14 septembre 2024 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

17-Year-Old Arrested in Connection with Cyber Attack Affecting Transport for London

17-year-old arrested over cyber attack on TfL, exposing 5,000 customers' sensitive data. Investigation ongoing.

https://thehackernews.com/2024/09/17-year-old-arrested-in-connection-with.html

Sur le même sujet

  • Bath Shipyard Scrambles As Thousands Retire; Months Behind On Destroyer Work, Says President

    27 mai 2020 | International, Naval

    Bath Shipyard Scrambles As Thousands Retire; Months Behind On Destroyer Work, Says President

    “Last year we hired 1,800 people, which was the most hired for 30 years I think,” BIW President Dirk Lesko said. "We probably would have hired 500 or 600 more people last year if we could have.” By PAUL MCLEARYon May 26, 2020 at 5:22 PM WASHINGTON: A round of highly-anticipated talks between Maine's Bath Iron Works shipyard and the local labor union representing many of the company's 6,800 employees kicked off this morning, with both sides hoping to keep one of the nation's most important shipyards humming. The labor negotiations could have a major impact on delivery of Arleigh Burke destroyers to the Navy, which BIW President Dirk Lesko told me are already running six months behind schedule even as he scrambles to hire several thousand new workers. “Last year we hired 1,800 people, which was the most hired for 30 years I think,” Lesko said. “The challenge that we have is that, at least prior to COVID-19, the economy was very good, and there's much less of a manufacturing sector to draw people from here than in other parts of the US. We probably would have hired 500 or 600 more people last year if we could have.” Some 1,800 new employees are being trained up to replace hundreds of older tradesmen who retired over the past several years after being hired during the last shipbuilding binge in the 1980s. Training the new group has taken time, and slowed some projects down. “Those people are leaving in groups, requiring us to replace them in big groups,” Lesko said. The talks come after attendance rates at the shipyard dipped by more than half in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, Workers stayed home due to local closures and the union pushed back over the use of non-union subcontractors. At one point in late March, only 41 percent of workers showed up for their shifts; by the end of April, only about 45 percent of Local S6 union members had clocked in over the previous month. The delays in work on the destroyers came well before COVID-19 however, and stemmed from a variety of issues: the aging workforce, the time it takes to train skilled workers, and the lingering effects of the delayed work on the Navy's troubled DDG-1000 Zumwalt destroyers, which is years behind schedule and has eaten up a good portion of the limited pier space at Bath. Lesko said the workers on the Zumwalt will turn back to their Arleigh Burke work later this year, freeing up labor and space at the pier to begin eating away at those delay times. But the low attendance rates at the shipyard, demands for pay increases, and company's use of some non-union subcontractors for some work are major points of contention between the company and the union. Last week, union leadership posted this on their Facebook page, “it is disheartening that, the very week our membership returns to work as normal after being encouraged to stay out and stay safe due to COVID-19 they are rewarded by subbing out their work. Claiming there were so many people out of work they are now further behind schedule.” Those issues will begin to be hashed out this week as the two sides look to get production of the Navy's workhorse destroyers back on track. Lesko told me the schedule slippages occurred before the COVID personnel shortages, but certainly haven't made up time with so many skilled workers staying home. The company currently has 11 Arleigh Burkes under contract with six under construction, ships that will be a critical part of the Navy's long and troubled effort to build a 355-ship fleet by the end of the decade. “They're in a tough position going into the labor negotiations because the unions will say ‘you can't afford a strike so you'll need to pay,'” naval analyst Bryan Clark of the Hudson Institute said. But any extra costs to the company would incur could make the costs to the Navy also go up. “That could make it harder for Bath to compete” for any future destroyer work, Clark said. The company had plans to hire another thousand workers this year before the COVID disruption, which stopped the hiring process. “We had a strong pipeline of people in our training programs in place, and our facilities were coming together in a way that I felt pretty confident about,” Lesko said. He added the company plans to get back to that as soon as possible. While the new workers are being trained and are making their way to the waterfront, the company has dealt with a few stinging defeats. The loss of the $795 million contract to build the first 10 of a new class of guided missile frigates for the Navy to Wisconsin-based Fincantieri Marinette Marine was a major blow to Bath, as the company looks to life after destroyer work runs out in the coming years. The company also lost out on a hard-fought effort to build the Coast Guard's Offshore Patrol Cutters in 2016. Lesko said the company will be in the running for the possibility of a recompete for the frigate contract after the first 10 ships are built, which would put another 10 ships up for grabs. He also expressed hope in talk coming from the Navy that it might be in the market for a new class of large surface combatants in the coming years, but those plans have yet to be fleshed out. Much of the Navy's future plans remain in limbo until Defense Secretary Mark Esper finishes his review of the Navy's force structure plans some time late this summer, which will guide the Navy's shipbuilding blueprint for the coming decades. Given the outcome of the November presidential election and knock-on effects of the ballooning federal deficit, however, those plans could change again next year as priorities, and budgets, change. These uncertainties are deeply worrying for the Navy and the Pentagon leadership, as they can ill-afford to lose a shipyard at a time when ship construction and repair are already stressed after years of budget cuts and reduced building rates. The Navy has ambitious plans for a new class of Columbia nuclear-powered submarines, modernizing Virginia-class subs, finishing up the Ford-class aircraft carriers and starting work on the new frigate program. There is also talk of building new classes of smaller amphibious ships and supply vessels to help the Marines in their own transformation efforts. This will take multiple shipyards working on multiple projects at once. In the near-term, there's widespread concern over how shipyards are dealing with local manufacturing shutdowns as a result of the COVID-19 crisis. Navy acquisition chief James Geurts told reporters last week that the Navy has seen around 250 suppliers close due to the pandemic in the past two months, but he's “seeing many more of those open than close,” in recent days. His office is tracking 10,000 companies and suppliers, and of those 250, all but 35 are open now, he said. “While we haven't seen major impacts to current work yet on most of our shipbuilding programs, we are keeping a very close eye on downstream work to make sure that [if] a part we were expecting in September doesn't show up, we understand how to adjust to that,” he said. Lesko said that he hasn't seen much disruption at his shipyard. “There have been modest levels of disruption, a relatively small number of suppliers” that have temporarily shuttered, he said. “We've been able to work through all of that with our existing supplier base. I would not want to leave you with the impression that I don't think the supply base in some cases is fragile, but at least at this point, they have been able to support us and have done quite well.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/bath-shipyard-scrambles-as-thousands-retire-months-behind-on-destroyer-work-says-president/

  • French military tees up new tech in rush to conquer the seabed

    16 février 2022 | International, Naval

    French military tees up new tech in rush to conquer the seabed

    The goal of the new strategy is to equip the French military with the ability to reach depths of 6,000 meters, or nearly 20,000 feet, said Minister of Defense Florence Parly in a Feb. 14 press conference.

  • MPF: Light Tank Competitors BAE & GD Head For Soldier Tests

    21 octobre 2020 | International, Terrestre

    MPF: Light Tank Competitors BAE & GD Head For Soldier Tests

    BAE and General Dynamics are vying to build 504 Mobile Protected Firepower vehicles to support light infantry units, especially in places the massive M1 Abrams cannot go. SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: After 24 years without a light tank in Army service, soldiers will climb aboard brand-new Mobile Protected Firepower prototypes this January. “It's not just PowerPoint” anymore, Maj. Gen. Bryan Cummings, the Army's Program Executive Officer for Ground Combat Systems (PEO-GCS), told me in an interview. “On Jan. 4th, we will have ... vehicles arriving at Fort Bragg.” Army experts have already started safety testing on prototype MPF vehicles, officials told me. Actual combat soldiers will start training on two platoons of prototypes in January – four MPFs from BAE, four from rival General Dynamics – with field tests scheduled to begin in April. A formal Limited User Test will start in August or September, with the Army choosing the winning design in 2022 and the first operational unit of MPF entering active service in 2025. A General Dynamics spokesperson told me they've already delivered five MPF prototypes to the Army, with two more in final checkouts and another five being built for delivery by the end of the year. BAE Systems is also building 12 prototypes, but they declined to say whether they'd delivered vehicles yet or not. While the Army can't comment on either contractor while the competition is ongoing, Cummings said, “both are on track to meet the major milestones” – despite the disruptions of COVID-19. After three months of training, the troops will start what's being called the Soldier Vehicle Assessment (SVA): four to five months of intensive field testing, including force-on-force wargames. It's all part of the Army's new emphasis on getting real soldiers' feedback on new weapons early and often. “The soldiers actually get to drive the vehicles around, shoot them, train with them,” BAE business developer James Miller told me. “Their feedback [is] likely to be the most critical factor ... in the decision the Army's going to make about who wins this contract.” The soldier assessment isn't just testing out the vehicles, however, Cummings told me: It's also a test of the Army. Specifically, how can light infantry brigades, which today have few vehicles or mechanics, sustain and operate a 20-plus-ton tank? The crucial distinction: MPF is not going to the Army's heavy brigades, which have lots of support troops and specialized equipment to take care of tracked armored vehicles. Instead, 14 MPFs per brigade will go to airborne and other light infantry units, which haven't had tracked armor since the M551 Sheridan was retired and its replacement cancelled in 1990s. Now, MPF won't be as fuel-hungry or maintenance-intensive as the massive M1 Abrams, America's mainstay main battle tank. Even with add-on armor kits for high-threat deployments, it'll be less than half as heavy as the M1. That's because MPF isn't meant to take on enemy tanks, at least not modern ones. Instead, it's designed to be light enough to deploy rapidly by air, simple enough to sustain at the end of a long and tenuous supply line, but potent enough to take on enemy light armored vehicles, bunkers, dug-in machineguns, and the like. That's a tricky balance to strike. In fact, the Army has never found a light tank it really liked despite decades of trying. Only six M22 Locusts actually fought in World War II, the M41 Walker Bulldog was too heavy for airborne units, the M551 Sheridan was plagued by technical problems throughout its service from Vietnam to Panama, the M8 Armored Gun System and the Future Combat System were both cancelled. So how do BAE and General Dynamics plan to square this circle? General Dynamics emphasized lethality in their interview with me. Their Lima tank plant builds the M1 Abrams, and while the MPF is smaller – though the company didn't divulge details, GD's version reportedly has a 105mm cannon, compared to the Abrams' 120mm – it will have the same fire controls and electronics as the latest model of its big brother. “If you sat in a Mobile Protected Firepower turret, you would think you were sitting in a [M1] SEPV3 turret,” a GD spokesperson told me. “It's all the same displays, architectures, power distribution, etc.” GD's design evolved from their Griffin demonstrators, prominently displayed for several years at AUSA annual meetings. It's got automotive components derived from the ASCOD/Ajax family widely used in Europe and an 800 horsepower engine. GD didn't tell me how much their vehicle weighed, but, depending on the armor package installed, the demonstrators ranged from 28 tons to 50 tons. Those figures would give horsepower/weight ratios ranging from 28 hp/ton, better than any model of the Abrams, to 16, which would make MPF much more sluggish. BAE, by contrast, emphasized their design's compactness and ease of maintenance – considerations as critical as firepower for a light infantry unit. BAE actually built the M8 AGS cancelled in the '90s drawdown, and while they've thoroughly overhauled that design for MPS with a new engine, new electronics, and underbody blast-proofing against roadside bombs, they've tried to preserve its airborne-friendly qualities. “The old M8 fit inside a C-130; in fact, it was air droppable,” Miller told me. “There's no requirement for that in the current MPF program, but we decided to stick with that as a design constraint: [Our MPF can] fit inside a C-130; we can do three on a C-17.” BAE's engine is less potent than GD's, with only 550 horsepower. With the base configuration coming in at under 30 tons, that equates to over 18 hp/ton, with heavier armor packages reducing performance from there. But the big selling point of the engine is ease of access, Miller argued. Engine maintenance on a tank requires a crane and partially disassembling the armor, but a mechanic can slide the BAE MPF's engine in and out of the chassis with a hand crank. If the MPF breaks down or gets stuck, it can be towed away by a truck, without requiring a special heavy recovery vehicle as an M1 does. “The infantry brigades are light. They don't have long logistics tails. They don't have a ton of mechanics and recovery vehicles,” Miller emphasized. “The vehicle has to be as mobile as them and fit inside their organization.” The Army estimates the life-cycle cost of MPF, from development to procurement to maintenance and retirement, at $16 billion. Whichever vehicle wins the Army contract will have an edge in sales worldwide – including, potentially, to the Marine Corps, which is retiring its M1s as too heavy for modern amphibious warfare. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/mpf-light-tank-competitors-bae-gd-head-for-soldier-tests/

Toutes les nouvelles