Live data from Hacker News

Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

online.wsj.com

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#71

the U.S. military found pirated drone video feeds on other militant laptops What is the meaning of "pirated" here? Are they going to sue militants for copyright infringement?

New definitions of words creep into usage all the time, and this is one I've been noticing.

Folks are using "pirate" to mean "intercept" or "surreptitiously copy", rather than the traditional usage (leaving aside the even older meaning, of course) of simply "distribute copyrighted material".

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#72

the U.S. military found pirated drone video feeds on other militant laptops What is the meaning of "pirated" here? Are they going to sue militants for copyright infringement?

Perhaps they're using it in a sense similar to "pirate radio".

Isn't "pirate radio" a radio station that broadcasts illegally? If I am listening to my local pirate radio station, I myself am not a pirate. I think the use of pirate here is just to sensationalize the situation.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#73
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm sure lack of reliability is part of their business plan. You make the perfect humvee, and suddenly the army stops buying as many. There is a reason the AK47 is so much more reliable than the M16. And it's been out for like 60 years now.

"... There is a reason the AK47 is so much more reliable than the M16 ..." There is nothing worse than "language" or "editor" wars, except maybe arguments over "weapon of choice" ~ http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/m16-vs-ak47-iraqi-...

I could hardly find a single person in that discussion advocating for an M16 over an AK47.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#74
Having an unencrypted video broadcast on a military drone is just a dumb idea by whoever manufactured it. Encryption would seem to be the most minimal requirement for such an application.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#75
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, what do our defence contractors care more about: making their weapons actually work? Or merely selling them?

The later is true. There is a large, high througput, revolving door between DoD and large contractors. Yesterday's generals are today's board members and C*Os of large defense contractors. When something is purchased, or a bid is chosen, it is often because of those conections not because a product is inherently better. The result is a lot of overpriced, under-performing equipment. The amount of waste is just ridicul…

This is also an apt description of the relationship between the FDA and large pharmaceutical companies. Also, the USDA and large food companies. There are likely many more examples. It's a systemic problem of our structure of government.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#76
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the mistake that allowed the Serbs to shoot down a Stealth bomber; aircrews communicating on open channels. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10-26-serb-stealth_x... "At times, they acted like amateurs," Dani said, listing some ways the Serbs managed to breach NATO communications security, including eavesdropping on pilots' conversations with AWACS surveillance planes.

A bit of a nitpick, but no stealth bomber has ever been shot down. That was a stealth fighter.

No need to shoot down a stealth bomber; they fall out of the sky on their own. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZCp5h1gK2Q

According to Wikipedia, that is how you turn $737M into smoke.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#77

the U.S. military found pirated drone video feeds on other militant laptops What is the meaning of "pirated" here? Are they going to sue militants for copyright infringement?

Have we already forgotten of "pirated cable (video)"?

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#78
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The later is true. There is a large, high througput, revolving door between DoD and large contractors. Yesterday's generals are today's board members and C*Os of large defense contractors. When something is purchased, or a bid is chosen, it is often because of those conections not because a product is inherently better. The result is a lot of overpriced, under-performing equipment. The amount of waste is just ridicul…

This is also an apt description of the relationship between the FDA and large pharmaceutical companies. Also, the USDA and large food companies. There are likely many more examples. It's a systemic problem of our structure of government.

it's not necessarily our structure of government. regulation (using the law to prevent certain economic activity rather than economic incentives) is always prone to falling under the influence of those it is trying to regulate. I believe it was taleb who compared financial regulation to a chess game between regulators and the regulated.

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#79
They say there's "no evidence" that they were able to take control of the plane's in flight. Since nobody bothered to encrypt the video feed, and they're saying there's "no evidence", it sounds to me like they also didn't bother to encrypt the control signals. Nice...

Re: Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

#80
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AK is the Perl of the weapons. I had to use AK-47 for year (serving in the Bulgarian army). It was easy to clean, assemble, disassemble, but every weapon was a bit-off due to the production (or heavy usage, don't know). So to get good results you have to learn where your weapon strays.

How much does that affect a user? I mean, if you take the time to learn how much it strays, are you at that point just as accurate as someone with a more accurate weapon? I've never used a gun so I'm curious.

In real close-to-mid-range combat, this matters even less (unless you're a marksman). It's rare that you'd have time to properly line up the sights and take one really good shot. What really matters in that situation is knock-down power, reliability, and the shooter's training.
Post reply on HN