Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/technology/ntu-researchers-discovery-lidar-sensor-autnomous-vehicles-10569472
(Updated: )
‘Would you expect to be able to prevent all crime in all cases?’: Why experts say cyberattacks are inevitable
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/cyberattacks-cybersecurity-singhealth-protection-prevention-10568850
(Updated: )
Ricky Lim
An extrapolation of this notion that it is impossible that "no cyberattacks will occur" --- wonder why driverless cars are using network in their navigation on the road?
Understand that driverless car need to :-
(1) Use radar, computer vision, deep learning, laser, noise sensors, light sensors, GPS, Google Maps etc to be mounted in the car to perform as "ear and eyes" of the car.
(2) But there is also a need to be supported by 5G wireless network - presumably to access the road information of traffic lights, buildings, congestion, roadworks, blockage etc from the back-end Data Centre to perform online real-time information processing of AI neural networks.
It sounds like is a military concept of :-
- drones, fighter planes, tanks, combat soldiers, intelliegence agencies, signal comms, satellite etc - all feeding back information to the military command centre via datalink to process online, realtime information to make combat decisions.
Having say so, decision on whether National Intranet or National Local Internet to support the driverless car operations will be required -- acting like datalink and military command centre.
And the concept of IoT-VRT and Internet-IoT-VRF &/or VPN-IPsec pilot testing and sandbox pilot will still be relevant.
Understand that driverless car need to :-
(1) Use radar, computer vision, deep learning, laser, noise sensors, light sensors, GPS, Google Maps etc to be mounted in the car to perform as "ear and eyes" of the car.
(2) But there is also a need to be supported by 5G wireless network - presumably to access the road information of traffic lights, buildings, congestion, roadworks, blockage etc from the back-end Data Centre to perform online real-time information processing of AI neural networks.
It sounds like is a military concept of :-
- drones, fighter planes, tanks, combat soldiers, intelliegence agencies, signal comms, satellite etc - all feeding back information to the military command centre via datalink to process online, realtime information to make combat decisions.
Having say so, decision on whether National Intranet or National Local Internet to support the driverless car operations will be required -- acting like datalink and military command centre.
And the concept of IoT-VRT and Internet-IoT-VRF &/or VPN-IPsec pilot testing and sandbox pilot will still be relevant.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Having say so, the dicussion on the cyber security threat on such network used by IoT driverless cars are also valid and should be factor into the driverless cars masterplan as part of the Smart Nation initiatives :-
Posted on :- 27 Jul 2018
Ricky Lim
Huh?? These are autonomous vehicles, they not expected to be network tethered and especially not to the internet.
Imagine someone in Afghanistan being able to access and potentially hack into these driverless cars?
----
For IoT sensors and devices implementation --- there will be 2 sides of the coin.
Should IoT devices be on Internet or National Intranet?
It depends.
If IoT devices are public infrastructure - then it is possible to ride on the National Intranet --- where dedicated Telecom networks (such as MPLS VPN) can be specifically dedicated to the IoT devices.
I believe IoT devices of such could be :-
- CCTV security surveillance cameras used by the Police
- maybe IoT sensors mounted on lighting street lamp for survey of climatic conditions, car traffic flow, human traffic flow, road blockage etc.
- water sensors to detect flooding.
- rail sensors to monitor rail fault.
- etc etc
For non-public IoT devices -- not sure should it be hosted in National Intranet or should it be Internet.
--- not sure should private driverless car be in Internet or National Intranet?
--- not sure should private drones be in Internet or National Intranet?
--- not sure should be commercial home IoT like fridge, TV, air-con control etc etc be in Internet or National Intranet?
----- reasons being, if these private IoTs meant for consumer consumption are mounted into public infrastructure CII (Intranet) such as IoT-VRF --- it may not be securely protected and can be compromised by botnets or malware - and can mount attacks into National Intranet that host public and Government Infrastructure.
---- so policy decision makers will have to ponder and consider all these in the Smart Nation IT policies.
--
As of now, all these IoT thingy are in a pilot phase - still testing - still in sandbox (even if detonate) - it is still in a control environment.
But can take the above comments into consideration --- when deploying IoT enmass --- come the days when IoT are ready for deployment to support the Smart Nation initiatives.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
If it deem that private or commercial IoTs such as driverless cars, commercial drones, home appliances etc are to be too dangerous to be hosted in National Intranet, then it will need to be hosted in the Internet with "special protection" - so that they will not be hack by international hackers - take control of driverless cars, drones, home appliances and cause accidents or havoc.
Then how to host commercial or private IoTs in Internet with "special protection"?
(1) All Telecom ISPs who offer Internet services for this private or commercial IoTs must take part.
(2) All Telecom ISPs will have to :-
(a) Carve out a Internet-VRF-IoT - and allow VRF routing by Internet routers.
(b) Tunnel VPN-IPsec to Internet-VRF-IoT (optional - as this is additional security, additional cost, and also need to pilot, test and sandbox whether the commercial or private IoTs can tolerate the double encrypted tunnel into the private tunnel - in terms of latency, delay and response time).
Most important
****(c) Block international internet access from these Internet-VRF-IoT - by Internet routers (very tedious job) or using Firewall ACLs or Proxies.
This will ensure that international hackers cannot receive any data transmitted by these commercial or private IoTs to the hacker servers.
At the same time, international hackers cannot take control of the commercial or private IoTs or load malware into the IoTs to launch attack on the internal network.
Local internet IoT providers can make use of local internet to support their IoT projects without the needs to create another nationwide network - save cost.
Local users can also can get access to or control or manage the private and commerical IoTs - via the local internet - using their smartphone mobile apps, laptop, notebooks, tablets, workstation, desktops etc.
With the above private tunnel &/or encrypted tunnel, firewall, proxies etc - security is assured -- and if inside job want to hack the private and commercial IoTs --- hackers will have to be very skilful and can be caught easily --- because Telecom ISPs will have logged all local access and can pinpoint local hackers.
Like · Reply · 1m
Posted on :- 27 Jul 2018
Ricky Lim
Huh?? These are autonomous vehicles, they not expected to be network tethered and especially not to the internet.
Imagine someone in Afghanistan being able to access and potentially hack into these driverless cars?
----
For IoT sensors and devices implementation --- there will be 2 sides of the coin.
Should IoT devices be on Internet or National Intranet?
It depends.
If IoT devices are public infrastructure - then it is possible to ride on the National Intranet --- where dedicated Telecom networks (such as MPLS VPN) can be specifically dedicated to the IoT devices.
I believe IoT devices of such could be :-
- CCTV security surveillance cameras used by the Police
- maybe IoT sensors mounted on lighting street lamp for survey of climatic conditions, car traffic flow, human traffic flow, road blockage etc.
- water sensors to detect flooding.
- rail sensors to monitor rail fault.
- etc etc
For non-public IoT devices -- not sure should it be hosted in National Intranet or should it be Internet.
--- not sure should private driverless car be in Internet or National Intranet?
--- not sure should private drones be in Internet or National Intranet?
--- not sure should be commercial home IoT like fridge, TV, air-con control etc etc be in Internet or National Intranet?
----- reasons being, if these private IoTs meant for consumer consumption are mounted into public infrastructure CII (Intranet) such as IoT-VRF --- it may not be securely protected and can be compromised by botnets or malware - and can mount attacks into National Intranet that host public and Government Infrastructure.
---- so policy decision makers will have to ponder and consider all these in the Smart Nation IT policies.
--
As of now, all these IoT thingy are in a pilot phase - still testing - still in sandbox (even if detonate) - it is still in a control environment.
But can take the above comments into consideration --- when deploying IoT enmass --- come the days when IoT are ready for deployment to support the Smart Nation initiatives.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
If it deem that private or commercial IoTs such as driverless cars, commercial drones, home appliances etc are to be too dangerous to be hosted in National Intranet, then it will need to be hosted in the Internet with "special protection" - so that they will not be hack by international hackers - take control of driverless cars, drones, home appliances and cause accidents or havoc.
Then how to host commercial or private IoTs in Internet with "special protection"?
(1) All Telecom ISPs who offer Internet services for this private or commercial IoTs must take part.
(2) All Telecom ISPs will have to :-
(a) Carve out a Internet-VRF-IoT - and allow VRF routing by Internet routers.
(b) Tunnel VPN-IPsec to Internet-VRF-IoT (optional - as this is additional security, additional cost, and also need to pilot, test and sandbox whether the commercial or private IoTs can tolerate the double encrypted tunnel into the private tunnel - in terms of latency, delay and response time).
Most important
****(c) Block international internet access from these Internet-VRF-IoT - by Internet routers (very tedious job) or using Firewall ACLs or Proxies.
This will ensure that international hackers cannot receive any data transmitted by these commercial or private IoTs to the hacker servers.
At the same time, international hackers cannot take control of the commercial or private IoTs or load malware into the IoTs to launch attack on the internal network.
Local internet IoT providers can make use of local internet to support their IoT projects without the needs to create another nationwide network - save cost.
Local users can also can get access to or control or manage the private and commerical IoTs - via the local internet - using their smartphone mobile apps, laptop, notebooks, tablets, workstation, desktops etc.
With the above private tunnel &/or encrypted tunnel, firewall, proxies etc - security is assured -- and if inside job want to hack the private and commercial IoTs --- hackers will have to be very skilful and can be caught easily --- because Telecom ISPs will have logged all local access and can pinpoint local hackers.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Goo Hiong Gwee
Ricky Lim IOT is in its infancy , ill defined and may just go the way of ISDN. Autonomous cars are NOT IOTs in whatever form. One does not mount sensor on AC for the sake of making them available. In any case, one must never make the controls of AC available via internet. In the case of tunnelling etc, they only make the channel safe. Password stealing trojan will break them if either side is available to internet. Man in the middle is only one form of attack. Public emails with trojans attached and websites with trojans will break security sooner or later. One way to be detached from internet.
Like · Reply · 2h
Ricky Lim
Goo Hiong Gwee -
(1) I have very little knowledge about driverless car nor am I involved in driverless car sandbox trial or pilot.
I only based on this author's narrative "Similarly, in our desire to implement driverless cars, it would be prohibitively expensive to institute a separate network for them and still expect them to function effectively."
(2) I feel a bit strange why driverless cars need to access network - because a car (whether driverless or not) should be locally controlled by those inside the car.
Once in a network, whether hackers with bad intent or even good guys with good intent (may misconfigure or mis-remotely managed) - without knowing the road condition - causing the driverless car to crash or cause an accident.
What is worst is that hackers or trojan may - remotely take control over the driverless car - and perform terror attack by crashing it into a crowd.
I agreed that trojan can be implanted - as long as they are in Internet - as all sorts of malicious software is floating around in the Internet - even if in local internet - as they not controlled or subject to security screening.
Similarly, trojan can also be implanted - even when they are in Intranet - if device security is not foolproof or virus signature is not updated or if face with zero day attack with unknown virus signature - when some users introduced a trojan into the intranet causing problem to the driverless car. However, malicious virus infection through Intranet are very much remote as compared to the Internet due to higher security screening and security updates.
As for driverless car sensors, I thought they are needed for the car to travel on the road and navigate through obstacles such as GPS, thermal sensors, motion sensor, sound sensors, radar, 5G wireless, sonar etc?
These sensors that work like the "eyes and ears" of the cars - even if locally fixed onto the driverless cars to navigate the roads ---- will also be subjected to hacking attacks - as 5G wireless, GPS etc - can also be remotely attack when near its vicinity - eg. hackers hiding on the road or nearby building to take control of the driverless car wirelessly.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim IOT is in its infancy , ill defined and may just go the way of ISDN. Autonomous cars are NOT IOTs in whatever form. One does not mount sensor on AC for the sake of making them available. In any case, one must never make the controls of AC available via internet. In the case of tunnelling etc, they only make the channel safe. Password stealing trojan will break them if either side is available to internet. Man in the middle is only one form of attack. Public emails with trojans attached and websites with trojans will break security sooner or later. One way to be detached from internet.
Like · Reply · 2h
Ricky Lim
Goo Hiong Gwee -
(1) I have very little knowledge about driverless car nor am I involved in driverless car sandbox trial or pilot.
I only based on this author's narrative "Similarly, in our desire to implement driverless cars, it would be prohibitively expensive to institute a separate network for them and still expect them to function effectively."
(2) I feel a bit strange why driverless cars need to access network - because a car (whether driverless or not) should be locally controlled by those inside the car.
Once in a network, whether hackers with bad intent or even good guys with good intent (may misconfigure or mis-remotely managed) - without knowing the road condition - causing the driverless car to crash or cause an accident.
What is worst is that hackers or trojan may - remotely take control over the driverless car - and perform terror attack by crashing it into a crowd.
I agreed that trojan can be implanted - as long as they are in Internet - as all sorts of malicious software is floating around in the Internet - even if in local internet - as they not controlled or subject to security screening.
Similarly, trojan can also be implanted - even when they are in Intranet - if device security is not foolproof or virus signature is not updated or if face with zero day attack with unknown virus signature - when some users introduced a trojan into the intranet causing problem to the driverless car. However, malicious virus infection through Intranet are very much remote as compared to the Internet due to higher security screening and security updates.
As for driverless car sensors, I thought they are needed for the car to travel on the road and navigate through obstacles such as GPS, thermal sensors, motion sensor, sound sensors, radar, 5G wireless, sonar etc?
These sensors that work like the "eyes and ears" of the cars - even if locally fixed onto the driverless cars to navigate the roads ---- will also be subjected to hacking attacks - as 5G wireless, GPS etc - can also be remotely attack when near its vicinity - eg. hackers hiding on the road or nearby building to take control of the driverless car wirelessly.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
No comments:
Post a Comment