Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossihas publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implementhis latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information wecan deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt clusterE-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADAsystem to do the command and control function to keep his creation inline. Theterm SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refersto a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrialinfrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread outover large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation).Most localized control actions are performed automatically by RemoteTerminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s.These are computer boards which are controlled by a low levelmicrocomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a fullduplex bus structure to communicate with a master controlstation(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus networkand provides a graphical user interface to depict the operationalparameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availabilityapplication, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. Thecost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command andControl(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost ofRossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out ofprofile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customerswill want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factorywide SCADA CC system. In myopinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment onthis reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog basedcontrol system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is modern to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossihas publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implementhis latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information wecan deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt clusterE-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADAsystem to do the command and control function to keep his creation inline. Theterm SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refersto a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrialinfrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread outover large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation).Most localized control actions are performed automatically by RemoteTerminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s.These are computer boards which are controlled by a low levelmicrocomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a fullduplex bus structure to communicate with a master controlstation(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus networkand provides a graphical user interface to depict the operationalparameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availabilityapplication, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. Thecost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command andControl(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost ofRossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out ofprofile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customerswill want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factorywide SCADA CC system. In myopinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment onthis reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog basedcontrol system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? This is what a PLC is. It is a few analog to digital converters, a microprocessor, a PROM, a bus comm controller, and a power supply. It cost about $800. There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. This is what a SCADA system is.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is *modern* to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
You can build a controller for much less than $800 per ECAT. I would expect that function to cost more like $50, which is on the high side. He uses the word computer if I recall correctly and that suggests something more complicated than a completed PLC. Since a microprocessor is sometimes referred to as a computer, I think that is what he is describing. Perhaps I read you wrong about how he should be concerned about SCATA systems. I got the impression that you thought that he was planning to control numerous 100 Megawatt systems from a central location. But he is only dealing with one at the moment. One can easily be controlled without having to worry about the Russians. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? This is what a PLC is. It is a few analog to digital converters, a microprocessor, a PROM, a bus comm controller, and a power supply. It cost about $800. There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. This is what a SCADA system is.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is modern to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossihas publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implementhis latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information wecan deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt clusterE-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADAsystem to do the command and control function to keep his creation inline. Theterm SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refersto a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrialinfrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread outover large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation).Most localized control actions are performed automatically by RemoteTerminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s.These are computer boards which are controlled by a low levelmicrocomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a fullduplex bus structure to communicate with a master controlstation(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus networkand provides a graphical user interface to depict the operationalparameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availabilityapplication, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Details, details, details, the costs are all in the details. The communication problems between the PLC and the PLS multiplexer (RTU) requires a complicated communication protocol, and data buffering in both the PLC and the RTU. The main control station can fail. this requires data storage during reboot. The bottom line is that the SCADA system is complicated and requires a lot of code. Coding is expensive, ask any programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
IF Rossi is developing his home grown command and control system, we won't see the E-Cat cluster reactor released for another 10 years. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is *modern* to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
I am a programmer. The cost depends upon the requirements that must be met. Each ECAT should be easy to control once it is understood since the input complexity appears very small. Controlling the complete system is more complex, but I do not think that we are looking at a major effort such as a modern operating system would require. A couple of good programmers should be able to make the first pass in a few months. I suspect that you are worried about an issue that is simple to handle. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Details, details, details, the costs are all in the details. The communication problems between the PLC and the PLS multiplexer (RTU) requires a complicated communication protocol, and data buffering in both the PLC and the RTU. The main control station can fail. this requires data storage during reboot. The bottom line is that the SCADA system is complicated and requires a lot of code. Coding is expensive, ask any programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Then there is the ghosted real time PC based master control system to consider. Have you ever worked on a PC based real-time graphic interface controlling 100 remote computer? If you can custom code that up in a few months, you are more than a good programmer, you are a GOD programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am a programmer. The cost depends upon the requirements that must be met. Each ECAT should be easy to control once it is understood since the input complexity appears very small. Controlling the complete system is more complex, but I do not think that we are looking at a major effort such as a modern operating system would require. A couple of good programmers should be able to make the first pass in a few months. I suspect that you are worried about an issue that is simple to handle. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Details, details, details, the costs are all in the details. The communication problems between the PLC and the PLS multiplexer (RTU) requires a complicated communication protocol, and data buffering in both the PLC and the RTU. The main control station can fail. this requires data storage during reboot. The bottom line is that the SCADA system is complicated and requires a lot of code. Coding is expensive, ask any programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(CC) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA CC system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, when
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Surely you are kidding. Have you written processor code before? I have written control systems for numerous radios that are more complex than an ECAT. You only have a couple of inputs to handle for an ECAT and the only outputs appear to be drive for the power heating system and monitoring processes. The communications link to the main controller should be straight forward as well. I would class the control system for a 100 Megawatt ECAT system as relatively simple provided someone figures out how to handle stability and so forth. Those functions can be determined by making the proper measurements of an operating device over environmental and time extremes. Throw in a DSP capable processor if you want to be fancy. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells IF Rossi is developing his home grown command and control system, we won't see the E-Cat cluster reactor released for another 10 years. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is modern to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossihas publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Who is going to design the hardware for the custom PLC and the RTU, and the custom bus interface cards inside the ghosted duel PCs? Will you do that during lunch? On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:57 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Surely you are kidding. Have you written processor code before? I have written control systems for numerous radios that are more complex than an ECAT. You only have a couple of inputs to handle for an ECAT and the only outputs appear to be drive for the power heating system and monitoring processes. The communications link to the main controller should be straight forward as well. I would class the control system for a 100 Megawatt ECAT system as relatively simple provided someone figures out how to handle stability and so forth. Those functions can be determined by making the proper measurements of an operating device over environmental and time extremes. Throw in a DSP capable processor if you want to be fancy. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells IF Rossi is developing his home grown command and control system, we won't see the E-Cat cluster reactor released for another 10 years. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is *modern* to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations. The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Axil--Give up! Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 2:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
OK On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil--Give up! Bob - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, December 09, 2014 2:04 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
I have personally designed PC GUI interfaces to my own radio controllers that are built into the radio system. The real question you should ask is how much independence can each of the ECAT controllers be? A good design would have the major control processes distributed and thereby limit the amount of control required by the more complex central system controller. If I were Rossi, I would make each ECAT processor intelligent enough to perform every function required to keep it operating smoothly. I would design in the fail safe mechanisms to each as well as the ability to take itself offline when a fault occurs. With that degree of independence you would only have to handle status communications at the main hub. Of course, a command structure would need to be generated. Lets not get lost in complexity by assuming that a task is impossible before a proper plan is worked out. My bet is that Rossi only has 3 or so programmers working on his 100 Megawatt system. A first pass control system should take 6 months or less once the requirements are established. A conservative person might wish to integrate purchased control sections into the design, but that should not be necessary. One day soon we will see how Rossi and company approached the control requirements and I suspect you will be surprised. Why design a car when a bike is all you need? Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Then there is the ghosted real time PC based master control system to consider. Have you ever worked on a PC based real-time graphic interface controlling 100 remote computer? If you can custom code that up in a few months, you are more than a good programmer, you are a GOD programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am a programmer. The cost depends upon the requirements that must be met. Each ECAT should be easy to control once it is understood since the input complexity appears very small. Controlling the complete system is more complex, but I do not think that we are looking at a major effort such as a modern operating system would require. A couple of good programmers should be able to make the first pass in a few months. I suspect that you are worried about an issue that is simple to handle. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Details, details, details, the costs are all in the details. The communication problems between the PLC and the PLS multiplexer (RTU) requires a complicated communication protocol, and data buffering in both the PLC and the RTU. The main control station can fail. this requires data storage during reboot. The bottom line is that the SCADA system is complicated and requires a lot of code. Coding is expensive, ask any programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Why do you think that one guy has to do all the design work? The PLC can be for the second generation where cost is focused upon. The first passes should be done with easier to program flash processors. As you say, details, details, etc. The main point is that it is a joke to think that this design will take 100 man years. Rossi most likely already has a first pass control system that he is in the process of debugging as we write. If he is smart, which I know that he is, he is putting plenty of intelligence into each individual ECAT controller (100 computers) so that later they can be operated in stand alone conditions. At least one of his software guys is likely working on some form of GUI that uses a standard operating system to save time. That guy is concentrating upon a command structure to interface with the individual ECATs by perhaps a serial driver. Of course other engineers, etc. are laying out the hardware for the ECAT PCBs and coming up with an acceptable package for them. I would expect the first pass process to take no more than 6 months to achieve a prototype. They can not afford to take much longer if they wish to win the race for a final product. After the first systems are debugged and operating well enough it will be time to pursue the cost savings that you imply for the final system. At that time, each controller should cost no more than $50 once they establish a high rate of production. In time, that cost will appear excessive. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 5:03 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Who is going to design the hardware for the custom PLC and the RTU, and the custom bus interface cards inside the ghosted duel PCs? Will you do that during lunch? On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:57 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Surely you are kidding. Have you written processor code before? I have written control systems for numerous radios that are more complex than an ECAT. You only have a couple of inputs to handle for an ECAT and the only outputs appear to be drive for the power heating system and monitoring processes. The communications link to the main controller should be straight forward as well. I would class the control system for a 100 Megawatt ECAT system as relatively simple provided someone figures out how to handle stability and so forth. Those functions can be determined by making the proper measurements of an operating device over environmental and time extremes. Throw in a DSP capable processor if you want to be fancy. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells IF Rossi is developing his home grown command and control system, we won't see the E-Cat cluster reactor released for another 10 years. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is modern to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
We have beat this horse enough. I agree it is time to consider other issues. ;-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells OK On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil--Give up! Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 2:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
When a vender designs a computerize automation control system, the vender will be required to meet many industry standard specs to plug and play with other equipment in the factory setting. If a vender supports many of these interface specs, he has an advantage in the market place over vendors who only provides a proprietary solution. Here is a list of some of these specs required in the automation marketplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automation_protocols On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:51 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: We have beat this horse enough. I agree it is time to consider other issues. ;-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells OK On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil--Give up! Bob - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, December 09, 2014 2:04 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells
Dave, As a programmer, it is a requirement to meet all interface specs in the market that you are coding for. Just finding out what specs are required to conform with is a pain in the neck. It is easy to do your own thing but this is seldom acceptable in the marketplace. On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: When a vender designs a computerize automation control system, the vender will be required to meet many industry standard specs to plug and play with other equipment in the factory setting. If a vender supports many of these interface specs, he has an advantage in the market place over vendors who only provides a proprietary solution. Here is a list of some of these specs required in the automation marketplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automation_protocols On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:51 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: We have beat this horse enough. I agree it is time to consider other issues. ;-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells OK On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil--Give up! Bob - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, December 09, 2014 2:04 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells This is not true Axil. Something this simple begs to have its own carefully constructed controller.There is an embedded design industry that makes its living by handling these types of systems. And, you have given them another reason to go that way due to your concerns. Perhaps the Iranians should have considered an alternate path? :-) Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. Any home grown systems development in this day and age is crazy. Not even the Iranians were crazy enough to go it alone. It takes at least ten years to design, code and debug such a system. We are talking 100 man years of work here, if everything goes perfectly which never happens.
