Drone aircraft downed in Iran

[topol-m]

I still laugh at SAM = Stealth STOP, how many sorties did it fly in enemy territory before one was shot down by luck.

 

And if it was indeed brought down by the iranians it probably wasn't with SAM.

[Falcon_S]

On the sources of information about this event ... Many have said clearly that it is not affected by the SAM, but the drone is assumed management control and then grounded by the department of Iran Army electronic warfare. Why avoid this fact? Have you seen the drones that you show by the Iranians in one piece? So drones are not caught with a sweep net.

 

So in this case, NATO suffered a heavy loss in electronic warfare.

[GGTharos]

Why avoid this fact? Have you seen the drones that you show by the Iranians in one piece? So drones are not caught with a sweep net.

 

Think about it: You can't just take over an encrypted command link, so they can't take control of the UAV like that.

 

The equipment they claimed to use is a jammer whose job is to deny radar ground maps, jam GPS and possibly data/command links.

 

So ok, they could have caused the drone to lose communication with base - but in that case, the UAV is programmed to fly back to base.

 

Now, if they did something called 'zorching' (basically take a powerful emitter, point it at something, blast away at full power), then they may have fried or damaged electronics onboard and caused it to crash, which ... isn't all that interesting because zorching is a known aspect of warfare.

 

I don't see why you're pushing that sort of thing though over something relatively simpler like a pitot tube malfunction for example, or an engine seizing, or a PCB cracking during flight.

 

Like I said before, drones crashing is NOT a new thing, it's actually somewhat common. Example:

 

 

So in this case, NATO suffered a heavy loss in electronic warfare.

 

 

Kinda doubtful.

[ALDEGA]

Elaborate why it is a heavy loss ... An RQ-170 is not the most high tech UAV, is it? How will Iran use it to defeat western forces in a hypothetical conflict.

It's barely worth using as propaganda.

[ALDEGA]

Think about it: You can't just take over an encrypted command link, so they can't take control of the UAV like that.

Encryption (in general IT) is not magical, this has been proven time and time again. Security in software from industry leading companies is often compromised so you can bet military contractors are no better. Even industry standard security protocols like SSL have known weaknesses (you use SSL to do your online banking ...) .Let's be realistic.

 

Practical example: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html

UAV video feeds were not encrypted and could be intercepted using minimal investment.

[GGTharos]

If it was doing what the Iranians say it was doing, it might be seen as an act of war. Either way, there's no way to tell what the payload was, and whether it was successfuly destroyed in terms of rendering it useless for analysis or reverse engineering.

 

At minimum it is possible that secret cipher chips could have been recovered.

[GGTharos]

We're talking about the encrypted command link, so yes, let's be realistic: To crack even DES-64 in the short amount of time required, you'd need a computer with something on the order of a million dedicated ASICs.

 

I'm pretty sure that military contractors do reasonably well in this area, at least where the ball is not dropped on the military's side. There's no reason whatsoever to believe that the UAV was taken over.

 

Encryption (in general IT) is not magical, this has been proven time and time again. Security in software from industry leading companies is often compromised so you can bet military contractors are no better. Let's be realistic.

 

Practical example: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html

UAV video feeds were not encrypted and could be intercepted using minimal investment.

[ALDEGA]

DES is ancient ...

 

Besides you're mentioning brute force cracking. People who hack a system would use a weakness in a system, not brute force cracking.

Other techniques also exist of course (man in the middle etc) (not specifically related to UAV communication)

 

Edit: at least you're not denying that unencrypted UAV video feeds were intercepted ;)

[RIPTIDE]

[asparagin]

CIA says, the drone crashed, because of interference: apparently some guy in Iran has a phone with blue tooth!

[GGTharos]

I'm well aware of encryption, and side-channel attacks, or other clever things. You're not taking over a UAV ;)

 

DES is ancient ...

 

Besides you're mentioning brute force cracking. People who hack a system would use a weakness in a system, not brute force cracking.

Other techniques also exist of course (man in the middle etc) (not specifically related to UAV communication)

 

Edit: at least you're not denying that unencrypted UAV video feeds were intercepted ;)

[jazjar]

OK, America lost an RQ-170 drone aircraft over Iran. Great, let's get on with our lives now. It still amazes me that there are some people today that try to rub in my face the fact that we lost a single F-117 in 1999. Notice that these are some of the same people that state 9/11 was a conspiriacy. Just saying.

[GGTharos]

CIA isn't saying anything other than 'we lost control of the UAV while it was performing a mission over Afganistan'.

 

CIA says, the drone crashed, because of interference: apparently some guy in Iran has a phone with blue tooth!

[ALDEGA]

I expected nothing less GiGi :D

[159th_Viper]

So in this case, NATO suffered a heavy loss in electronic warfare.

 

:megalol:

 

Seriously?

 

:megalol::megalol:

 

Who knows - might be a clever plant......Certainly more plausible than some Delusions of Grandeur permeating this thread. Oh wei, the dangers of the Internet :music_whistling:

[Vekkinho]

OK so the drone was hacked by Iran while flying ofer A'stan, was driven to Iran where was soft landed. USA is accused of spying by Iran who tripled their production od WMD and turned their and missiles towards Israel with trajectories crossing thru Polish and Czech airspace.

 

Israel and USA with rest of NATO buddies should solve this immidiately!

 

And yeah:

[GGTharos]

By that you mean you wouldn't have expected anything less than someone handing a secret hardware encryption component to Iran, and Iran blowing having this component or reasonably good intel about it, not to mention the day's keys - for a propaganda stunt instead of a potential war? :D

 

I expected nothing less GiGi :D

[tflash]

I must say I find the hypothesis that the Sentinel just went astray due to a malfunction and landed unscathed in the hands of Iranian officials not quite convincing. Just open Google Earth and have a look at the mountanious region between Afghanistan and Iran where it is supposed to have come down.

They sure needed much more time to find Steve Fossets plane or the missing F-22 in Alaska.

I do not believe they just stumbled on it. They must have at least known approximately where it would come down. Unless it simply self-landed in Tehran of course. (So programmer typed the wrong GPS coordinates, can happen :=)

[GGTharos]

It could have come down near a populated area. You mention Fosset's plane, I'll mention a MiG-23 that flew 600km without a pilot and hit a house, killing a person.

[tflash]

Certainly, but statistically improbable. (BTW I guess you hint at the incident in Belgium many years ago, when a pilotless Russian jet crashed on a lone villa with a young guy at home who was killed - I'm not sure it was a Mig though, thought it was a Sukhoi. maybe Ross knows more about it.)

[159th_Viper]

1989 - a Mig-23M. Escorted by a F-15.

[ALDEGA]

Might as well link the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Belgian_MiG-23_crash

 

...

[GGTharos]

It was a MiG-23. It was even escorted by F-15's :)

 

And statistically improbable based on what? Aircraft crash or emergency land near populated areas all the time. Those that do not tend to be found quickly - Fosset's plane is an exception to the rule it appears.

[tflash]

Thanks, R.I.P. for my unfortunate compatriot!

 

Back to topic: of course I still find the idea that the iranians would have managed to take control of the jet or successfully jammed the communications even more improbable, not to say absolutely unlikely.

[GGTharos]

I think jamming the communications is not entirely unlikely, or perhaps flat out zorching the UAV - but actually taking over it, that's rather unlikely.