Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet • Hacker News Board

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#151

Post by pcottle » Fri, Oct 07, 2011, 11:57 PM UTC

javert wrote: post #100

pcottle wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No modern UAV has hardware capable of running an entire Windows installation. Think of arduino boards; those things can control huge robotics systems and they are very simple (and thus simple to debug). If you're designing a robot from the ground-up, why would you scale all the way to Windows? No one is going to be playing minesweeper inside the plane

No modern UAV has hardware capable of running an entire Windows installation. I highly, highly doubt that you're right about this. If you happen to be right, you won't be for long. It might be that nobody wants to run Windows , but there is clear motivation, as well as hardware and software technology, to have a full-scale OS on an advanced UAV.

The google car is an exception where there is a lot of sophisticated software. UAV's like Boeing's and even the ones you buy online (with the open source software) are running on boards, not full-scale PC's with the ability to play a DVD.

UAVs are very complicated in terms of technology and engineering, but the hardware is simple because it's basically just running control loops on some board.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#152

Post by ams6110 » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:02 AM UTC

Pyrodogg wrote: post #57

Vivtek wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there was that case maybe ten years ago of the nuclear carrier that had to be towed back to port after a BSoD killed it dead in the water; its control systems all ran Windows.

> On 21 September 1997, while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing a divide by zero error in the ship's Remote Data Base Manager which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_(CG-48)#Smart_ship... Wow. Reading more of the wiki article (and linked sou…

So the problem was actually the data validation logic in the application, allowing invalid data to get into the database (and why no constraint on the database field?) coupled with no exception handling on a division operation (always a red flag). None of that has anything to do with Windows, really, but it's an easy cheap shot to take.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#153

Post by Radix » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:17 AM UTC

Steko wrote: post #59

JonnieCache wrote: post #11

Like hugh says, this doesn't add up at all. “We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back,” says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. “We think it’s benign. But we just don’t know.” C'mon. You're the military. "It just keeps coming back?" So you decide to do a press release about it? Please. I wouldn't have whined like that when I was de-malwareing neigh…

US hacks other countries war machines with targeted virus: brilliant! Other countries hack US war machines with targeted virus: man, I couldda stopped that shit easy.

This is consistent. The assumption is that defense will be top notch. Therefore attacking is hard and defending is, if not easy, solved.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#154

Post by daeken » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:21 AM UTC

VladRussian wrote: post #112

iopuy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guarantee UAV's are not running XP or Windows 2000. The government has heard of things called RTOS.

>I guarantee UAV's are not running XP or Windows 2000. The government has heard of things called RTOS. Of course. There is Windows NT for _that_ : http://www.theragens.com/misc/MR%20-%20Windows%20NT%20Real-T...

Soft real-time systems aren't used for things like drones. Look at things like INTEGRITY from Green Hills for that sort of task: http://www.ghs.com/customers/bae_herti.html

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#155

Post by sc00ter » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:28 AM UTC

teej wrote: post #89

Bud wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how I can be any more clear here: If they are not smart enough to keep malware off of what should be the most secure systems around, perhaps they shouldn't be building the fricking FLYING REMOTE-CONTROL DEATH MACHINES for a while, until they can figure out the basics. Capisce, guys?

I am totally with you. If software is going to operate deadly weapons, it sure as hell better be secure. But you are glossing over a LOT of detail here. The military doesn't work like Apple: they don't design, oversee, or directly control the construction of the hardware they use. And they shouldn't - the government is woefully inefficient at building products, that's what corporations are good at. Here's the situati…

"You can't just slap Norton on these things and call it a day"

No, you can't - you have to slap Symantec Critical System Protection on them. /Then/ you can call it a day.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#156

Post by lucasjung » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:39 AM UTC

ArbitraryLimits wrote: post #138

iopuy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guarantee UAV's are not running XP or Windows 2000. The government has heard of things called RTOS.

The UAV itself will have a computer running a commercial RTOS. The computer on the ground which the operator sits and and uses to interact with the UAV is almost certainly a Windows box. And as someone else said, the military's way of securing Windows machines like those has traditionally been not to hook them up to a network in the first place, instead of installing anti-virus software. That actually worked really w…

USB flash drives are banned DOD-wide. Most DOD computers are setup up to not even mount them when they are plugged in.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#157

Post by lucasjung » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:44 AM UTC

VladRussian wrote: post #117

teej wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am totally with you. If software is going to operate deadly weapons, it sure as hell better be secure. But you are glossing over a LOT of detail here. The military doesn't work like Apple: they don't design, oversee, or directly control the construction of the hardware they use. And they shouldn't - the government is woefully inefficient at building products, that's what corporations are good at. Here's the situati…

>The military doesn't work like Apple: they don't design, oversee, or directly control the construction of the hardware they use. they are just wined and dined by the contractor when they should be directly overseeing and controlling. >And they shouldn't - the government is woefully inefficient at building products, that's what corporations are good at. Starting at some architectural level, many DoD systems is a just…

>they are just wined and dined by the contractor when they should be directly overseeing and controlling.

There are actually very strict controls on how much government personnel are allowed to accept from contractors. IIRC, the limit is something like $20-$50 per year in gifts. When contractors host large events with catered lunches, they put out bowls or some other sort of receptacle so that government personnel can pay for their lunch, otherwise it would count towards that annual limit.

Enforcement at the level of "you didn't pay for that six-inch sub and can of coke" is not really practical, but quite a few government personnel have gone to jail in recent memory for accepting more lavish gifts from contractors.

Now, if you send your lobbyists to buy expensive meals for legislators (you know, the ones who actually decide how the money gets spent) and write them big checks, that's generally perfectly legal.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#158

Post by rdl » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:44 AM UTC

vogonj wrote: post #147

rdl wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People do this for kiosks (unattended, public use) all the time. It's a good solution for some things. It's easier to enforce a security policy on well-managed PCs which turn off various ports in software (AND DISABLE AUTORUN!), vs. trying to physically disable them, but DoD also had people go around and epoxy USB ports, or at the very least put foil seals on them. There are problems with this, like the usb cd-rom to…

(AND DISABLE AUTORUN!) on the topic of disabling autorun, there was a patch earlier this year to disable autorun on non-shiny media by default in XP and Vista (it's already turned off in 7.) http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/archive/2011/06/14/autorun-a... infections by autorun-abusing malware families dropped by over 60% as everything got patched, and total infection rate dropped by almost half.

Never underestimate the power of defaults.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#159

Post by alanh » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 1:57 AM UTC

roc wrote: post #42

civilian wrote: post #28

Okay! Here's what the sysadmins should be doing: Each GCS should be recording the identity & timestamp of each removable drive that is attached to it. Then we'll have a graph of all the connections between the machines. If any GCSes aren't infected (or if we have any information about which machines first showed evidence of the virus) then we might be able to trace out the path of infection. Hopefully it'll lead to p…

Or they could just fill all the usb ports with glue and remove the optical disk drives, if any. I thought the whole point of an air gap network is that nothing crosses the gap. Having those ports/devices available is just asking for it.

But how will they update Windows & DOD-specific software if they are not connected to the Internet … oh, right, okay, a server on the "air gapped" network that does still have USB.

Re: Computer virus hits US Predator and Reaper drone fleet

#160

Post by angstrom » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 2:09 AM UTC

CWuestefeld wrote: post #64

falcolas wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a leak, not an official comment. The official comment about the incident from the story is: “We generally do not discuss specific vulnerabilities, threats, or responses to our computer networks, since that helps people looking to exploit or attack our systems to refine their approach,” says Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis, a spokesman for Air Combat Command, which oversees the drones and all other Air Force tactical aircr…

Perhaps. But in modern politics, diplomacy, etc., intentional strategic "leaks" are a common practice, for many reasons.

And considering how kindly they looked on some of the mundane stuff revealed by wiki leaks debacle...I'd definitely assume this intentional.