U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#2"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down."
I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't see it as being feasible. Hurricane Sandy cut out my own power for a week, and several people I know were without power for 2 weeks, and we got through it. I just don't believe that a cyber attack could damage the electrical infrastructure so badly that it would kill thousands.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#3"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
It's saying that taking the whole country off the grid would be worse than killing a thousand people.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#4"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
It's saying that taking the whole country off the grid would be worse than killing a thousand people.
And I'm saying that it's impossible to take the whole country off the grid with a cyber attack.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#5"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
Bringing Sandy grids back up depended in part on loaned electrical workers from all over the region and country.
If more regions or a large part of the country is affected, that's going to be hard or impossible.
Providers don't staff for that kind of disaster, they rely in part on each other.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#6"In an interview, Mr. Burrows noted that the audiences in China were far more accepting of the American intelligence assessments — both those predicting China’s economic ascendancy and those warning of political dangers if there was no reform of governance in Beijing — than were audiences in Russia."
Really, they project China as #1 and Russia on a major downwards trend. Astonishing that this would be the reaction.
The whole cyber-attack warning reminds me of all the Ma Bell projections of phone outages during the phreaking era :P
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#7"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
>"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could..."
Will this ever go away? Have terrorists ever pulled off a meaningful cyber attack? Why didn't the study mention the risk of those aliens from "Mars attacks" flying in and vaporizing important COLO sites?
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's saying that taking the whole country off the grid would be worse than killing a thousand people.
And I'm saying that it's impossible to take the whole country off the grid with a cyber attack.
You may be under-appreciating the interconnected nature of the power grid.
A huge swatch of the north-east US lost power for a couple days, not all that long ago, because of a tree branch. And efforts to contain the problem were hampered by an obscure bug in the management software.
If a freak accident can expose a cascade of unexpected fail-over behavior, do you really think the grid is hardened against deliberate malfeasance? Particularly when we consider that the vulnerabilities from which voltage irregularities could be created, could quite likely attack or destroy the management software itself.
Mix in the likelihood of attackers having access to several nodes on the grid at once and regional blackouts seem quite plausible.
In which case a country-wide blackout is merely a question of whether attackers could compromise enough stations across enough of America to effect several concurrent regional blackouts.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#9"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
It isn't saying damaging the electrical infrastructure would kill anyone. It seems to be saying that cutting power to a few million people for a few weeks would be more heinous than killing a few thousand, which if you will excuse me is bullshit. If we lose electricity, we'll still live on.
Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent
#10"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…
Bringing Sandy grids back up depended in part on loaned electrical workers from all over the region and country. If more regions or a large part of the country is affected, that's going to be hard or impossible. Providers don't staff for that kind of disaster, they rely in part on each other.
To be fair, Sandy-related grid repair needed loaner crews because damage was widespread. An electronic attack would only need loaner crews if they could exploit things to the point that equipment was damaged.
The more likely case is that power would be down until the stations could be disconnected, computers brought back online and the station brought back up in an orderly fashion -- not unlike the situation in 2003, where extra line crews were largely unnecessary.
Though if such an attack could cause physical damage to transmission or generation equipment, I don't think even loaner crews would help much. Downtime would likely be gated by how quickly new equipment could be made and shipped.
If they could damage notably more parts than are annually made for replacement/expansion... it could be much worse than widespread downed lines.