Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

USBKill

usbkill is an open-source anti-forensic kill-switch software that monitors USB ports for hardware changes and triggers an immediate system shutdown to prevent unauthorized data access. Written in , it targets , BSD, and OS X operating systems, executing configurable actions such as wiping or swap space upon detection of USB insertion or removal. Developed by the pseudonymous creator hephaest0s, the tool addresses vulnerabilities like those exploited by USB Rubber Ducky devices used in rapid data extraction during physical seizures. Key features include a customizable check interval (default 250 ms), USB device whitelisting to avoid false triggers, and compatibility with full-disk encryption setups to enable secure hibernation or data sanitization. Hosted on with over 4,500 stars, usbkill emphasizes user-configurable defenses against forensic recovery, such as melting the program itself on shutdown and optional integration with secure-delete utilities for file erasure. While intended for privacy protection, its deployment raises considerations of potential misuse in evading lawful investigations, though its primary design prioritizes rapid, non-reversible denial of access to encrypted data.

History

Origins and Conception

USBKill was conceived as an anti-forensic tool to mitigate risks associated with physical seizure of devices containing sensitive , particularly in scenarios involving raids or where an unlocked system could be accessed before or wiping measures activate. The software addresses vulnerabilities exploited by tactics such as mouse jigglers to prevent screensaver lockouts or unauthorized USB insertions for , enabling rapid system shutdown triggered by monitored USB port changes, such as the removal of a tethered USB key worn by the user. This design draws from first-hand awareness of cases where authorities confiscated operational laptops, underscoring the need for hardware-independent, software-based kill switches compatible with full-disk setups. The project originated from the efforts of an anonymous developer operating under the pseudonym Hephaest0s, who implemented it in for cross-platform use on , BSD, and OS X systems. Development focused on lightweight monitoring of USB device states at configurable intervals (defaulting to 250 milliseconds) to detect insertions or removals, followed by customizable actions like immediate power-off, and swap wiping via tools such as secure-delete, and optional whitelisting of trusted devices. Hephaest0s emphasized its utility for high-risk environments, such as encrypted servers on low-power devices like , where physical access threats are elevated. The initial public release occurred via on May 9, 2015, marking the first commit and establishing usbkill as an open-source repository under no explicit license but with disclaimers urging users to pair it with robust for . Early highlighted its non-destructive nature—merely halting operations to thwart forensic recovery—while cautioning against reliance without complementary layers, reflecting a pragmatic approach to causal threats in adversarial settings. Subsequent announcements, such as in security blogs around mid-2015, positioned it as a defensive rather than an offensive tool, aligning with its core conception as a privacy-preserving emergency protocol.

Key Developments and Milestones

The USBKill device emerged from prototypes developed in , with early testing demonstrating its ability to disable laptops and other hardware via USB port surges. Commercial availability began in mid-2016, when the Hong Kong-based manufacturer released the initial model as an (ESD) testing tool for penetration testers and security professionals. In January 2017, USBKILL.com introduced the V3 iteration, incorporating feedback from the community to enhance discharge reliability and speed; it was offered in two variants—an anonymous black casing for discreet use and a branded version. This update maintained compatibility with standard USB-A ports while improving surge repetition rates to overwhelm target devices more effectively. The most significant advancement occurred on September 15, 2020, with the announcement of the V4 series, which featured a complete architectural overhaul for greater stability, higher discharge voltages, and expanded trigger options including timed, remote, and magnetic modes. The V4 lineup included Basic, Pro, and Classic editions tailored to different user needs, such as offline attacks or application-integrated controls, and incorporated an internal for prolonged dormancy. These developments solidified USBKill's role in hardware , with documented success against desktops, servers, and legacy USB-A equipped laptops.

Technical Mechanism

Electrical Principles and Operation

The USBKill device functions by harvesting electrical power from the host's USB port VBUS line, which provides approximately 5 volts at currents of 1 to 3 amperes, and employing an internal voltage multiplication process to generate a high negative potential of around -200 to -240 volts. This step-up occurs via a that accumulates charge in capacitors, enabling the device to store sufficient energy for destructive output without external power sources in basic configurations. Upon reaching the target voltage and activation—via manual button, timer, motion sensor, or other triggers in V4 models—the capacitors discharge their stored energy as rapid pulses directly into the host's USB data lines (D+ and D-), overwhelming ESD protection diodes, MOSFETs, and integrated circuits connected to the interface. This targeted delivery to data lines circumvents some VBUS-specific safeguards, such as fuses or TVS diodes optimized for power surges, propagating damage to upstream components like USB controllers and system motherboards. The operational cycle involves repeated charging from the host supply followed by discharges occurring multiple times per second in continuous mode, sustaining stress until the host circuitry fails catastrophically or the device is unplugged. In V4 variants, an integrated supports pre-charged "offline" discharges, allowing immediate high-voltage output without initial host power draw, which can evade detection in powered-off or low-power states. This mechanism exploits the USB standard's lack of mandatory high-voltage isolation on data paths, rendering unprotected ports vulnerable to irreversible breakdown via avalanche or .

Triggering and Delivery Modes

The USBKill device, particularly in its V4 Pro variant, supports multiple configurable trigger modes that determine the conditions under which the destructive electrical discharge is initiated. These modes are selected via the accompanying application or dedicated , allowing for flexibility in deployment scenarios such as penetration testing or forensic data protection. Classic mode activates the discharge immediately upon insertion into a USB port, relying on drawn from the host device to initiate the without external intervention. Magnetic trigger mode employs a to detect proximity to a , such as the included covert ring accessory, enabling discreet activation by passing the magnet over the device after insertion. Timed attack mode schedules the discharge for a specific date and time, with the internal supporting dormancy for over 200 days without host . Remote and smartphone-based triggers provide wireless control options for standoff operation. The remote trigger utilizes a dedicated USBKill Remote accessory, transmitting Bluetooth signals up to 100 meters to initiate a single or continuous attack, with the remote's enabling long-term standby. Smartphone trigger integrates with the USBKill V4 on devices, allowing configuration and activation via , including options for single-device or multi-device targeting within range. These wireless modes require initial pairing and can be set for low-power sleep states to conserve energy post-insertion. Upon triggering, the device executes one of two primary delivery modes that dictate the nature of the electrical payload discharged into the host's USB data lines. Single mode delivers a one-time high-voltage , typically sufficient to overwhelm unprotected circuitry by shorting lines through multiplied voltage from the internal bank. Continuous mode, in contrast, repeatedly cycles discharges at intervals configurable via the , escalating damage potential against resilient by sustaining stress until the host's delivery is disrupted or the USBKill's depletes. Both modes leverage the device's offline for attacks on ports with authentication, bypassing reliance on host-supplied voltage seen in earlier iterations. Configuration of delivery occurs pre- or post-insertion via or remote, ensuring adaptability to target specifications.

Versions and Modifications

Early Iterations

The initial prototype of the , developed in March 2015 by Russian security researcher Dark Purple, featured a compact circuit board with a DC-DC converter, capacitors, and a (FET) to step up the USB port's 5V input into a -110V discharge pulse directed at the device's data lines, exploiting inadequate surge protection in . By October 2015, Dark Purple introduced version 2.0, which upgraded the design to deliver repeated -220V negative pulses—doubling the voltage of the prior model—for enhanced reliability in inducing hardware failure, as demonstrated in tests that rendered a X60 inoperable within seconds by overwhelming its circuitry. These prototypes prompted commercialization efforts; a Hong Kong engineering team, after the 2015 public disclosure, produced limited private units and refined three internal iterations focused on stability before launching their own Version 2.0 publicly around 2016, aiming to expose persistent USB vulnerabilities and urge manufacturers to implement robust (ESD) safeguards.

Advanced Models like V4

The USBKill V4, released on September 15, 2020, represents a complete redesign from prior iterations, emphasizing enhanced performance, stability, and adaptability for professional . It delivers output voltages up to -215V, enabling more potent electrical discharges capable of overwhelming target device systems. Key advancements include an integrated rechargeable battery supporting offline mode operations, where discharges can occur without host power via 1Hz pulses of unlimited duration, facilitating scenarios like post-power-off attacks on dormant . Available in three variants—Pro, Basic, and Classic—the V4 lineup tailors functionality to user needs while maintaining backward compatibility with USB standards. The version introduces wireless control via , allowing remote triggering, configuration, and monitoring through a smartphone , alongside multiple discharge modes (e.g., single , continuous, or timed sequences) and trigger options such as motion sensors or timed delays. The variant focuses on core discharge capabilities without wireless features, prioritizing simplicity and cost-effectiveness, while the Classic retains a trigger-upon-insertion akin to earlier models but with upgraded voltage stability and reduced failure rates under load. All models incorporate improved covertness through smaller form factors and adaptive adapters for USB-A, , and other ports, ensuring broader device across laptops, tablets, and systems. Testing demonstrates the V4's efficacy against modern hardware, including successful disruptions of power circuits in devices from manufacturers like Apple and since 2015, though outcomes vary by target safeguards such as fused ports. These models prioritize industrial reliability, with feedback-driven enhancements reducing operational inconsistencies reported in predecessors, such as inconsistent voltage delivery during extended use. Deployment kits often include modular components for customization, underscoring the V4's role in advanced penetration testing where precision and repeatability are paramount.

Applications and Uses

Legitimate Security Testing

USBKill devices are employed by penetration testers and cybersecurity professionals to evaluate vulnerabilities in reliant on USB ports. Red teams, simulating adversarial attacks, use the device to disable mission-critical systems, thereby assessing organizational responses to sudden failure and the effectiveness of access controls on unattended devices. This application underscores the risks of USB ports as entry points for destructive physical attacks, prompting organizations to implement stricter policies on peripheral connections. In controlled testing environments, USBKill serves as a tool for validating protection mechanisms in , including computers, servers, and mobile devices. teams deploy it to verify that systems withstand high-voltage discharges, often revealing that over 95% of unprotected USB-equipped devices suffer permanent damage from such s. For instance, tests on desktops and servers demonstrate the device's utility in exposing inadequate shielding, enabling defenders to prioritize hardware hardening like inline fuses or port isolators. Law enforcement and ethical hackers further utilize USBKill to test "fail-to-open" protocols in secure facilities, where triggering a device can force behavioral shifts or simulate data destruction scenarios during seizures. Advanced models like the V4 allow timed or remote activation via mobile apps, facilitating realistic exercises that mimic insider threats or lost device exploitation without requiring constant physical access. Such testing has been documented in evaluations of USB-C ports on devices like the , highlighting persistent vulnerabilities despite evolving standards. These applications are conducted exclusively with explicit authorization to avoid legal repercussions, emphasizing USBKill's role in proactive risk mitigation rather than exploitation.

Forensic and Anti-Seizure Applications

The USBKill V4's advanced trigger modes, including remote activation via a dedicated controller up to 100 meters away, app control, timed attacks configurable for dormancy up to 200 days, and magnetic triggering, facilitate its deployment in scenarios aimed at preventing unauthorized access during potential device seizures. By installing the device in a host system and configuring it for delayed or conditional discharge, users can initiate destruction—via high-voltage pulses into USB lines—to render storage controllers inoperable, such as damaging SSD interfaces or HDD platter mechanisms, thereby complicating forensic without relying on software alone. This physical impairment approach contrasts with wipes, as it targets persistent failures that persist post-power cycle, though success varies by device protections like fused USB ports. In , USBKill serves and security professionals for testing the vulnerability of seized hardware to power surge exploits, simulating real-world attacks to assess recovery feasibility from damaged components. Investigators have documented characteristic artifacts from USBKill s, including anomalous voltage spikes in system event logs, charred USB port residues, and controller chip failures identifiable via or impedance testing, enabling attribution of damage to deliberate surge events rather than natural failure. Such aids in reconstructing timelines of anti-forensic actions, as the device's discharge leaves non-erased on undamaged peripherals or , potentially revealing premeditated deployment intent. While not marketed explicitly for evading seizures, the V4's offline battery operation and configurable pulses (: 5 discharges; continuous: until halted) support covert integration into sensitive systems, such as embedding in custom enclosures for remote detonation if physical custody is threatened. However, empirical tests indicate inconsistent data inaccessibility across targets—e.g., platter HDDs may retain recoverable platters post-controller failure, while SSDs often suffer total array loss—necessitating complementary measures like full-disk for robust protection. Forensic countermeasures include pre-seizure port via blockers and post-incident chip-off recovery techniques, underscoring USBKill's role in highlighting systemic USB flaws rather than foolproof denial.

Risks, Misuse, and Controversies

Notable Incidents of Abuse

In April 2019, Sai Akuthota, a 27-year-old former student expelled from in , used a commercially available device to intentionally damage 66 items of computer equipment, including laptops, desktop computers, monitors, and digital podiums, across multiple campus buildings. The attacks occurred between October 2018 and March 2019, with Akuthota inserting the device into powered-on USB ports to discharge high-voltage surges, rendering the hardware inoperable; he recorded videos of the acts, verbally expressing intent to "kill" the targeted machines. The total damage amounted to $58,471, as assessed by the college's IT department. Akuthota pleaded guilty to charges of criminal of computer equipment and petit in County Court, agreeing to full restitution of the damages as part of the plea deal; he faced potential but sentencing details emphasized repayment over incarceration. This incident highlighted the device's —purchased online for under $50—and its potential for targeted sabotage by disgruntled individuals, prompting discussions on for institutional hardware. No other widely documented cases of hardware deployment in criminal have been reported in reputable sources, though the device's design has raised concerns about analogous misuse in adversarial contexts. The distribution and use of USBKill devices have prompted ethical debates centered on the tension between promoting awareness and enabling potential harm. Proponents, including the device's creators, argue that openly demonstrating USB vulnerabilities through tools like USBKill encourages manufacturers to implement better surge protection, akin to responsible disclosure practices in software security. However, critics contend that making high-voltage destruction accessible via inexpensive, portable hardware lowers barriers to and targeted , potentially incentivizing malicious actors over defensive improvements. Legally, possession and purchase of USBKill remain permissible in most jurisdictions, as the devices are marketed for legitimate testing and no widespread bans exist on ownership for personal or professional use on consenting systems. Use against non-owned equipment, however, constitutes criminal damage to property; a notable case occurred in April 2019 when a former student at in , pleaded guilty to destroying approximately 66 university computers valued at $58,000 using a device, resulting in charges and restitution. In anti-forensic contexts, deploying USBKill to prevent data seizure by authorities raises further legal questions, potentially intersecting with statutes, though no specific precedents directly prohibiting such defensive use on personal devices have been widely reported. Security discussions highlight USBKill's role in exposing a fundamental flaw: many devices lack inherent protection in USB interfaces, allowing physical access to cause irreversible damage to components like motherboards and power circuits. This has fueled arguments for standardized safeguards, such as active voltage clamping, but also underscores limitations—effectiveness requires close physical proximity, rendering it impractical for remote threats while amplifying risks in scenarios like inspections or recovery. Debates persist on whether such tools enhance overall by simulating insider attacks or erode trust in USB ecosystems by demonstrating persistent, low-tech vulnerabilities despite decades of awareness.

Countermeasures and Protections

Hardware and Firmware Safeguards

Modern USB implementations incorporate overcurrent protection on the VBUS line, typically using polymeric positive temperature coefficient (PTC) devices or electronic fuses that detect excessive current—such as from a VBUS-to-ground short—and automatically limit or interrupt power delivery to prevent damage to the port controller or downstream components. These mechanisms comply with USB specifications requiring host ports to provide up to 500 mA () or 900 mA () with safeguards against faults, rendering many basic USBKill short-circuit modes ineffective on compliant hardware. Data lines (D+ and D-) are commonly protected by transient voltage suppressor (TVS) diodes or low-capacitance diode arrays, which clamp overvoltages and shunt ESD or surge energy to ground, diverting high-voltage discharges from reaching sensitive transceivers. However, these components, often rated for IEC 61000-4-2 ESD levels up to 15 kV contact discharge, may be overwhelmed by the sustained high-energy pulses (e.g., -220 V at several amperes) generated by devices, potentially leading to partial or complete failure if not augmented with higher-energy-rated protectors. External hardware mitigations include inline surge protectors, such as the , which insert between the USB cable and port to monitor for anomalous voltage spikes, block malicious discharges via internal circuitry, and signal detection with an LED while permitting normal 5 V charging. Additional modifications, like adding high-power Zener diodes across lines to clamp voltages above 5.1 V or employing galvanic isolators for bidirectional signal separation, can enhance resilience but require custom integration and may introduce latency or compatibility issues. Firmware-based safeguards offer limited defense against physical surges, as USB controller primarily manages enumeration, power negotiation, and port enabling rather than real-time hardware fault isolation. UEFI/BIOS settings can disable unused USB ports or legacy support to reduce exposure vectors, but insertion of a USBKill device bypasses these by triggering damage before intervention. In specialized embedded systems, watchdogs might monitor port currents via integrated sensors and trigger power cutoffs, though this remains uncommon in consumer hardware.

Best Practices for Mitigation

Mitigating the threat posed by devices, which exploit physical access to USB ports to deliver destructive electrical surges, primarily involves operational and procedural measures to prevent unauthorized insertions, as software-based defenses cannot interrupt the hardware-level power discharge. Organizations should implement strict policies prohibiting the insertion of any unverified or unknown USB devices into workstations or servers, coupled with enforcement through access logs and disciplinary actions for violations. Physical barriers such as USB port caps, locks, or blockers provide a low-cost, effective deterrent by rendering ports inaccessible without legitimate tools or keys, thereby eliminating the insertion vector in unattended or shared environments. These measures are particularly recommended for high-value assets, where ports can be capped when not in use for authorized peripherals. Employee programs must emphasize of USBKill risks, instructing personnel to treat all unsolicited or found USB devices as potential threats and to them without insertion, as may such devices to bypass vigilance. Regular simulations or exercises simulating USB drop attacks can reinforce this, reducing accidental or coerced insertions. In environments requiring USB functionality, procedural controls like centralized device approval processes—where only whitelisted, inspected peripherals are permitted—and routine physical inspections of equipment can further minimize exposure, though these must be paired with broader to deny adversaries brief access windows. For portable devices, best practices include never leaving them unattended in public or unsecured areas and avoiding connections to untrusted charging stations, which could facilitate surreptitious swaps. While no procedural measure guarantees absolute protection against determined physical attacks, these practices collectively raise the bar by prioritizing denial of opportunity over reactive defenses.

Impact and Reception

Exposure of Vulnerabilities

The USBKill device exposes fundamental vulnerabilities in USB interfaces, primarily the lack of robust and protection mechanisms that allow malicious devices to exploit the standard 5V for destructive discharges. By charging internal capacitors from the host device's USB port and then releasing high-voltage pulses (typically up to 220V negative or positive spikes) into the lines (D+ and D-) or VBUS line, USBKill demonstrates how unprotected ports can suffer immediate component , such as blown fuses, damaged controllers, or fried motherboards, without any software mediation. This stems from the USB specification's design assumption of benign peripherals, which does not mandate sufficient safeguards against adversarial power manipulation, rendering billions of devices susceptible to physical via a simple . Testing with USBKill variants, such as the V3 and V4 models, has repeatedly shown high failure rates across , including flagship smartphones. For instance, the and were destroyed in seconds when connected, highlighting deficiencies even in devices with advanced implementations that rely on protocol-level authentication rather than low-level electrical isolation. Similarly, the proved vulnerable to USBKill V4 Professional tests, where custom adapters bypassed power delivery negotiation, confirming that authentication schemes like those in Apple's ecosystem do not fully mitigate raw electrical attacks on exposed ports. These demonstrations underscore a broader systemic issue: many USB hosts, from laptops to embedded systems, incorporate minimal transient voltage suppression (TVS) diodes or fuses that are easily overwhelmed by repeated or amplified pulses, as evidenced by USBKill's tracked test results on over hundreds of device models spanning industries. Beyond immediate destruction, USBKill reveals cascading risks in supply-chain and contexts, where attackers could deploy disguised devices to disable without relying on exploitable or . This has prompted recognition in penetration testing communities that USB ports represent a "trusted " blind spot, often unprotected against hardware Trojans that exploit power asymmetry—hosts supply power unidirectionally without verifying peripheral intent. While some enterprise hardware incorporates enhanced ESD () protection rated for higher joule , consumer-grade implementations frequently fall short, as USBKill's consistent success rates in validations illustrate the gap between USB standards (e.g., USB-IF ) and real-world adversarial . The USBKill hardware devices, primarily used for USB port , have gained adoption among penetration testers, hardware manufacturers, agencies, and industrial clients as a standard tool for simulating power surge attacks. This niche market reflects broader security industry awareness of physical USB vulnerabilities, though quantitative adoption metrics remain limited due to the specialized nature of the product. The Kong-based company behind USBKill operates amid 16 competitors as of June 2025, holding a fifth-place ranking in terms of activity and visibility. Ongoing hardware developments center on the USBKill V4 model, which enhances discharge voltage multiplication for more effective testing across data lines, available in and professional configurations for custom . The associated open-source software variant, usbkill, persists on with community forks adapting it for platforms like , enabling USB-triggered shutdowns without physical damage. Emerging alternatives, such as —a kill cord for laptops—demonstrate parallel innovation, with its v0.7.0 release in July 2023 adding soft-shutdown triggers, fixes, and broader OS to reduce risks in anti-forensic scenarios. These developments underscore a trend toward refined, less destructive tools in response to ethical concerns over -killing devices, though USBKill maintains a focus on aggressive for vulnerability exposure.

References

  1. [1]
    usbkill » is an anti-forensic kill-switch that waits for a change on your ...
    usbkill is an anti-forensic kill-switch that waits for a change on your USB ports and then immediately shuts down your computer.Repository Files Navigation · Why? · Feature List
  2. [2]
    The USBKILL anti-forensics tool – it doesn't do *quite* what it says ...
    May 8, 2015 · A hacker who very modestly goes by the handle Hephaest0s has just announced an “anti-forensic kill switch” dubbed, well, usbkill.Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
  3. [3]
    What Happens if you plug a USBKill in a gaming console or a car?
    Dec 2, 2016 · The USBKill is manufactured by the Hong Kong-based technology manufacturer USBKill.com, it is a USB dongle that is able to fry any computer ...
  4. [4]
    This USB Stick Will Instantly Destroy Your Computer - Fortune
    Sep 10, 2016 · The USB Killer, released earlier this summer, rapidly draws power from the hardware, then returns that power in an overloading burst.
  5. [5]
    USBKILL.com Launches New USB KILLER, the USB KILL V3
    Jan 31, 2017 · PRNewswire/ -- USBKILL.com introduces the successor of their famous ESD tester: the USB KILL V3. The V3 is the newest technical evolution in ...
  6. [6]
    This USB stick will fry your unsecured computer - Computerworld
    Sep 8, 2016 · This charge/discharge cycle is repeated many times per second, until the USB Kill stick is removed. The company said its USB Kill 2.0 stick was ...
  7. [7]
    USBKill V4 Announced | USBKill
    Sep 15, 2020 · The V4 architecture is completely rebuilt, focused on feedback from our industrial partners: performance, stability and functionality.Missing: key developments milestones
  8. [8]
    USBKill V4
    In stockThe USBKill has evolved beyond a simple plug-and-zap device. Aside from more powerful discharges and improved stability, the V4 has an internal, rechargeable ...
  9. [9]
    USBKill Desktop / Server Computers Test Results
    USBKill Desktop / Server Computers Test Results. Ever since Version 1.0, the classic test device is a desktop computer. Synonymous with corporate workspace and ...Missing: key developments milestones
  10. [10]
    USBKill | USB Kill devices for pentesting & law-enforcement
    The USBKill is a device that stress tests hardware. When plugged in power is taken from a USB-Port, multiplied, and discharged into the data-lines.USBKill · USBKill Kits · FAQ · USBKill Logo Pin
  11. [11]
    USB Kill | USBKill
    The USB Kill collects power from the USB power lines (5V, 1 - 3A) until it reaches ~ -240V, upon which it discharges the stored voltage into the USB data lines.Missing: operation principle
  12. [12]
  13. [13]
    FAQ | USBKill
    Both the USB Kill and the USB Kill Testing Shield are 100% CE Approved - test in complete confidence. ABUSE. What is your stance on malicious use? USBKill.com ...
  14. [14]
    USBKill V4 Kit
    In stockAside from more powerful discharges and improved stability, the V4 has an internal, rechargeable battery, which allows for "Offline Attacks" - where the host ...Missing: multiplier capacitor
  15. [15]
    USBKill Remote
    In stockIts internal battery and deep-sleep mode allow a device to be installed and remotely triggered up to 200 days later. Triggering via smartphone requires a ...
  16. [16]
    USBKill Laptop and Tablet Test Results
    In our tests, every laptop with a USB-A ("old style") USB port failed either completely or partially. Apple tablet and phone devices typically fail slowly.Missing: key developments milestones
  17. [17]
    The 'USB Killer' Won't Fry Your Computer. Probably. - VICE
    Mar 20, 2015 · Imagine a USB thumb drive that looks just like any other one, but is actually rigged to discharge a destructive amount of electricity to your enemies' ...
  18. [18]
    The USB Killer, Version 2.0 - Hackaday
    Oct 10, 2015 · The USB Killer v2.0 is [Dark Purple]'s second version of this device. The first version was just a small board with a DC/DC converter, a few caps, and a FET.
  19. [19]
    New USB killer 'destroys computer within seconds' - WeLiveSecurity
    Oct 14, 2015 · The follow-up to the original USB killer by Dark Purple can obliterate a computer within seconds by delivering a a negative 220-volt charge ...
  20. [20]
    “USB Killer” flash drive can fry your computer's innards in seconds
    Oct 14, 2015 · Booby-trapped USB stick delivers 220-volt charge to attached computer.
  21. [21]
    USB Kill: Behind the scenes
    Aug 30, 2016 · USB Kill is produced in Hong Kong, by a team of friends and engineers specialising in the conception, production and distribution of security / ...Missing: inventor | Show results with:inventor
  22. [22]
  23. [23]
    USBKill V4 Classic Introduction - YouTube
    Sep 22, 2020 · The V4 Classic is the USBKill that you know and love - but upgraded onto the V4 Framework: more stable, more powerful.
  24. [24]
    USB killer: What it is and how to protect your devices - Infosec Institute
    Jun 6, 2019 · USB Killer is sold commercially under the name USB Kill and can be found here. The product is marketed as a legitimate pentesting tool. It ...
  25. [25]
  26. [26]
    Red Team Insights: Unveiling iPhone 15's USB Port Vulnerability ...
    Dec 12, 2023 · The USBKill Team undertook a significant test using the USBKill V4 Professional on the iPhone 15. This article explores our discoveries and their broader ...Missing: legitimate | Show results with:legitimate
  27. [27]
    USB pen-testing stick: what happens if it falls into malicious hands?
    Mar 22, 2017 · A USB stick marketed to pen testers and law enforcement that could be used to test the surge protection circuitry of electronics.
  28. [28]
    USBKill Cell / Mobile Phone Test Results
    Some Samsung phones resist the USBKill, whereas current models no longer provide protection. One evolution was the Lightning Port and USB-C port.Missing: legitimate | Show results with:legitimate
  29. [29]
    Countering the USBKill Switch - Magnet Forensics
    This research is an attempt to counter the USBKill switch by sharing how it works, what artifacts can be found, and how investigators and incident responders ...
  30. [30]
    Student used 'USB Killer' device to destroy $58,000 worth of college ...
    Apr 17, 2019 · In total, Akuthota caused $58,471 worth of damage. As part of his guilty plea, he has agreed to pay back that amount to the college, a small ...
  31. [31]
    Using 'USB Killer,' former student fries $58,000 in college computer ...
    Apr 22, 2019 · According to USB Kill, the Hong Kong-based company that originally developed the device, the device is developed and sold as a testing ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  32. [32]
    USBKill used to wipe clean criminal's PCs - Security Affairs
    May 5, 2015 · Criminals, activists, and whistleblowers have a new weapon dubbed USBKill in their arsenal to shut down laptops before they police start ...<|separator|>
  33. [33]
    USB Killer: A Threat In The Tech World - FireShark
    Dec 30, 2024 · Legal and Ethical Considerations. The emergence of USB killers has raised significant legal and ethical concerns across various jurisdictions.
  34. [34]
    Should USB killers be illegal? - Quora
    Dec 23, 2016 · The “USB Killer” devices themselves aren't illegal on their own, they're perfectly legal, you can legally carry one around with you everywhere ...
  35. [35]
    How to Protect Mobile Devices from 'USB Kill' Threats - Bourns
    A USB Kill or USB Killer Drive is a malicious USB flash drive that can first charge via the USB Vbus, and then deliver a power surge of between -220/240 VDC and ...
  36. [36]
  37. [37]
    Are USB ports in laptops protected against short circuits? - Super User
    Feb 14, 2016 · Many motherboards uses PTC thermal cutout as the short circuit protection for the USB ports. This device go into high impedance state when its ...
  38. [38]
    ESD Protection of USB 2.0 Interfaces - Semtech Blog
    Aug 17, 2020 · ESD protection is achieved by placing a transient voltage suppression (TVS) diode between the USB port and the USB controller.
  39. [39]
    USBKill Shield
    In stockThe USBKill Shield detects and deflects Power Surge attacks, and also protects your devices against data exfiltration by untrusted third-party chargers.Missing: seizure | Show results with:seizure
  40. [40]
    How can protect my computer against a USB killer? Is it possible to ...
    May 17, 2019 · You could make a USB protection circuit using 5.1V Zener diodes on the 5V and Data lines to clamp the maximum voltage to 5.1V as they will short out any excess ...What would happen if you plugged a USB killer into a wall? - QuoraWhat if I plug the USB Killer into a phone using an adapter? - QuoraMore results from www.quora.com
  41. [41]
    Protect USB Ports From Nefarious “USB Killers" | Bench Talk
    ### Summary of USB Port Protection from USB Killers
  42. [42]
    Security for USB Ports: Why Do Computer Manufacturers Disable ...
    Feb 19, 2021 · Computer manufacturers sometimes disable Universal Serial Bus (USB) ports as boot sources to protect end customers from a USB cyberattack.Missing: USBKill | Show results with:USBKill
  43. [43]
    AskECE: How to defend vs USB Kill? : r/ECE - Reddit
    Sep 14, 2016 · ... protection will be gone. If the USB-kill device can hold a couple ... firmware/software which acts as a watchdog and cuts off the +5V ...an anti-forensic kill-switch that waits for a change on your USB ports ...What is the USB Kill 2.0, and why on earth would anyone want it?More results from www.reddit.comMissing: countermeasures hardware
  44. [44]
    What Is USB Killer Attack and How to Prevent It - IDStrong
    May 15, 2023 · USBKILL V.4 is a USB drive laden with capacitors. The drive is modified to send a 210 - 220 volt electrical surge to a data line overpowering any electronic ...
  45. [45]
    How to Protect USB Interfaces from Malicious USB Killers
    Dec 31, 2024 · One of the simplest ways to protect against USB killers is by using USB data blockers or other data isolation devices. These tools allow USB ...
  46. [46]
    Best Practices for Securing USB Ports | Locking USB Devices
    Jun 20, 2024 · Best practices include using physical USB locks, assessing security needs, and using encrypted USB devices for data security, especially for ...
  47. [47]
    USB Blockers: Physical Security Solutions for Critical Port Protection
    USB blockers provide tangible protection against unauthorized device connections through physical port security that complements software-based controls.
  48. [48]
    Protect the Physical Security of Your Digital Devices - CISA
    Leave your devices unattended, including in a car or hotel room. · Insert unknown media storage devices into your computer. · Throw away your device or sell it ...
  49. [49]
    'USB Killer 2.0' Shows That Most USB-Enabled Devices Are ...
    Sep 9, 2016 · USBKill.com publicly launches its "USB Killer 2.0" to show that most computing devices with USB ports are still vulnerable to power surge
  50. [50]
    [PDF] Killing Your Device via Your USB Port - cscan
    The USB Killer is a USB thumb drive that allegedly destroys the physical component of any hardware device that it is connected to it via an active USB port. The ...
  51. [51]
    Flagship Killer: USBKILL V3 Demonstrates iPhone 8 & Samsung ...
    Sep 28, 2017 · The USB Kill v3 is a thumb-drive sized device that tests the resistance of electronics to a USB Power Surge Attack.
  52. [52]
    USBKill Test Results
    Over the years, we have tracked hardware that is vulnerable, resistant and protected - across a huge variety of devices, spanning multiple industries.Missing: exposes | Show results with:exposes
  53. [53]
  54. [54]
    USBKill - 2025 Company Profile & Competitors - Tracxn
    Jun 23, 2025 · USBKill is an unfunded company based in Hong Kong (China), founded in 2016. It operates as a Brand of charging accessories.
  55. [55]
    NobodySpecial256/qusbkill: Qubes USB kill script, based ... - GitHub
    A working USBKill script for Qubes. Installation is as follows: Copy/move uk into /usr/bin and mark it executable (Optional, but recommended)
  56. [56]
    BusKill v0.7.0 Released with New Features and Support
    Jul 20, 2023 · Downloading it from GitHub. Changes. This update includes many bug fixes and new features, including: Adds support for a 'soft-shutdown' trigger ...
  57. [57]
    BusKill - Crowd Supply
    Free deliveryComparisons. BusKill is the first-ever implementation of a hardware kill cord for laptops. As such, there aren't any real competitors on the market.