Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday June 28 2017, @01:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the tried-and-tested dept.

Recently launched and not yet operational, the HMS Queen Elizabeth's computers are running Windows XP.

The ship's officers defend this, claiming that the ship is secure, but the phrasing of their comments suggests that they really don't have a clue:
"It's not the system itself, of course, that's vulnerable, it's the security that surrounds it.
So the security is vulnerable?

"I want to reassure you about Queen Elizabeth, the security around its computer system is properly protected and we don't have any vulnerability on that particular score."

Apparently, where you buy your computers makes Windows XP more secure:
"The ship is well designed and there has been a very, very stringent procurement train that has ensured we are less susceptible to cyber than most."

He added: "We are a very sanitised procurement train. I would say, compared to the NHS buying computers off the shelf, we are probably better than that. If you think more Nasa and less NHS you are probably in the right place."

Didn't they learn from recent events how even air-gapped computers can be compromised?

Also covered at The Register, The Times, and The Guardian.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:27AM (1 child)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:27AM (#532792)

    It was called stoned, and at its peak it infected 90%+ of floppy booting DOS based PCs in the mid 1980s.

    There were others, but stoned was the first I personally encountered.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by anubi on Thursday June 29 2017, @05:33AM

    by anubi (2828) on Thursday June 29 2017, @05:33AM (#532833) Journal

    I remember those days well. Never lost a machine to them though, albeit I did end up reformatting drives and restoring from backup.

    It taught me a lot of what it takes to make a robust resilient system if I was going to trust putting something like critical infrastructure under control of a machine.

    Although I feel I can construct "bulletproof" machines, there is something even harder to do... that is to get support of management. They seem to drawn to the most complex things possible, where I tend to the simplest things possible.

    They seem so drawn to impressive images instead of substance. Much like "dress codes" where a three-piece suit trumps integrity.

    Most industrial stuff I run across is quite easily controllable by an Arduino, or in some cases arduino/parallax propeller hybrids, albeit I would run a HMI to interface for presentation to management. The thing I love about these little microcontrollers is that I feel I can actually trust one not to have a backdoor where others are having more control over the machine than I do. Although the later machines are far more powerful, I see them like having workmen in my house that I cannot trust.... I know they are working for someone else who is casing the place, selling off anything he can get for his own profit.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]