Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday October 09 2019, @10:20PM   Printer-friendly
from the security-is-not-an-add-on dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Unmanned aerial vehicles, more commonly called drones, are now a fundamental part of defence force capability, from intelligence gathering to unmanned engagement in military operations. But what happens if our own technology is turned against us?

Between 2015 and 2022, the global commercial drone market is expected to grow from A$5.95 billion to A$7.47 billion.

[...] UK cybersecurity consultant James Dale warned earlier this year that "equipment is now available to hack drones so they can bypass technology controls".

Drones are relatively cheap technologies for military use—certainly cheaper than the use of satellites for surveillance. Off-the-shelf drones can be used to gather intelligence, without any significant development effort.

[...] Russian software company Coptersafe sells such modifications for a few hundred dollars. Anyone can buy a drone from a retail store, purchase the modifications, and then send their drone into no-fly zones such as military bases and airports. Ironically, Russia's military base in Syria came under attack from drones last year.

Australia is at the frontier of the military drone revolution, equipping itself with a fleet of hundreds of new drones. Lieutenant Colonel Keirin Joyce, discussing the program in a recent defence podcast, declared Australia will soon be "the most unmanned [air vehicle] army in the world per capita".

It will be essential to safeguard every single component of this sophisticated unmanned aerial fleet from cyber attack.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by Username on Wednesday October 09 2019, @10:41PM (3 children)

    by Username (4557) on Wednesday October 09 2019, @10:41PM (#904936)

    Well, the FCC needs to make a bunch of laws that prevents the jamming or use of licensed frequencies which will stop this from happening. We needs to limit the power of these transmitters and the size of the antenna.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @10:57PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @10:57PM (#904941)

      One can put together, from scratch and on a reasonable budget, a drone that doesn't require remote control to deliver an one-of payload to a target.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @11:52PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @11:52PM (#904955)

        If you are gonna break the law, might as well go whole hog and use any frequency/spectrum/encryption you want. Anything that you think would hide in the clutter and get the job done.

        They will only have a few minutes to find it and deal with it.

        You would not wanna make it easy for them by using allocated frequencies and protocols, would you?

        Let em pass all the law they want. It won't mitigate the threat.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday October 10 2019, @12:20AM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday October 10 2019, @12:20AM (#904962) Journal

          If you are gonna break the law, might as well go whole hog and use any frequency/spectrum/encryption you want.

          Creating a dependency on something (the spectrum/jamming) that I can't control? If it can be avoided, why should I do that?

          You would not wanna make it easy for them by using allocated frequencies and protocols, would you?

          Actually, now that you mention it, it may be an idea to generate transmissions that look legit as a diversion. With satellite drones flying on a different path, with a dummy remote control operated by nobody; actually, sprinkle more of those dummy on the perimeter.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @11:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09 2019, @11:13PM (#904947)

    Manned planes are also hackable. They rely heavily on software and telemetry.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10 2019, @04:32AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10 2019, @04:32AM (#905049)

    Can we please differentiate between Quad copters https://www.dji.com/ [dji.com] and Drones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper [wikipedia.org] Thank you.

    • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday October 10 2019, @05:27AM

      by MostCynical (2589) on Thursday October 10 2019, @05:27AM (#905070) Journal

      Military drones include the X37B [abc.net.au] which can stay up... a long time

      Even the largest octocopters [youtube.com] only manage flights of around half an hour

      --
      "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday October 10 2019, @12:45PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Thursday October 10 2019, @12:45PM (#905166)

    our own technology

    Who's this "our"? This doesn't seem to be a link to a Chinese website, but it talks about weaponizing consumer level stuff, by definition made in China.

  • (Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday October 10 2019, @01:39PM

    by jmichaelhudsondotnet (8122) on Thursday October 10 2019, @01:39PM (#905189) Journal

    Why *authentication over distance* could be *a primary military threat in any situation*.

    Just ask Caprica.

    Good thing the United States is letting Israel handle all of that tough thinky stuff for us fat dumb americans and snobby western europeans. /s

    (really though wtf are you thinking)

    thesesystemsarefailing.net

(1)