Since we had this discussion about UAVs and F22s etc...

djolds1 · Post by **djolds1** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:58 pm

Roger wrote:
ladajo wrote: The single greatest threat we face as a nation is EMP.
Heard that in the 70's too. Retreading threats tends to make folk turn off. After 40 years even more so.

*cough* CO2 causing cooling, no warming, no cooling... *cough*

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:22 pm

djolds1 wrote:
Roger wrote:
ladajo wrote: The single greatest threat we face as a nation is EMP.
Heard that in the 70's too. Retreading threats tends to make folk turn off. After 40 years even more so.
*cough* CO2 causing cooling, no warming, no cooling... *cough* :twisted:

More like "coal fired plants are evil". Aerosols or CO2 take your pick.

Now who would gain from "coal fired plants are evil" ? Follow the money.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:05 pm

Another reason to keep the targeting loop within the confines of the airframe:

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/ ... ed_121709/

Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, said this week that hacking is always a worry.

“Any time you have a system that is operated through command links, and that broadcasts information using omnidirectional signals, those are subject to listening and exploitation,” said Deptula.

AI then... ready for air combat yet?

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:31 pm

Code: Select all

Another reason to keep the targeting loop within the confines of the airframe

This has been blown out of proportion and your conclusions are wrong for multiple reasons.
First of all all they did was intercept images sent to the ground by the drones to the handheld field systems deployed with the ground troops. These systems were deployed so quickly that there was no time to implement an encryption system. I would call that an oversight.
But then the system to was so successful that they put it into all US aircraft, including all MANNED aircraft as well.
That is what I would call negligent.
So as you see the issue is not just with the UAVs but with any aircraft.
Now, this does not allow any enemoy to take control of the UAV, or to do anything else other than to spy at the spy. This is still bad enough though.
Luckily the easy solution is to implement an encryption.
Problem solved.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:36 pm

Skipjack wrote:Luckily the easy solution is to implement an encryption.
Problem solved.

And we all know that encryption can never, never, ever be defeated.
Muwahhahahhahhahhhhahhhahahhh!

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:43 pm

And we all know that encryption can never, never, ever be defeated.
Muwahhahahhahhahhhhahhhahahhh!

Sure it can be. Any encryption can be. But by the time the enemy has decrypted it, it will be outdated data that noone cares for anymore, if the enemy is still alive at that point.
If it was such a BIG problem, then any kind of wireless data comunication would be impossible. The US would have to return to scouts carrying letters between units or something?

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:58 pm

Actually, there is a type of encryption that cannot be broken without access to the original key. It is called a single-use key. The earliest forms used some existing book. You used the book as the source additional data to encode and decode the messages. As long as the identity of the key was unknown to a third party, it was not possible to decode the message.

The best keys for this should be truely random, not pseudorandom. They only are fully secure if only used once.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water on this video hacking thing. Yeah, it is kinda dumb to let it happen, but if it was done to get the UAVs into the field faster, they may have saved tens of thousands of lives in the process. The Falluja campaign alone could easily have cost 4000 lives, but they let UAVs spot the enemy, and arty and manned aircraft pound the snot out of them instead of going in house-to-house.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 12:00 am

As I said, this mistake was not limited to UAVs. It affects all US military aircraft. So the UAVs do not really have a disadvantage out of it.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 12:08 am

I'm not saying UAVs should not be used. I'm saying they are nowhere near ready to replace F-22s. For remote-contolled UAVs, there is also the comm link delay issue, in addition to link hacking.

Figure minimum 0.5 sec, Nevada-to-Afghanistan-to-Nevada, more when data compression/encryption/de-encryption/decompression is used, yet more when bandwidth is compromised by enemy jamming activity, solar storms, equipment degradation, etc. Auto-tracking neutrino beam links are somewhat faster, but won't be technologically mature for a "while".

Looks like unmanned air combat will have to go the AI route, but by then the F-22s will be retired and high-power, fast-slewing, airborne DEWs will have neutralized the threat from small, fast, idiot-savant UCAV dogfighters.

Helius · Post by **Helius** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 12:21 am

"Look! The Yankee UAV is showing some mujahideen looking at a laptop. Oh Oh..."

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 12:54 am

DeltaV wrote:
Skipjack wrote:Luckily the easy solution is to implement an encryption.
Problem solved.
And we all know that encryption can never, never, ever be defeated.
Muwahhahahhahhahhhhahhhahahhh!

Time is not on the side of the decrypters.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:42 am

You may be hinting at quantum encryption. Yes, that will be tough to crack.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:27 am

DeltaV wrote:You may be hinting at quantum encryption. Yes, that will be tough to crack.

The key to Enigma being useful in WW2 is that in many cases they could decrypt the messages at the same time the Germans did. Some times if there was a garble in the transmission (due to radio noise or human factors) the Allies could decrypt a message before the German's could.

Militarily significant messages have to be decrypted in real time.

For instance: it does no good to know the German rate of rise in tank production does not match the allied effort if the Germans are beating you in tank battles due to superior tactics and intelligence.

UAV missions? By the time you see yourself in the "headlights" it is probably too late. What you really want is the mission orders.

choff · Post by **choff** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:50 pm

You don't really need encryption/decryption to find out what the other guy is doing, all you need is your own insurance company or bank. Before the U.S. entered WWII, there was an intense effort in Canada to keep convoy traffic info out of German hands. Meanwhile, the German consul in New York could pick up the morning newspaper, turn to the commodities page and read about the arrival/departure time of ships heading to England.
Another fun way to find out what the other guy is doing is through second and third party reinsurance. During WWII for the cost of a few stamps a German insurance company could get detailed blueprints of U.S. factories complete with danger areas highlighted, same for ships and cargo.
A lot of major international banking executives also worked in senior intel/government admin positions, it gets murky.

IntLibber · Post by **IntLibber** » Sun Dec 20, 2009 1:27 pm

The UAV video problem is due to the fact that they were developed cheaply to use commercial architecture. The video signal is relayed over commercial DISH network satellites, or was until a few years ago when one DISH satellite, AMC-14 failed to reach GSO. DoD bought it from the insurance company for 10 million and nudged it into position over the persian gulf, and it now handles all the Predator video signals, isolating the Predator system from the regular commercial satellites. This year it was joined by the PAN satellite, which uses the exact same satellite bus and provides more capacity and signals capabilities.

DoD didn't use video encryption because of flawed logic that they didn't have to worry about paying customers... but this can easily be implemented by a change in programming.

I suspect that the only video feeds they can hack into today are ones the DoD WANTS them to see, to provide informants within insurgent groups plausible deniability when information is leaked and attacks come.