this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
227 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

69041 readers
3153 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
227
The reason we don’t see exploding battery attacks more often is not because it’s technically hard, it’s because the erosion of public trust in everyday things isn’t worth it. (www.bunniestudios.com)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

edit: after 20 comments, i'm adding a post description here, since most of the commenters so far appear not to be reading the article:

This is about how surprisingly cheap it is (eg $15,000) to buy a complete production line to be able to manufacture batteries with a layer of nearly-undetectable explosives inside of them, which can be triggered by off-the-shelf devices with only their firmware modified.

screenshot of paragraph from the article saying "The process to build such batteries is well understood and documented. Here is an excerpt from one vendor’s site promising to sell the equipment to build batteries in limited quantities (tens-to-hundreds per batch) for as little as $15,000:" followed by a screenshot of "Flow-chart of Pouch Cell Lab-scale Fabrication" showing a 20 step process

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 102 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

Jfc Christ Lemmy.

Every single comment misunderstanding the point. The batteries are exploding because there's explosives in them. This does make them exploding batteries. They explode because they are partially made with explosives. Please don't "well actually" this.

No this is not a description of something Israel did, it's a hypothetical way to do a similar attack to show how within reach of idiot terrorists it is.

Raising the idea of doing this so everyone is thinking about it is extremely bad for us all. Thanks Israel.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 36 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Please don't well actually this.

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 22 points 7 months ago

No, it doesn't. The battery itself is not the source of the explosion, it's the explosive hidden inside it.

A regular battery cannot be made to explode in this way.

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

I think there may be a couple edits needed in your comment. Reread slowly and get back to us.

[–] femtech@midwest.social 15 points 7 months ago (3 children)

That does not make them exploding batteries, it had explosives in them. A suicide bomber is not an explosive human.

[–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A suicide bomber is not an explosive human but they are an exploding human.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They're batteries. And they are explosive because of the explosives in them. They are discrete things that are explosives.

You're trying to make a weird, un-useful, pedantic distinction here.

Comment you replied to was making a far more useful correction, because people did not read the article.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Jfc Christ Lemmy.Every single comment misunderstanding the point.

Pedantics fighting pedantics LOL

The batteries are exploding because there's explosives in them. This does make them exploding batteries.

And when you put the same explosives inside a barbie doll and make it go off, then it wasn't an exploding barbie doll. Or was it? ;-)

[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Pedantics fighting pedantics LOL

I think you mean "pedants fighting pedants" :p

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Fun fact, a group of pedants is called a flem. To use it in a sentence: "the party was ruined by a flem of pedants".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

JFC Christ, does anyone know where the nearest ATM Machine is?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 65 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's also a big ass war crime. And if you did it habitually as anyone other than the West you could expect a visit from the US military. Inside the West you'd likely end up in prison. Except Israel. Israel is just immune to everything because uhhh... Because... Well nobody actually has a good reason.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 20 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Because people are scared to be seen as an anti-Semite if you are critical of a Jewish state and their wrongdoings.

This is how Jeremy Corbyn got slammed as being an anti-Semite across the media and eventually kicked out of the labour party.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 64 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just to be clear, the pager thing wasn't exploding batteries, they had apparently been modified at the production level to have explosives in them, which could be triggered by the pager system itself.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Did you read the article? It sounds like you didn't.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 41 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Did you read it?

The article literally talks about inserting an explosive layer inside the battery at production. Just like the comment said.

It isn’t “any batteries can explode”.

Reports indicate the explosive payload in the cells is made of PETN.

Such a sheet could be inserted into the battery fold-and-stack process, after the first fold is made (or, with some effort, perhaps PETN could be incorporated into the spacer polymer itself – but let’s assume for now it’s just a drop-in sheet, which is easy to execute and likely effective)

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just to be clear, the pager thing wasn’t exploding batteries, they had apparently been modified at the production level to have explosives in them, which could be triggered by the pager system itself.

What? 🤦 The comment I replied to said:

Just to be clear, the pager thing wasn’t exploding batteries, they had apparently been modified at the production level to have explosives in them, which could be triggered by the pager system itself.

It seems clear that "they had apparently been modified at the production level" is referring to the pagers, rather than their batteries. But the article is explaining how it could have been that the batteries were the part of the pager that had the explosives (in which case it was the battery that was exploding).

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You are inferring what someone meant, and then applying some super pedantic reasoning.

When manufacturing pagers, that includes the pager electronics, the case, and the battery.

Wasn’t exploding batteries

The batteries themselves unmodified, standard batteries were not somehow hacked to explode. At some point in the manufacturing of the pagers which includes the battery, explosives were included.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You are inferring what someone meant, and then applying some super pedantic reasoning.

I think I am inferring correctly, especially since the person you're talking about replied "of course not" to my question about if they read the article.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

alrighty then. Dig your heels in.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

i encourage you to re-read the original comment in this thread after reading the article 😂

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You should do the same.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nick@midwest.social 4 points 7 months ago

Delete this entire post or shut up, bro. You’re being nuked with downvotes.

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago

Most other people wont be reading it either so I don't see an issue with pointing out the obvious misconception people could make based on the headline that talks about exploding batteries.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Of course not, what did you expect?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 61 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Even though your edit clarified it, I wish we’d stop calling them “exploding batteries”. The battery isn’t the explosive, it’s the explosives that were hidden in the device. I’ve already encountered far too many morons describing conspiracies where the big bad government could make your iPhone explode.

[–] grudan@programming.dev 10 points 7 months ago

Title felt misleading.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago

I wish we’d stop calling them “exploding batteries”. The battery isn’t the explosive, it’s the explosives that were hidden in the device.

Do you want to stop calling them exploding pagers too? How about other exploding things? And what should https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Lebanon_pager_explosions be renamed to? Maybe 2024 Lebanon explosions of explosives inside of pagers? 🙄

[–] jdeath@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

but the article is about exploding batteries, no?

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's like saying exploding cars when you're really talking about a bomb placed in a car...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ashar@infosec.pub 59 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sending out IEDs that will probably explode in a supermarket and kill civilians is generally considered a war crime. So far 2 kids killed in Beirut by the Israeli bombs in devices.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 28 points 7 months ago

Exterminating the next generation of people who would live on the land they want to steal is the goal.

[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 50 points 7 months ago

I don't think terrorists care about the people's trust in everyday things

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 24 points 7 months ago (2 children)

We don't see exploding batteries more because most militaries are better about securing their supply chain.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 17 points 7 months ago

The attack hit many civilians. For militaires it might be feasible to secure their chain. For terror attacks, which this was, it would be far more difficult.

[–] SoJB@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Really glad to hear the dead 8 year old girl was Khamas. I’m sure the dozen children that will be shot in the head today will be relieved once they find out they were Khamas as well and deserved to be shot in the head.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Did you hit your head? This comment makes no sense

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

Lithium burns intensely but it doesn't explode. An electric car can burn for a long time, but they don't explode. One of the comments says so

I understand that what happened in Libanon was that dedicated explosives were added to the devices, it was not the batteries exploding. But that does not take away the conclusion of your story.

It shouldn't be undetectable. Throw a device from s series into a fire as a spot check and if it burns it's ok, if it explodes give the entire series to your enemy's kids to play with.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 7 months ago

Throw a device from s series into a fire as a spot check and if it burns it's ok, if it explodes give the entire series to your enemy's kids to play with.

Most high explosives burn unless detonated properly.

This is really basic stuff. I don’t think you should be out and about giving people advice about handling (potential) explosives.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 7 months ago

I am not an explosives expert, but I've seen enough YouTube videos about explosives to know that not all explosives explode in fire. Some are incredibly stable at extreme conditions right up until deliberately triggered. It all depends on the type of explosives.

There may still be ways to detect them, but it's not necessarily going to be that simple.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Did you read the article? It sounds like you didn't.

[–] iamanurd@midwest.social 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Are you able to say anything but that?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Heads up, I don't think C4 explodes when burned. I think it requires electronic detonation or a blasting cap.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

But I don't want my devices to be bombs

load more comments