Feeds

Ancient vulnerability sparks world-wide hypegasm

Radio signal jamming + hint of terror threat = lots of column inches

The essential guide to IT transformation

A class of attack against radio networks documented as far back as the year 2000 has pulled worldwide headlines by being highlighted in a submission to the US government.

The submission, here, has gained notoriety all over the world, starting with Technology Review which headlined it “One simple trick could disable a city’s 4G phone network”.

The paper, to an inquiry into the use of LTE in public safety networks, outlines denial-of-service attacks. These include a technique that sends fake synchronisation signals to handsets within range (thereby stopping them from logging into the base station), or generating signals to the base station that make it assign resources to the jammer rather than “real” users.

The paper describes the Virginia Tech work, headed by Dr Jeffrey Reed, as a “work in progress”, but the idea that an entire city’s network could be disabled by a suitcase-sized jammer is, in these paranoid days, too good to resist.

Since it didn’t seem feasible that the submission existed without reference to previous research, The Register decided to seek out the background.

One thing becomes clear, very rapidly: if carriers, vendors and standards-setters are not aware of the feasibility of synchronisation attacks, they’ve been asleep at the wheel since at least the year 2000, when this paper was published. Authored by Mika Ståhlberg of Helsinki University of Technology, it focuses on the radio standards of the day, such as GSM, noting: “Jamming can be concentrated on the synchronization signal, cutting effectively the entire transmission.”

Virginia Tech’s prior publications – which probably form the basis of the submission, at least in part – include “Physical Layer Security Challenges of DSA-Enabled TD-LTE” here, and from earlier this year, “Efficient Jamming Attacks on MIMO Channels”, here and “Performance of Pilot Jamming on MIMO Channels with Imperfect Synchronization”, here.

The last two were presentations at the IEEE’s ICC 2012 conference, but seem to have escaped everybody's notice at the time. ®

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup

More from The Register

next story
Ice cream headache as black hat hacks sack Dairy Queen
I scream, you scream, we all scream 'DATA BREACH'!
Goog says patch⁵⁰ your Chrome
64-bit browser loads cat vids FIFTEEN PERCENT faster!
Chinese hackers spied on investigators of Flight MH370 - report
Classified data on flight's disappearance pinched
KER-CHING! CryptoWall ransomware scam rakes in $1 MEEELLION
Anatomy of the net's most destructive ransomware threat
NIST to sysadmins: clean up your SSH mess
Too many keys, too badly managed
Scratched PC-dispatch patch patched, hatched in batch rematch
Windows security update fixed after triggering blue screens (and screams) of death
Researchers camouflage haxxor traps with fake application traffic
Honeypots sweetened to resemble actual workloads, complete with 'secure' logins
Attack flogged through shiny-clicky social media buttons
66,000 users popped by malicious Flash fudging add-on
prev story

Whitepapers

Gartner critical capabilities for enterprise endpoint backup
Learn why inSync received the highest overall rating from Druva and is the top choice for the mobile workforce.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Consolidation: The Foundation for IT Business Transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.