UTC, with 46 sailors unaccounted for. Their bodies were later found when the hull was salvaged. What lends some credibility to the Southern claim is that the Cheonan radioed back to Fleet Command that they were under attack. The Cheonan's sister ship, the Sokcho, returned fire on an unidentified radar image, which was, however, later confirmed to have been a flock of birds.

Once the wreckage was salvaged, South Korea, the US, and Canada formed an investigation team to determine the cause of the sinking. While up to that point, Korean authorities gave conflicting reports of the cause, the joint investigative team determined that the most likely cause of the breakup was a 'bubble jet' from a proximate torpedo explosion, not a direct hit. Additionally, traces of a high explosive, RDX, were found in May.
The 'bubble jet' effect occurs when a mine or torpedo detonates without impacting the hull, resulting in a 'hole' in the water. This hole collapses rapidly from the bottom to form a column of water that can go as high as a hundred meters, and bores a hole through the ship, flooding several compartments at once, or breaking up the hull.
Also of note are the traces of RDX on the hull. RDX, or Royal Demolitions eXplosive, or Research Department (composition) X, is a British military high explosive, one of the most powerful and brisant of all high explosives currently in use, and a major component in many explosive mixtures, such as the fabled Semtex. Although household production is possible, it requires skill and courage, as, although RDX itself is very stable, intermediate products are prone to detonation at the slightest agitation.

The remnants of the specific weapon used for the attack, a CHT-02D torpedo, were recovered. The weapon is of North Korean manufacture, lending further credibility to the Cheonan's captain's testimony. US intelligence showed that, despite previous attestations that no extraordinary activity was noted, a group of small submarines with support units left port shortly before the attack.

In light of this incident, South Korea yesterday suspended nearly all trade with North Korea, and took part in a joint naval exercise with the United States in the area. According to the New York Times, this was the most serious action South Korea could take without resorting to actual military maneuvers. In response, North Korea placed its military forces on high alert, preparing for a possible invasion. Psychological warfare is also under consideration as propaganda and loudspeaker installations at the Demilitarized Zone to demoralize Northern patrols, to which the North has promised retaliation in force.
Illustrating the severity of the crisis is the fact that Ba-Ki Moon requested that the Security Council "fulfill its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, will take measures appropriate to the gravity of the situation", and take action against North Korea.

This incident may just prove to be the spark that sets the Korean Peninsula aflame. We must not forget that North Korea is an unofficial nuclear power, with all the powers and none of the responsibilities that come with the title, and a dangerously unstable dictator keeping his finger on the proverbial Button, who has not hesitated to defy international directives before, and will probably not hesitate to defy them now.

For all our sakes, let us hope that this conflict can be resolved peacefully, or at the very least, without resorting to nuclear weapons on either side.

On Google, privacy, and lawsuits

2010-05-21T08:40:00.002+02:00

Apparently, Google has done it again. During their regular photo shoot for Google StreetView, they 'accidentally' sniffed all wireless traffic they encountered, prompting a class-action lawsuit. Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous?

According to an article here, Google is to be hit with a class-action lawsuit in the US, and other lawsuits in several countries for collecting personal data. While I may not endorse sniffing the wireless traffic of others, I could say these people brought their troubles upon themselves.

Take the article's example, Vicki Van Valin: she works in the technology industry, no doubt having contact with several technicians or IT experts every day. She routinely transmits large amounts of sensitive data subject to non-disclosure agreements. Across an unsecured wireless network. I sincerely hope I'm not the only one who sees the problem here.
Other argued that via sniffing their traffic, Google has gained access to their credit card numbers and other account data. If they transmit that in the clear, over an unsecured, unencrypted connection, Google is the least of their problems by now. There is a good chance that they were using Google accounts and Google Checkout anyway, making their points moot, since Google already owns their data...

If anyone is familiar with the practice of wardriving, they know that wardrivers, in any given car, will routinely index wireless networks they pass. They do not sniff the traffic (most of the time), just the access point name, location, and security. Google did the same thing basically, only a bit more extensively. Some hapless engineer probably forgot to enable a filter, and now all hell is breaking loose.

I say give Google a breather. I have a wireless network at home, and I routinely transmit private data. But I have a 256-bit WPA2 encryption in place. Let the NSA come and weep, for they won't break that before the Universe dies. I've been walking around with my PDA set to scan for a while now. It astonishes me how many network I see with no lock icon beside it, and even with the default network name set by the router. I have to say I'm often tempted to see whether they changed the default password. I have done that with people I know, and found that I could easily access their router with the default login credentials. It's sad to see that networks go unsecured, data leaks out, and the users blame everyone but themselves, for a problem they let occur in the first place.
Also of interest is the fact that people worry about Google's privacy policy, all the while using Google products, against their supposedly better judgement. Easy solution: if you're worried about them stealing your data, don't use them.

This would be the smart move: if you're worried, leave it! Not sue them, continue using the products, over unsecured networks, then go cry when someone actually does bad things with your plaintext data.

I'll leave you to your thoughts, and hopefully securing your networks, now.

Just how secure is your car?

2010-05-19T15:34:00.002+02:00

Do you have on on-board computer in your car? Of course you do!
And is it secure? Of course it's not!
What can I do with it? Anything, of course!

Recently, a report (PDF) came to light by researchers from University of California San Diego and the University of Washington that the security on the on-board networks of cars is absolutely dismal.

While it may not look much, as it requires physical access to the vehicle, it does present some questions: notably the next time you bring your car in for its regular checkup, could someone plant a piece of code in there to take over the system in an instant? After all, all it requires is a connection to the diagnostics port in your car, and you wouldn't look twice what that tech is doing with his laptop. Guess what, he just killed you in ten minutes, by disabling the brakes with a time delay. And the code will erase itself from the ECU, so nobody will ever know.

How much longer until we start hearing that terrorist leaders or other persons the secret services of the world want dead start having mysterious traffic accidents? And how much longer until our cars become fully networked, and terrorists/crackers start to mess with them on the highway? Because then the only thing that will be needed is a simple transmitter, and a parked car on a flyover or in a roadside cafe to cause one hell of a traffic jam and chaos with a massive brake-engaging or engine-killing.

The problem with this is not what it is now, but what it can become in the future. It's not easy t pull off something like this, but with enough motivation and knowledge, it can be done very quickly. And rest assured, there are already people who have both. Method, Motive, Opportunity: they have two. How much longer until the third piece falls into place?

On the Hungarian elections

2010-05-18T19:41:00.001+02:00

Recently, Hungary held general elections for local governments and parliamentary representation, which also decided the governing party for the next four years (barring incidents). The results are somewhat surprising.

FIDESZ became the governing party, with an overwhelming majority, above the two thirds required to modify the constitution, which is worrying, to say the least. Why? During the campaigns, FIDESZ advocated quite a radical stance. They preached a thoroughly populist propaganda, blaming the previous, emergency government for the current situation, forgetting that they themselves held power for two terms before, and did nothing at all to improve the economy. They vowed to repeal all laws by the previous administration, especially those that introduced belt-tightening measures. Those acts, mind you, which dragged the country out of the pits, and set in on the road to recovery in the midst of a global financial crisis. What they are planning to do will not only deplete the national reserves in an instant, but will also undo all the recovery measures the previous administration took. But that is not the greatest of worries...

The second biggest party is Jobbik, short for Jobbik Magyarországért Mozgalom (Movement for a Better Hungary). They are obviously far-right wing, maintaining a clearly illegal militia, despite several court orders banning it. And although both parties deny it, they are clearly in allegiance with FIDESZ. This has led to them being in control of at least one important committee in the parliament, the 'committee in charge of youth, education, social affairs and housing'. The chair of this committee is a Jobbik representative, a convicted vandal and known skinhead leader, who has been photographed clashing with the police several times. They also very nearly gained the chair of the national defense committee, but the House rejected this nomination after intense debate.

What the new government does still remains to be seen, but one can only hope that FIDESZ will not undo all the progress the previous government wrought, even if it was at the expense of the populace. Sometimes, sacrifices must be made. And let this be on the record, especially by the politicians of this country, who have long ago lost our trust.