Smart meter confusion

[akist]

As I understand it, yes they have a sim card in them.

Wow this is crazy. Big brother and all that. And you cannot blank it, it is always on and transmits. I would not mind if the transmitted information was in clear text and pre-approved format to contain only the reading.

 

[JohnW2]

Unfortunately that attitude can be a reason for ending up with poor security. "No, we don't need to bother making this secure, because who would ever want to...." The problem is that you just don't know. You don't know what some jerk might want to do just for a laugh. You don't know what onward damage could be done once a hacker has control of a meter, can install his own firmware, etc.

or the home automation of your sister's ex boyfriend .... When her boyfriend dumped her her brother ( a real geek ) hacked into the ex-boyfriend's home automation system and messed up his new relationship.

If I'm not mistaken, this discussion has gone a bit off-track....

Everyone now seems to be talking about the security of the (2-way) communication between a smart meter and the supplier. Whilst I can't really see why anyone would bother to 'hack into' data being transmitted by the meter to supplier (nor why anyone should be particularly bothered if that happened to them), the security of the 'control' communication from the supplier to the smart meter is clearly crucial (particularly given the existence of the 'disconnectors'), and I can therefore understand concerns about the security of that.

However, my understanding is that what Harry was interested in doing was 'hacking into' the (1-way) wireless link between a smart meter and the 'remote customer display', so that he could suck the data into his PC. As with the 'up-communication' between smart meter and supplier, I cannot really see why anyone ('hacker' or 'victim') should be particularly interested in, or concerned about, the security of that.

Or did I misundersatnd Harry?

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Chrysler have issued a software patch to block this loop hole which happened in 2015

 

[AndyPRK]

I am for security between the meter and the rest of the world. And this was one of the significant changes between SME1 and SME2 (or whatever the 3 letters are).

I'm not so bothered what the neighbours can do, but I guess there is possibility it could leave a back door, but even so, one would need to be on UK soil

There were others change of course, to have a common solution for working with different suppliers.

It was the energy companies who insisted on remote disconnection.

I assume these meters use the 3G network.

 

[JohnW2]

I am for security between the meter and the rest of the world. And this was one of the significant changes between SME1 and SME2

Fair enough but, as I said, I personally don't see that one-way communication out of the meter to a remote display (which, I believe, is what Harry was talking about) is actually of any particular concern.

(or whatever the 3 letters are).

Four letters actually

It was the energy companies who insisted on remote disconnection

Interesting (and a little odd, if they are saying they would not use the facility). How do we know that?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

@Bas I quoted from the article in the Daily Telegraph. They were not my words

I know.

Apologies for not knowing that that meant I was not allowed to comment on them.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Chrysler have issued a software patch to block this loop hole which happened in 2015

I'm sure that they have.

But that doesn't mean that the hole wasn't there, and it doesn't mean that it could not have been exploited for nefarious purposes.

 

[bernardgreen]

Apologies for not knowing that that meant I was not allowed to comment on them.

Then modify the quote command to show the correct source

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Everyone now seems to be talking about the security of the (2-way) communication between a smart meter and the supplier. Whilst I can't really see why anyone would bother to 'hack into' data being transmitted by the meter to supplier (nor why anyone should be particularly bothered if that happened to them)

To change the data in order to reduce their bills?

To change the data to increase someone else's bill?

To establish usage patterns and thus know when a house was empty?

However, my understanding is that what Harry was interested in doing was 'hacking into' the (1-way) wireless link between a smart meter and the 'remote customer display', so that he could suck the data into his PC. As with the 'up-communication' between smart meter and supplier, I cannot really see why anyone ('hacker' or 'victim') should be particularly interested in, or concerned about, the security of that.

To establish usage patterns and thus know when a house was empty?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

If I'm not mistaken, this discussion has gone a bit off-track....

Everyone now seems to be talking about the security of the (2-way) communication between a smart meter and the supplier. Whilst I can't really see why anyone would bother to 'hack into' data being transmitted by the meter to supplier (nor why anyone should be particularly bothered if that happened to them), the security of the 'control' communication from the supplier to the smart meter is clearly crucial (particularly given the existence of the 'disconnectors'), and I can therefore understand concerns about the security of that.

However, my understanding is that what Harry was interested in doing was 'hacking into' the (1-way) wireless link between a smart meter and the 'remote customer display', so that he could suck the data into his PC. As with the 'up-communication' between smart meter and supplier, I cannot really see why anyone ('hacker' or 'victim') should be particularly interested in, or concerned about, the security of that.

Or did I misundersatnd Harry?

Kind Regards, John

You got it in one John!

It would be pointless for me to hack into a once per day data transmission from meter to the supplier. I'm only interested in meter to indoor display.

I have seen sites from the US where they talk about hacking into the data stream using a cheap SDR (software defined radio), but nothing I could find in the UK.

 

[akist]

The Big Brother possibilities, which I can not be the only one in thinking?

It is not a great leap of faith to assume that by design, by error, or by hack, the GSM module may be transmitting other information too. For example it could be made to transmit WiFi packets from your house, as it already has a WiFi module and therefore "listens" to all WiFi traffic around it.

And as it already has a GSM module, adding a camera and a mic on the mainboard is an extra 2 cm2, trivial. "Spying" trackers work in this exact way, a simple GSM module, with GPS, mic and camera, all in a few cm2. The hardware could already be there with the suppliers not even aware of it, for example if the hardware design is a re-purposed mobile phone.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It would be pointless for me to hack into a once per day data transmission from meter to the supplier.

With a full smart grid+smart metering+smart appliances it might not be once per day. It could be continuous real time. It could contain predictive information.

 

[JohnW2]

To change the data in order to reduce their bills? To change the data to increase someone else's bill?

Fair enough - but that would be a much more sophisticated type of 'hacking' than I was envisaging, and presumably well beyond the capabilities of almost everyone who might have a wish to increase or decrease the electricity bills for just one consumer (or a small number of consumers). Just 'looking at' data which is being transmitted is one thing, but preventing that data being transmitted and, instead, transparently substituting some other data would, I would have thought, be pretty challenging. However, in terms of the (2-way) communication between meter and supplier, this is really moot - since I think we are all agreed that the 'down-link' part of that communication (from supplier to meter) has to be very secure, in which case the up-link would presumably also become very secure.

To establish usage patterns and thus know when a house was empty?

Perhaps, but there are plenty of other ways of trying to do that.

 

[JohnW2]

With a full smart grid+smart metering+smart appliances it might not be once per day.

I suspect that even our offspring, let alone ourselves, will not still be alive by the time that 'smart (SMET-compatible) appliances' are widely deployed (if ever).

 

[JohnW2]

It is not a great leap of faith to assume that by design, by error, or by hack, the GSM module may be transmitting other information too. For example it could be made to transmit WiFi packets from your house, as it already has a WiFi module and therefore "listens" to all WiFi traffic around it.

Theoretically true - but presumably that's not peculiar to smart meters - mobile phones, routers or any number of WiFi-connected thingies could ("by design, error or hack") do exactly the same, couldn't they?

Kind Regards, John