Hackers can infect network-connected wrenches to install ransomware | Researchers identify 23 vulnerabilities, some of which can exploited with no authentication::Researchers identify 23 vulnerabilities, some of which can exploited with no authentication.
You must log in or register to comment.
Removed by mod
I’m assuming it’s a torque wrench, which can apply variable force to a bolt.
Scan a barcode next to the hole, insert bolt, wrench applies correct force for the piece.
They can also similarly check the tightness of the bolt and record what it measured for quality control.Every bolt doesn’t use the same torque, and manually inputting the value is slower and more error prone.
Similarly, checking the torque and recording that it was correct and fixing any errors is slower and more error prone with manual lookup.Scan a barcode next to the hole, insert bolt, wrench applies correct force for the piece.
The why not just have the barcode have all of that information encoded in it and not reference a database on a network?
My understanding is that it’s more for logging in industries like aerospace, where it’s imperative to be sure that bolt X was tightened with force Y if you don’t want the airplane to fall apart. Networking isn’t the only way to do this, or even the only automated way, but I guess they didn’t want to have to hook each wrench up to a USB cable at the end of every shift to download its log.
(The comments section on Ars is studded with remarks about Boeing, as you would expect.)
Because in event of a product change all wrenches can be updated immediately via network with all new codes and torques instead of someone having to go through each tool and upload new specs or swap memory cards manually.
It may not make much sense to us, but for a manufacturer it saves time and reduces the number of bodies needed to do the tech work. That’s $.
Not an industrial process engineer, so I can’t tell you all the possible reasons, but in general it works out well to assume that people have a reason for why they do stuff, and doubly that you probably can’t do someone’s job better than them with 10 minutes of thinking.
My initial guess would be that you want the system to record “yes, I tightened these bolts”, and then you want that record to have a matching “I inspected these bolts and they were correct” follow-up entry.
My next thought would be what you do if the sticker falls off. In the sticker only solution, you have to look up the part, and then enter the parameters into the tool. In the networked system, you look up the part and then the system programs the tool. Automatic is going to be faster and have less errors. Both of those improve product quality and save money, through time, not having to fix error, or having to dispose of parts that were made incorrectly and can’t be salvaged.The existence of a vulnerability is very different from the exploitation of that vulnerability.
You fix the vulnerability, but you don’t need to worry too much when a prerequisite is that the attacker has already gained a privileged position in the system.This is “oof” not “oh shit”.
I am that kind of engineer and yep that’s why I’d use them. And yeah the hacker that has your wrench probably has your assembly line and server too.
But of a slippery slope. What else do we need to encode?
A barcode doesn’t have enough bits to be unique and also contain useful information. It’s just a unique identifier that can be used to look up a wide variety of information.
For bolts, it could be metal grade, thread pitch, load ratings, manufacturer info etc
Also, say Boeing discovered that the doors were flying off their airplanes because the specified torque was too low for the bolts. If the barcode contained the torque, the barcodes would all have to be replaced. If the barcodes point to a database entry that contains the correct torque, you can update the DB and the wrenches will get the new value when they look it up.
Having said that, this should definitely be an air-gapped system. There’s no need for the wrenches to be able to talk to Bing or OnlyFans. It shouldn’t just be behind a firewall, because, again, it’s not like the wrenches only need to access someof the Internet, they really never need the Internet, just the local network.
I’m not a network engineer, but my guess is that a good network engineer could design a network that makes it really unlikely that a wrench ever exchanges packets with the real Internet. For example, design a flat network and use a very small TTL so that even if somehow the Internet is connected to the network the wrenches live on, the packets expire before they leave the local network.
If you can’t isolate and protect the network you’re using, you’re just asking for trouble, because that means that every single piece of industrial equipment with a TCP/IP stack is properly patched and hardened against the latest vulnerabilities.
For critical bolts you want a record in a database. See Boeing’s panel scandal for the need for that. Could be a local-only database though
Based on the product details it is. It’s not an Internet connected tool.
For efficiency and quality of service. If you have to tighten a hundreds of fasteners with specific amounts of torque then this would make the work go much more quicker than using a manual torque wrench.
That does not require an internet connection.
Network connection isn’t the same as Internet connection.
It’s to avoid the worker needing to manually input the torque for each bolt, and it can also be used to record the torque as part of inspection.
You’re right, something like what I described wouldn’t necessarily need networking to work like that. However, think if you had to manage 100 or more of these devices for people in an assembly plant. Deploying new torque specs to all of the workers’ tools wirelessly would be much faster than having them bring them in individually after each batch job had been completed.
I have no earthly idea, but feels like “‘Cuz we can”.
For firmware updates I guess (/s)
Because nobody funds hardware if they can’t get MRR.
This really isn’t shocking news. Tons of industrial devices have poor or out of date security. This is why you always segment off your Operational Technology on your network.
Why is the wrench in space?
Your wrenches aren’t in space?
Just let him cook
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Researchers have unearthed nearly two dozen vulnerabilities that could allow hackers to sabotage or disable a popular line of network-connected wrenches that factories around the world use to assemble sensitive instruments and devices.
The vulnerabilities, reported Tuesday by researchers from security firm Nozomi, reside in the Bosch Rexroth Handheld Nutrunner NXA015S-36V-B.
The cordless device, which wirelessly connects to the local network of organizations that use it, allows engineers to tighten bolts and other mechanical fastenings to precise torque levels that are critical for safety and reliability.
The Nutrunner provides a torque-level indicator display that’s backed by a certification from the Association of German Engineers and adopted by the automotive industry in 1999.
The malware could then be used to disable entire fleets of the devices or to cause them to tighten fastenings too loosely or tightly while the display continues to indicate the critical settings are still properly in place.
The vulnerabilities found on the Bosch Rexroth NXA015S-36V-B allow an unauthenticated attacker who is able to send network packets to the target device to obtain remote execution of arbitrary code (RCE) with root privileges, completely compromising it.
The original article contains 344 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 46%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Removed by mod
