After Danfoss, hackers strike other refrigeration systems used in France

French supermarkets faced attacks against computerized refrigeration equipment on consecutive nights. The first offensive disabled systems in several hundred stores using Danfoss technology. The next night, attackers targeted a supermarket in the Bordeaux area using Dixell equipment. The incidents mattered because changing refrigeration controls could rapidly endanger food stocks.

At the Dixell-equipped store, monitoring systems detected an abnormal temperature rise around 4 am. Responding store teams and refrigeration specialists found that the attackers had changed defrost and temperature-regulation settings. Frozen goods set for -22 degrees were instead assigned a setting of 150 degrees. The specialists managed to restore control, so no goods were thrown away.

The article does not identify the attackers or explain how they entered the systems. It does show that the operation continued across different equipment brands. Damien Deudon said the changes appeared automated, because two or three settings were altered every second. Supermarkets therefore faced an ongoing threat requiring vigilant monitoring and rapid intervention.

Danfoss and Dixell are companies that provide technology for refrigeration systems. In a supermarket, their equipment helps control cooling units, monitor temperatures, and manage defrost cycles. These controls keep refrigerated and frozen goods within the intended temperature range. The article identifies both companies through the systems installed in the affected stores.

The incident shows why these systems matter. In the Dixell-equipped supermarket, attackers changed defrost and temperature-regulation settings remotely. Frozen goods that should have been kept at -22 degrees were assigned a setting of 150 degrees. Monitoring systems detected the resulting temperature spike around 4 am, allowing specialists to intervene before products had to be discarded.

The source does not describe the precise products or network design made by either company. More generally, connected refrigeration controls can become operational technology targets because software settings affect physical equipment. The attacks show that supermarket cooling is not merely background infrastructure. It is a digitally managed part of protecting food stocks.

The clearest figure is that the initial offensive disabled systems in several hundred stores operated with Danfoss technology. That indicates a broad attack rather than an isolated incident. The article describes the targets as French supermarkets, but it does not provide a complete national store count or map of affected locations.

The follow-up incident involved at least one supermarket in the Bordeaux area equipped with Dixell technology. Damien Deudon identified that store but chose not to name it. Monitoring systems detected the problem, and responders stopped the attack before goods were lost. The source does not say how many other Dixell-equipped stores were affected.

The attacks therefore crossed technology brands, but their full scale remains unclear from the available text. The first incident had a documented impact of several hundred stores. The second is confirmed at one Bordeaux-area location. No article-provided figure establishes the total number of French supermarkets involved.

The attackers altered two kinds of refrigeration controls: defrost settings and temperature-regulation settings. For frozen goods, the intended setting was -22 degrees, but the attackers changed it to 150 degrees. The extreme value shows how a software command could push a physical refrigeration system far outside safe operating conditions.

The immediate danger is warming inside freezers. Frozen products could begin thawing, lose their required storage condition, and become unsuitable for sale. The article does not describe actual spoilage in the Dixell incident. Instead, it reports that monitoring detected the abnormal rise and that teams and specialists stopped the attack before any goods had to be discarded.

The event also highlights why temperature alarms matter. A changed setting may not instantly destroy stock, but it can create a rapidly worsening condition. The article gives no confirmed losses from the Danfoss attacks or a detailed food-safety assessment. It does establish that altered controls created a direct risk to frozen goods.

The article does not reveal exactly how the attackers reached the refrigeration systems. It shows that they could alter settings remotely and affect multiple controls. In modern connected facilities, such access can occur through a management network, remote service connection, or compromised account, but those possibilities are general background, not confirmed details here.

At the Bordeaux-area supermarket, the hackers changed defrost and temperature-regulation settings at a remarkable pace. Damien Deudon said they were changing two or three settings per second. He considered that much faster than any human could manage manually. The changes produced an abnormal temperature spike detected around 4 am.

The speed suggested an automated operation, such as software issuing repeated commands rather than a person editing each setting individually. The article does not name the tool, identify the attackers, or describe their entry point. It does show that automation allowed rapid, systematic manipulation and made continuous monitoring especially important for supermarket operators.

The reported supermarket used monitoring systems that detected an abnormal temperature spike around 4 am. That early warning gave store teams and refrigeration specialists time to investigate and respond. The article confirms monitoring and on-site intervention, but it does not list the system’s exact sensors, alarms, or communication methods.

A practical defense combines continuous temperature monitoring with alerts for sudden changes and impossible settings. Operators can also restrict remote access, use strong authentication, keep control systems separated from ordinary business networks, and record setting changes. Emergency procedures should identify who can isolate remote control, restore safe settings, and inspect affected freezers. These are established cybersecurity and refrigeration practices, not specific measures confirmed in the article.

Rapid response remains central. Staff should verify alarms, contact refrigeration specialists, and check goods while systems are secured. In the reported case, specialists stopped the attack and no products were discarded. The continuing attacks suggest supermarkets need both technical safeguards and vigilant human oversight.

Refrigeration removes heat from a storage space, while temperature regulation controls when cooling equipment runs to maintain a target temperature. Frozen goods in the reported store were meant to remain at -22 degrees. A control system monitors conditions and adjusts equipment when temperatures move away from that target.

Defrost cycles are also part of the process. They temporarily manage ice buildup on cooling equipment so the system can continue working effectively. The article does not explain the engineering details of the cycle, but it confirms that attackers changed both defrost and temperature-regulation settings. That combination could disrupt normal cooling and push temperatures upward.

When these controls work correctly, frozen goods remain within their required storage conditions. When settings are altered, cooling may be weakened, interrupted, or misdirected. In the incident, monitoring detected an abnormal rise around 4 am. Specialists intervened quickly, preventing the temperature change from causing reported product loss.