Iraqi Militants Hack US Predator Drones
Iraqi Militants Hack US Predator Drones
Posted 12/17/2009 at 2:45pm
| by Bart Salisbury
26
Comments
Print
It’s a sad reality of technological sophistication: the more technology you develop, the more weapons you devise for your enemies to use against you, no matter how primitive they might seem. The current example of this truism are Iraqi militants, who used an off-the-shelf program to hack into the video feeds of the U.S. Predator drone--our military’s ‘eyes-in-the-sky.’
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that militants, using the readily available, $25.95 Windows application SkyGrabber, have routinely captured drone video feeds. U.S. officials are saying there is no evidence militants can actually commandeer a drone, but they acknowledge that just having the videos undercuts intelligence gathering and strategic planning.
Militants are only able to capture unencrypted video feeds between the drones and their ground control. The U.S. military has been aware of this flaw in the Predator since its deployment in Bosina in the 1990s, and it readily admits it is a problem. It also says it is in the process of beefing up encryption, but this will take time as both drones and ground receiving stations need upgrading.
SkySoftware, the Russian company that makes SkyGrabber, says it’s surprised by this use of its software. SkyGrabber, it says, is meant to “intercept music, photos, video, programs and other content that other users download from the Internet--no military data or other commercial data, only free legal content.”
Image Credit: U.S. Air Force
Tags:
More like this
sirphunkee
December 18, 2009 at 7:58am
Right
A Russian program, designed to steal the wireless streams of other people's stolen content...what could be more on the level than that??
I'm guessing that the thought behind the "we're surprised by this use of our software" comment was actually completed with "...but it's a market we're glad to have discovered and are looking forward to seeing major growth in!"
Morete
December 18, 2009 at 12:07am
Since the 1980's the U.S. military has implemented various tactical electronic decoy programs for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. UAV's were specifically designed (apart from solo missions), to work with other fighter jets in the future as a decoy target especially alongside future generation figher jets, like the F-35. The robotic drone UAVs operate with at least three separate networks in sending full video,audio,tactile feedback to ground operations, other pilots and military commanders. IADS (Interactive Authoring and Display System), is the software written and developed by Symvionics and the U.S. Army Aviation & Missile Command for the specific purpose of receiving, processing and sending video, audio, tactical, real-time display and analysis data via satellite. This data is transmitted from a UAV to one or several military satellites in multiple (overlapping), layers of encryption to ground operations, joint force pilots or military commanders. Symvionics and the U.S. Army faced challenges to overcome high performance tests due to the fact that encrypted data sent through satellites becomes increasingly latent and slower to transmit/receive than non-encrypted data. A second encrypted data network that the UAVs utilize is for backup, should the primary network fail or become compromised. A third network that used is called a cooperative data recognition capability feed. Most of the world's commercial air surveillance and satellite networks are not that sophisticated and it's the air surveillance picture that comprises most/all of the air picture fed to rouge third world military communications and to commercial satellite dishes/antennas on the ground.
Programs like Skygrabber are only as good as their access to information. The best way to take out a missile battalion, terrorist camp or convoy, is to deny it any targeting data. Using decoy video feed, good modeling and simulation techniques will allow you to plan optimized ingress/egress routes to minimize exposure to the enemy and to plan which enemies are unavoidable and hence need to be engaged kinetically (while in motion).
Ravenhurst
December 21, 2009 at 12:49pm
Coming from an Air Force opsec point of view, whether sensative information or not, what you wrote in your rant has already told anyone, no matter how miniscule of a chance, more information to use against the US Military.
Keep your military facts to yourself, and your workcenter, if you do currently work in service of the DoD.
n0ctis
December 17, 2009 at 6:10pm
I am disappointed in our military intelligence for there being UNencrypted feeds in the first damned place. I mean come on... seriously?
________________________________________________________________
.: vires et honos :.
Biceps
December 17, 2009 at 11:21pm
No kidding... we spent how many millions/billions on these things and some one was like, "Nah.... why would we encrypt the video links? It's not like we would ever use these spy drones for anything critical, like SPYING."
WTF???!!!! Just goes to show that military intelligence really is an oxymoron.
tnrccola
December 17, 2009 at 4:17pm
Well. sometimes the war of misinformation is just as important as information.
kiaghi7
December 17, 2009 at 5:06pm
"All of war is deception" Sun Tzu... Written (over) 2,000 years ago and still every bit as true today as it was then.
lien_meat
December 17, 2009 at 4:10pm
Why would you not encrypt the traffic? I mean, that's a given if you want secure data transmission...but somehow that got left out of the original design? I think people need to be fired...
bikerbub
December 17, 2009 at 4:16pm
if you know it has been a problem SINCE THE 1990'S you may want to change your habits.
Gailim
December 17, 2009 at 3:18pm
the army admitted that Pentagon hackers WERE able to commendeer the drones via these unsecure connections. Apparently the insurgency doesnt have anyone skilled enough to do this but it is possible.
kiaghi7
December 17, 2009 at 5:04pm
WOW, nice flagrant lying there... I'm sure there's no agenda in your vomiting of ignorance like so many others of your ilk, but I digress.
First off, not one drone has been "commandeered" by anyone, ever, PERIOD!
The one, and only thing, that could be accessed is -SOME0- of the video feeds, which were not encrypted for SPEED sake, and keep in mind, anyone being targeted at the very best could have seen their imminent demise from a birds-eye-view.
This childish, and flagrant disregard for the fact that this problem has ALREADY BEEN SOLVED is conveniently left out... Perhaps the news would be best left to those actually have something new to say, this story would have barely been worthy of remark in spring, and here knocking on Winter's door and not only is it being incorrectly reported, but all it does is expose the ignorant dregs among the masses for who and what they are.
Gailim
December 17, 2009 at 5:33pm
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/12/17/drone.video.hacked/index.html
Pentagon hackers WERE able to break into the command controls in a lab test
nobody said that this had actually happened on the battle field.
my ilk? I wonder. what is my ilk? and just to ask, what is my "agenda"? I am dying to know.
kiaghi7
December 18, 2009 at 2:57pm
Wow, didn't even bother to read more than the headline huh? Your ilk are those with the agenda of propagandist ignorant trolls who have nothing better to do than attack that which they do not understand, flagrantly lie through your teeth about everything you can, and to prattle on about things you do not know.
For heaven's sake, read your own link, there is not one single reference to ANYONE of ANY creed hacking the CONTROLS of a UAV. First off, they are on an entirely other, and far different feed but seeing as you know absolultely NOTHING WHAT SO EVER about the subject, why bother knowing it when you can just LIE about it. Second, even if it -could- be hacked, the interface doesn't just "happen", you have to have the correct functions figured out for each and every function of the aircraft. Third, receiving a SENT signal and merely looking at it is an entirely different creature than actually SENDING a signal, having it received, accepted, and acted upon.
That fact alone, and your omission of understanding it are all the evidence anyone could ever need that you're woefully ill informed and are making up your story as you go to pretend like you're not a propagandist troll.
Please save us all the time of having to point out your ignorance by just shutting up.
Gailim
December 18, 2009 at 3:49pm
wow, I linked to a video, did you watch it?
watch a bit before the middle
....
you say I'm a propagandist? who's propaganda am I speweing?
kiaghi7
December 18, 2009 at 4:37pm
ADMIN NOTE: TEMP BAN for ad hominem attacks. It doesn't matter whether you're right or wrong, calling people names is never appropriate. The remainder of the comments will be removed as well.
kiaghi7
December 18, 2009 at 8:59pm
Oh bull crap! this troll is flagrantly lying, portraying misinformation as truth, and should be PERMA-banned!
This imposition is nonsense, it is not attacking anyone to call them what they ARE! If he isn't a TOOL of propagandist nonsense, then he will make tools of us all if we are forced into kow-towing and letting him post such vile rhetoric unopposed!
Of what exactly am I guilty? Stating the FACTS!?! If anyone finds the truth distasteful then perhaps it is up to them to make it "not so" anymore. By God I will call a duck a duck, and a troll a troll.
Gailim
December 18, 2009 at 8:13pm
sigh, when this story broke the CNN link I posted lead to the the coverage they had on thier channel. they have since replaced it with a report. the Pentagon spokeswoman in the original video said that Pentagon hackers were able to infiltrate the systems of the drone in a lab setting. I never said anything about it happening on the battle field. or that this skygrabber program was responsible. it was a commentary on the insecure systems used abord the dronesas further demostrated. no propganda and nothing for you to blow a gasket ove.
and what does Couric have to do with anything?
kiaghi7
December 18, 2009 at 8:57pm
No they didn't, and no they haven't you liar, you're just trying to rewrite reality to compensate for not even investigating the matter beyond your preconceived (or prescribed) notions spoon fed to you by others equally as uninformed as you... No such hack ever took place, and you are LYING to try and cover your tracks.
If one source posted it, then others have it, it's called the "ASSOCIATED PRESS" for a reason, by all means prove your case liar, the burdon of proof is firmly upon you!
_-slick-_
December 17, 2009 at 11:52pm
I hate to get involved in these jr. high school age fights, but let me just quote a paragraph from that article you just linked... Maybe you should read the article again... :S
"There also is evidence that unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) feeds also have been hacked in Afghanistan, according to the Journal article,
but there was no evidence the militants were able to take control of the remote aircrafts' systems in either country."
I bolded the part that seems to be in question here. They were never able to control the UAV; they were only able to view video...
Right???
Hope that helped.
tri8gman
December 18, 2009 at 11:00am
"Pentagon hackers WERE able to break into the command controls in a lab test"
Notice he said Pentagon hackers. That is, the Pentagon did it. Not Aghanistan or Iraq hackers. All they did was show, in a lab environment, the signal compromise has a more pressing issue than video capture.
In any case - since the 1990s... I cannot fathom nearly 2 decades of not fixing this.
Number Six
December 17, 2009 at 2:57pm
I thought these video fees were available on youtube all along?
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
We introduce Intel's latest class of tablet killers and review 4 of the first Ultra...
Where have all the memorable videogame enemies gone?
This month's issue
Feature
11 Hardware Hacks
Feature
Overclock Your CPU
How-To
Supercharge Your Smartphone
Build It
A Powerful $830 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Multi-Monitor Usage On The Rise http://t.co/eWfJfCEG14 hours 39 min ago
- maximumpc: Windows 8 Consumer Preview Coming On February 29 http://t.co/3Nd04FdR20 hours 27 min ago
- maximumpc: Can RIM *ever* catch a break? Not today! App World numbers not as great as previously reported http://t.co/3ERRhr311 day 16 hours ago
