Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #89521 > unrolled thread

LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-03 20:50 -0400
    Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-04 07:10 +0000
      Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-04 10:44 +0200
        Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-04 17:53 +0000
          Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-05 02:47 -0400
            Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 20:26 +0000
      Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-04 11:14 +0100
        Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-04 18:07 +0000
          Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-05 02:55 -0400
            Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-05 11:42 +0100
            Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 14:09 +0000
              Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-05 18:42 +0100
                Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-08-05 20:19 +0000
                  Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 22:38 +0000
                    Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-06 12:45 +0100
                  Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-06 12:19 +0100
                Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 22:36 +0000
                  Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-06 12:37 +0100
                Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-06 02:19 -0400
              Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-06 02:18 -0400
              Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-06 14:22 +0200
          Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-05 11:40 +0100
            Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 20:39 +0000
              Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-06 12:35 +0100
      Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-05 00:58 -0400
        Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 06:14 +0000
          Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-05 03:52 -0400
            Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-05 14:07 +0000
          Re: LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-05 11:46 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#89521 — LOTS of US Water Plants Hit by Hacks

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/7-states-water-cyberattacks-fbi/

They identified the threat to “programmable logic controllers,”
or PLCs, in water systems and urged infrastructure owners to
remove publicly exposed PLCs from the internet.

Michael McAandrews, a former special agent with the FBI’s
cyberteam, told NewsNation that these attacks are common and
can occur on a massive scale, with bad actors exploiting parts
of our critical infrastructure tied to the internet, possibly
with simple, default passwords.

“What happens is, the attackers will scan the internet, and they’ll
look for the signature of known devices. When they find one, they
simply try the default password. If it hasn’t been changed, then
they’re in. When it comes to operational technology and things
like PLCs, a lot of these passwords are coded by the manufacturers,
and if they’re exposed to the internet, that signature comes back,
the attackers immediately try it, and if they can get in, they’ll
get in and see what they can do,” he said.

McAndrews said there were no ransom demands, so it appears the
attacks were trying to stoke fear.

. . .

   PLCs ... or the software used to diddle with them ?

   Fair GUESS, we're looking at a bunch of entities that
   were all sold the SAME control software. Find a way to
   crack one and you can crack 'em all.

   Note :

https://openautomationsoftware.com/knowledge-base/how-to-view-allenbradley-web-browser/

https://industrialmonitordirect.com/blogs/knowledgebase/displaying-plc-data-on-a-website-solutions-and-architectures

   though not claiming either corp was involved here.

   This was originally declared to be IRANIAN hacks, but
   no supporting info. Iran does do cyber-war (and the
   USA did cyberwar on Iran, most notably penetrating
   the Siemens industrial process controller used on all
   their uranium centrifuges - wrecking them). The odd
   localization of water plants hit says "local actor"
   more than "Iran".

   The actual attackers - could be anyone. Mere 'anarchists'
   or maybe some 12-year-old whose Daddy does IT work for
   such facilities and got a glimpse of the manual.

   Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't
   actually hack them directly. They're basically a
   replacement for a box of relays or equivs. Software
   PLCs - a uC or even better - are more "computers",
   oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make
   a fair software PLC. A low-end PI even better.

   But 'computers' CAN be hacked.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#89538

On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 20:50:24 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't actually hack
>    them directly. They're basically a replacement for a box of relays or
>    equivs. Software PLCs - a uC or even better - are more "computers",
>    oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make a fair software
>    PLC. A low-end PI even better.

https://www.realpars.com/blog/plc-hardware

What's a hardware PLC? It amazed me to find that they still use the ladder 
logic metaphor. I thought that was a temporary crutch when they started 
showing up in the '70s.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89542

On 2026-08-04 09:10, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 20:50:24 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't actually hack
>>     them directly. They're basically a replacement for a box of relays or
>>     equivs. Software PLCs - a uC or even better - are more "computers",
>>     oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make a fair software
>>     PLC. A low-end PI even better.
> 
> https://www.realpars.com/blog/plc-hardware
> 
> What's a hardware PLC? It amazed me to find that they still use the ladder
> logic metaphor. I thought that was a temporary crutch when they started
> showing up in the '70s.
> 

I did a training course on them on 2002 and they certainly taught me 
ladder language (can be changed to text something). Coming from standard 
digital electronics, it is very weird on start, but then you grasp the 
idea and it is very useful.

It would not surprise me that they can be connected "somehow" to the LAN 
so that you can adjust parameters. Think of traffic lights, the city 
control room adjusts the timings according to hour or actual traffic 
conditions. Or they can obtain data which you want to save on computers.

If you connect them to the LAN, you can naively connect them to 
Internet. Saves moving your arse.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89558

On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 10:44:03 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:


> I did a training course on them on 2002 and they certainly taught me
> ladder language (can be changed to text something). Coming from standard
> digital electronics, it is very weird on start, but then you grasp the
> idea and it is very useful.

When I started out I worked with physical relay logic. There were large 
NEMA 12 cabinets filled with octal relays, 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4_uSYorMQk

A timer required a 3 1/4" hole in the panel to mount it, enter the 
Greenlee hydraulic hole punch. The schematic on the drawing board was a 
ladder diagram. Debugging, so to speak, was done with a roll of 16 gauge 
MW wire, strippers, and a screwdriver.

I never worked with PLCs and went directly to MCUs programmed either in 
assembler or FORTH. Despite its drawbacks FORTH is really useful for 
creating a domain specific 'language'. 

However industrial electricians had worked with relay logic for years, 
were familiar with the schematics, and were adept at trouble shooting. I 
thought the ladder interface was to ease them into the brave new world but 
it seems to have stuck. In it's way it was the original no-code IDE where 
you drag boxes around and connect them with no idea of what code is being 
generated. 

> 
> It would not surprise me that they can be connected "somehow" to the LAN
> so that you can adjust parameters. Think of traffic lights, the city
> control room adjusts the timings according to hour or actual traffic
> conditions. Or they can obtain data which you want to save on computers.

I doubt very much they are air gapped. A Mossad agent may have destroyed 
the Iranian centrifuges with a thumb drive but no way are people sneaking 
into multiple water plants.

There is a huge body of apocalyptic literature but those scenarios are 
fiction, aren't they?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89578

On 8/4/26 13:53, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 10:44:03 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> 
> 
>> I did a training course on them on 2002 and they certainly taught me
>> ladder language (can be changed to text something). Coming from standard
>> digital electronics, it is very weird on start, but then you grasp the
>> idea and it is very useful.

   I hate traditional "ladder" - just
   doesn't grok very well. DO kinda
   Get It, but ......

   Anything I do from now on will be
   uC/mP based. Even using Python the
   challenge is a VERY low bar now and
   easy to document.

> When I started out I worked with physical relay logic. There were large
> NEMA 12 cabinets filled with octal relays,
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4_uSYorMQk


   Heh - DO remember those. Even MADE versions,
   albeit for often simpler needs. DO like the
   clicky-click of the relays though. Logic
   you can literally HEAR !  :-)


> A timer required a 3 1/4" hole in the panel to mount it, enter the
> Greenlee hydraulic hole punch. The schematic on the drawing board was a
> ladder diagram. Debugging, so to speak, was done with a roll of 16 gauge
> MW wire, strippers, and a screwdriver.
> 
> I never worked with PLCs and went directly to MCUs programmed either in
> assembler or FORTH. Despite its drawbacks FORTH is really useful for
> creating a domain specific 'language'.

   FORTH can be very useful and simple. You can
   run it on a fairly low-end microcontroller.

   It's almost Gone Away these days - a mistake.
   Damned 'academics' always over-complicate ...

   Have a married-in relative, astronomer. He
   is WELL versed in using FORTH to control
   instruments. It's maybe all we have in common,
   but it's something.

   ALWAYS install a version of FORTH on every
   platform I use. Haven't used it lately, but
   it's THERE if I want it.

   Odd compilers - look into "TCC" - a very
   nice tiny 'C' compiler. CodeBlocks
   understands it. Small/simple/fast code.

> However industrial electricians had worked with relay logic for years,
> were familiar with the schematics, and were adept at trouble shooting. I
> thought the ladder interface was to ease them into the brave new world but
> it seems to have stuck. In it's way it was the original no-code IDE where
> you drag boxes around and connect them with no idea of what code is being
> generated.

   Relay logic isn't THAT transparent. If it's
   really SIMPLE then yes ... but not when it
   get really detailed. The common 'ladder'
   diagrams - I find them NOT informative,
   a poor rep of what's going on IMHO.

   These days ... I'll use uC/computer logic
   for controlling complex processes. No,
   using Python or whatever is NOT too hard.
   Joe Electrician may not get it, but the
   equiv of a giant box of relays is NO
   better. DONE those ...

   Tutorials on-line always tell you about very
   SIMPLE cases. It's not always like that.

>> It would not surprise me that they can be connected "somehow" to the LAN
>> so that you can adjust parameters. Think of traffic lights, the city
>> control room adjusts the timings according to hour or actual traffic
>> conditions. Or they can obtain data which you want to save on computers.
> 
> I doubt very much they are air gapped. A Mossad agent may have destroyed
> the Iranian centrifuges with a thumb drive but no way are people sneaking
> into multiple water plants.
> 
> There is a huge body of apocalyptic literature but those scenarios are
> fiction, aren't they?

   Ummm ... maybe NOT so much 'fiction' anymore ...

   What can we DO about that, if anything ......

   This is kind of an 'existential' issue now.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89613

On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:47:27 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>  Have a married-in relative, astronomer. He
>    is WELL versed in using FORTH to control instruments. It's maybe all
>    we have in common, but it's something.

One of the big wins for FORTH was Kitt Peak. A person I worked with who 
had moved on to UA astronomy department tried to recruit me. They have 
other sites on Graham, Bigelow, and others including Kitt. I'd spent 
several winters in Why, AZ, which is west of Kitt just after you leave the 
Rez but didn't want to be a year round AZ resident. Nice place to visit. 
At least UA is in Tucson, which is semi-bearable.

>    Relay logic isn't THAT transparent. If it's really SIMPLE then yes
>    ... but not when it get really detailed. The common 'ladder' diagrams
>    - I find them NOT informative,
>    a poor rep of what's going on IMHO.

In 1971 the 8080 and other MPUs were a dream on the drawing board. 
Industrial applications were all about relay logic. Solid state slowly 
advanced but the first steps were shaky. An industrial forklift charging 
station or a motor controller starting a 50 HP induction motor tend to put 
some nasty spikes on the plant wiring. With 120 VAC relays nobody 
noticed. 

Logic is logic. If you can do ladder diagrams you can do TTL. You can also 
do  if 
(a && b)
{
     activate_solenoid();
}

It's all the same. 


>> There is a huge body of apocalyptic literature but those scenarios are
>> fiction, aren't they?
> 
>    Ummm ... maybe NOT so much 'fiction' anymore ...
> 
>    What can we DO about that, if anything ......
> 
>    This is kind of an 'existential' issue now.

Not to get into the pros and cons but covid proved how easy it is to 
generate a huge cluster fuck. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89546

On 04/08/2026 08:10, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 20:50:24 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't actually hack
>>     them directly. They're basically a replacement for a box of relays or
>>     equivs. Software PLCs - a uC or even better - are more "computers",
>>     oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make a fair software
>>     PLC. A low-end PI even better.
> 
> https://www.realpars.com/blog/plc-hardware
> 
> What's a hardware PLC? It amazed me to find that they still use the ladder
> logic metaphor. I thought that was a temporary crutch when they started
> showing up in the '70s.
> 
I would assume its a chip with inputs , outputs, containing a 
programmable state table

So a state machine in silly con.

-- 
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in 
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in 
someone else's pocket.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89559

On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 11:14:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 04/08/2026 08:10, rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 20:50:24 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>> 
>>>     Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't actually hack
>>>     them directly. They're basically a replacement for a box of relays
>>>     or equivs. Software PLCs - a uC or even better - are more
>>>     "computers", oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make a
>>>     fair software PLC. A low-end PI even better.
>> 
>> https://www.realpars.com/blog/plc-hardware
>> 
>> What's a hardware PLC? It amazed me to find that they still use the
>> ladder logic metaphor. I thought that was a temporary crutch when they
>> started showing up in the '70s.
>> 
> I would assume its a chip with inputs , outputs, containing a
> programmable state table
> 
> So a state machine in silly con.

Relay logic always was very much a state machine. When the moving part 
hits the limit switch, transition to the next state.

https://www.plctalk.net/forums/threads/eagle-signal-mta330a6-05-what-kind-
of-plc-or-control-is-this.129042/

Steppers made it very obvious. An input, be it a timer, limit switch, or 
pushbutton, would advance the drum one step. The solenoid had a very large 
lead counterbalance that made a pleasing 'thunk'. No question about a 
state change. Nubs on the cams determined which outputs were live for 
every step.

The earlier Eagle Signal steppers required breaking out a tab on the cam 
with needle nose pliers. Revising the programming required disassembling 
the whole thing to replace the cam. Later some genius redesigned the cams 
with removable nibs that snapped on the cam.

In the '70s the company I worked for built the controllers used for the 
sequenced airport landing lights (rabbit). The FAA, being rather slow 
moving, specified steppers with the wiring harness being laced rather than 
using those new fangled nylon TyWraps.  Fortunately the girls, excuse me, 
female electronics technicians, were skilled in macrame.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89579

On 8/4/26 14:07, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 11:14:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> On 04/08/2026 08:10, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 20:50:24 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>>
>>>>      Anyway, hardware PLCs are pretty stupid - you don't actually hack
>>>>      them directly. They're basically a replacement for a box of relays
>>>>      or equivs. Software PLCs - a uC or even better - are more
>>>>      "computers", oft net-connected these days. An Ard Uno would make a
>>>>      fair software PLC. A low-end PI even better.
>>>
>>> https://www.realpars.com/blog/plc-hardware
>>>
>>> What's a hardware PLC? It amazed me to find that they still use the
>>> ladder logic metaphor. I thought that was a temporary crutch when they
>>> started showing up in the '70s.
>>>
>> I would assume its a chip with inputs , outputs, containing a
>> programmable state table
>>
>> So a state machine in silly con.
> 
> Relay logic always was very much a state machine. When the moving part
> hits the limit switch, transition to the next state.
> 
> https://www.plctalk.net/forums/threads/eagle-signal-mta330a6-05-what-kind-
> of-plc-or-control-is-this.129042/
> 
> Steppers made it very obvious. An input, be it a timer, limit switch, or
> pushbutton, would advance the drum one step. The solenoid had a very large
> lead counterbalance that made a pleasing 'thunk'. No question about a
> state change. Nubs on the cams determined which outputs were live for
> every step.
> 
> The earlier Eagle Signal steppers required breaking out a tab on the cam
> with needle nose pliers. Revising the programming required disassembling
> the whole thing to replace the cam. Later some genius redesigned the cams
> with removable nibs that snapped on the cam.
> 
> In the '70s the company I worked for built the controllers used for the
> sequenced airport landing lights (rabbit). The FAA, being rather slow
> moving, specified steppers with the wiring harness being laced rather than
> using those new fangled nylon TyWraps.  Fortunately the girls, excuse me,
> female electronics technicians, were skilled in macrame.

   Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in
   THESE hacks. Sounds more like spoofing instrument
   readings to cause downstream machinery to run
   wild until it broke.

   Still, my best guess, this is some 12-year-old
   whose daddy does IT for these systems - and got
   a good look at the manual.

   The underlying prob is "Net Access" to all these
   infrastructure systems. Yea, SEEMS all "modern",
   someone in Virginia can monitor/run systems in
   many states far away. SEEMS like a money-saver,
   but, obviously, ISN'T.

   "Infrastructure" should NOT be on-line - EVER.
   Way TOO much damage can be done TOO easily.

   But will anyone GET that ???

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89587

On 05/08/2026 07:55, c186282 wrote:
> "Infrastructure" should NOT be on-line - EVER.
>    Way TOO much damage can be done TOO easily.
> 
>    But will anyone GET that ???

You might just as well say  - given the Ukraine/Russia situation, that 
critical infrastructure should NOT be above ground, EVER.

Cost benefit dear boy. Stop binary thinking before it turns you into a 
fanatic


-- 
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of 
a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

Dennis Miller

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89602

On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>    more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>    to run wild until it broke.

Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of 
obsolete tech in US infrastructure.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89604

On 05/08/2026 15:09, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>     more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>>     to run wild until it broke.
> 
> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.

Steppers all over the place. Default thing to drive car instruments 
these days. And 3D printers. And laser printers.




-- 
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that 
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is 
fully understood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89612

On 2026-08-05, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 05/08/2026 15:09, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>> 
>>>     Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>>     more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>>>     to run wild until it broke.
>> 
>> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
>> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.
>
> Steppers all over the place. Default thing to drive car instruments 
> these days. And 3D printers. And laser printers.

Sounds like the apparent disagreement might be a matter of which
kind of "stepper" each party is talking about:

  - stepping relays/switches -- used in very old mechanical
    telephone switching equipment

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepping_switch

  - stepper motors -- used in lot of current equipment

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepper_motor

-- 
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89618

On 5 Aug 2026 20:19:24 GMT, Robert Riches wrote:

> Sounds like the apparent disagreement might be a matter of which kind of
> "stepper" each party is talking about:
> 
>   - stepping relays/switches -- used in very old mechanical
>     telephone switching equipment

A picture is worth 1000 words so I clarified. The 'steppers' I had in mind 
didn't have much in common with the telco equipment. Among other things 
they rotated 360 degrees.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89633

On 05/08/2026 23:38, rbowman wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2026 20:19:24 GMT, Robert Riches wrote:
> 
>> Sounds like the apparent disagreement might be a matter of which kind of
>> "stepper" each party is talking about:
>>
>>    - stepping relays/switches -- used in very old mechanical
>>      telephone switching equipment
> 
> A picture is worth 1000 words so I clarified. The 'steppers' I had in mind
> didn't have much in common with the telco equipment. Among other things
> they rotated 360 degrees.

Yeah. Uniselectors I think we called them...360 degrees was rare though...
essentially multiway relays.

Big, expensive  - especially to replace if one contact was dodgy.

Became easier to use a bit of electronics to drive a bank of single way 
relays instead.

That whole area of control logic was one of the first areas to get 
'digitised' IIRC. It wasn't my field though.



-- 
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89630

On 05/08/2026 21:19, Robert Riches wrote:
> On 2026-08-05, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 05/08/2026 15:09, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>>
>>>>      Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>>>      more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>>>>      to run wild until it broke.
>>>
>>> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
>>> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.
>>
>> Steppers all over the place. Default thing to drive car instruments
>> these days. And 3D printers. And laser printers.
> 
> Sounds like the apparent disagreement might be a matter of which
> kind of "stepper" each party is talking about:
> 
>    - stepping relays/switches -- used in very old mechanical
>      telephone switching equipment
> 
Oh Strowgers...et all.

>          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepping_switch
> 
>    - stepper motors -- used in lot of current equipment
> 
>          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepper_motor
> 
Sorry, I hadn't heard the stuff described as just 'steppers' before, 
Stepping witches, Strowgers, Uniselectors etc etc.




-- 
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow witted 
man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest 
thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly 
persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid 
before him."

    - Leo Tolstoy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89617

On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 18:42:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 05/08/2026 15:09, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>> 
>>>     Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>>     more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream
>>>     machinery to run wild until it broke.
>> 
>> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
>> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.
> 
> Steppers all over the place. Default thing to drive car instruments
> these days. And 3D printers. And laser printers.

If you want to be pedantic 'stepping switches'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepping_switch

They were commonly referred to as 'steppers' in the day. 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/167685007179?
mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=711-53200-19255-0&campid=5338722076&customid=&toolid=10050&amdata=enc%3AAQALAAAAoGfYFPkwiKCW4ZNSs2u11xBy8wdJkViToPsAuY8UpY1csRzq63MYYGwDlvB%2FUtJ8TJVNwahnLQEyTJwNNIEKPOxAxSe08vBiReyRV5eF191eIB0JZ1ToPlD32vM%2FvmPZ9%2BwVvQE%2BJA7Mvf6QBj6zyllxR%2BIu%2BzcZNbhGDC2gxdAVTFa5O%2BR9%2B2V9u60C60wl0qiP7qbVaMto3QmxJsW%2Br%2BA%3D

https://tinyurl.com/dzcjhpew

This is a later model with the black plastic nibs that snapped into place 
on the cam. The earlier ones required breaking segments off the cam. One 
of the screens shows the large lead weight. The solenoid lifted it up and 
released it. Rotating the drum took more than a gentle suggestion.

As you might imagine it was a bit slow. We began a line of down acting 
hydraulic presses that opened a pilot operated check valve that allowed 
the ram to free fall rather than being pumped down. There was a limit 
switch that would advance the stepping switch, closing the check valve, 
and start the final closing under pressure. A client used very light 
hydraulic fluid and during the preliminary on-site testing the stepper 
barely quivered as the ram passed the momentary limit switch.  Crash! I 
had to add a relay to latch in the signal. For the next design I got rid 
of the legacy hardware entirely.

I learned something else of value. We bought the bare press frame from 
Daniels of Stroud.

https://www.stroudlocalhistorysociety.org.uk/research/daniels/

Shortly before it was to be shipped the UK had one of their little dock 
strikes. A 100 ton press refers to the clamping force and doesn't weigh 
100 tons but shipping the thing air freight was a bit pricey. It would 
hardly fit into your carry on luggage. 

Depending on international trade has its drawbacks. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89632

On 05/08/2026 23:36, rbowman wrote:
> I learned something else of value. We bought the bare press frame from
> Daniels of Stroud.
> 
> https://www.stroudlocalhistorysociety.org.uk/research/daniels/
> 
> Shortly before it was to be shipped the UK had one of their little dock
> strikes. A 100 ton press refers to the clamping force and doesn't weigh
> 100 tons but shipping the thing air freight was a bit pricey. It would
> hardly fit into your carry on luggage.
> 
> Depending on international trade has its drawbacks.

As does unionised dock labour.

There are no dockers any more. Just one man in a crane and containers 
everywhere


-- 
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89621

On 8/5/26 13:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 05/08/2026 15:09, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>>     Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>>     more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>>>     to run wild until it broke.
>>
>> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
>> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.
> 
> Steppers all over the place. Default thing to drive car instruments 
> these days. And 3D printers. And laser printers.

   And BIG stuff too !

   Nothing obsolete about steppers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89620

On 8/5/26 10:09, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 02:55:04 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Not sure how much 'steppers' were involved in THESE hacks. Sounds
>>     more like spoofing instrument readings to cause downstream machinery
>>     to run wild until it broke.
> 
> Steppers faded away in the '70s. Mostly. Never underestimate the use of
> obsolete tech in US infrastructure.

   Nothing wrong with steppers ...

   Even a lot of current tech - in the end
   it's running steppers. It's how mechanical
   stuff gets DONE in a quasi-quantifiable
   fashion.

   Or do you think DC/PWM gets it done ?
   Done that - NOT especially precise.

   At some point, 'software' has to translate
   into 'real world'. Best Dreams don't work
   valves and machines at the water plant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web