[SCADASEC] Water Supply Poisoning Threat

Wed Aug 27 10:51:41 CDT 2008

Jake,

My water experience is limited, Hydroelectric Power, and we only worry
about flow rates to keep the fish happy and to make sure that we keep
the water essentially clean (oil separators and filters should we have
any problems going through the turbines) or at least in the same state
as we got it.

Never the less, I agree with the comment that,  "Suffice it to say that
this is yet another system, like grid Interties, that relies upon trust
and a person's sense of self preservation to keep the public safe".  

Lou Hatton

-----Original Message-----
From: scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com
[mailto:scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com] On Behalf Of Brodsky,
Jake
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:27 AM
To: scadasec at news.infracritical.com
Subject: Re: [SCADASEC] Water Supply Poisoning Threat

I'm a bit closer to the issue than Lou might be.  :-)

Water treatment plants are surprisingly effective, given how primitive
the processes look at first glance.  The fundamental parts of surface
water treatment are primary filtration (remove the sticks, dead animals,
mud, etcetera), flocculation, filtration, and disinfection.  

In the scheme of things most of the heavy lifting is done with sand and
charcoal filters.  We aid that effect by mixing very small amounts of
chemical coagulants.  An effective water treatment plant will maintain
an array of several of these chemical coagulants for use in various
situations.  

Whatever poison one might use must be water soluble, and capable of
staying in solution at various pH levels.  We adjust the pH of the water
with common chemicals such as Lime, to bring it close to 7.  It should
also be able to remain poisonous after chlorination.  That's no small
feat.  

There are some poisons that could do this.  Some are naturally
occurring, such as arsenic.  At plants where the ground water contains
arsenic, they use special adsorbing filters to remove it.  

We also have a rather funny, crude test we use to test our water at the
plant: a fish tank.  The species of fish is carefully selected because
of its tendency to react quickly to water chemistry or biology problems.
If the fish get sick or die, we have to shut the plant down.  

Remember, our water doesn't go straight in to the distribution system.
It goes in to enormous reservoirs called clear-wells.  These are
finished water storage areas designed to feed the distribution system's
needs at a moment's notice while giving the plant time to adjust their
process to keep up with changing river conditions.  

There are constant tests being performed on the water at various stages
through the plant.  We know what the water quality is from the river, we
know what has to be done to make sure it's safe.  

Now, one assumption we do not make is what might happen were someone to
inject or dump such poisons in to an elevated storage tank.  These
storage are not something easily hidden.  We have been installing alarms
in various key places so that we can be alerted to an unexpected entry.
But there are ways around this as well.  I won't go in to gory details.
Suffice it to say that this is yet another system, like grid interties,
that relies upon trust and a person's sense of self preservation to keep
the public safe.  

Jake Brodsky

-----Original Message-----
From: scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com
[mailto:scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com] On Behalf Of Hatton,
Louis
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 6:34 PM
To: scadasec at news.infracritical.com
Subject: Re: [SCADASEC] Water Supply Poisoning Threat

I am not qualified to discuss the lethality of a particular substance in
water, regardless the concentration.  But, I will discuss the "fear
factor" should someone do something like that.  Most of us like to go
the lakes, oceans and water ways for recreation of many kinds.  Then we
go home and never think about what we are drinking.  The last time I
checked outboard motor fuel was hazardous to my health and it leaks from
my motor, the water is used to cool the engine and help to muffle the
exhaust.  Look around the fuel dock at all the products floating on the
water.  But, we go home and drink with out a second thought.  On the
lake, many of us have reached over and had a glass of water, unfiltered
and unfettered because we were thirsty.  Not a care in the world.

But, let someone suggest tossing in 50 to 100 gallons of Arsenic and you
would be gravely concerned.  Ask questions of your water agency about
their ability to filter it out.  It is not the actual threat that is the
cause of all the trouble, but rather the perception of the threat that
is at issue, and how we mitigate that perception.

How many cities along the Mississippi River use that river for drinking
water?  How many cities use the same river for waste water removal?
Someone on the list suggested  that "Pollution was a matter of dilution"
and they may be right to a point, it just depends upon what you are
diluting as to how much people will yell about it.

Lou Hatton

-----Original Message-----
From: scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com
[mailto:scadasec-bounces at news.infracritical.com] On Behalf Of Adriel
Desautels
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 2:08 PM
To: scadasec at news.infracritical.com
Subject: Re: [SCADASEC] Water Supply Poisoning Threat

Realistically how much damage would that much poison cause in that
volume of water? It strikes me that the poison would be highly diluted?

Regards,
	Adriel T. Desautels
	Chief Technology Officer
	Netragard, LLC.
	Office : 617-934-0269
	Mobile : 617-633-3821
	http://www.linkedin.com/pub/1/118/a45

	Join the Netragard, LLC. Linked In Group:
	http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/48683/0B98E1705142

---------------------------------------------------------------
Netragard, LLC - http://www.netragard.com  -  "We make IT Safe"
Penetration Testing, Vulnerability Assessments, Website Security

Netragard Whitepaper Downloads:
-------------------------------
Choosing the right provider : http://tinyurl.com/2ahk3j Three Things you
must know  : http://tinyurl.com/26pjsn

ab3a at comcast.net wrote:
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,406664,00.html
> 
> It's an attempt to poison city water.  
> 
> We're lucky they don't know enough detail to be dangerous.  
> 
> For now.  
> 
> Jake Brodsky
> _______________________________________________
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please visit:
> http://news.infracritical.com/mailman/listinfo/scadasec
> 
> To review our usage policy, please visit:
> http://www.infracritical.com/usage-scadasec.html
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please visit:
http://news.infracritical.com/mailman/listinfo/scadasec

To review our usage policy, please visit:
http://www.infracritical.com/usage-scadasec.html
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please visit:
http://news.infracritical.com/mailman/listinfo/scadasec

To review our usage policy, please visit:
http://www.infracritical.com/usage-scadasec.html