morboComplete Your Transaction join:2002-01-22 00000 |
morbo
Member
2012-Nov-14 6:49 pm
How is this different than regular cell phone jamming?I know that cell phone jammers are common in Europe, but this sounds like it is more a horrible flaw in LTE. Yet another reason to get the Nexus 4? |
|
kaila join:2000-10-11 Lincolnshire, IL |
kaila
Member
2012-Nov-14 7:24 pm
I'm not sure that it is any different, except that LTE has some weak links within the spec (the article mentions control instructions that are a crucial part of LTE transmissions). Because of LTE's weak points the article seems to infer that it wouldn't take as much power, or require a less sophisticated jammer, to disrupt a tower or towers running LTE compared to a 3G or 2G network. |
|
|
to morbo
I doubt there is any effective way of guarding against such attacks.
LTE and newer wireless standards are focusing on speed per MHz of spectrum per watt since spectrum costs a fortune per MHz at government auctions. Optimizing in that direction cuts into SNR margins and noise tolerance. LTE can cope with normal noise spikes using forward error correction but deliberate jamming, either brute-force or interactive, can knock out almost any narrow-band network.
If you want a rugged wireless connection, you have to use wider channels, spread-spectrum modulation and lower symbol loading. Unfortunately, all of these significantly reduce efficiency and speed. |
|
|
to kaila
Sounds like typical SCADA engineering practices. Just enough engineering to get it to do what they want under ideal circumstances... |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK |
to InvalidError
It also suggests that moving infrastructure like traffic signaling or emergency responders onto LTE exclusively is a very bad idea. |
|
|
said by KrK:It also suggests that moving infrastructure like traffic signaling or emergency responders onto LTE exclusively is a very bad idea. The MIT guys just happened to find a particular jamming sequence that was unusually effective. Other researchers will probably revisit other networks and find similar kryptonite for them. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
|
KrK
Premium Member
2012-Nov-14 10:26 pm
Certain Infrastructure should always be hardwired.
It only brings up the same point again that wireless from a security standpoint is a risk. It may be easier and cheaper to control your traffic networks (or other networks) wirelessly... but that sets you up for the system to be compromised or jammed. |
|
|
Security-wise, wireless can be as secure as wired when properly encrypted. Critical wired infrastructure still needs to be adequately encrypted to prevent people from tapping into the wire and hijacking control. For jamming, no miracle there... but unless you want to put a 1000km wire spool in every vehicle, hard-wiring them would not be practical |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
moonpuppy (banned)
Member
2012-Nov-15 8:33 am
said by InvalidError:Security-wise, wireless can be as secure as wired when properly encrypted. Critical wired infrastructure still needs to be adequately encrypted to prevent people from tapping into the wire and hijacking control.
For jamming, no miracle there... but unless you want to put a 1000km wire spool in every vehicle, hard-wiring them would not be practical Who cares how secure it is because when you jam the signal, it still doesn't work. And I bet you could get a few hundred people running around with jammers in their vehicles. Think New York City and its fleet of cabs. Quite a few foreigners driving them and just enough of them with a grudge against the US could mean a very bad day for NYC. |
|
|
said by moonpuppy:Who cares how secure it is because when you jam the signal, it still doesn't work. Most signaling infrastructure is autonomous and only needs communication to change its programming and report BIST or other results. If the communication is jammed, this is a non-issue but if it gets hacked, it can be a much worse issue so security is more important than jamming there. Since it is not practical to wire moving vehicles, those have no choice but to use some form of wireless just like they have always been, not much of a change there. If LTE is jammed, they just have to fall back on their CB radios and punch things down by hand. If CB radio is jammed as well, they are no better/worse off than without LTE. |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
moonpuppy (banned)
Member
2012-Nov-15 10:54 am
said by InvalidError:Most signaling infrastructure is autonomous and only needs communication to change its programming and report BIST or other results. If the communication is jammed, this is a non-issue but if it gets hacked, it can be a much worse issue so security is more important than jamming there.
Since it is not practical to wire moving vehicles, those have no choice but to use some form of wireless just like they have always been, not much of a change there. If LTE is jammed, they just have to fall back on their CB radios and punch things down by hand. If CB radio is jammed as well, they are no better/worse off than without LTE. Wrong, if you disrupt enough nodes, the communication system will start failing and data will move very slowly through less and less nodes creating choke points. And how many people still use CB? Even if people had them, their range is minimal and with a bunch of people going nuts, that will become useless in minutes. |
|
|
KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
Kearnstd
Premium Member
2012-Nov-15 1:45 pm
not to mention those choked nodes could go down just from load itself. Going to guess even enterprise class routers have a fail point |
|
|
to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy:And how many people still use CB? Just about every emergency response service (police, firefighters and ambulances) still does rely on CB for dispatching and reporting. I doubt governments will ditch spectrum reserved for emergency services any time soon. |
|
CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picture Premium Member join:2011-08-11 NYC |
CB is a particular public radio band... public safety doesn't use it. They monitor it in some localities for emergencies but they don't use it for communications. You are thinking simply of 2-way radios. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK |
to InvalidError
You can encrypt it, yes... but it still can be jammed. |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:Just about every emergency response service (police, firefighters and ambulances) still does rely on CB for dispatching and reporting. I doubt governments will ditch spectrum reserved for emergency services any time soon. Not even close. As explained, CB is a public use band. And ask NYPD and NYFD how their systems worked on 9/11 when they lost the WTC complex. Most of their fancy digital communications were rendered useless in a matter of a couple of hours. |
|