How Much Did We Pay for These Drones?
Thursday, December 17th, 2009 by Harry Lewis
There buy cheap ampicillin are also several therapeutic options, including surgery, medication, and assisted buy cheap zofran online reproductive technology (ART). Healthcare professionals no longer use these terms cheapest estrace due to their inaccuracy and because they are demeaning to viagra non prescription people with COPD. Treatments for IC may include hyaluronic acid buy prozac and chondroitin sulfate, which are glycosaminoglycans. Those with bowel conditions, zofran online such as irritable bowel syndrome, irritable bowel disease, or small allopurinol intestinal bacterial overgrowth, should consult a medical professional before taking pyrantel pamoate online Citrucel. Cardiovascular events are much less common than musculoskeletal injuries cheap bentyl on internet and generally occur in conjunction with congenital or hereditary abnormalities. buy norvasc sale However, some instances of bile duct cancer arise in peripheral buy discount atrovent sale jelly bile ducts within the liver tissue itself, making it the clomid for order second most common liver malignancy. Recovering from global aphasia depends find accutane no prescription required on many factors, including the severity of the condition and order generic kenalog the motivation of the individual. To find out what the cheap accutane internet cost of bicalutamide will be for you, talk with your doctor,.
Incredibly, the signals between the unmanned drones being used in Iraq and Afghanistan and their base stations are transmitted in the clear — unencrypted. The insurgents have figured that out and are watching the same scenes that our military is watching. The Wall Street Journal says the system has been “hacked,.” Not really — no more, as a colleague put it to me, than someone who buys a police scanner is “hacking” the police radio system.
Encrypting signals is easy, obvious, and taken for granted. How could the system have been designed and deployed without it?
December 25th, 2009 at 3:18 am
See the more sophisticated discussion by Bruce Schneier at http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/intercepting_pr.html This points to the mix of bureaucratic rules and tradition, as well as technology.
December 28th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Thanks for that link, Alan. Schneier makes a good argument, though its details are challenged a bit in the comment thread. As one who has never experienced the command and control of a military operation, I’ll gladly defer to those who have.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Encryption is easy. However, you must understand that there are times when operations has a need over security. Encryption takes time and resources that would hinder the performance of drones out in the battle field. I take it that the one making the decision to have the drones communicate in the clear was taking that in to account.
Have you ever seen a movie called the hitchhikers guide to the rest of the galaxy? If you have, then you might recall a race of people who put policy and paper work over operations. As a result, their units performed poorly. This is do to the long waits for the paper work to come in. I liken this wait to the encrypt/decrypt time secure communication requires. Now to go in the clear is a mission by mission and case by case decision.I assume not every drone mission is unencrypted. All and all, as CPU power increases, the benefits of going in the clear will decrease. Until that day, one must have a balance of security and operations.
The views expressed in this posts are the authors and do not represent the views of the United States Navy or the United States Department of Defense.