Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 75

Thread: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

  1. #61
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    I was wrong. Perhaps this does need a second and serious look.

    Not Just Drones: Militants Can Snoop on Most U.S. Warplanes (Updated) | Danger Room | Wired.com

    Tapping into drones’ video feeds was just the start. The U.S. military’s primary system for bringing overhead surveillance down to soldiers and Marines on the ground is also vulnerable to electronic interception, multiple military sources tell Danger Room. That means militants have the ability to see through the eyes of all kinds of combat aircraft — from traditional fighters and bombers to unmanned spy planes. The problem is in the process of being addressed. But for now, an enormous security breach is even larger than previously thought.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  2. #62
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    Actually it was. People like to say that slavery was not the main cause of the Civil War. People like to say that the South seceded from the Union in order to preserve states' rights, not slavery. And that Lincoln went to war to preserve the Union, not to end slavery. I have no idea why this has become fashionable but it defies what really happened.

    The difference of labor systems was the point of conflict for the powerful in the North and the powerful in the South. The expanding industry of the North depended on a wage labor system, and the Southern plantation depended on slavery. As both sides eyed the newe territories in Texas and the West, these differences in systems, offerred more than enconomic competition. As the conflict of words intensified, easch system came to stand for a way of life. Slavery meant agriculture, Southern gentility, honor, the traditions and values of past generations of planters. In the North, wage labor meant free labor, free land, free men, opportunity, progress, and industry.

    Politicians and media began the rhetoric work up that led to the Civil War. By the time Lincoln was elected, the West had leaned entirely towards the wage labor concept of the North. This signaled the ultimate loss of that battleground. To Southern plantation owners, it seemed as another blow towards their class and way of life. It all began over economics. If this is true, then what part of slavery are we supposed to pretend had nothing to do with it?

    Now, after the Civil War, the North would go on to prove that freeing slaves had nothing to do with equality. Society went on to fail them for another 100 years. But the Civil War was about the slaves and the economic system they represented.
    Then it was a war to destroy the Southern way of life? That sounds even more brutal and intolerable if you ask me.

    Maybe it was laced in the rhetoric associated with liberating slaves, but it was not a war for the goodwill of Blacks. No matter how you twist it, you are going to find that it is still the Federal powers demanding change with a militia.

    The only peaceful acts was when Robert E. Lee and others called off the insurrection that was going to follow the war. Forever made Lee an unpalatable figure to strong Southerners.
    Last edited by Arch Enemy; 12-18-09 at 11:58 AM.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  3. #63
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    It's Obama's fault.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    It's Obama's fault.
    Silly American, You spelled Bush wrong.

  5. #65
    Guru
    Councilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Riverside, County, CA.
    Last Seen
    11-04-11 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,454
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Everyone should keep in mind these systems are used along the southern border now as well. Clearly not to stop illegal aliens because Obama and all the Dims (no spell error) want as many of them as they can get here so that ACORN can illegally register them to illegally vote as well, but supposedly catch drug smugglers, who now have been told how to tao into the systems and avoid being caught.

    I think we should go down and get the software so we can all join in the fun and see what they are really looking at here at home.

    I'm wondering if they have them circling over nude beaches or resorts.
    I know it's not funny but a stupid as it is to allow this problem to go unfixed for 5 years is the ultimate in stupidity at management level.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    Actually it was. People like to say that slavery was not the main cause of the Civil War. People like to say that the South seceded from the Union in order to preserve states' rights, not slavery. And that Lincoln went to war to preserve the Union, not to end slavery. I have no idea why this has become fashionable but it defies what really happened.

    The difference of labor systems was the point of conflict for the powerful in the North and the powerful in the South. The expanding industry of the North depended on a wage labor system, and the Southern plantation depended on slavery. As both sides eyed the newe territories in Texas and the West, these differences in systems, offerred more than enconomic competition. As the conflict of words intensified, easch system came to stand for a way of life. Slavery meant agriculture, Southern gentility, honor, the traditions and values of past generations of planters. In the North, wage labor meant free labor, free land, free men, opportunity, progress, and industry.

    Politicians and media began the rhetoric work up that led to the Civil War. By the time Lincoln was elected, the West had leaned entirely towards the wage labor concept of the North. This signaled the ultimate loss of that battleground. To Southern plantation owners, it seemed as another blow towards their class and way of life. It all began over economics. If this is true, then what part of slavery are we supposed to pretend had nothing to do with it?

    Now, after the Civil War, the North would go on to prove that freeing slaves had nothing to do with equality. Society went on to fail them for another 100 years. But the Civil War was about the slaves and the economic system they represented.
    From what research I've done, it wasn't mostly about slavery, but seeing as slavery was tied to the main reasons for the war, slavery was indirectly a cause of the conflict which led to war. Those reasons being State's Rights to make laws as they please (including slavery) and the North's seemingly blatant crusade on the South's economy (Plantation economy with slaves vs. the North's Textile industry) with tariffs.
    Last edited by EpicDude86; 12-18-09 at 01:30 PM.

  7. #67
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    Then it was a war to destroy the Southern way of life?
    In ways it was.

    It's the powerful that shake the world. They are the ones that move civilizations into conflict and create most wars, especially where capitalism is involved. The powerful in the South were the plantation owners. With the North winning influence in Texas and the rest of the west, the South saw even more encroachment. Like the South, the powerful of the North were the business owners. Their economy was based on wage labor and they were denied expansion in the South. Add in a few other things and the American Civil War goes down in history.


    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    Maybe it was laced in the rhetoric associated with liberating slaves, but it was not a war for the goodwill of Blacks.
    Of course not. One only has to look at th period between the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil Rights Movement to prove this.

    The North was just as racist as the South. The only difference was that they had the luxury of declaring their superiority because their society was based on wage labor and not associated with slavery. The hypocrisy here is that the North and Europe greatly benefited from the South's cotton industry. Cotton was absolutely huge to exportation, which the North was associated with. But in the end, two contrasting systems of labor was not going to last in a country where unification depended on common laws and order. Slavery and the business of it was a huge factor between the South and the North.

    Think of it like this....if business and economy wasn't involved would the American Civil War have occurred? Probably not (at least not when it did). Business and economy made slavery a political focus. Sort of like the poor Kuwaitis...or saving the world from the oppression of the Soviet Union.
    Last edited by MSgt; 12-18-09 at 11:16 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  8. #68
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    In ways it was.

    It's the powerful that shake the world. They are the ones that move civilizations into conflict and create most wars, especially where capitalism is involved. The powerful in the South were the plantation owners. With the North winning influence in Texas and the rest of the west, the South saw even more encroachment. Like the South, the powerful of the North were the business owners. Their economy was based on wage labor and they were denied expansion in the South. Add in a few other things and the American Civil War goes down in history.




    Of course not. One only has to look at th period between the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil Rights Movement to prove this.

    The North was just as racist as the South. The only difference was that they had the luxury of declaring their superiority because their society was based on wage labor and not associated with slavery. The hypocrisy here is that the North and Europe greatly benefited from the South's cotton industry. Cotton was absolutely huge to exportation, which the North was associated with. But in the end, two contrasting systems of labor was not going to last in a country where unification depended on common laws and order. Slavery and the business of it was a huge factor between the South and the North.

    Think of it like this....if business and economy wasn't involved would the American Civil War have occurred? Probably not (at least not when it did). Business and economy made slavery a political focus.
    We agree then.

    The war of northern aggression was about bypassing the state's rights in order to promote the business plan of the North.

    It was still a war with the kernel of determinism. The North wanted to spread the idea of the "Union" that made no facade of it's attempt to screw the South; and the South was fed up with the Fed.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  9. #69
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,027

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    All communications lines are to be encrypted. This is doctrine. Encryption does not slow video feeds down to any real noticable point. VTCs between commanders and Generals in the war zone with the Pentagon are encrypted. The video feed from the UAVs seems to have been exempt from this rule since the 90s because tapping into a video feed wouldn't give an enemy time to react anyway. This was an over sight and one made because the decision makers on this lacked imagination. I guarantee that our UAVs will be fitted with encryption in the near future.
    The point was not that they aren't fitted with encryption, the point was sometimes the users didn't want to encryption to slow down a real time operation. If you want me to believe all the industry experts and folks in the present military are wrong and you are the only right one I don't buy it.

  10. #70
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

    The point was not that they aren't fitted with encryption, the point was sometimes the users didn't want to encryption to slow down a real time operation. If you want me to believe all the industry experts and folks in the present military are wrong and you are the only right one I don't buy it.
    What industry experts are claiming that real-time video encryption doesn't exist? It currently exists is numerous forms today, and there no technical reason it couldn't have been implemented on these drones.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •