News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

Do you happen to know what the impact was for CN? Would this have halted their freight trains system wide or do they have different regional control centres making this a GTA or Ontario or East Coast issue?

Their trains were stalled also. Their hottest Chicago-Toronto train, No 148, was reportedly about 8 hours late into Toronto. Others are just crawling into the terminal. VIA too - for example, 85 (not their hottest train, but whatever) delayed 4 hours.

CN's Toronto office controls from halfway to Winnipeg to somewhere around Belleville, and Windsor/Sarnia/Niagara to Toronto.

- Paul
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
Something very odd happened, and we might (probably not) be told the details. It has national security implications. Although the story we're being told is suspect ("constant reboots wouldn't work"), it does have the hallmarks, beyond poor back-up procedures, of a malicious code attack. Which begs the question, upcoming "dispatch move to Metrolinx" besides (and I don't know how that will address the system still including sharing track with CP and CN), are we wide-open to massive disruption due to such attacks?

To make it clear, I'm not claiming this was a malicious event, but it could have been, and well might be next time. The fact that CN was so flummoxed by this is indicative of susceptibility. In all deference to CN, GO and other operators, it's been mostly the airline industry displaying this weakness, time and again.

Any of you involved in business computer systems knows the basic features of back-up, both soft and hard ware.

Shid happens, you run a very valuable system? You invest a few grand to back it up. Bit of a no-brainer, or even outsource it if your budget chief is that foolishly tight. (Data in the cloud is never fully safe)
 
Last edited:
Something very odd happened, and we might (probably not) be told the details. It has national security implications. Although the story we're being told is suspect (constant reboots wouldn't work), it does have the hallmarks, beyond poor back-up procedures, of a malicious code attack. Which begs the question, upcoming "dispatch move to Metrolinx" besides (and I don't know how that will address the system still including sharing track with CP and CN), are we wide-open to massive disruption due to such attacks?

To make it clear, I'm not claiming this was a malicious event, but it could have been, and well might be next time. The fact that CN was so flummoxed by this is indicative of susceptibility.

So, in other words - go get your tin foil hat....
 
So, in other words - go get your tin foil hat....
Well Michael, feel absolutely free to produce some facts, but here's an example of how unprotected even US systems are:
Criminals have been causing much grief with ransomware, whether knocking out businesses or entire hospitals with their infections. San Francisco's transport system is the latest to suffer. This weekend, previously-known PC ransomware found its way onto computers at the Municipal Transportation Agency, hitting the city's light rail system, the Muni. The hackers reportedly demanded 100 Bitcoin, worth roughly $70,000, to release Muni machines from their control though it's unlikely they'll ever get paid as the network was back online as of this morning. [...]
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...rancisco-muni-hacked-ransomware/#55f21eea4706

Forbes is hardly...err..."tin foil". I stated that it's indeterminate at this time as to what caused CN's outage, but the *susceptibility* is the issue. There's lots more incidents documented on-line. Maybe you could work with The Donald to debase the media reporting these events?

Edit to Add: And more "tin hat" fashion, from Popular Science:
Train technology is so old it should be futureproof. The lumbering iron giants cover much of the world, carrying billions of tons of freight and billions of passengers. Since the first trains were introduced just over two centuries ago, trains have adapted to increased use, world wars, and natural disasters, and engineers have still made the mechanical beasts work. Now, security researchers in Germany have found a new foe with which trains must contend: hackers.

Many of the risks stem from new, internet-dependent automated systems. Motherboard reports:

The issues included lack of authentication protections, systems using very old operating systems, and hard-coded passwords for remote access.
There are also worrying design choices in the trains themselves, such as having entertainment devices for customers and engineering systems on the same network, meaning that accessing the former may lead to a compromise of the latter.

The flaws were exposed by German whitehat security researchers SCADA Strangelove, who have previously looked at security flaws in green energy systems and smartgrids. Their presentation, entitled “The Great Train Cyber Robbery,” was given at the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg on December 27th. It details the change from simple mechanical rail-switches (think levers thrown on tracks in old-timey movies) to more automated means. One problem is that some switches require constant access to the internet, and if that signal is lost the trains stop automatically. More embarrassing, for one of the train systems they looked at there were still default passwords associated with admin accounts, leaving access to the system wide open.

Their discoveries are detailed in a 110-slide presentation, though not in so much detail that an attacker can figure out exactly the trains to traget. In their presentation abstract, SCADA Strangelove clarifies “No vendor names and vulnerabilities details will be released, for obvious reasons.” While trains can’t be commandeered and stolen like other vehicles, there is still plenty that can go wrong if a malicious attacker takes control, with delays at a minimum and train-on-train collision as the scarier risk.

Fortunately, just because it can be done doesn’t mean it’s likely. There’s no obvious profit in delaying trains, and getting into the systems to find the vulnerabilities is a time-intensive process.

Which is to say: man-machines in electric cafes will still need to do some kraftwerk in computer world to figure out how to turn radio activity into trans-europe distress. Then, and only then, does it make more sense to take the autobahn.

[Motherboard]
http://www.popsci.com/european-trains-vulnerable-to-hacking
 
Last edited:
This has nothing to do with backup power.

The RTCII system - the software and hardware that CN uses to dispatch and monitor their rail network - failed outright. CN is not sure why. They couldn't even get the control shifted to any of their other locations, which the system is supposed to do automatically. They have backup generators which would have worked fine had the power gone out.

This is literally a once-in-a-billion situation.

Backup systems are great but the only way to truly test them is to randomly pull a plug. This takes more courage than most organizations have: Imagine the PR nightmare if the test fails, and everything grinds to a halt because of something you did on purpose?
 
Well Michael, feel absolutely free to produce some facts, but here's an example of how unprotected even US systems are:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...rancisco-muni-hacked-ransomware/#55f21eea4706

Forbes is hardly...err..."tin foil". I stated that it's indeterminate at this time as to what caused CN's outage, but the *susceptibility* is the issue. There's lots more incidents documented on-line. Maybe you could work with The Donald to debase the media reporting these events?

Edit to Add: And more "tin hat" fashion, from Popular Science:

http://www.popsci.com/european-trains-vulnerable-to-hacking

I am not saying that the system cannot be hacked. I know that most systems, if run on a computer that is connected to the internet can be hacked. I am saying that the system they control has built in physical fail safe devices. For example, when a train looses contact with home, and they come to a light out, they stop and wait.

Power plants run on computer systems that could be hacked. But, you have a physical on off switch that bypasses any computer control.

So, my comment was more to the ones that have the "the sky is falling" mentality.
 
I am not saying that the system cannot be hacked. I know that most systems, if run on a computer that is connected to the internet can be hacked. I am saying that the system they control has built in physical fail safe devices. For example, when a train looses contact with home, and they come to a light out, they stop and wait.

Power plants run on computer systems that could be hacked. But, you have a physical on off switch that bypasses any computer control.

So, my comment was more to the ones that have the "the sky is falling" mentality.

In fact, what failed was simply the office "console" that the Rail Traffic Controllers use to set up routes for each train. The console communicates with, but is standalone to, the field signalling and the interlockings. The field system did not fail, it simply stopped receiving new commands from the RTC's. Trains that had routings already lined continued to see green signals until they reached the end of whatever section of their route had been set. Safety was not affected. The system can be controlled locally to some degree, also.

I'm told that the cold startup of this particular system, even under benign conditions, is "painful". You have the added complication in a railway application that at the moment of failure, any number of maintainers or rail machinery may have held authority to be on the rails in any number of locations. You can't just boot up and start sending trains onwards, until you are certain that you have accounted for all the previous authorities and that everyone is clear of the track.

While the ML and CN workers that I bump elbows with all said it was quite a trying day, the actual time elapsed until the system was restored was only a few hours. It was a serious failure, but not really out of line with crashes in other industries or technologies. I'm not folding any tinfoil hats.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
I know that most systems, if run on a computer that is connected to the internet can be hacked.
Many, but if they take appropriate protective steps, most are virtually immune save for purported back-doors, but I won't delve on that one. Most hackers aren't that good, save for professionals working with government or surreptitious agencies.

The case in point here is CN, and their demonstrated susceptibility.

I am saying that the system they control has built in physical fail safe devices.
Now you're completely contradicting yourself. "Failsafe" in what respect? Seconds, minutes, hours, days? Most back-ups are post events to failure. (Some, like those that control aircraft and nuclear reactors, as just two illustrations, kick in within a micro-second, so the operator doesn't even know a glitch happened until being informed by a read-out)

For example, when a train looses contact with home, and they come to a light out, they stop and wait.
Errr....exactly. That's what happened, other than direct radio dispatch override which one presumes was the case. Care to explain how what happened is an acceptable "Failsafe"?

Power plants run on computer systems that could be hacked. But, you have a physical on off switch that bypasses any computer control.
Really? Fascinating. I design and build electronic devices and components. I'm only computer savvy by association, like a book printer is to a library system, but I can completely debase your rationale on that:
upload_2017-2-25_16-49-2.png
https://www.sans.org/reading-room/w...ulnerability-power-grid-electronic-attack-606

Here's something more up to date:
http://energypost.eu/vulnerability-electric-utility-system-cyber-attacks/

The author of above:
Allan Hoffman, former Senior Analyst in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), writes a regular blog: Thoughts of a Lapsed Physicist.

On Energy Post, we regularly publish posts from Allan’s blog, which often deal with issues at the intersection of energy technology, policy and markets. Allan, who holds a Ph.D. in physics from Brown University, served as Staff Scientist with the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and in a variety of senior management positions at the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and the DOE. He is a Fellow of the American Physical Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-2-25_16-49-2.png
    upload_2017-2-25_16-49-2.png
    76.4 KB · Views: 247
  • upload_2017-2-25_17-2-21.png
    upload_2017-2-25_17-2-21.png
    165.7 KB · Views: 271
Last edited:
Many, but if they take appropriate protective steps, most are virtually immune save for purported back-doors, but I won't delve on that one. Most hackers aren't that good, save for professionals working with government or surreptitious agencies.

The case in point here is CN, and their demonstrated susceptibility.

Now you're completely contradicting yourself. "Failsafe" in what respect? Seconds, minutes, hours, days? Most back-ups are post events to failure.

Errr....exactly. That's what happened, other than direct radio dispatch override which one presumes was the case. Care to explain how what happened is an acceptable "Failsafe"?

Really? Fascinating. I design and build electronic devices and components. I'm only computer savvy by association, like a book printer is to a library system, but I can completely debase your rationale on that:
https://www.sans.org/reading-room/w...ulnerability-power-grid-electronic-attack-606

That's as far as I need to make that point, there's reems on-line of systems that have already gone down due to hacking.

I have worked at a power plant that I could be at home and start up or shut down the plant. This was done by a internet connection. If that connection goes down, and it has, there is a computer system at the plant I could access. If that goes down, and it has, I can physically push a button that will start up and shut down the plant.

It might surprise you how much is now done with computers and how much the internet is part of our world. It is not just funny cat pictures anymore.
 
I have worked at a power plant that I could be at home and start up or shut down the plant. This was done by a internet connection. If that connection goes down, and it has, there is a computer system at the plant I could access. If that goes down, and it has, I can physically push a button that will start up and shut down the plant.

It might surprise you how much is now done with computers and how much the internet is part of our world. It is not just funny cat pictures anymore.
Uh huh...
 

Back
Top