# Predator Feeds Hacked



## AWP (Dec 17, 2009)

I don't have the words....how our designers could allow this to happen. Unreal.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/17/insurgents-hack-drones/



> WASHINGTON -- Militants in Iraq have used $26 off-the-shelf software to intercept live video feeds from U.S. Predator drones, potentially providing them with information they need to evade or monitor U.S. military operations.


----------



## Crusader74 (Dec 17, 2009)

Now its been highlighted, I hope they remedy the situation ASAP.


----------



## Chopstick (Dec 17, 2009)

Tsk Tsk..Free where is your sense of transparency and fairness?? :confused:   Shame on you.


----------



## JBS (Dec 17, 2009)

There is nothing I can say that wouldn't automatically be an understatement.

Highly, highly unsat.


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 17, 2009)

Typical.

$10 bucks says the feed software design was subcontracted out/then outsourced to a non US company during design.  The non US designers (Pakistan anyone?) then sold the source code to another company which then developed the hacking software; and is now reaping big bucks.

Anyone know where I can get some of this software?


----------



## Boondocksaint375 (Dec 17, 2009)

www.skygrabber.com


----------



## JBS (Dec 17, 2009)

Nothing is secure at any time, if you yourself are not secure in your behaviour and attitudes.   The fact that this UAV feed was unencrypted suggests there's a whole nest of people involved who were not secure in their attitudes.

They probably also grossly underestimated the technical capabilities of the enemy.  The moment you think these are ALL just morons and goat herders, that's the moment they'll surprise you.


----------



## Typhoon (Dec 17, 2009)

> $10 bucks says the feed software design was subcontracted out/then outsourced to a non US company during design. The non US designers (Pakistan anyone?) then sold the source code to another company which then developed the hacking software; and is now reaping big bucks...Anyone know where I can get some of this software?


Yes probably it is available as an online cheat for World of Warcraft or Medal of Honor lol.

Two thoughts: First, it is not surprising to me that the cyber world has become the latest venue where entities play both sides of the fence in warfare. Second, there are still secrets from World War II that are still unknown to us more than 60 years after its end. But in our current conflict ordinary things such as field intel are widely available to our enemies. That is just not acceptable in our current fight...


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Dec 17, 2009)

1) It is beyond me why the feeds were never encrypted from the start.

2) It is beyond me why this information even made it to the mainstream media.  Loose lips sink ships, but I guess staying quiet doesn't feed today's egos.

3) I wonder if there was a way to find out when a feed was being monitored and if then it could be used to spread mis-information to the enemy...


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 17, 2009)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> 1) It is beyond me why the feeds were never encrypted from the start.



My guess is new technology and band-width issues.  They probably tested the unencrypted feeds to see if the technology was feasable, then they kept deploying the birds (see J_STARS history).  The system worked with no appparent issues , so they moved the money elsewhere (new uniforms perhaps  :)  ).



LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> 2) It is beyond me why this information even made it to the mainstream media.  Loose lips sink ships, but I guess staying quiet doesn't feed today's egos..



Or someone got pissed off that $$$ for encryption wasn't forth coming and figured this was a good way to force DoD to develop encryption.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Dec 17, 2009)

Good points SOWT


----------



## formerBrat (Dec 17, 2009)

This is definitely interesting as I just saw on a link from Military.com to DOD Buzz,  that they were increasing the ability of the UAV's, I believe the Reaper and Predators  on the AF side specifically to increase their field of view with increased lenses, cameras, etc in line with increased ISR capabilities.  Hope they get that fixed before, or as someone else said, could be much more information that the bad guy's could use.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/12/16/many-headed-dragon-heads-to-af-pak/


----------



## AWP (Dec 17, 2009)

SOWT said:


> My guess is new technology and band-width issues.  They probably tested the unencrypted feeds to see if the technology was feasable, then they kept deploying the birds (see J_STARS history).  The system worked with no appparent issues , so they moved the money elsewhere (new uniforms perhaps  :)  ).


 
I'd have to dig but I didn't think that encryption would increase the bandwidth requirement and if it did then it couldn't be by much. Most everything on the Pred is encrypted so why not add one small box for this feed or drop it down to a ground station to be relayed?

It almost sounds like an add-on to enable other units outside of the Predosphere to see the imagery and the add-on link is the one with issues. 

It kills me to think and hear about all of the supposed emphasis the AF is putting into ISR and then shit like this happens. Fucking ISR guys asking for 500 sq. ft. of living space in Afghanistan, maybe they should worry less about their accommodations and more about their jobs.......


----------



## SpitfireV (Dec 17, 2009)

This happened a few years ago where someone was intercepting the link between the satellite and the ground station from Predators over Kosovo. Seems some lessons aren't learned.


----------



## Snaquebite (Dec 17, 2009)

SpitfireV said:


> This happened a few years ago where someone was intercepting the link between the satellite and the ground station from Predators over Kosovo. Seems some lessons aren't learned.



True and this has been known from the start...back to 1996.

Decision was to go with commercially available sat transmissions because of $$$.


----------



## Marauder06 (Dec 17, 2009)

At least they haven't figured out how to hack the control system... yet.


----------



## Scotth (Dec 17, 2009)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> 1) It is beyond me why the feeds were never encrypted from the start.


 
We have only been encrypting radio transmission for how many decades? Why would we want other transmissions to be secure?:doh:


----------



## Voodoo (Feb 11, 2010)

I think technically you could backtrack and triangulate the signal and take a picture of the dude/dudett doing the stealing just before they hammered them with a hellfire.


----------



## TheWookie (Feb 11, 2010)

> The stolen video feeds also indicate that U.S. adversaries continue to find simple ways of counteracting sophisticated American military technologies.



Why don't I find this hard to believe.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 11, 2010)

Voodoo said:


> I think technically you could backtrack and triangulate the signal and take a picture of the dude/dudett doing the stealing just before they hammered them with a hellfire.


 
I don't think you could because the person isn't actually transmitting anything, they're just intercepting what's already out there. Someone with a bit more nouse with this can correct me?


----------



## AWP (Feb 11, 2010)

I had a chat with my SATCOM guy about this recently. Stealing a Ku-band signal is almost child's play. It is done in Africa with alarming regularity and there isn't anything that the commercial carriers can do about it. Transmissions are taking place, but they aren't long enough to be of value, just maintaining the carrier wave.


----------

