The real headline here is “Anyone can control Europe’s key satellites because they didn’t bother to put encryption on billions of dollars worth of critical infrastructure”
direwolf20 2 days ago [-]
US satellites are the same
4d4m 2 days ago [-]
phones and their baseband radios too :)
direwolf20 1 days ago [-]
and their wifi radios and Bluetooth radios and touchscreen controllers using TEMPEST
Havoc 2 days ago [-]
“Sensitive” satellites have unencrypted command channels?!?!
Even with narrow transmission angle that seems like a bold strategy
Encoding sensitive message is a thing since dark ages
lxgr 2 days ago [-]
Yes, this is pretty standard, even in military contexts.
For example, military aircraft ACARS communications are often entirely in plaintext, and don't forget the famous "Predator drone video feed intercepted via $26 software" incident: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB126102247889095011
However, that's only the data they forward, and this can be more or less trivially fixed at several layers, since many of these communication satellites are just "bent pipes" that often don't even digitally demodulate what they receive before frequency-shifting and rebroadcasting it.
Authentication is a bit more challenging; interesting things can happen even when traffic itself is encrypted, such as Brazilean truckers using your expensive military communications satellite as a football chat room: https://www.wired.com/2009/04/fleetcom/
Beyond payload encryption/authentication, satellite operational commands (e.g. engine and inertia wheel control, power management etc.) should have been encrypted for decades, though (and are one of the few explicitly carved out exemptions to otherwise strict "no encryption on amateur radio bands" regulations), so these claims about "software kill commands" seems very worrying.
arethuza 2 days ago [-]
During the Falklands War some of the UK's European allies intercepted transmissions from Soviet spy satellites that allowed the location of the Argentinian fleet to be identified - this information was passed to the UK.
mrguyorama 2 days ago [-]
Is this true or is this the way the US passed intel to the UK against their nominal ally?
That's clever. Normally you can't intercept satellite uplinks because they're pointed at the satellite. But if you have your own, highly manoeuvrable satellite...
phplovesong 2 days ago [-]
Russia is a terrorist state. Nothing more, nothing less.
toss1 2 days ago [-]
TBF, Russia does have something more. It is a terrorist state with a gas station
citrin_ru 2 days ago [-]
Venezuela has more oil than Russia and yet it's irrelevant because the US actually enforces sanctions against Venezuela.
cc81 2 days ago [-]
Venezuela does not have the capacity to extract that much oil and it is also quite expensive.
fmlpp 2 days ago [-]
USA violated Venezuelan sovereignty. USA is a terrorist state.
rurban 2 days ago [-]
More so than the US?
goodmythical 2 days ago [-]
So is [insert list of commonly recognized nations].
What's your point?
lovegrenoble 2 days ago [-]
[flagged]
polotics 2 days ago [-]
Interesting. A Russian speaking Kharkov ex-resident i heard recently would like an interview with you, can you post your contact details?
JohnnyLarue 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
NedF 2 days ago [-]
[dead]
lovegrenoble 2 days ago [-]
[flagged]
krige 2 days ago [-]
Extremely easy to convince population that state X is an evil, looming threat if state X is actually doing evil, looming, and threatening things for decades on no end.
Russia could have stopped at any moment. Can still stop at any moment. They could have single-handedly undermined Europe's trust in the States, years before the orange-in-charge did, merely by not starting an invasion. Their choice. Their FA, now they FO.
lovegrenoble 2 days ago [-]
>> if state X is actually doing evil, looming, and threatening things for decades on no end.
This sounds like a description of the United States to me...
krige 2 days ago [-]
Ah, the good ol "And you are lynching N-----s!" defense. Supremely topical for discussing Russia's dickery.
mrguyorama 2 days ago [-]
How does the US being shitty justify a Russian invasion of their sovereign neighbor?
OKRainbowKid 2 days ago [-]
Whataboutism and deflection, the favorite tool of Kremlin apologists.
lovegrenoble 2 days ago [-]
Bien sur!
polotics 1 days ago [-]
Hello lovegrenoble. Are you in Grenoble we could organise a meetup maybe?
justsomehnguy 2 days ago [-]
Everyone knows they are evil. Not that many states out there fly to other side of the planet to bomb someone irrelevant or outright kidnap president of the country they are not even have a boarder with.
Rendered at 13:06:06 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
Even with narrow transmission angle that seems like a bold strategy
Encoding sensitive message is a thing since dark ages
For example, military aircraft ACARS communications are often entirely in plaintext, and don't forget the famous "Predator drone video feed intercepted via $26 software" incident: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB126102247889095011
However, that's only the data they forward, and this can be more or less trivially fixed at several layers, since many of these communication satellites are just "bent pipes" that often don't even digitally demodulate what they receive before frequency-shifting and rebroadcasting it.
Authentication is a bit more challenging; interesting things can happen even when traffic itself is encrypted, such as Brazilean truckers using your expensive military communications satellite as a football chat room: https://www.wired.com/2009/04/fleetcom/
Beyond payload encryption/authentication, satellite operational commands (e.g. engine and inertia wheel control, power management etc.) should have been encrypted for decades, though (and are one of the few explicitly carved out exemptions to otherwise strict "no encryption on amateur radio bands" regulations), so these claims about "software kill commands" seems very worrying.
I have seem other references.
What's your point?
Russia could have stopped at any moment. Can still stop at any moment. They could have single-handedly undermined Europe's trust in the States, years before the orange-in-charge did, merely by not starting an invasion. Their choice. Their FA, now they FO.
This sounds like a description of the United States to me...