Prowler flicks

[Lawman]

Definintely, while I don't have first hand experience in the impossibility of cracking a synchronous stream cipher, I believe in the technology. Cryptography is that anomalous science where defense beats offense most of the time...

Also I didn't realize that jamming was that difficult, I thought if you were pumping out enough trons on the right freq/freqs you'd be golden. But most of my knowledges comes from wikipedia so I guess that explains it.

I imagine ECMO school would be a heck of a lot shorter if it was as simple as turning it up to 11 on whatever station your enemys radars are on.

 

[raptor10]

Is there a Cliff's Notes version of this thread ... ?

[threadjack]

+

≠

Yeah thats a mac...
[\threadjack]

 

[Brett327]

Definintely, while I don't have first hand experience in the impossibility of cracking a synchronous stream cipher, I believe in the technology. Cryptography is that anomalous science where defense beats offense most of the time...

Also I didn't realize that jamming was that difficult, I thought if you were pumping out enough trons on the right freq/freqs you'd be golden. But most of my knowledges comes from wikipedia so I guess that explains it.

I can pump out all the trons I can muster here in SOCAL, but it doesn't mean a single one of them is going to make it into the receiver in that shiny new SA-15 parked in front of the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran (thanks Vladimir!).

You need a clearance, and we need a SIPR AW because I have a lot more to teach on this subject.

Brett

 

[Herc_Dude]

You need a clearance, and we need a SIPR AW because I have a lot more to teach on this subject.

Brett

Calling all computer nerds, calling all computer nerds ... we have a project for you ... I want to know the secret squirrel Brett knowledge ...

 

[Brett327]

Calling all computer nerds, calling all computer nerds ... we have a project for you ... I want to know the secret squirrel Brett knowledge ...

You're missing an 's'

Brett

 

[nittany03]

Calling all computer nerds, calling all computer nerds ... we have a project for you ... I want to know the secret squirrel Brett knowledge ...

Select Prowlers and all will be revealed . . . and as for a SIPR side AW, well, what passes for an aspiring PECMO's social life would be dying a slow miserable death. :icon_tong

 

[Brett327]

Select Prowlers and all will be revealed . . . and as for a SIPR side AW, well, what passes for an aspiring PECMO's social life would be dying a slow miserable death. :icon_tong

That's my next FITREP bullet, BTW.

Brett

 

[Gatordev]

Yeah, but we're not talking about normal signals. An encrypted link signal (TCP or otherwise) looks like noise without the right gear/crypto - likewise to anyone trying to get into it. You don't hear too much about hackers within the SIPRnet because it's encrypted.

Brett

I don't know that I totally buy that argument. It's safe to say this isn't much of an OPSEC issue yet since we're just talking IP stuff, so here it goes... If I can interface w/ some widget (let's say the datalink system) using a protocol standard (let's say TCP/IP), I don't need to have crypto, I can just make noise and interfere w/ the signal. I'll leave it up to you Tron geeks to figure out what you want to call it. Here's a real world example: When using a data link on the helo, I can have crappy crypto (on either or both sides) and still interface. Sure there's no data, but it still interrupts any other real data that's trying to make it through. This happens a lot on the ship, even w/ a hardwired datalink on deck.

Maybe I'm not speaking the same language, and I'm not trying to get into the debate of jamming vs Pinging (a simple DOS attack method), but seems like my description above would validate this "make believe TCP/IP datalink DOS attack" scenario and it would be technically possible (regardless of whether or not it's probable).

 

[Brett327]

I don't know that I totally buy that argument. It's safe to say this isn't much of an OPSEC issue yet since we're just talking IP stuff, so here it goes... If I can interface w/ some widget (let's say the datalink system) using a protocol standard (let's say TCP/IP), I don't need to have crypto, I can just make noise and interfere w/ the signal. I'll leave it up to you Tron geeks to figure out what you want to call it. Here's a real world example: When using a data link on the helo, I can have crappy crypto (on either or both sides) and still interface. Sure there's no data, but it still interrupts any other real data that's trying to make it through. This happens a lot on the ship, even w/ a hardwired datalink on deck.

Maybe I'm not speaking the same language, and I'm not trying to get into the debate of jamming vs Pinging (a simple DOS attack method), but seems like my description above would validate this "make believe TCP/IP datalink DOS attack" scenario and it would be technically possible (but obviously not probable).

Sure, we're talking about a lot of different things. Obviously, if you have physical access to the network infrastructure, you can do lots of things to it from injecting noise to cutting the connection, and depending on network topology, that can have various effects. Most of the stuff we're talking about is theoretically a network based on RF transmission, and my point is that getting into that in a meaningful way (jamming the carrier or trying to inject data) requires power and proximity to the nodes of the network - something an inter-dweeb lacks.

Before we jump off the geekery cliff, let's just say that in general, the link systems employed by the military are fairly robust and secure.

Brett

 

[ProwlerPilot]

While this thread has certainly turned very technical, I will shed some light on the drop tanks. As the guy who made the video and who jettisoned the tanks, we did have a total transfer failure. We were working blue water ops, although a divert was available about 7k lbs of gas away. It was a good deal day section flight and both I and my wingman had a camera. The clip looking back at the pilot with the superhornet crossing under is actually that flight when I was getting a little more gas in the main tank to let the ship figure out what we were going to do. Final decision was to jettison the 4k lbs in the drops and land with full wings. (dumps weren't working either!) Amazingly the jet does not fall apart on a trap with fuel in the wings as many think it might! Anyway, the boss told us to drop them 1 mile abeam on downwind. His comment was "If you are gonna do it, I wanna see it!" As we turned downwind to jettison, our wingman came screaming out of high holding to get some sweet video... Okay, back to the beeps and squeaks!!

 

[Brett327]

While this thread has certainly turned very technical, I will shed some light on the drop tanks. As the guy who made the video and who jettisoned the tanks, we did have a total transfer failure. We were working blue water ops, although a divert was available about 7k lbs of gas away. It was a good deal day section flight and both I and my wingman had a camera. The clip looking back at the pilot with the superhornet crossing under is actually that flight when I was getting a little more gas in the main tank to let the ship figure out what we were going to do. Final decision was to jettison the 4k lbs in the drops and land with full wings. (dumps weren't working either!) Amazingly the jet does not fall apart on a trap with fuel in the wings as many think it might! Anyway, the boss told us to drop them 1 mile abeam on downwind. His comment was "If you are gonna do it, I wanna see it!" As we turned downwind to jettison, our wingman came screaming out of high holding to get some sweet video... Okay, back to the beeps and squeaks!!

What a great post/story - thanks. Out of curiosity, what was the cause of the xfer failure? Something to do with tank press, I presume.

Brett

 

[ProwlerPilot]

I don't remember what the exact maintenance failure was, but we were not getting pressure at all in the tanks. There was nothing else wrong with the jet (that we saw). Selective Stores Jettison worked 4.0!!

 

[A4sForever]

While this thread has certainly turned very technical....

That's why the bombers used to call the jammers ... "Queers".

 

[Brett327]

That's why the bombers used to call the jammers ... "Queers".

That's just dipole envy.

<---Pushes horn rimmed glasses back up bridge of nose and eats another generous serving of paste.

Brett

 

[Steve Wilkins]

<---Pushes horn rimmed glasses back up bridge of nose and eats another generous serving of paste.

It all makes sense now