Power station and electricity grid operators around the world are on alert to a new type of computer virus capable of attacking critical industrial process equipment.
Iran’s state news agency reported on 26 September that the bug, known as Stuxnet, had infected computers at the country’s Bushehr nuclear power plant. The Iranian government is said to have denied the report.
But information security experts say the threat is real and sightings of the Stuxnet worm have been reported across Europe and around the world.
According to Stephen Wolthusen, a researcher in the Information Security Group at Royal Holloway, University of London, Stuxnet is different to viruses that attack normal PCs. This is the first kind of malware that can infiltrate the system that controls industrial equipment such as sensors, actuators, pumps and valves.
The system, which is called a programmable logic controller (PLC), runs supervisory control and data-acquisition software (SCADA).Such computerised control systems are the backbone to industrial automation.
If these systems are compromised, Wolthusen said there could be a variety of worst-case scenarios ranging from power plants switching off to explosions in the oil and gas industry.
‘It’s very easy to come up with some kind of doomsday scenario,’ he said. ‘So far we’ve just been incredibly lucky.’
Wolthusen said Europe’s ageing nuclear power plants will be mostly resilient to the digital virus because most safety-critical components are run on analogue technology.
It is believed that the virus made its way into the Iranian nuclear plant via a USB stick. Wolthusen said the Stuxnet authors designed the virus to exploit vulnerabilities in Microsoft Windows to give remote hackers the ability to introduce malicious code into a popular PLC manufactured by Siemens.
It is only a matter of time before a technology designed to manufacture atomic bombs results in an event so hideous it is beyond our comprehension – we’ve had enough warnings, so why do we push our luck when renewables are cheaper and safer. Clive Burke – Energy Security Campaigner with ten years served in to power industry
Clive Clive Clive,
I can’t believe you are still pushing your anti-nuke drivel after all these years. I bet you still believe that Solar is cheaper than nuclear based on that article in the NY Times don’t you?
“It is only a matter of time before a technology designed to manufacture atomic bombs results in an event so hideous it is beyond our comprehension”
Interesting you use that statement since I bet you can’t comprehend nuclear power well enough to think of anything bad that could actually happen in a US plant.
Alas it does seem that the pro nuke or anti wind commentators cannot ever say something sensible without degenerating down to cheap/patronizing insults. STUXNET is yet another reason why we need to steer well clear of atomic fission. NO technology is reliable enough to be entrusted to safely maintain atomic fission – accidents WILL happen, how many mishaps do we need before we move away from this ghastly form of power once and for all. Even if solar was 20 times the price, it would be worth it over nuclear, fortunately it isn’t, wind is cheapest in the long run as the turbines once built don’t require any fuel. I’m very fortunate to live just three miles away from an experimental fusion reactor – this is the atomic power we should be pushing for, not wasting our money on inflexible fission plants that can’t respond to the requirements of the grid, therefore requiring constant ‘spinning reserves’ to make up the shortfall between peak and base load. Atomic power is a boondoggle pushed by big business for their own benefit. If wind turbines and solar panels could produce atomic bombs as a byproduct, we’d have all the renewable energy we could ever possibly want already in place. Clive Energy Security Campaigner with ten years served in the UK power industry.
Given the enormous expense we are about to incur to create safe storage for all the nuclear waste we’ve created over the last 60 years, as well as the huge cost in creating nuclear power plants, I fail to see how anyone can still think that nuclear power is cheap, or a solution to energy shortages! The long lead times on nuclear power plant construction rules them out as a quick fix, any planning applications will meet lengthy planning objections and appeals, and the costs are unthinkable in the current economic climate.
We need to start thinking about reducing our energy consumption, and that means designing better, more efficient products.
Most domestic appliances (of which there are billions sold in the UK) are poorly designed re. energy efficiency; rather they are built to a cheap price.
The EU needs to bring in tougher legislation to weed out inefficient designs on all products. Whilst this might push up the purchase price of goods, it would reduce the lifetime cost of running them, and reduce our power generation requirements.
The real problem is that we’ve lived with cheaply available energy for so long, we’ve got used to it and don’t think about it. Sadly, this is about to end!