Lennokkien torjunta

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
A big rise in drone use is likely to lead to a new wave of "dronejackings" by cybercriminals, security experts warned Tuesday.

A report by Intel's McAfee Labs said hackers are expected to start targeting drones used for deliveries, law enforcement or camera crews, in addition to hobbyists.

"Drones are well on the way to becoming a major tool for shippers, law enforcement agencies, photographers, farmers, the news media, and more," said Intel Security's Bruce Snell, in the company's annual threat report.

Snell said the concept of dronejacking was demonstrated at a security conference last year, where researchers showed how someone could easily take control of a toy drone.

"Although taking over a kid's drone may seem amusing and not that big of an issue, once we look at the increase in drone usage potential problems starts to arise," he said.

The report noted that many consumer drones lack adequate security, which makes it easy for an outside hacker to take control.

Companies like Amazon and UPS are expected to use drones for package deliveries -- becoming potential targets for criminals, the report said.

"Someone looking to 'dronejack' deliveries could find a location with regular drone traffic and wait for the targets to appear," the report said.

"Once a package delivery drone is overhead, the drone could be sent to the ground, allowing the criminal to steal the package."

The researchers said criminals may also look to steal expensive photographic equipment carried by drones, to knock out surveillance cameras used by law enforcement.

Intel said it expects to see dronejacking "toolkits" traded on "dark web" marketplaces in 2017.

"Once these toolkits start making the rounds, it is just a matter of time before we see stories of hijacked drones showing up in the evening news," the report said.

Other predictions in the report included a decrease in so-called "ransomware" attacks as defenses improve, but a rise in mobile attacks that enable cyber thieves to steal bank account or credit card information.

The report also noted that cybercriminals will begin using more sophisticated artificial intelligence or "machine learning" techniques and employ fake online ads.
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Dronejacking_may_be_the_next_big_cyber_threat_999.html
 
Saa nähdä, kuinka hyvä tämä on...

Israeli company develops system capable of neutralizing hostile drones

Convexum, an Israeli company, has developed an anti-drone system that is capable of neutralizing the operator’s control of the unmanned aerial vehicle and prevent a hostile infiltration without human interaction. Just yesterday, it was reported that Palestinians illegally surveilled Israeli settlements in the West Bank, violating an IDF directive.

Drones in the air have turned into an integral part of our world. Alongside their many advantages, they present plenty of dangers. This is why the Israeli company Convexum developed an anti-drone system that is capable of taking over the drones’ frequency without human interaction, preventing a hostile infiltration into sensitive locations.

According to Convexum, the system can take over a drone frequency automatically, neutralize the operator’s control and accompany the drone until it safely lands in the field. The existing systems today can only identify infiltrations. The Israeli company said that its product can be used at sensitive locations, prisons, rallies and every place that needs to be protected.

Follow JerusalemOnline Twitter page and stay up to date with the latest news


Israeli anti-drone system Photo Credit: Convexum/Channel 2 News


Convexum was founded by Niv Magen and Gilad Sahar, both of whom are alumni of the Israeli Intelligence Corps Unit 8200. Convexum is working along with Tyco Innovation on this project. The first installations of the anti-drone system are currently being conducted in the US. According to the companies, the system should go on the market later this year.

Just yesterday, JOL News reported that members of a Palestinian organization funded by the EU recently surveilled Israeli settlements in the West Bank using a drone. The members belong to the Palestinian Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC). The drone was operating without permission, violating an IDF directive.
http://www.jerusalemonline.com/high-tech/israeli-company-develops-anti-drone-system-25707
 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
Over the past decade, Russian armed forces and Russian defense industry have made strides in developing, testing and fielding domestically produced unmanned aerial vehicles.

While lagging behind their Western and East Asian counterparts in reach, distance and strike capability, Russia nonetheless was successful in using smaller and lighter UAVs for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance purposes, both at home and in conflicts abroad.

In fact, Russian Ministry of Defense officially states that ISR remains the primary purpose for its various UAV platforms. More specifically, the war in Eastern Ukraine showcased Russia’s use of unmanned aerial systems that enhanced Russian-allied forces’ ability to more accurately target Ukrainian opposition and gain significant advantage on the battlefield.

This success was more remarkable considering that Moscow’s allies used less sophisticated UAV technology than is currently in service with Western armies, prompting careful reviews of emerging new tactics, techniques and procedures across Russian armed forces.
https://warisboring.com/so-you-want-to-take-out-a-drone-swarm-e423ff57cf4d#.nszd5oqgp

According to designers, Repellent is based on a heavy three-axle truck with a mobile control room and long telescopic mast. The mast houses electronic intelligence and jamming technologies, as well as a circular camera. This complex is supposed to detect and neutralize drones at a distance of up to 35 kilometers, an achievement that Russian considers unique, given that the closest counterpart is a British EW system capable of targeting small drones at a distance of only 2.5 kilometers.

Russian developers claim that Repellent is supposed to detect miniature drones during day and night, and in bad weather. True to Russian form, its supposed to operate even in the “most challenging Arctic conditions, at temperatures below minus 45 degrees and strong winds.”
 
Pitkään foorumia seuranneena, äskettäin liittyneenä, pistänpä tällaisen raadin ruodittavaksi. Jos aihe on jo puitu läpi, ylläpito heittänee roskiin.
Ukrainassa on puhuttu jossain uutisessa jopa 20 lennokista taistelukentän yllä vuorokaudessa. Noin massiivinen määrä valvoo kaiken 24 h. Miten meikäläisissä olosuhteissa ne poksautetaan alas?
Korkeammalla olevat isommat maalit lienee ohjusten kauraa. Alakorkeuksilla olevia voi hätyytellä ammusit:llä. Onko realistista olettaa, että itkolla tai Sergeillä osuu pieneen lennokkiin? Toisaalta olisi tärkeää saada se edes väistymään.
Meinaan, joukko ei pysty liikkumaan ollenkaan paljastumatta reaaliajassa lennokin kameroille. Perusratkaisu varmaan on pitää pää puskassa, mutta huolto nyt ainakin paljastuu vähintää, vaikka puolustuva joukko olisi kyseessä.
Toisaalta, voiko joukko itse häätää itkolla? Sehän antaa samalla vihulaiselle hyviä viitteitä joukkue/komppaniatason sijoittumisesta.
Tulee mieleen taktiikka, että jopa yksittäsiä it-aseita siroteltaisiin niin laajalle aluuelle tasaisesti, kuin missä halutaan olla rauhassa lennokeilta. Ideana se, ettei lennokki voi väistyä sivummalle, vaan on aina jonkun aseen vaikutuspiirissä.
Ukrainassa käytettiin kiivaimpaan aikaan lennokkeja kasvamassa määrin ja Syyriassa tätä toimintaa on kehitetty entisestään. Jos aiemmin ne ammuslaatikot paljasti tykistön sijainnin, niin Syyriassa on pyritty siihen että toimitaan reaaliajassa lennokin pörrätessä kohteen yllä ja tätä kautta kohdistetaan tuli-iskuja.

No, jos katsotaan taas mitä Mosulissa tapahtuu, niin Jammereilla häiritään ja pudotellaan. Varmasti osan saa alas ampumallakin, mutta ei ehkä se paras väline kaikissa olosuhteissa.
 
Jammerit ovat varmaan ihan käyttökelpoisia tavallisille kaupasta ostettaville droneille, oletuksena kun laskeutuvat yhteyksien katkettua. Vähänkään kehittyneemmät osaavat palata takaisin lähtöpaikkaan tai jatkaa ohjelmoitua reittiä. Vaihtoehtoisesti voidaan mennä kompassin mukaan kotiinpäin kunnes häirintä helpottaa. Jammerin pitäisi pystyä tukkimaan koko WLAN kaista (2.4-6GHz) ainakin, GPS häirinnästä ei haittaakaan ole. Militaaripuolella taajuuksia on toki vapaammin valittavissa, ja isommat UAV:t ovat suunta-antennilla (satelliittiin) yhteydessä, joten väliin on hieman vaikeampi päästä.

Mistä päästäänkin siihen, että tuollainen häirintälähetin on tietty helppo löytää kun lähettää jatkuvasti. Joten seuraavaksi tulee taivaalle lähteeseen hakeutuva drone. Kumpi lienee halvempi, kamikaze drone vai häirintälähetin?
 

SJ

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Mistä päästäänkin siihen, että tuollainen häirintälähetin on tietty helppo löytää kun lähettää jatkuvasti. Joten seuraavaksi tulee taivaalle lähteeseen hakeutuva drone. Kumpi lienee halvempi, kamikaze drone vai häirintälähetin?
Tuo menee jo hankalaksi, häirintälähetin tuskin on ympärilähettävä laite, vaan olettaisin että sellainen suunnataan lennokin omien signaalien perusteella oikeaan suuntaan. Tämä lisää monimutkaisuutta lähettimeen, joten se saattaa olla kalliimpi, kuin tuo kamikaze drone. Mutta nähdäkseni tuo ei ole kuitenkaan se oikea vertailukohta, kyse on enemmän siitä, että kuinka kovasti sinä haluat sen jammerin hiljaiseksi.
 
Jammerit ovat varmaan ihan käyttökelpoisia tavallisille kaupasta ostettaville droneille, oletuksena kun laskeutuvat yhteyksien katkettua. Vähänkään kehittyneemmät osaavat palata takaisin lähtöpaikkaan tai jatkaa ohjelmoitua reittiä. Vaihtoehtoisesti voidaan mennä kompassin mukaan kotiinpäin kunnes häirintä helpottaa. Jammerin pitäisi pystyä tukkimaan koko WLAN kaista (2.4-6GHz) ainakin, GPS häirinnästä ei haittaakaan ole. Militaaripuolella taajuuksia on toki vapaammin valittavissa, ja isommat UAV:t ovat suunta-antennilla (satelliittiin) yhteydessä, joten väliin on hieman vaikeampi päästä.

Mistä päästäänkin siihen, että tuollainen häirintälähetin on tietty helppo löytää kun lähettää jatkuvasti. Joten seuraavaksi tulee taivaalle lähteeseen hakeutuva drone. Kumpi lienee halvempi, kamikaze drone vai häirintälähetin?
Väittävät, että Ukrainassa lännestä saadut dronet ovat osoittautuneet yllättävän haavoittuvaisiksi venäläisten elsolle.
 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
Hacking sensors isn’t as big an area of research as hacking operating systems and firmware, but the results of simple physical hacks can be far-reaching.

In a talk at Enigma 2017 Yongdae Kim, professor in the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology’s Graduate School of Information Security, showed how active and passive sensors can be hacked by simple laser pointer or speakers set on just the right frequency.

Passive sensors, like gyroscopes and magnetometers, simply measure their environment and report back. Active sensors, like radar and sonar, send out a signal and then take measurements on the return signal. Both are hackable relatively simply.

Take, for example, the gyroscopes used in off-the-shelf drones, which use an inertial measurement unit that tracks the forces on a weight along three axes. Many materials have a resonant frequency that causes them to oscillate – think breaking a wine glass with a high note – and it’s just a matter of finding that frequency.

Kim and his team found the correct frequency for gyroscopes in seven of the 15 commercial drones they tested, including hardware from STMicro and InvenSense. These ranged between audible and inaudible sounds for humans, but all proved effective in confusing the drone and causing it to crash.

This was demonstrated on stage, where a commercial quadrocopter crashed after Kim and his assistant fired the right sound at it. While you needed to be close up for the attack to work, more distant attacks could be achieved by ramping up the power output.

There are limiting factors, he admitted. If the gyroscope housing is sturdy, this would make the hack much more difficult, and there’s a limit to how loud you can go before the attack becomes more trouble than it’s worth.

On the active side, Kim showed how an active medical sensor that dispenses drips of drugs can be hacked using a laser pointer. By shining the laser at the sensor controlling droplet flows, it loses its ability to measure the droplets of medicine flowing into the patient.

In testing, the sensor could be tricked to double the dose of drugs to the patient, or to cut the flow of medicine by 45 per cent. To make matters worse, the physical distance needed to do this is based on the laser’s power, so as long as the laser has line of sight access to the sensor, the hack could work.

Thankfully this is fairly easy to block. Kim said you could simply cover the transparent sections of the device in masking tape. But overall, he said, it was worrying how easily commonly used sensors can be hacked.

This problem is only going to get worse. Sensors are increasingly added into all manner of devices and his team is currently looking at the kinds of sensors that self-driving cars rely on to keep us safe.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/31/drones_brought_down_using_sound/
 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö


Weapons specialists at the US Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD) at China Lake, CA. have recently tested the capability of guided missile to defeat an unmanned aerial vehicle in flight. The Spike miniature, lightweight precision guided missile was used for the test performed in December 2016 at China Lake. Two of the small missiles demonstrated the capability of the Navy designed weapon to shoot down an Outlaw UAV with a single shot. In one engagement, the Spike performed with proximity fuse while the second verified contact activation with a direct hit.
http://defense-update.com/20170202_spike-cuav.html

 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
Syracuse Research Corporation, a non-profit research and development firm, has received a $65 million U.S. Army contract for an integrated counter-UAS system.

The contract was issued on an urgent basis.

Work on the counter-drone systems -- engineering, production and sustainment -- will mainly performed by SRC at a facility in New York State, with work also being performed by teammate DRS.

"We are proud to partner with the Army to provide critical technology that will defend against evolving threats like small drones," said Paul Tremont, president and chief executive officer of SRC. "This contract is a great example of the innovative solutions our employees create."

SRC said the contract, together with other recent wins, has resulted in the company hiring more than 50 engineers in central New York.

SRC anticipates continued growth in several technology areas, requiring an additional 300 employees nationwide over the next three years.

SRC's Silent Archer system uses radar and electronic warfare technology to detect and track drones and disrupt the drone operator's signals to the aircraft.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US_Army_orders_counter-drone_systems_999.html
 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
Pitkä luku ja varoitus, Wired on täynnä trackkereita. 72 löyty ensimmäisen minuutin aikana.

Imagine you’re part of a great swelling crowd, one of 60,000 people who fill up the cauldron of noise and chaos that is a sold-out football stadium. For you and everyone around you, the game is an open-air gathering place, a chance to steam and scream and worry about nothing except the other team’s menacing D. To the security officials responsible for your safety, it is a constant source of worst-case-scenario planning.

They install metal detectors; they enlist a kennel’s worth of bomb-sniffing dogs; they plant concrete pillars around the perimeter to keep out cars; they train personnel in the dark art of bag searching; they even obtain a temporary flight restriction from the FAA to keep all aircraft above 3,000 feet for a radius of 3 miles. They spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours to keep you safe, yet they know that none of it can stop a 3-pound off-the-shelf drone from flying in and dropping something on the crowd. Maybe it’s a toxic mist. Maybe it’s a bomb. Whatever it is, you’ll never see it coming, and because there is currently no legal way to bring down a drone with any accuracy or reliability, there’s nothing anyone can do but wait for it.

In the summer of 2015, Ross Lamm and Dave Romero watched just such a scenario unfold from within a skybox at a large university stadium.
https://www.wired.com/2017/02/sky-net-illegal-drone-plan/
 

ctg

Ylipäällikkö
Toinen näkökulma asiaan.

Common security flaws in mainstream robotic technologies leave them wide open to attack, infosec researched have warned.

IOActive made the admonition after evaluating the security of multiple home, business, and industrial robots. The array of vulnerabilities identified in the systems evaluated included many graded as high or critical risk, leaving the robots susceptible to cyberattack.

Hackers might be able to abuse the flaws to maliciously spy on owners via the robot’s microphone and camera, leak personal or business data, and in extreme cases, even cause "physical harm or damage to people and property in the vicinity of a hacked robot", according to IOActive.

IOActive’s white coats Cesar Cerrudo and Lucas Apa tested mobile applications, robot operating systems, firmware images, and other software over the last six months in order to identify the flaws in several robots from vendors, including SoftBank Robotics, UBTECH Robotics, ROBOTIS, Universal Robots, Rethink Robotics, and Asratec Corp.

Cerrudo explained why the two researchers had taken up the ongoing study: “Robots will soon be everywhere - from toys to personal assistants to manufacturing workers - the list is endless," he said. "Given this proliferation, focusing on cybersecurity is vital in ensuring these robots are safe and don’t present serious cyber or physical threats to the people and organisations they’re intended to serve.”

IOActive has discovered 50 cybersecurity flaws (many of them common problems) across six of the biggest robotics brands and manufacturers, including:

  • SoftBank Robotics: NAO and Pepper robots
  • UBTECH Robotics: Alpha 1S and Alpha 2 robots
  • ROBOTIS: ROBOTIS OP2 and THORMANG3 robots
  • Universal Robots: UR3, UR5, UR10 robots
  • Rethink Robotics: Baxter and Sawyer robots
  • Asratec Corp: Several robots using the affected technology
The problems identified in the home, business, and industrial robots ranged from insecure communications and authentication issues, to weak cryptography, memory corruption, and privacy problems.

A research paper published on Wednesday, Hacking Robots Before Skynet, outlines security precautions that should be taken by robotic vendors to improve the security of robots, including implementing the Secure Software Development Life Cycle methodology, encryption, security audits, and more.

All vendors included in the paper were alerted to the various specific vulnerabilities identified within their products many weeks ago in the course of responsible disclosure.

Specific technical details of the vulnerabilities identified will be released at the conclusion of the disclosure process when vendors have had adequate time to address the findings, according to IOActive.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/01/robots_security_vulns/
 
Jenkkien häirintälaite estää ISIS:n lennokki-iskut Mosulissa.

Irak
 

vlad

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Jenkkien häirintälaite estää ISIS:n lennokki-iskut Mosulissa.

Irak
Aiheesta lisää:

"U.S. forces are using modern counter drone system in Iraq

U.S. troops are using modern counter drone system in Iraq. The Anti-UAV Defence System developed by Blighter Surveillance Systems Ltd and mounted on U.S. FMTV truck was spotted outside Mosul in northern Iraq.

The AUDS (Anti-UAV Defence System) is a counter drone system that is designed to disrupt and neutralise unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) or unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) engaged in hostile airborne surveillance and potentially malicious activity. The AUDS system combines electronic-scanning radar target detection, electro-optical (EO) tracking/classification and directional RF inhibition capability.

According to the company, the AUDS is a smart-sensor and effector package capable of remotely detecting small UAVs and then tracking and classifying them before providing the option to disrupt their activity. The system may be used in remote or urban areas to prevent UAVs being used for terrorist attacks, espionage or other malicious activities against sites with critical infrastructure.


AUDS Anti-UAV Defence System
According to the group’s own media releases, ISIS carried out dozens of drone strikes already in the month of February.

ISIS has relied on a wide variety of drones to defend its stronghold in the Iraqi city of Mosul — largely “commercial off-the-shelf drones to observe and drop explosives on the Iraqi security force and civilian positions,” coalition spokesman Col. John Dorrian said in early February."

Linkki: http://defence-blog.com/army/u-s-forces-are-using-modern-counter-drone-system-in-iraq.html

vlad