AnonTechie directs us to a Wired article on the importance of electronic warfare (EW) in support of global military operations, "Inside the New Arms Race to Control Bandwidth on the Battlefield."
From the the article:
It is well known that America's military dominates both the air and the sea. What's less celebrated is that the US has also dominated the spectrum, a feat that is just as critical to the success of operations. Communications, navigation, battlefield logistics, precision munitions all of these depend on complete and unfettered access to the spectrum, territory that must be vigilantly defended from enemy combatants. Having command of electromagnetic waves allows US forces to operate drones from a hemisphere away, guide cruise missiles inland from the sea, and alert patrols to danger on the road ahead. Just as important, blocking enemies from using the spectrum is critical to hindering their ability to cause mayhem, from detonating roadside bombs to organizing ambushes.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by internetguy on Tuesday March 04 2014, @08:09PM
>> hindering their ability to cause mayhem, from detonating roadside bombs to organizing ambushes.
.
I thought most roadside bombs used a mechanical trigger, like a string across the road.
Ambushes are easier with communication devices but it's still easy to organize an ambush.
Sig: I must be new here.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by tynin on Tuesday March 04 2014, @08:29PM
Basically, this. The US military has a much higher budget to play with more expensive war toys. These war toys need bandwidth. So they'll use any propaganda necessary to insure they have the budget and popular support (but really, they paid for them, so they want to use them) and to keep them working on the battlefield.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Daniel Dvorkin on Tuesday March 04 2014, @09:34PM
To be fair, TFA gives examples of ways guerillas in Iraq and Afghanistan have used "electronic warfare" (really simple stuff like detonating IEDs by cell phone) that US forces have had to counter. But fundamentally, this stuff is about fighting wars with opponents who have big conventional armies. Which is something we still ought to be able to do.
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 2, Interesting) by monster on Wednesday March 05 2014, @05:33AM
Not really something which is going to happen. Right now, there are too many available options, even setting aside nuclear weapons, to disrupt and/or destroy big armies moving together. The massive troops movements of WW2 are not going to happen again, they are too big a liability.
Anyway, there is a fundamental problem with "owning the spectrum": There is no such thing. The media is shared, so any noise/countermeasure you put in, you receive it too. You may be able to discount it [dev.soylentnews.org], but your other units can't unless it isn't really random, but then your enemy can try to get that pseudorandom function too, as can also add its own noise and disrupt your communications.
The only time you can really talk about "owning the spectrum" is when your enemy can't fight for it, and in that case it's not different from winning a battle because the enemy didn't come to fight.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 05 2014, @01:08PM
Maybe it's my old infantryman's bias, but statements like this always make me deeply skeptical. We've been hearing for generations about how this-that-or-the-other technological advance will make the old ways of fighting wars obsolete, and yet practically every war still comes down to boots on the ground. Tactics change constantly, but strategy is surprisingly consistent.
Agreed, "owning the spectrum" is silly hyperbole. But the goal of disrupting the enemy's communications while securing your own isn't silly at all.
(Score: 2) by Daniel Dvorkin on Wednesday March 05 2014, @01:11PM
Heh, the above AC comment is mine. Speaking of disrupted communications ... Has anyone else had trouble with their SN login being annoyingly non-persistent? I carefully don't check the "Public Terminal" box whenever I log in, but I still seem to get logged out whenever I put my computer to sleep.
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Nobuddy on Tuesday March 04 2014, @10:04PM
They have both. mechanical triggers are too easy to get around or trigger early, so they started wiring them to radio recievers or cell phones and triggering them manually at the best moment for effect.
Mechanical was defeated by IED rollers on the front of the vehicles:3 fd88330148c749f56f970c-250wi [typepad.com]
http://waronterrornews.typepad.com/.a/6a00e551d9d
Cell/radio was defeated by signal jammers on the vehicles.
(Score: 1) by tibman on Wednesday March 05 2014, @11:06AM
I've seen the Warlock system on HMMWVs. Never saw it work though. It would scream noise all over except for a collection of white-listed frequencies. There use to be a wikipedia page on the system but has since disappeared. The most popular detonation system i saw was a combination of mechanical timer plus radio. Radio was typically a 900mhz cordless phone. This system let an insurgent start the detonation timer while the jamming system was still out of range. Napkin math and aiming stakes are plenty good if the IED is powerful enough.
You are dead on about mechanical triggers. A civilian vehicle would have set it off long before a coalition truck did.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday March 04 2014, @08:42PM
They quite proudly released photographs of the captured drone to the world press.
They did not shoot nor force it down.
No, they spoofed a GPS signal. When the plane landed at an Iranian airbase, it's autopilot was completely convinced that was landing at a US airbase in Iraq.
Now you know why you need to sanitize your inputs. There are all kinds of ways that could have been prevented, say by validating the GPS with the intertial guidance systems used for ICBMs from way before GPS was invented.
I have a major product announcement [warplife.com] coming 5:01 PM 2014-03-21 EST.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday March 05 2014, @09:30AM
As both a RF guy and a ex .mil guy I know a bit about GPS and as usual its a tradeoff.
If you think you won't get spoofed, you use a cheap C/A code possibly plus the "new" L2C code rx. This is cheap and off the shelf and your phone probably has a $20 one in it. The problem is anyone with a lot of DSP chips and some really basic RF gear (it won't take much) can spoof. If you're smart enough to understand how to make a RX, you're smart enough to make a spoofer.
The .mil has the legacy P code, which you encrypt with the secret W code, then for a variety of reasons thats called the P(Y) code. You can hack the W code slowly, which isn't very helpful for an airplane (hey pilot, we were ... exactly there ... 90 minutes ago...) or you can get a huge amount of bureaucracy and BS and get legit access to the P(Y). Maybe there is a top secret way to spoof the P(Y). Most likely, if your W code expires while you're in the air, you'll lose P(Y), so rather than instantly firing the self destruct signals you drop back to C/A and L2C which you can spoof. So jam the P(Y) or just supply random noise, and spoofed C/A L2C and you're good to spoof. Also it may or may not be public that W may or may not be cracked by state level actors, so I can't generate spoofed P(Y) with what I know, but someone hired by a major world state might very well be able to.
If you have way more tolerance for security theater BS and paperwork, you can get access to the new M code, which does everything for everyone all the time blah blah and is all secret meaning its going to have an immense cost.
(Score: 0) by JimmyCrackCorn on Tuesday March 04 2014, @09:52PM
No more than two trumpets wide?
When arms race is it a win by a knuckle?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Nobuddy on Tuesday March 04 2014, @10:08PM
While in Afghanistan as a civilian contractor, I hated those jammers. They work, and work well. But there was always one or two dumbasses that wanted to park right by housing areas and forget to turn the jammer off (they were supposed to turn these off when they entered the base). Worse in winter, when certain vehicles had to be idling all night so they could respond quickly if needed.
Our only internet was either shitty cell internet of slightly less shitty satellite internet. Both were FUBARed by a jammer left on anywhere nearby. And on a small FOB, this is pretty much anywhere on base.
(Score: 1) by tibman on Wednesday March 05 2014, @11:14AM
Those guys were not very professional. Forgot to turn the jammer off? Did they remember to clean their equipment after each mission? Probably not. Jamming friendlies is full stupid. Unless it was intentional but then we're getting into different labels.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 05 2014, @07:32AM
broadcast Drone surveillance footage to enemy combatants in Afghanistan, because there was no crypto on the feeds.
(Score: 1) by SleazyRidr on Wednesday March 05 2014, @12:37PM
"Arms Race" ... "Battlefield"
I see what you did there.