What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Geek Squad employee sings for Best Buy in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Valerie DeAngelo explains the moment she got the casting call.
30 Comments
- dracken, on 12/18/2008, -1/+35Ten vulnerabilities ? More like three with creative variations :-|
1. Enemies might use our GPS
1a. They might use it in planes
1b. They might use it on trucks
1c. They might use it on cars
2. GPS can be jammed
2a. Using off the shelf components
2b. It is easy to jam
2c. Sometimes gets jammed by other radio sources
3. GPS satellites can be attacked
3a. By space debris
3b. Intentionally by anti-satellite weapons
3c. Meteors and other particles
Now how many on Digg didnt know this ? meh. - craeyon, on 12/18/2008, -0/+14The other big problem is people capitalizing every first letter in each word of their sentence
- g33b33, on 12/18/2008, -1/+9From 2001...dugg down.
Then dugg up for shotgunning satellites with gravel! - DamnMan, on 12/18/2008, -0/+6Seriously is the first point a "vulnerability"? Heaven forbid the governments citizenry has access to the same technology as its military.
- inactive, on 12/18/2008, -0/+5Yes
- c130commnav, on 12/18/2008, -0/+5Ok first off I can only speak for planes in the Air Force, but our systems have pretty effective anti-jamming systems so jamming isn't as easy as it would be for the off-the-shelf hand held systems. As far as navigation we use the "P" codes which gives us accuracy of 15 meters, but we don't use GPS alone, we combine it with INS, when used together the INS will correct the GPS when it starts to drift. there are other systems that do this too like Doppler. He talks about how Clinton opened the access, but we could turn that off at any time so it isn't that big of a deal, we could even stop it from working at all unless you had the codes.
tl:dr most of this article is moot - basex, on 12/18/2008, -1/+5the USA can disable the GPS for other countries, that's why the EU is spending a lot of money to build galileo
- Jonsey, on 12/18/2008, -0/+4Aparently a seven year old article when Selective Availability was still enabled by the US haha
- cowboy86, on 12/18/2008, -2/+5Eagle Eye?
- mphree, on 12/18/2008, -0/+3Is it just me or is this list kindof... obvious? The same vulnerabilities the author discusses apply to tons of other technology.
- evilEL, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2Bottom line is that the military shouldn't rely on GPS technology. Personally, I was great at land navigation when I was in the Army and all I needed was my compass, map and protractor. GPS are great, but like all other electronics that depend on an outside signal to function, they can be jammed and exploited.
- noahhoward, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2"Selective Availabilty (SA) may be turned off, but the United States has made a commitment to give 10 years notice before turning off the GPS. With techniques to counter the effects of SA along with the added systems of GLONASS (Russian) and the future Galileo (European), the US would stand to lose a large consumer industry if SA was turned back on, and/or GPS was turned off."
In the event of a direct attack on the US, I doubt they'd care about any of that. - djwk1928, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2Don't have to read it now lol, thanks :)
- rusty0101, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2While I agree that GPS should not be the sole technology for land navigation, I strongly suspect that the future of land navigation will involve multiple technological solutions. Just as my cell phone will use GPS to locate itself when it can lock onto sufficient satellites, it can also provide an approximation of where it is in relation to other services such as cell towers, and presumably at some point by looking up the locations of WiFi APs that it can detect, and triangulating it's position based on that information.
In some areas that will be difficult, however the same technology that allows GPS to work can be used across other technologies, specifically knowing where the transmitter of a signal you are working from happens to be located at the time you are sensing it, and having a means of determining the distance to that transmitter. If the transmitter can tell you where it is, or it is located at a well known location (Local FM broadcast tower perhaps, known cell phone tower, etc.) and you can find a way of gathering an acceptably reliable distance to that device. Ping time may be sufficient if you can gather reliable statistics to compensate for machine processing of the ping. As a comparison point NTP provides sub millisecond deviation from a Stratum 1 time source if you need that. How likely it is that you will have one of those in your area of operations seems low, but technically that is what a GPS receiver is at this time.
For military operations, it is often more important to know where you are in relation to the rest of your team and forces, than where you are on the planet. Granted it's also pretty important to know where you are related to enemy combatants, but that's almost a given. In either case if you need to adjust windage for a range of 1200 meters, it really doesn't matter whether that's in North Korea, or Bosnia. - opiniastrous, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2If you guys like this, you should really try reading some military journals like the Air and Space Power Journal, Military Review and Parameters.
- IamSunstorm, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2We need lasers on satellites. Why don't satellites have lasers yet?
- Kalais, on 01/19/2009, -0/+1Interested in the GNSS technology and research behind GNSS? Download audio on it: http://digg.com/general_sciences/Download_free_aca ...
- c130commnav, on 12/18/2008, -0/+1Our INS is far more accurate than GPS (especially on our planes with dual INUs) and that is why the INS position will override the current GPS position on our planes. While you are correct with the P codes adding more anti-jamming functionality, it drastically improves accuracy. a C130 without P codes gets a FOM of 4 (~100M variance) without and 1 (15M variance) with.
- crackah, on 12/18/2008, -1/+2Getting stolen out of cars?
- laser314, on 12/18/2008, -0/+1Forbidden by the treaty the US government made with the space aliens currently in Earth orbit tracking every GPS device.
- Zhukovsky, on 12/18/2008, -0/+1The "P" code is so carefully guarded that it is not typically used for anything but ships and aircraft (unlikely to be captured). Infantry uses commercial grade units because there is no risk of exposing technology in the event of a capture. The main purpose of the P code is not improved accuracy, but improved anti-jamming capability. The length of the code is so much longer than that of the civilian code that it is near impossible at this point to "spoof" or fake the code.
GPS positions never drift, they are discrete measurements that are not causal (or shouldn't be, depending on your navigation filter). INS positions wander off quickly and GPS helps to keep them in line. This also added the benefits of anti-jamming (and reduced multipath error if you're concerned about that)
Selective Availabilty (SA) may be turned off, but the United States has made a commitment to give 10 years notice before turning off the GPS. With techniques to counter the effects of SA along with the added systems of GLONASS (Russian) and the future Galileo (European), the US would stand to lose a large consumer industry if SA was turned back on, and/or GPS was turned off. - majordanger, on 12/18/2008, -0/+1My Trend Micro fired off a "hacking alert" on that C4I.org website.
Trend Micro URL Filter
Trend Micro URL Filter has blocked the requested Web URL by Credibility Level.
URL: http://www.c4i.org/gps-adams.html
Category: Hacking / Proxy Avoidance
Credibility Level: Dangerous - inactive, on 12/18/2008, -3/+3? commercial Grid Positioning System receivers ?
Did the article just lose credibility.......
? GPS, which provides accurate positioning to within 100 meters ?
Yes, yes it did - houndeyex, on 12/18/2008, -1/+1Mmm... invalid HTML
- plinkey, on 12/18/2008, -0/+0This is why most military planes still rely on things like INS/INU (inertial navigation) as the main source for navigation. GPS is just part of an overall nav system. If GPS goes the planes and such still know where they are.
- Zhukovsky, on 12/19/2008, -0/+015m variance = ~3.9 m standard deviation, 68% of the time the position will be within 4m of reported position.
- Zhukovsky, on 12/19/2008, -0/+0It is highly unlikely that the INS is more accurate than GPS. The C130 uses a Honeywell H423 IMU as part of its INS/IRS. All inertial systems have drift and are based on relative location, not absolute location(that is to say that the unit only knows where it is, relative to where it was). Without an update from an external source the INU will only be able to tell you where you are compared to where you did your alignment. Most likely the INS is being updated from GPS and will have a lower variance because it can produce a higher rate position with high confidence.
A dual frequency, L1/L2 (not P code, just carrier pahse measurments), high-end, non-military unit will have < 2m CEP (50% confidence interval). This is much better than a 15m variance. - akawraith, on 12/18/2008, -5/+2does it matter
- honeybrass, on 12/18/2008, -4/+1da gv'mnts not trak'n me!
- syntaxgs, on 12/18/2008, -12/+1One BIG Problem Is That By Having A GPS Device People Can Spy On You and put Viruses On your GPS Device,
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is