Archive

ShareThis Page
Hackers from China invade federal weather systems; NOAA fails to report attack to law enforcement | TribLIVE.com
News

Hackers from China invade federal weather systems; NOAA fails to report attack to law enforcement

Tribune-Review
| Wednesday, November 12, 2014 8:51 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Hackers from China breached the federal weather network recently, forcing cybersecurity teams to seal off data vital to disaster planning, aviation, shipping and scores of other crucial uses, officials said.

The intrusion occurred in late September, but officials gave no indication that they had a problem until Oct. 20, according to three people familiar with the hack and the reaction by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or NOAA, which includes the National Weather Service. Even then, NOAA did not say its systems were compromised.

Officials said that the agency did not notify the proper authorities when it learned of the attack.

NOAA officials declined to discuss the suspected source of the attack, whether it affected classified data and the delay in notification. NOAA said publicly in October that it was doing “unscheduled maintenance” on its network, without saying a computer hack made that necessary.

In a statement released Wednesday, NOAA spokesman Scott Smullen acknowledged the hacks and said “incident response began immediately.” He said that all systems were working again and that forecasts were accurately delivered to the public. Smullen declined to answer questions beyond his statement, citing an investigation into the attack.

But the agency confirmed to U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Virginia, that China was behind the attack, the congressman said. Wolf has a longstanding interest in cybersecurity and asked NOAA about the incident after an inquiry from The Washington Post.

“NOAA told me it was a hack and it was China,” said Wolf, who scolded the agency for not disclosing the attack “and deliberately misleading the American public in its replies.”

“They had an obligation to tell the truth,” Wolf said. “They covered it up.”

Commerce Department Inspector General Todd Zinser said his office was not notified of the breach until Nov. 4, well after he believes the hack occurred. He said that is a violation of agency policy requiring any security incident to be reported to his office within two days of discovering the problem.

“We’re in the process of looking into the matter, including why NOAA did not comply with the requirements to notify law enforcement about the incident,” Zinser said.

Wolf said he did not know whether the breach involved classified material or what information was accessed.

Confirmation of the NOAA hack followed an admission Monday by the Postal Service that a suspected Chinese attack — also in September — compromised data of 800,000 employees, from letter carriers on up through the postmaster general.

NOAA officials would not say whether the attack removed material or inserted malicious software in its system, which is used by civilian and military forecasters in the United States as well as feeding weather models at the main centers for Europe and Canada.

The hack may have been aimed less at manipulating weather data than finding an opening in a U.S. system to exploit, said Jacob Olcott, a cybersecurity consultant with Good Harbor Security Risk Management and former Senate staffer on cybersecurity legislation.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.