Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

signalandsilence.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#181

Post by mlyle »

skhr0680 wrote: post #164
nwallin wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aircraft carriers are not particularly well suited to be supplied by cargo aircraft. The largest cargo aircraft with the strengthened landing gear, arresting hook, and catapult attachment used to be the C-2 Greyhound. It had a range of approximately 1,500 miles with a 10,000 pound cargo. It was retired on July 28th, 2026. The C-2 has been replaced by the CMV-22B Osprey. It has a range of only 1,150 miles and a more l…

I thought it was well-known that unmodified C-130s (Look ma, no hook!) can land and take off from US-sized carriers successfully. Ergo, in a pinch, everyone will be getting their chicken nuggets and canned corn.

When we had crews that had trained for it and recent operational experience with the capability, it was deemed not worth it.

Trying to stand it up in an emergency now is asking for trouble.

You'd have to be in a really dire situation to risk the carrier and aircraft this way.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#182

Post by mlyle »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #153
nwallin wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aircraft carriers are not particularly well suited to be supplied by cargo aircraft. The largest cargo aircraft with the strengthened landing gear, arresting hook, and catapult attachment used to be the C-2 Greyhound. It had a range of approximately 1,500 miles with a 10,000 pound cargo. It was retired on July 28th, 2026. The C-2 has been replaced by the CMV-22B Osprey. It has a range of only 1,150 miles and a more l…

The Osprey is air refuelable though, isn't it? Each flight is roughly one pound per person on board. It's also roughly 2800 nautical miles from Kuwait to Diego Garcia, so regardless of where the carrier group is, it should be at most a ~6 day round trip at 20 knots for a supply ship from the closest of the two. That assumes there is no way to airdrop watertight pallets of food (e.g. steel drums loaded with cans and M…

Trying to do 4 Osprey flights per day, with refueling, for spartan resupply... is going to be tough. Sure, it's not impossible...

In such a situation I expect you'd have a lot of other stuff competing with food for that lift, too, like spare parts.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#183

Post by reedf1 »

AI or not - can we agree to stop doing this now that AI has ruined it:

"But the thing I can’t get past is Fort Huachuca’s failure mode.

Not: the freezer compressor died.

Not: the power went out.

Not even: the refrigeration system stopped cooling.

Every freezer went into active defrost."

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#184

Post by psunavy03 »

nwatson wrote: post #94
ericmay wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally agree with your assessment, but in the case of Guam or other more remote installations if there were catastrophic issues we'd just airlift food in. Costly but certainly manageable. Hawaii I'm not sure why that would be an issue unless the whole island was attacked or shut down. Even if the on-base shops were hacked you could just go shop at Wal-Mart or Costco or any number of other locations on the islands.…

Did they airlift better supplies to a floating aircraft carrier somewhere in the northern Indian Ocean recently? No.

You're just revealing your ignorance of Navy supply chains with this comment, and I say that as a veteran who has no support for the ongoing shitshow, only sympathy for my former colleagues trapped underway.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#185

Post by psunavy03 »

skhr0680 wrote: post #164
nwallin wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aircraft carriers are not particularly well suited to be supplied by cargo aircraft. The largest cargo aircraft with the strengthened landing gear, arresting hook, and catapult attachment used to be the C-2 Greyhound. It had a range of approximately 1,500 miles with a 10,000 pound cargo. It was retired on July 28th, 2026. The C-2 has been replaced by the CMV-22B Osprey. It has a range of only 1,150 miles and a more l…

I thought it was well-known that unmodified C-130s (Look ma, no hook!) can land and take off from US-sized carriers successfully. Ergo, in a pinch, everyone will be getting their chicken nuggets and canned corn.

No, in a pinch, you're just beclowning yourself with your utter ignorance of carrier air operations.

They're not striking the entire air wing below just so one C-130 can land and take off, and that's assuming a stunt pulled by one elite test pilot was replicable by a bog-standard junior C-130 pilot.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#186

Post by avs733 »

ungreased0675 wrote: post #174

The timing of the event at 2AM suggests something nefarious rather than an accident. That’s when it would be least likely to be noticed, but the temperatures would be high long enough to spoil all the food.

That’s also when (poor) logic would dictate you should push a software update.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#187

Post by lostlogin »

nkrisc wrote: post #111
nwatson wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did they airlift better supplies to a floating aircraft carrier somewhere in the northern Indian Ocean recently? No.

Surely airlifting supplies to a carrier in a war zone is not totally comparable to airlifting supplies to a base in a US territory?

> war zone

But the US won and have and have a peace agreement. Several times.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#188

Post by croon »

namenotrequired wrote: post #173
TZubiri wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it materially different? Or is it a difference in quantitative increase of likelihood of the exploit? The thesis "everything hackable" will be hacked, and with the advent of hacking LLMs, the boundary between criminal hacking and civil hacking is being blurred, it's no longer attributable to a criminal intent, hacking commands are just something that happens through no criminal intent. Practically, the hackers…

Yes? “one of us made a mistake” vs “someone is attacking us” is a difference that people care about.

Not only care about; a mistake is unlikely to be repeated, a motivated attack is very likely to be attempted again.

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#189

Post by lostlogin »

LtWorf wrote: post #179
vkou wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you attack a country, that country shooting back at any military installations in missile range has to be one of the expected outcomes. Americans make war on other people, other people don't make war on Americans. It's one of the reasons why they are so eager to do so. 'The other guys might hit back' doesn't even register in the cultural psyche.

They hit back on 9/11 and it caused a panic that is still ongoing.

I'm no shill for the US, but that's a hot take that's too simplistic by far.

Eg who armed the Mujahideen?

Re: I think the military commissary's freezers were hacked

#190

Post by lostlogin »

wbl wrote: post #133
wongarsu wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That explains why resupply doesn't work as well as in peace time But at the same time, it's not like that came out of nowhere. If you attack a country, that country shooting back at any military installations in missile range has to be one of the expected outcomes. Given the US had all the initiative in starting the conflict I would have hoped there was a logistics plan that involved not relying on those bases to con…

You'll notice that the aircraft carrier continues sortie generation. What's causing us to lose is failure to achieve victory due to the means employed not the enemy constraining our freedom of action through force. Not to say it's great: it sucks to be on the ship for this, but if Hezbollah murdered 3,000 Americans the shortage wouldn't make the news amid our invading Iran.

> What's causing us to lose is failure to achieve victory due to the means employed

We can all agree on your opening.

Post reply on HN