• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

The U.S. government has known about the flaw since the U.S. campaign in Bosnia in the 1990s, current and former officials said. But the Pentagon assumed local adversaries wouldn't know how to exploit it, the officials said.

This has nothing to do with cutting expenditure corners. It's about making decisions on where to spend (waste in some cases) the funds. But this actually exposes another problem within the Pentagon. The Pentagon and the RMA often loses sight of the world their troops inhabit. This is what happens when war fighters become too far removed from it, become politically minded, and are surrounded by civilians who have never experienced the uniform yet "out rank" them.

The Gulf War taught the Pentagon and the RMA the wrong lessons. Instead of the future they envisioned, where technology alone would win wars with the minimum of ground troops waltzing in to greet the surrendering enemy, they got the same future history has produced for thousands of years. Technology has its place, but war will never change. Of course, it would take the blundering of fools at high levels years to prove this correct with the concept of non-lethal weapon fantasies and "Shock and Awe" fireworks.

We spend billions of dollars on a jet program that exists to fight a Soviet model enemy, but no troop receives adequate body armor to protect him against the 7.62 round that has been fired at him since the inception of the AK. I guess individual armor wasn't technological enough of a toy to play with. But once it became a political tool....

Foolish theories and blundering decisions do indeed infect the hierarchy of the Defense sector. Our military power around the globe has allowed our diplomats and politicians to be unimaginitive and feed an impractical idea that our military can do anything at anytime with little effort (another bad lesson learned from the Gulf War). This relates directly into assuming that the enemy will behave in the manner in which our toys have been made. Or that if our enemy actually points out a weakness in our systems that he will be too stupid to "know how to exploit it." How about a UAV leak allows our enemy to understand our patterns? Or how to adjust his movement tactics? Just another example of how far removed the Pentagon thinkers and their civilian over lords are from the world of the troop. Our enemy has mixed the Internet, cellular phones, and Radio Shack devices with donkeys and the good old reliable AK. We spend billions on our toys and the media focuses on the 100 dollar IED. Who is getting a bigger bang for their buck?

We are thinking too big. While we must remain aware and ready for that improbable war with a bigger nation state enemy, we must also be aware of the enemy history is placing before us.
 
Last edited:
Are some of you done bitching and moaning without the facts not to mention going off topic? The reason encryption was nonexistent in some cases is because it slows things down. Sometimes you have to act here and now and you have to take some risk.

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.
 
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 U.S. is apparently responded to these findings by attempting to add encryption to video feeds from drones. However, ready available encryption systems may not be compatible with the proprietary technology used by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. for communication between the drone and those remotely controlling the aircraft. Furthermore, encryption may slow down the sharing of time-sensitive information.

Moral Machines: Hacking Drones
 
haha.


God forbid the voice of the States get heard over the commanding of the Fed.

People forget... the North came down here.

It was not a fight to liberate black people. It was a fight to finally put the Federal government as the sole-ruler of the lands. State's right today is almost an illusion.

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.
 
The U.S. is apparently responded to these findings by attempting to add encryption to video feeds from drones. However, ready available encryption systems may not be compatible with the proprietary technology used by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. for communication between the drone and those remotely controlling the aircraft. Furthermore, encryption may slow down the sharing of time-sensitive information.

Moral Machines: Hacking Drones

Oh c'mon. What does this tell you? Since the 90s mind you....

"Ready available encryptian systems may not be compatible" because no one cared to look into it over the past 15 years. Somebody made a decision a long time ago and it has been out of mind ever since. Perhaps if this was a focus of funding something from our Defense Industry may have been made "readily available." I guarantee that now that there is money to be made somebody will create something "readily available." Were Flak Jackets compatible to blocking 7.62 in 2003? Yet, 7.62 has been tearing into the flesh of our soldiers for decades while our cops on the streets are protected from bullet impacts. Like this encryption issue somebody decided a long time ago that anything more was "unnecessary" and that money should be spent elsewhere. Perhaps another 15 F/A-22s to be parked in hangers during two wars.

"Encryptian may slow down" is excuse making. The military has been encrypting VTC for years and years. You don't unencrypt systems because it may be easier. This defies our doctrine and they need to fix it.
 
Last edited:
As much as I like winning, I think when we take the honor out of combat (i.e. remote controlled planes) we're asking for bad karma. Plain and simple. But then again, how do you fight a honorless coward if you're playing by the rules? You cheat.
 
The U.S. is apparently responded to these findings by attempting to add encryption to video feeds from drones. However, ready available encryption systems may not be compatible with the proprietary technology used by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. for communication between the drone and those remotely controlling the aircraft. Furthermore, encryption may slow down the sharing of time-sensitive information.

I love our procurement process. What moron decided to order a system that doesn't inter-operate with our current encryption systems? Vendor lock-in is completely unacceptable for military requirements. Someone is either extremely incompetent or utterly corrupt. An investigation should be launched to figure out which.
 
I say we fix the problem. There must an 8th grader out there someplace that can fix the problem.
A few years ago my grandson showed me a bunch of electronic parts scattered all over his bedroom floor attached by wires. He said isn't this neat? I said I suppose it might be if I knew what the hell it was. It's my new computer I just finished it, watch he said as he flipped a switch. Sure as shooting a monitor lit up and in seconds he was online. He was 15 at the time. I asked him where he learned to do it He said Uncle Mitch told me.

I am using one of his Uncles home made PCs right now. Between my Son and Grandson they have built dozens for the family from scratch, My son has a degree in computer technology and my grandson wants one.
My son explained how easy it would be to encrypt a complete system like the Predator but I didn't understand it all but he said his nephew could most likely do it.
 
I say we don't fix the problem. They want to zoom in on video feeds from a Reaper or Predator....bring it on. A hellfire missile will be your last dip into your popcorn.

US airstrike kills 3 in North Waziristan - The Long War Journal

The US killed three Islamist terrorists in the third airstrike n two days in Pakistan's Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan.

The strike, carried out by unmanned Predator or Reaper attack aircraft, hit a Taliban safe house in the Datta Khel region in North Waziristan. Several Hellfire missiles were reported to have been launched in the airstrike.

Not watching TV, Zuhaib? Didn't have yer little hand held video capture interception toy? Or did you?

"The US drone missiles hit a house in the mountains," a Pakistani intelligence official told Dawn. "We have reports of three militants killed and five injured. The house was completely destroyed."

US intelligence officials contacted by The Long War Journal would not comment on the target of the attack.

The Datta Khel region was the focus of two airstrikes yesterday which killed a senior al Qaeda commander and six fighters, as well as 11 Haqqani Network fighters.

The al Qaeda commander was identified as Zuhaib al Zahibi. A senior US military intelligence official described Zahibi as "a general officer equivalent" in the Lashkar al Zil, or the Shadow Army.

Al-Qaeda's Lashkar al Zil is their shadow army, I wonder if the hellfire had a shadow on the way down...

We're right behind you Barack Obama, I think you're a circus clown, but you are our Commander in Chief. Unchain McChrystal and allow attack dog Stanley to wage this war.

And Zuhaib...as you obviously won't be needing it anymore, can we have yer lil hand held video capture thing there.....can someone pry it from Zuhibi's fingers there, it looks like a good Santa's sack toy for a good little girl or boy.

Merry Christmas!
 
As much as I like winning, I think when we take the honor out of combat (i.e. remote controlled planes) we're asking for bad karma. Plain and simple. But then again, how do you fight a honorless coward if you're playing by the rules? You cheat.


IMO, it creates a weak link.
 
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.
 
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:
It's Obama's fault.
 
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.
 
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:
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.


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:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
I think there might be another element at play here.

Data is only sensitive when it's pertinent ... For example, if the drone is reporting its position (telemetry), that information is only applicable for that instant. Someone who intercepts it can't do anything with it .. because the circumstance has changed. So, the data, though sensitive, does not need to be protected because, by the time it is intercepted, it is no longer true and, thus, no longer of any value.

Similarly, if the drone were downlinking photos of terrain as it passes over, that info doesn't need to be protected because it has no practical value. By the time they receive the picture, the drone is no longer there. Besides, if they wanted pictures of the terrain, they could just use a Canon SureShot and get their own.

I would expect that a data analysis was done to determine the need to protect the data based not on the information, but on the potential for exploitation.

Applying blanket rules to unique situations inevitably leads to the wrong conclusions.
 
This data could be extremely useful to the Taliban. Looking at this telemetry would let you know the aircraft's location letting you give advance warning for your fighters to hide, or even simply drop their weapons and act like civilians. Even better, you know for certain if they have identified you, letting you relocate before an attack can be commenced. You can determine how effective your camouflage is against aerial photography and test new schemes if your current stuff doesn't work. Finally, in a combat situation, knowing you have been located lets you scatter or hit the dirt to minimize casualties, especially if the aircraft is performing the attack.

That is what I came up with in 5 minutes of writing that post. I am sure the Taliban, who bought the receivers in the first place, put a little more thought into it. The Enigma was cracked in WW2 solely because the Germans broadcasted the same weather data both encrypted and in the clear, leading to a known plain-text attack. In fighting a war of information, small mistakes can have large impacts.
 
I think there might be another element at play here.

Data is only sensitive when it's pertinent ... For example, if the drone is reporting its position (telemetry), that information is only applicable for that instant. Someone who intercepts it can't do anything with it .. because the circumstance has changed. So, the data, though sensitive, does not need to be protected because, by the time it is intercepted, it is no longer true and, thus, no longer of any value.

Similarly, if the drone were downlinking photos of terrain as it passes over, that info doesn't need to be protected because it has no practical value. By the time they receive the picture, the drone is no longer there.

I would expect that a data analysis was done to determine the need to protect the data based not on the information, but on the potential for exploitation.

Applying blanket rules to unique situations inevitably leads to the wrong conclusions.

BINGO! Get this man a Cigar!
 
This data could be extremely useful to the Taliban. Looking at this telemetry would let you know the aircraft's location letting you give advance warning for your fighters to hide, or even simply drop their weapons and act like civilians. Even better, you know for certain if they have identified you, letting you relocate before an attack can be commenced. You can determine how effective your camouflage is against aerial photography and test new schemes if your current stuff doesn't work. Finally, in a combat situation, knowing you have been located lets you scatter or hit the dirt to minimize casualties, especially if the aircraft is performing the attack.

That is what I came up with in 5 minutes of writing that post. I am sure the Taliban, who bought the receivers in the first place, put a little more thought into it. The Enigma was cracked in WW2 solely because the Germans broadcasted the same weather data both encrypted and in the clear, leading to a known plain-text attack. In fighting a war of information, small mistakes can have large impacts.

I'm sorry the fact that some data was not encrypted indicating a total dumb dumb meltdown of pre-planning, engineering, and operations in the field, just doesn't add up. There have to be good reasons why some data is not encrypted, and one must always be aware the media will exaggerate a story to make a sell. Hell the FAUX network has been caught completely fabricating things.
 
I'm sorry the fact that some data was not encrypted indicating a total dumb dumb meltdown of pre-planning, engineering, and operations in the field, just doesn't add up.

Why not? It isn't the first time such a thing has happened, and it sure as hell won't be the last.

There have to be good reasons why some data is not encrypted, and one must always be aware the media will exaggerate a story to make a sell.

No there isn't. Just like there wasn't a good reason why Mark 14 torpedo failed to work reliably during WW2, or the M-16 was issued with improper ammunition increasing weapon jamming in Vietnam.

Hell the FAUX network has been caught completely fabricating things.

Not in this case. Its clear that the Taliban have been intercepting our signals, and that technology exists that could have prevented it.

Claiming "but the military can't make mistakes", especially considering numerous counterexamples, is not a valid argument. Encrypted video feeds needs to be added ASAP, and the people responsible for this mistake need to removed to prevent further problems. Claiming it doesn't exist just aids our foes.
 
Back
Top Bottom