Could this have been expected (?)

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Wed Dec 13, 7:14 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A number of countries are developing ways to knock
out U.S. space systems,

Robert Joseph, undersecretary of state for arms control and international
security, did not name any such states


referred to such possibilities as maneuvering out of harm's way,
redundancy, system "hardening," encryption and rapid frequency changes.

Controversy, as usual, because we do not have sufficient details.  Posted
for interest and information.

Is the ISS far behind?  Why would anyone want to knock the US out of space
(?).  [Oh, please.]

As above, FYI&I (interest and information).  I am listening, but no reply
necessary.  Just a sad state of affairs, IMO.  -- Best.

Re: Could this have been expected

Assuming there's a Linux context to the communique, I'll just follow my
usual rap on tech security systems and their promoters. The big boys who
decide on spending for big programs almost always opt for elaborate
hardware costing tens of billions while overlooking the simplest of
attacks an adversary might employ. Consider: the sat net you infer, with
its rad-hardening, encryption freq. mix, etc...a Chinese orbital pod
(low-reflective) with a crew of two visits each sat in the net and wraps
aluminum foil around it.  End of sys.

Defense analysts need to wise up and start defending the country with
common sense instead of dollar signs.

Re: Could this have been expected

On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 01:30:28 -0500, OSbandito wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

snort.. maybe if one dropped loaves of bread instead of so
many bombs, one's list of friends around the world would be a little
longer, the need for "defending the country" a lot less... food for

Re: Could this have been expected

OSbandito wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Buck Rodgers or Flash Gordon may have been able to do such things but in
the real world wrapping aluminum foil around each satellite in a network
would be pretty darn hard. The fuel needed to go from orbit to orbit
alone would be pretty daunting.

Re: Could this have been expected

OSbandito wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


[A nod to Barton L. Phillips' realistic comments.]

What has happened before could happen again.  The most likely attacks on
IT infrastructure are rooted in a monoculture of M$ based
proprietary software, incessant new zero-day openings (or anything newer
than 30 days, I guess) and unchecked proliferation of known botnets.  This
allows [massive] attacks on the ground-based assets that interface with
and control the space assets and all other infrastructure. By now, this is
simply and easily understood stuff, that could be easily defended against.
There are many smart people watching these things daily.  It is still
frequently ignored or insufficiently considered, to all our detriment.

Some governments and agencies are recently embracing open source systems
and software, which in its broadest variety will resist the monoculture
and most widespread zero-day attacks.  Consensus is still needed to
immediately and collectively disrupt botnets.  Illuminating of satellites
still seems a _way_ secondary threat.  But it is apparently a new sign of
how much serious hostility there is in these times.  We have been warned.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Greetings and wishes to a perceived fellow fiscal conservative.  I
recommend mr.b's remarks.

Site Timeline