The intitial investigation is in.
In a “bizarre and unprecedented” cyber-attack, hackers had remotely overridden the temperature settings on thousands of freezers, fridges and chiller cabinets pushing them from as low as -27C (-16.6F) to well over 50C (122F).
If shop managers first assumed it was an isolated failure, it soon became clear up to 700 stores – including those from the Intermarché, Coopérative U, Carrefour, Leclerc and Monoprix chains along with a number of smaller independent shops – had been victims of a cyber-attack.
The hackers had pirated the controllers supplied by the Danish company Danfoss that controls the freezers and fridges. Most supermarket cold aisles are connected to the internet to allow remote maintenance and alerts for system failures. Initial investigations suggest the hackers disabled alarm systems before tampering with the thermostats, or extended the defrost programme by several hours to avoid triggering alarms.
Danfoss said it had identified security flaws last year and had “long recommended” that customers install updates or replace obsolete unsupported systems. The affected refrigeration units were “running outdated firmware”, it said. In the days following the first wave of attacks, France’s cyber-attack alert centre ANSSI confirmed supermarkets using controllers from two other companies were also targeted.
You are right. But also, authentication in a distributed industrial infrastructure is hard, and it is not really a solved problem. You would need to set up a public key infrastructure, giving each shop clerk, service worker, and manager a smart card, revoking them when they leave, recover lost access credentials, and so on. For every class of devices.
And it gets even more difficult if you want machines to securely talk with each other (think in administering every smart home thing un your house with a smart card…).
No. Controlling and monitoring the fridge and freezer temperature is not something left to non-technical people. Set up a company-wide VPN system, and make it secure. Run those services from a centralized place, with the control systems disconnected from the internet outside the VPN.
Run separate VPNs for financial systems, orders, company emails, and you are as set as one could expect.
I agree that using a VPN is much more secure. And together with not allowing remote temperature control, this would have prevented this specific issue.
Still, if you have a VPN in a large supermarket chain, you need to manage the access keys - in a way that when one user of the VPN quits the organization, their access is revoked.
And also, it isnot a good idea that many people share passwords to devices which give administrative rights. So, you should give a unique password to every user, similar as every guest in a hotel gets an NFC card with a unique code.
The best way I know of to do that would be a PKI and smart cards. This also prevents users from using dumb passwords or using the same ones in multiple places.
But my impression is that very few organizations like supermarkets do that.
It gets even more complex with the modern rush to outsource every little thing.
Wtf would each ship clerk need access to remote monitoring of each fridge
And no, this is absolutely solved
How? According to the EU CRA, each connected device should have unique access credentials. How do you solve that in practice, in an organization like this?
Not that hard… why was this connected to internet at all? To be able to manage it remotely is a dumb excuse.
Makes sense to have them connected for remote monitoring and alarms and such, when a big freezer malfunctions you don’t have much time to save the merchandize before they are all legally unsellable. It’s too late when the morning staff finds everything thawed out. But that should be purely read-only access.
Yes, it does make sense to have them connected, but not to the internet. They should use a company intranet.