Breaking news UAV downlinked video's being watched--by the targets!

[John Kettler]

Just got through watching a stunning BBC World News America segment in which Wall Street Journal reporter Siobhan Gorman was interviewed regarding her blockbuster exclusive that U.S. UAVs' downlinked video is being watched, as it's sent, by the insurgents we're surveiling and and sometimes targeting in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Apparently, it's being done via software available on the Internet for $25.99, software which exploits a vulnerability in the downlink system. If there's any good news here, it's that progress on a fix for a vulnerability first identified in the 1990s is well advanced and that this hack doesn't affect UAV course control or weapons. The fix is evidently based on scrambling the downlinked video to render it useless to unauthorized viewers.

I think this offers some intriguing scenario design possibilities for clever designers.

Regards,

John Kettler

[souldierz]

Hacking a UAV.Now that's some serious business.

Wouldn't look to smart if you have all these unmanned vehicles,then your enemy hacks them and is able to see everything,even take control or know your exact position.That's troublesome.

Funny how a $25.99 piece of software can almost compromise a million dollar piece of hardware.

[Flanker15]

A case of arrogance perhaps?

The reason for not encrypting the downlink (which is unimaginable for something in the military or anything really) seems to be that they thought the people they were watching were to primitive to intercept it (all you need is a wideband antenna and a terminal with the appropriate software to read the data).

Well they've certainly learnt their lesson about never underestimating your foe (although this is hardly the first time so I'm not so sure).

[MikeyD]

The report I heard said they got wind of this a year ago - December 2008. Best-case-scenario, we're hearing about it now because the downlink fix is now in place. That's best-case scenario.

[Thomm]

I think this offers some intriguing scenario design possibilities for clever designers.

Why, you already know where your own troops are

Best regards,

Thomm

[MrWombat]

It's always a trade-off. Encryption slows down transmission. By not encrypting some of the imagery streams (presumably the communications controlling the flight and weapons engagement commands were encrypted), you trade off the risk of interception for increased responsiveness. Presumably as well the imagery streams had more volume of data than the command streams and thus benefited most from going in the clear.

That doesn't mean folks didn't underestimate the opposition, of course. And yeah, it's kind of embarrassing. But at base it's the sort of trade-off you always have to make.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

And this is why I think not too great a faith should be stored in UAVs. This was always going to happen. Against a hi-tech opponent you'd be lucky to be in control of your own vehicles!

[c3k]

I have an image of a bunch of the AQ huddled around a laptop at a table near a marketplace. As they're hacking the datastream they recognize the very same marketplace they're sitting in. Finally, as the image zooms in on them, they all turn around and stare upwards, smiling and waving, mouthing "Hi, Mom!" Kind of like football fans when they see themselves on the big screen.

It could be arrogance; it could be cost cutting; it could be ignorance. Or, it could be a pre-planned method of infesting the hacker's networks with a cleverly designed trojan. Or not.

Ken

[souldierz]

In today's world,its getting to the point If a General is not aware of the exploits of computers and technology and has little knowledge of them, he will find himself in a serious situation if the opposing generals do have an understanding of these things.

If the hack could be done and has been,I'm willing to bet more powers got a hold of this and not just the foes in the field of Afghanistan or Iraq.All those rivals of the western powers like Iran, China and Russia to name a powerful few, are no doubt watching to.

[Vark]

If this story is genuine, and it is a big if, think how you could use it to your advantage. One UAV has an encrypted system but when hacked broadcasts feed from a nearby UAV, insurgents think they are free to move! Or less high-tech, broadcasts a recording of where it was 10 minutes earlier. Even easier, the UAV is used as a beater to drive the insurgents into an ambush, thus reducing civilian casualties, imagine watching the UAV circling your hideout, would you stay in there? I just wonder why the story was released now, and is it linked to the stories about Quetta being looked at as the next hunting ground for the Reapers?

[Ryujin]

Well, it could give them very good intel, especially at night. While they can't control where the UAV looks and don't have the radio chatter context, it can tell them what the US is interested in. If it's used in support of troops on the ground, it can possibly give away their positions (if the camera is ever pointed in their direction) and with FLIR, this can give them a pretty good picture at night that they normal wouldn't have.

Don't forget the UAV would probably overfly a lot of positions, including where ever it lands, with the camera broadcasting it.

So while it may not be as good as controlling it themselves, I'd say it would be VERY useful relative to what usually is available to the insurgents, especially if they could study it for a couple months, a bird's eye FLIR view of the US operations.

[MikeyD]

Just be happy the Taliban doesn't have an airforce! Here's a clip of a UAV being shot down by a MiG. In a 'real' war a UAV would be little more that an unmanned Piper Cub.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/04/video-russian-m/

[souldierz]

Good video, MikeyD

Watching the plane sweep in and then watching the missile being launched into the UAV camera as it was being engaged was spectacular.

First person look at what its like to have an AA missile coming at you.

The message is clear,Russia is in control of that airspace.

[SD Smack]

I've often wondered what the UAV operator thinks about when this happens. Is it "oh no! This is terrible! What is going to happen to me now?" or is it more like "...ah f#ck it, I'm going to get a cup of coffee."

[Vark]

Probably a lot calmer than this pilot.

Another problem with present day UAV's is their design precludes aggressive manoeuvring when engaged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82JDJNjcHZ8&feature=related

[SD Smack]

True. Watching that video brings me back to the Falcon 2.0 days.....except I usually didnt end up as fortunate as this pilot did.

[Yair Iny]

Probably a lot calmer than this pilot.

Another problem with present day UAV's is their design precludes aggressive manoeuvring when engaged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82JDJNjcHZ8&feature=related

Absolutely awesome vid Vark, but in fairness to the pilot I didn't take him to have lost his cool. The heavy breathing is standard fare when pulling Gs, you can see the G indicator on top of the left (airspeed) scale. From my (very modest) personal experience flying light aircraft, 3g is quite a bit, so imagine what the 5-6g he was pulling must feel like, especially since he was doing it on and off for quite a long time. Must have been a really stressful environment, the constant beep that can be heard most of the video is an continuous lock indication from the threat warning receiver, and that was only interrupted by the loud beeping which is a launch indication, I'd be ****ting myself .

[Bigduke6]

What with McChrystal's new emphasis on helicopter ops, seems like the Taliban is really going to be doing some serious shopping for hand-held missiles. Everything they really want to hurt can they can trashed with a Strela.

Kind of funny that it was the Americans that trained the Taliban to use hand-held SAM in the first place. Thank you greenie beanies!

On the Georgian UAV shootdown vid, what that Georgian officer was saying was all well and good, but let's not forget that when the Georgians flew a UAV over South Ossetia, the Georgians may have seen that as Georgian territory, but the Russians had a very different opinion. Legally the Georgians were in the right...BUT on the other hand Russian troops have been stationed in South Ossetia since 1993, since which time the Georgian state has had zero control. South Ossetia has been de facto independent of Georgia for a quarter century.

So, when the Georgians begin overflying South Ossetia and Russian positions within South Ossetia with UAVs, and considering the South Ossetian government considers the Russian military its protector, it's sort of pushing it to expect the Russians to politely sit by do nothing. They are Russians after all, and what makes things more dangerous is this is Russians in the Caucauses region, this is a place where a military response, and violence, is very often the standard response.

In retrospect, whatever intelligence the Georgians gained from the overflights, probably was not worth cranking up the tension level with the Russians. The Georgian genius who decided UAV overflights of South Ossetia were a good idea probably could use some remedial training in cause and effect. You can't just fly UAVes around and expect every one will just ignore them.

[souldierz]

Kind of funny that it was the Americans that trained the Taliban to use hand-held SAM in the first place. Thank you greenie beanies!

This is an old, very old ancient repetitive process taking place.

In ancient times people adopted and were trained by the ancient Greeks in tactical warfare and physical combat with the phalanx formations.Lot's of major powers adopted this kind of fighting technique for armies to use in the field.There were also many Greek generals scattered all over earth who would give advise to foreign armies much like America is now.

In turn the enemies of the Greeks were also trained by the Greeks and also adopted to their ways of fighting because it was superior.Alexander's era and the kingdoms after it is proof to this.

History repeated itself again after the rise of the Roman Republic.Now this new major power is up and coming and dominating in warfare and is now taking the role of the Greeks.

In time they will be training people all over the world in the arts of war,with new and improved tactical warfare methods with short sword, shield and pila, along with machines for war and fortifications.Also advising other nations and also other nations adopting to the infantry methods and armor and weapons as the superior Romans.

In turn once again, the enemies of Rome were trained by Romans in warfare,fortifications and building.Later on the enemies of Rome used Roman tactics and weapons, as well as siege works against the Romans.

Most of Roman history and Attila the Hun is proof to this.

History repeated itself again and again same scenario over time and we can make a long story short by jumping over the dark ages and Medieval times and so on, into the British Era where gunpowder is starting to find it's niche.

Same thing over,training armies,advising them and supplying them with superior weapons, only to face them as enemies later on in life just like all the other major powers before them.

The lessons of history is not lost.

America is facing the same situation and has done the same as the other major powers through out history.Train, advise, supply influence and fund.So to see America facing a foe that they trained is not to surprising giving the cycle of our world,it's to be expected.The thing that makes it worry some, is that's exactly how all those former major powers lost their edge.Their foe was trained by them, giving the foe an insight to how they operate as well as access and knowledge on better weaponry.

Only time will tell how this is gonna play out for America.History doesn't shine to brightly for major powers, but history is to be made and not followed.

Your friend of today can be your enemy for tomorrow,treat your enemies with care, because tomorrow they can turn out to be your friend.

[MikeyD]

What with McChrystal's new emphasis on helicopter ops, seems like the Taliban is really going to be doing some serious shopping for hand-held missiles.

I'm reminded of how Sergei helped us track down the ID of an odd looking RCCL gun currently used by the Taliban. It turned out to be a Chinese weapon. Plus I recall Chinese made later-generation RPG warheads (with improved fusing) turning up in Iraq. It makes you wonder if China is playing dog-in-the-manger, doing minor things simply to make life difficult for their primary competitor in the region. Not too much, just enough to keep from being noticed. Would Chinese shoulder fired anti-copter missiles in Taliban hands be farther down the road than they're willing to go?

[Bigduke6]

Certainly, it's in China's interest to keep the Americans bogged down in Afghanistan. But that place is so awash with weapons, I would assume just pumping money through several dozen front corporations would give the needed effect.

Still, the Chinese connection may become superfluous before very long. If the insurgents stay on track, their main source of military material supply is going to be the ANA - it's already a minor source.

[costard]

I'm reminded of how Sergei helped us track down the ID of an odd looking RCCL gun currently used by the Taliban. It turned out to be a Chinese weapon. Plus I recall Chinese made later-generation RPG warheads (with improved fusing) turning up in Iraq. It makes you wonder if China is playing dog-in-the-manger, doing minor things simply to make life difficult for their primary competitor in the region. Not too much, just enough to keep from being noticed. Would Chinese shoulder fired anti-copter missiles in Taliban hands be farther down the road than they're willing to go?

Whoever gets the supply contract should make money - I doubt it's just the Chinese who are interested. Of course, becoming a high priority target for the US/NATO militaries is the risk you run: it'd want to be a high return.

As I see it, at the moment the US/NATO forces are keeping the highway through Pakistan open for the Chinese by keeping the militants in Afghanistan busy. If the US pulled out, I think the Chinese would need to send in their military - or, at least, a few thousand "advisers". They'd be unlikely to want to face militants armed with their own missiles.

[Vark]

Given the conflict in Afghanistan has gone on for 8 years I suspect that the lack of MANPADS in theatre is because it would be seen as an escalation too far and risk some covert retaliation, to the supplier. Iran, for all its bellicose statements is really a blowhard, ready to bully when finding weakness and backing off quickly when threatened. As for China, they need the West to sustain their rapid industrial growth, after all, who else would buy crappy toys, made in China but from recycled Western plastic? Their rapid expansion and resources grab in Africa, the " string of pearls" naval strategy etc all require the status quo.

I guess a parallel is Libya supplying the PIRA. Although security forces were fearful of ASU's getting their hands on Strelas, the only helicopter brought down was as a result of an engagement with a WWII era HMG.

Finally, why bother taking risks when the US have all but said they are going home soon. The greatest weapon our 'enemies' have, in the present conflict is the ability to play the long game not SAM's.

[MikeyD]

Well, Iran was always a foe of the Taliban. I recall shortly before 9-11 Iran had pretty much had it with their wacky Taliban neighbors and were making noises like they were willing to go in, themselves. As it was, they quietly provided short takeoff aircraft logistics to the U.S. in 2001-2002. China's got its own restive muslim minority. Afghanistan even abutts China in the very very farthest northeast corner. So they'd want to provide just enough support to keep the U.S. occupied without turning the Taliban into an actual regional threat to them.

[JonS]

HOWTO:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Reading_mission_control_data_from_Predator_Drone_video_feeds%2C_20_Dec_2009

not just UAVs:

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/12/19/battlefield_robot_had_security_hole/