Stuxnet Scenario: TechCore Semiconductors Defense Contract

TechCore Semiconductors: Advanced manufacturing, 600 employees, defense contractor
APT • Stuxnet
STAKES
Defense contract delivery + National security + Industrial IP protection
HOOK
TechCore Semiconductors is 96 hours from delivering critical semiconductor components for a major defense system, with contract penalties of $50M for delays. The sophisticated attack began when new manufacturing equipment was installed last month, and malware is now subtly manipulating precision manufacturing processes while hiding its activities from quality control systems.
PRESSURE
Defense contract deadline Thursday - delays affect national security and company survival
FRONT • 150 minutes • Expert
TechCore Semiconductors: Advanced manufacturing, 600 employees, defense contractor
APT • Stuxnet
NPCs
  • Dr. Sarah Park (Manufacturing Director): Overseeing final production run for defense contract, discovering that precision manufacturing equipment is producing components with subtle quality deviations
  • James Liu (Quality Control Manager): Detecting microscopic defects in semiconductor components that could compromise defense system performance, must balance delivery deadline with product integrity
  • Maria Rodriguez (Industrial Security Officer): Investigating sophisticated attack targeting defense manufacturing, realizing nation-state adversary may be attempting to compromise U.S. defense capabilities
  • Colonel Michael Kim (Defense Contract Officer): Representing Department of Defense, expecting delivery of critical components that cannot be sourced elsewhere within required timeframe
SECRETS
  • New manufacturing equipment installation created vulnerabilities in air-gapped production control networks
  • Nation-state adversary specifically targets defense contractors to compromise U.S. military technology supply chains
  • Sophisticated malware manipulates precision manufacturing while providing false quality control readings to conceal sabotage

Scenario Details for IMs

Opening Presentation

“It’s Monday morning at TechCore Semiconductors, and the final production run for a critical defense contract is underway. The components must be delivered by Thursday to meet national security requirements, with no alternative suppliers available. But quality control is detecting microscopic anomalies in semiconductor components that could compromise defense system performance. Initial investigation suggests that sophisticated malware may have compromised precision manufacturing equipment, potentially representing a nation-state attack on U.S. defense supply chains.”

Initial Symptoms to Present:

  • “Precision manufacturing equipment producing components with subtle dimensional variations outside specification”
  • “Quality control systems showing normal readings while physical measurements detect manufacturing defects”
  • “Network monitoring detecting unusual communication patterns on manufacturing control networks”
  • “New equipment installation documentation showing potential compromise during system integration”

Key Discovery Paths:

Detective Investigation Leads:

  • Forensic analysis reveals sophisticated malware designed specifically for precision manufacturing equipment
  • Manufacturing control system examination shows subtle manipulation of production parameters
  • Equipment installation timeline reveals compromise during integration of new manufacturing systems

Protector System Analysis:

  • Manufacturing process monitoring reveals discrepancies between control commands and actual production output
  • Quality control system integrity analysis shows potential manipulation of defect detection systems
  • Industrial network security assessment reveals compromise of air-gapped manufacturing control systems

Tracker Network Investigation:

  • Traffic analysis reveals covert command and control communication through manufacturing networks
  • Production data analysis shows subtle sabotage patterns designed to introduce defects while avoiding detection
  • Attribution investigation suggests nation-state-level sophistication targeting defense manufacturing supply chains

Communicator Stakeholder Interviews:

  • Manufacturing engineers describe subtle inconsistencies in production equipment behavior and output quality
  • Equipment installation contractors explain procedures that may have introduced compromise vectors
  • Defense security staff describe federal requirements for supply chain integrity and incident reporting

Mid-Scenario Pressure Points:

  • Hour 1: Quality control reports that 15% of produced components show microscopic defects that could affect performance
  • Hour 2: Defense contract officer calls to confirm delivery schedule and component specifications
  • Hour 3: Manufacturing director discovers that backup quality systems show different readings than primary control displays
  • Hour 4: CEO informs team that contract cancellation would result in layoffs and potential company closure

Evolution Triggers:

  • If malware manipulation continues, defense components will fail quality standards and compromise military systems
  • If delivery deadline is missed, national security implications and $50M contract penalties threaten company survival
  • If attack involves nation-state adversary targeting defense supply chains, federal counterintelligence and national security protocols activate

Resolution Pathways:

Technical Success Indicators:

  • Team identifies sophisticated malware and manufacturing control system sabotage
  • Production process integrity restored through comprehensive system validation and malware removal
  • Manufacturing security enhanced to prevent future supply chain compromise while meeting defense contract requirements

Business Success Indicators:

  • Defense component quality and delivery schedule maintained throughout cybersecurity incident response
  • Contract obligations fulfilled with verified component integrity and performance specifications
  • National security implications addressed while preserving critical defense manufacturing capability

Learning Success Indicators:

  • Team understands nation-state threats to defense industrial base and supply chain security
  • Participants recognize precision manufacturing cybersecurity challenges and national security implications
  • Group demonstrates coordination between cybersecurity, manufacturing operations, and national security considerations

Common IM Facilitation Challenges:

If National Security Context Is Overwhelming:

“The defense contract details are complex, but the core issue is clear: sophisticated adversaries are trying to compromise U.S. defense capabilities by sabotaging the components that go into military systems. How do you protect national security while maintaining production?”

If Supply Chain Impact Is Underestimated:

“James just confirmed that defective components could cause defense system failures in the field, potentially putting military personnel at risk. How does this change your response priorities?”

If Manufacturing Precision Requirements Are Missed:

“Dr. Park explains that semiconductor manufacturing tolerances are measured in nanometers - tiny changes can have huge impacts. What does this tell you about the sophistication and objectives of this attack?”

Success Metrics for Session: