Viruses affect German nuclear power plant

If this can happen in Germany, imagine what could happen in French-designed system!

“A computer system at a German nuclear power plant which controls the movement of radioactive fuel rods has been infested by two viruses.
Officials discovered the unauthorised software at the Gundremmingen plant around 75 miles northwest of Munich.

The plant,run by German utility company RWE,claims the security of the facility was not jeopardised because the infected computer systems were not connected to the internet.

The computers were infected by ‘W32.Ramnit’ and ‘Conficker’ viruses.
Malware was also found on 18 removable data drives, mainly USB sticks, in office computers maintained separately from the plant’s operating systems. RWE said it had increased cyber-security measures as a result.

W32.Ramnit is designed to steal files from infected computers and targets Microsoft Windows software, according to the security firm Symantec. First discovered in 2010, it is distributed through data sticks, among other methods, and is intended to give an attacker remote control over a system when it is connected to the Internet.

Conficker has infected millions of Windows computers worldwide since it first came to light in 2008. It is able to spread through networks and by copying itself onto removable data drives, Symantec said.

RWE has informed Germany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), which is working with IT specialists at the group to look into the incident.
The BSI was not immediately available for comment.

Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer for Finland-based F-Secure, said that infections of critical infrastructure were surprisingly common, but that they were generally not dangerous unless the plant had been targeted specifically.

The most common viruses spread without much awareness of where they are, he said.

As an example, Hypponen said he had recently spoken to a European aircraft maker that said it cleans the cockpits of its planes every week of malware designed for Android phones. The malware spread to the planes only because factory employees were charging their phones with the USB port in the cockpit.

Because the plane runs a different operating system, nothing would befall it. But it would pass the virus on to other devices that plugged into the charger.

In 2013, a computer virus attacked a turbine control system at a U.S. power company after a technician inserted an infected USB computer drive into the network, keeping a plant off-line for three weeks.

After Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster five years ago, concern in Germany over the safety of nuclear power triggered a decision by the government to speed up the shutdown of nuclear plants. Tuesday was the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3561945/Security-alert-German-nuclear-power-plant-computer-systems-used-fuel-rods-infected-viruses.html

Austerity – not at East Devon District Council!

The employee statistics for EDDC make very interesting reading. It can be hard to work out what is going on, as structural changes such as the creation of Strata, or the transfer of traffic wardens to DCC, can distort the numbers.

However, between May 2015 and March 2016, the number of staff measured by full-time equivalent has increased by 23. And the number of new starters exceeds staff leavers by a whopping 34.

The cost of 23 full-time staff, when all the extras are taken into account could be of the order of £1 million per annum. Has this been budgeted for?

And, of course, the new HQ at Honiton is going to have to be substantially bigger, and therefore more expensive, to accommodate all those extra people.

Since relocation was first proposed, and the HQ space needs assessed, the number of full-time equivalent staff appears to have risen by about 50.

Tax avoidance isn’t the only problem …

“The Guardian has calculated that Green and his family collected £586m [from BHS] in dividends, rental payments and interest on loans during their 15-year ownership of BHS. Over the same period, the group’s pension fund went from a surplus to a deficit of £571m.”

http://gu.com/p/4tjzf

So, basically, Green robbed the pension fund, avoided tax, got a knighthood from Labour and was appointed “Waste Czar” by the Coalition!

Interestingly, Journalist Will Straw spotted this anomaly in August 2010 when he wrote an article entitled “Philip Green is an odd choice for efficiency tsar” in which he wrote:

Philip Green is clearly a savvy businessman, but his avoidance of tax raises questions about his suitability:

Earlier this week, David Cameron wrote in the Sun: “Cutting benefit fraud is a no-brainer. That’s why benefit fraud is the first and the deepest cut we will make.” Launching his one-sided crusade there was no mention of the tax gap, which dwarfs welfare and tax credit fraud by a factor of more than 10 to one. Cameron has now added insult to injury by appointing Sir Philip Green – a tax avoider – as his efficiency tsar.

David Cameron’s focus this week on tackling “welfare cheats” has underlined his priorities. The coalition is committed to an ideological programme of spending cuts worth £83bn by the end of this parliament – 60% more than planned by the Labour government. But, as the Guardian reported, there is just £1.5bn in benefit and tax credit fraud – the rest is due to system failure. Compare this with the £17bn on tax avoidance, evasion and non-payment identified in HMRC’s Protecting Tax Revenues report and you get a sense of whether we’re really “all in this together”.

Tax avoidance is not a crime, but it is certainly a poor qualification for taking on a new role as head of an “external efficiency review”. In 2006, using figures calculated by campaigning accountant Richard Murphy, the BBC’s Money Programme reported that Philip Green and his family had saved themselves nearly £300m the previous year living partly in Monaco, where residents do not have to pay income tax. …”

Devolution: Conservatives reject idea of mayors for rural parts of England

Scared they might get an Independent or worse (for them)? Scared a Mayor coming from Somerset might neglect Devon or vice-versa? Or a Mayor who doesn’t like Hinkley C? Or just plain scared of all these things happening over which they have no control whatsoever?

And this “bottom up” devolution – where exactly IS its bottom?

Plans for new elected mayors announced in the Budget by the government should be abandoned, Conservatives have said.

Local councillors and some MPs say mayors for three rural parts of England will add an expensive and unwanted extra tier of government. Councils could reject the idea and opt out of new authorities in Lincolnshire, the west of England and East Anglia, North Somerset MP Liam Fox said.

The government says it wants to help the local economy and devolve power.
Some Conservative councillors in the rural areas intend to try to block the policy, which will not be imposed on unwilling areas.

In his Budget in March, Chancellor George Osborne announced plans for elected mayors in the three areas.

Local authorities will vote on whether or not to accept detailed proposals by the end of June.

MPs dilemma

North West Norfolk MP Sir Henry Bellingham, said people would feel no affinity to a new authority and elections for a new mayor would attract a “pathetic” turnout.

He told the Today programme on Radio 4: “Now I don’t want a regional leader coming along and saying ‘look Henry you’ve been a bad boy, I gather you don’t want this incinerator, you don’t want these houses, well actually the region do want it and I’d like you to have it’.

“That is going to put MPs in a very difficult position and change their constitutional position.” While he supported the idea of devolution, he said plans for a new mayor should be put on hold.

‘Unstoppable momentum’

A spokesman for the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) said it was making “huge progress” in making local areas more powerful by devolving power from Whitehall.

A source close to the chancellor said: “The devolution revolution taking place across the country has unstoppable momentum behind it.” Six new authorities, which will have elected mayors, have been established in mainly urban areas, with another expected this summer.

Conservative sceptics argue the plans will not work in rural areas. Passing extra powers to large authorities with accountable, high-profile mayors is one of the Mr Osborne’s central aims.

‘Bottom-up process’

Privately, some Conservatives have compared it to the government’s attempt to turn all English schools into academies, accusing it of forcing the plan on reluctant councils. One said councils had been “bribed and bullied” in a bid to make them accept the idea.

But a DCLG spokesman said: “The government is making huge progress towards rebalancing the economy and empowering local areas through the devolution of powers and resources away from Whitehall to local people.

“Ministers have been repeatedly clear that devolution is a genuinely bottom-up process – all proposals are agreed by local leaders, and the government will not impose an arrangement on any area.”

Chris Skidmore, the Conservative MP for Kingswood near Bristol, said he supported the idea, and a new West of England mayor would create a “powerhouse in the south”.

Directly-elected mayors would be put in place, he said, even if some authorities chose not to take part. He said: “If one council decides they don’t want to do a deal, the other three will go ahead with the same pot of money given to those three councils.”

Huge cost

Peterborough MP Stewart Jackson, who has secured a House of Commons debate on the topic, said politicians would not give the government a “blank cheque” to sign up for more local government with a weak mayor.

He said: “It’s not something when you’re talking of spending hundreds of millions of pounds over the next 30 years that any responsible elected politician accountable to their electorate can sign up to.”

North East Somerset Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg is also opposed.

The leader of the Conservative group on Norfolk County Council, Cliff Jordan said he thought the council would reject the policy.

The Labour leader of the Council George Nobbs supports the idea of devolution but also opposes the policy in its current form.

Cambridgeshire County Council, which has a Conservative leader, has already voted to oppose the plan as it stands.

The Local Government Association wants local areas to be able to accept new powers and extra funding offered by the Treasury without having elected mayors.

A spokesman said: “People should be free to choose the appropriate model of robust governance for their community.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36147593