[iwar] t

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-06-13 23:14:38
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] t"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Do.you.sit.next.to.a.security.risk?]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Message-Id: <200206140614.g5E6Ec507877@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 23:14:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [iwar] t
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Nasty new weapons class - somewhere between conventional and nuclear 
  
"A weapon designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level
dangerous to human life."
   - State of Indiana definitions for weapons of mass destruction, RdWMD. 
 
In the mid seventies and throughout the eighties, U.S. and other nuclear weapons 
developers began to explore the concepts learned from underground nuclear tests as 
well as, in the case of U.S. developers, some of the effects of the neutron bomb 
tests.   Well known nuclear effects noted by scientists were related to radioactive 
fallout as well as the electromagnetic pulse generated by the atomic blast. 
Radioactive Fallout 
An early effect discovered immediately with nuclear weapons research was the transformation 
of dust and debris into deadly material that could cause long time health hazards 
and after some research it was found that almost every type of nuclear blast produced 
such dangerous material.  Generation of the hazardous material was a direct result 
of a nuclear explosion -- the nuclear explosion changing the nature of previously 
benign material into deadly radioactive material.  Another method for creating such 
material was a direct result of the nuclear power industry.  When fuel rods are removed 
from a nuclear reactor, the nuclear waste has even more deadly effects than "simple" 
fallout from a nuclear blast. 
In the eighties, think tanks looking at new weapons possibilities explored the concept 
of building a conventional weapon whose goal was to spread toxic material over a 
widespread area.  The typical problems include spreading the material without destroying 
its toxic abilities.  For instance, early tests of biological or chemical dispersion 
type weapons was that high temperatures tended to sterilize the very material you 
were hoping to distribute. 
But dispersion of nuclear material seemed to be much more immune to such effects. 
  In fact the burning of nuclear material tends to simply produce radioactive "smoke", 
very similar to radioactive fallout.  In addition, the conventional explosion throws 
the nuclear material away from the explosion and spreads already radioactive material 
around the device.  This material then becomes dangerous to anyone nearby and requires 
extremely expensive and intrusive cleanup. 
In the nineties, Iraq's nuclear scientists who defected brought back stories of 
a program to develop such a weapon.  The reason for this focus was a logistical challenge. 
 For Saddam, nuclear waste procurement was easy -- he already had such waste on hand 
from nuclear reactors used in his country.  In contrast, weapons grade material required 
for creating a true nuclear blast was hard to come by.  Thus a program was started 
in parallel with the nuclear bomb program, a program to develop an RDW using nuclear 
waste which was already on hand. 
The radioactive dispersion weapon (RDW) design is actually quite simple.  A conventional 
set of explosives is surrounded by radioactive waste. A timer or altitude detector 
triggers the blast, which atomizes some portion of the material into an aerosol like 
cloud and throwing large chunks of un-atomized radioactive material in a wide pattern. 
Typically the weapon would be designed to be detonated in the air, spreading nuclear 
waste over a fairly wide area -- say several blocks in city.  Since terrorists might 
not be able to deliver this like a conventional gravity bomb, it could easily be 
designed inside a large crate and placed high in skyscraper near windows.   The blast 
would produce a "spray" of cloud and chunks in a swath out onto the city below. 
The target area would be coated -- cars, buildings, streets, you name it.  And of 
course anyone in the area would most likely inhale the radioactive material.  Cleanup 
would require quarantining the area, washing off the waste and isolating runoff so 
that the radioactive material wasn't swept into local sewage ponds or nearby lakes 
and waterways.  Of course those who came in contact with the material would require 
decontamination as well, and then some would require lengthy and expensive medical 
treatment. 
Unlike a nuclear blast, however, the radioactive weapon will have a very small blast 
damage area, and ignoring the cleanup issues, only effects a small number of victims. 
  Some killed or wounded by the explosion -- perhaps a few hundred maximum, and then 
those from secondary effects of contamination.  This is in contrast to hundreds of 
thousands who would be killed and injured in a nuclear blast. 
The RDW has more of a terror effect.  The thought of exposure to a radioactive source 
frightens most people more than the exposure to an explosion.  Thus the RDW is an 
ideal terrorist weapon. 
Manufacturing an RDW is quite simple.  A trunk could be made into an RDW.   One 
could mount explosives in a truck and surround those explosives with nuclear waste. 
 While this type of weapon would have extremely limited dispersion, the terror effects 
remain pretty much the same.  As indicated previously, a large crate exploded near 
the top of a skyscraper, say near a window has a much more large dispersion area. 
  The size of an RDW could be as small as a bomb in an attaché case, to a large crate 
size bomb.  The size will determine the amount of radioactive waste to be distributed 
around by the explosion.  This is what makes the RDW so worrisome.   A number of 
small devices could be planted around a city and produce radioactive hot spots and 
severe panic.  A large single device could be used to "dirty up" an area of two to 
six blocks in diameter. 
Since this type of RDW is totally unsophisticated, anyone can build and deliver 
this type of weapon as long as they have access to a large enough supply of nuclear 
waste and explosives.  Estimates are that an RDW could be developed and manufactured 
in three to six months regardless of size as long as the manufacturing facilities 
were scaled appropriately.  Once development was completed production manufacturing 
could deliver about two devices a week in a single line, assuming you had enough 
radioactive waste.   Aside from the cost for the radioactive waste (if purchase of 
waste material is required), the device construction could be as low as $600 to $12,000 
for a device from 1 foot to 4 foot across. 
The waste material could range from radioactive slurry in rod production, to the 
material from depleted and not longer useful fuel rods from a reactor. While not 
as effective, even previously benign material from a reactor that has been exposed 
could be used as radioactive shrapnel -- vessel linings, tools, or infrastructure 
items from a pile.  If radioactive material is to be purchased on the black market, 
it could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for only a few ounces.  Many pounds 
would be required to make an effective RDW. 
Electromagnetic Weapons 
One of the other more important discoveries about the effects of a nuclear blast 
has become more important as we have moved fully into the "information age."  A nuclear 
blast creates an electromagnetic effect called EMP -- ElectroMagnetic Pulse.  Also, 
the pulse is followed by an ionization effect which limits  radio signals in the 
area for up to 72 hours. 
The major effect, the pulse, has so much energy, it is highly dangerous to sensitive 
electronic equipment.  Effected the most are semiconductor based devices - computer 
chips.  While certain physical and electrical designs mitigate dramatically the effects 
of an EMP pulse, protecting against it is quite expensive for each chip.  As a result, 
few devices in commercial use would survive a large EMP.  The effects to electronic 
devices vary from reduced power in radio transmitters, low sensitivity in receivers, 
to total catastrophic failure of electronic devices such as vehicle ignition systems, 
computer controls, or communications equipment. 
The original idea, thought up in 1927 by Dr. Arthur Compton to study atomic particles, 
makes use of injection of plasma into low electron count elements.  By the mid 1980s, 
scientists had found ways to build a high energy device that, without resorting to 
a nuclear blast, could emit a huge EMP.  Test drops of devices using B-52s and Cruise 
Missile airframes demonstrated the feasibility of the technology.  A one time explosive 
device provides kinetic energy required to rapidly move a bar through a magnetic 
field, which in turn generates the pulse, in this case, through electromagnetic induction 
rather than through the nuclear explosion.  A second, low cost technology uses a 
moving short in a charged system to create a huge pulse. 
While the details of the mechanical construction are actually simple enough -- development 
of an efficient device can be determined by a college graduate in electronics or 
physics.  For that reason, we will not discuss the details for security reasons. 
  Suffice to say that the non-nuclear EMP device can be manufactured anywhere a machine 
shop  and electronic supplies are available.  The electronics and explosives, while 
not available at your local Radio shack or hardware store, are never-the-less much 
easier to procure by terrorists than any type of nuclear materials.   Build the device's 
structure, add the electronics and explosives, and all you need is a timer to set 
off the explosion.  Today, universities are already building prototype devices for 
further exploration of weapons designs as well as non-lethal devices for use by police 
to disable vehicles.  Other nations, including India and several other Asian nations 
are working on both devices and countermeasures. 
Like the RDW,  detonating the EMP device in the air or near the top floors of a 
skyscraper maximizes the effects.  Defenses include Faraday cages (similar to screening 
in that which is to be protected), however other effects, including one called "late 
time effect" may be able to get pass the Faraday cage protection. 
The EMP bomb is only effective in a finite area about the device.  The larger the 
armature of the device, the larger the electromagnetic field produced.  Thus a device 
could be one foot across and take out very localized equipment, say a control facility 
  or communications system.  A device four or five feet across could be used to take 
out all communications at an airport or from a skyscraper take out the semiconductor 
devices for several miles in a swath extending out from all unshielded directions. 

The EMP device's somewhat sophisticated mix of mechanical and electronics make it 
harder to design and thus given the same starting date for the program as an RDW, 
the EMP device would take longer.  Estimates are from 6 months to two years. Cost 
is estimated to around $1000 for a small prototype to up to $10,000 for a large production 
line device effective over several miles.  However, several sources indicate that 
a FCG (Flux Compression Generator -- the moving short technology) might only cost 
$400 a device in a production environment). 
Reality and Availability 
Today, both EMP and RDW devices are technologically feasible weapons to manufacture. 
  Except for the difficulty for the average person to obtain nuclear wastes, both 
weapons can be constructed with materials available to governments easily and through 
low level black market contacts are available to terrorists -- for instance the same 
dealers who sell terrorists their guns probably would be able to find someone to 
sell them the chemicals required for the EMP device.  Explosives are already in the 
arsenals of most terrorist groups.  With nations like Iraq, Iran and possibly Libya, 
Syria, Lebanon, and North Korea who have terrorist connections, the opportunity for 
both explosives and nuclear waste sales to terrorists is at an all time high. 
U.S. Director of Central Intelligence Tenet reported to Congress after 9/11 that 
while there is no conclusive proof any nation or terrorist group has created either 
an RDW or and EMP device.  However, recent finds in Afghanistan show that the Taliban 
or Al-Qaida might have been experimenting with the design and the materials for an 
RDW have been found in caches. 
Since it is expected that at least one nation has begun work on both types of devices 
over several years ago, it is quite possible the design is available to terrorists 
today.   Construction and delivery ready devices may already also be available on 
the black market. 
Statements from public and protected sources lead MILNET to believe that both RDW 
and EMP devices  will be used by terrorists in the short term.  We evaluate the risk 
as being high and our confidence in our sources is also high.  Recent efforts by 
the intelligence community to find manufacturing facilities for such devices indicate 
that MILNET is not alone in its analysis of the risk level. 



Sources: 
Bartleby.com's Columbia Encyclopedia  "radiation weapon" 
Newshouse News Service, Radiation Weapon Is Among Most Discomfiting of Terror Threats 
October, 2001 
New Delhi (archived at WISE), Atomic haul raises fears of Bin Laden terror bomb, 
April, 2002 
Definitions for Weapons of Mass Destruction, University of New Mexico and State 
of Illinois 
Definitions of weapons of mass destruction, Infragard - National Infrastructure 
Protection Center 
ABCNEWS.com, E-Bombs Could Spell Digital Doomsday, October 19, 2001 
University of Waterloo, project descriptions, Systems Design Engineering 1999-2000 
4th Year Project WorkShops - Automobile Killer 
Computing SA - International:  Experts: Electromagnetic pulse devices threaten US, 
10/29/2001 
Popular Mechanics, E-BOMB: Electromagnetic Bombs Could Throw Civilization Back 200 
Years , Jim Wilson, September, 2001 
USAF Air University at Maxwell, AFB, Aerospace Power Chronicles, The Electromagnetic 
Bomb - a Weapon of Electrical Mass Destruction, Carol Kopp 
 
© Copyright, 2002, Michael Crawford, MILNET 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Will You Find True Love?
Will You Meet the One?
Free Love Reading by phone!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Deo18C/zDLEAA/Ey.GAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] t"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Do.you.sit.next.to.a.security.risk?]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2003-08-24 02:46:32 PDT