OPSEC - never underestimate the enemy...

Discussion in 'Int Corps' started by CRmeansCeilingReached, Dec 18, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. various sources report the story that insurgents in both iraq and afghanistan have managed to view downlink footage from Predator, using commercially available software:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/17/skygrabber-software-drones-hacked


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8419147.stm (snipped)


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/6834884/Iraq-insurgents-hacked-Predator-drone-video-feed.html


    from the beeb again:

    or in other words: "what the hell do you mean the downlink is unencrypted!??!? are you insane?!?! sort it out!!!"


    don't know how accurate or up to date the story is, but a timely reminder never to underestimate the enemy...
     
  2. There is obviously an issue with potentially unencrypted sat links, but was this not known? Is this not how Rover works? Anyhoo.

    The bigger thing is that this is practically a non issue. The Iraqi's that I 'met' over there had a hard enough time working out how a map worked, and could not even identify their own house from a overhead image. Asking them to try and interpret a FMV feed, that could actually be being taken from anywhere in TELIC, HERRICK is another thing entirely. I'm pretty sure that I wouild have a difficult time doing it and I'm an IA.

    Yes there is an underlying issue, and no I'm not in anyway saying that our enemies are dense, but as usual, IMHO the media have blown this out of all proportion...
     
  3. Whilst the opposition may not be able to take full tactical advantage of what can be watched, it has been known for some considerable time that these feeds were available to anyone with the knowhow and equipment to watch. Without being specific, I believe you would be horrified at the ease of data capture.
     
  4. Well the media have blown the Russian originated software that allows you to view the video stream.
    Apparently it was available to the Serbs during the Kosovo campaign.
    The US is claiming they knew about this but didn't believe anybody would have the nouse to use it.
    The problem was encrypting live video stream when it was shared with multiple users,
    as numerous command eyes wanted in on the video game!
    They claim that the Predators in Af/Pak are datastream protected.
     
  5. Having seen your IA skills, I concur! :wink: You can't even spell 'would'!
     
  6. and according to his missus, he also has problems with "wood" ;)
     
  7. I think that's a ridiculous view to take.

    There are people linked to the Taliban, Muslim extremists, who have been born and bred in the UK. They have lived with technology and our way of life since birth, and are returning to, or at least assisting, the Taliban.

    To assume that the people are sub-standard to interpret the intelligence is completely naive! It's beyond the point.

    BATCO sheets were barely understood even by the people that use them. But if there was a systematic failure found out that allowed the enemy to intercept them at the same time that we used them... somebody would have done something about it!
     
  8. I have to say that this is one of the mongiest statements. There is a huge issue. How can you say that these people would have a hard time even to identify their own house etc when a) they figured out how to get the video feed, and which satellite or satellites it was on b) the information that they gain is given to the commanders who then use it to determine where best to send their troops and/or weaponary.
    If anything the media has undermined the issues that this could/can cause. How many lives has this cost? Why on earth do you think that they cannot interpret the feed? Do you think that only people from the west have knowledge about how technology works? It is far from a non issue.
     
  9. No. A mong statement would calling an individual who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome a retard.
     
  10. Is that the best you can come up with?
     
  11. I did my sigs course over forty years ago when we were told that any signal sent by any means was going to be heard and read by the enemy after a time, being over confident about your technoligy is stupid and it cost the Germans the war, If we and the Septics did not see this coming then we have a command that is thicker than I thought. After the cock up with the US Navy not encripting the SatNav signals you would have thought they had learnd somthing
     
  12. Quite right, history repeating itself?
    The Japanese were portrayed as educationally sub normal with poor eyesight (slitty eyes) and their armed forces were outdated.
    Just before they sunk two capital ships - with unrestricted movement at sea, using land based bombers. Then they kicked our arrses out of Singapore by cycling pretty much their whole army through jungle paths and shitty roads to beat a force of superior numbers. Not bad for slitty eyed short-arrses.
    Never underestimate the enemy.
     
  13. Agreed. The naivity in many quarters is that those who would attack BRITFOR consist purely of those in-country. Tosh - there are many, located not only in this country, but throughout the world, who now view any "resistance" to the US and other coalition forces as legitimate, given what must now be viewed as a completely flawed invasion of Iraq.

    These people have the same degrees, attended the same universities as our smartest candidates.

    The story here being that data is unencrypted in the downlink. Which is where the expert comment is due. The answer to which, can no doubt be found in the myriad of procurement scoping, technical feasibility and costing documents. Yet again, compare and contrast to the steps that would be taken by a commercial organisation dealing with data that is of commercial value over this kind of link. The performance hit as I understand, is minimal. One could almost get the feeling that this architecture and platform was signed off, by a group of people that did not understand the operational risk and technical openess of the shiny boxes that the nice sales man showed them in the cgi generated video.
     
  14. If this is what a terrorist group can do with off the shelf kit it scares me what someone like the Chinese or russians could do!
     
  15. msr

    msr LE

    No it isn't, it's a well known issue which has been public knowledge for about for the last 10 years.

    Getting the feed is as easy as surfing the internet via your neighbours unencrypted wifi*.

    Non story.

    msr
    * not that I would do that