Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Defense News)   US intelligence community continues to do its part to protect the US tech industry from profits. Billion dollar satellite deal in jeopardy because US parts contain a backdoor into the highly secure communications   (defensenews.com) divider line 40
    More: Interesting, communications security, United Arab Emirates, Intel, spy satellites, satellite deal, navigation system, ground station, Sheikh Mohammed  
•       •       •

2181 clicks; posted to Geek » on 06 Jan 2014 at 7:51 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-06 06:23:35 AM  
This aint nothin

Google INSLAW

Piracy, trojan horses, espionage, and a journalists death all tied to the DoJ
 
2014-01-06 06:44:07 AM  
FTFA:
"...UAE officials in late 2012 said they had narrowed the Falcon Eye competition from 11 bidders and their backing governments to proposals from US and French teams.
The UAE source said the French team won the bid due to the US State Department's restrictions on the use of the system, often referred to as "shutter control."..."


The UAE is buying the satellite from FRANCE, subby.
 
2014-01-06 06:46:54 AM  

Marmilman: FTFA:
"...UAE officials in late 2012 said they had narrowed the Falcon Eye competition from 11 bidders and their backing governments to proposals from US and French teams.
The UAE source said the French team won the bid due to the US State Department's restrictions on the use of the system, often referred to as "shutter control."..."

The UAE is buying the satellite from FRANCE, subby.


But they found the security "flaws" in American built parts.

/people realize that the US isn't the only country that spies on people right?
//Willing to bet if you took a close look at Chinese stuff, you'd find similar things
 
2014-01-06 07:03:18 AM  
Subby should RTFA. It's a billiin dollars going to a *French* firm, in jeopardy because the spysat uses a critical component that camw from the US.

It's still a goddam travesty how our civil liberties are routinely peed upon, but tbis specific issue doesn't cost US firms diddly
 
2014-01-06 08:08:04 AM  
So the UAE is pulling a Snowden by running to the Chinese and the Russians?
 
2014-01-06 08:08:38 AM  

stratagos: Subby should RTFA. It's a billiin dollars going to a *French* firm, in jeopardy because the spysat uses a critical component that camw from the US.

It's still a goddam travesty how our civil liberties are routinely peed upon, but tbis specific issue doesn't cost US firms diddly


Actually, yes, it very well could.

Foreign firms that build these sorts of things will start to shy away from using US parts, and that will hurt US industry, so yes, it could cost them a bunch of money.  Maybe not on this particular deal, but going forward.

Having said that, I'm OK with it, if that sort of economic pressure helps Congress and the courts to reign in the domestic spying part of the NSA.  The two are unrelated, of course, but often Congress takes action based upon perception, not actual objective reality.
 
2014-01-06 08:09:02 AM  

stratagos: Subby should RTFA. It's a billiin dollars going to a *French* firm, in jeopardy because the spysat uses a critical component that camw from the US.

It's still a goddam travesty how our civil liberties are routinely peed upon, but tbis specific issue doesn't cost US firms diddly


Well, except that sales of these components from this US firm might dip in the future.  And questions will be raised about every piece of hardware or software coming out of the US because of this precedent.  Now will that mean that China or Russia will be considered more secure vendors?  Maybe, I don't think that they have been back-dooring their products.  I expect the tech industries of countries like Japan or the Nordic countries might benefit from these shenanigans or vendors like the one in France will roll their own.
 
2014-01-06 08:21:07 AM  

JasonOfOrillia: stratagos: Subby should RTFA. It's a billiin dollars going to a *French* firm, in jeopardy because the spysat uses a critical component that camw from the US.

It's still a goddam travesty how our civil liberties are routinely peed upon, but tbis specific issue doesn't cost US firms diddly

Well, except that sales of these components from this US firm might dip in the future.  And questions will be raised about every piece of hardware or software coming out of the US because of this precedent.  Now will that mean that China or Russia will be considered more secure vendors?  Maybe, I don't think that they have been CAUGHTback-dooring their products.  I expect the tech industries of countries like Japan or the Nordic countries might benefit from these shenanigans or vendors like the one in France will roll their own.


FTFY.  If you think Chinese and Russian firms aren't doing the same thing, you are one of the most naive human beings alive.
 
2014-01-06 08:27:27 AM  
Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.
 
2014-01-06 08:34:22 AM  

JasonOfOrillia: Now will that mean that China or Russia will be considered more secure vendors?  Maybe, I don't think that they have been back-dooring their products.


I would be willing to bet significant amounts of money that any products from the US, Russia, or China that are destined for intelligence-gathering applications in other countries have been thoroughly backdoored for years. It's only coming to light now because there's a lot more awareness of the practice than there used to be.
 
2014-01-06 08:53:07 AM  
I've always assumed that anything I sent in the clear was insecure and could always be traced back to me and/or could be used against me in the future. I'm old enough (but not too old) to remember when the word 'netiquette' was used and actually occasionally practiced.

I am tempted to say "encrypt everything" is the solution, but it really isn't. Sure, if my data is going to pass through a satellite I can tunnel whatever with ssh - but there is always an endpoint, and unless you're using TOR it can be traced back to you.

If you are a bad guy and they want to find you, all the PGP and SSH in the world won't protect you from things like keyloggers, infrared cameras, surveillance satellites, and boots-on-the-ground spying. So the trick is, don't be interesting enough to the folks who have the power to tremendously fark with your life. Keep a low profile, and don't shoot yourself in the foot by posting donkey porn on your facebook timeline that comes up in a google search. The younger generation is probably screwed the most - people who just treat the internet as an extension of themselves, who grew up with smartphones, texting, blah blah... and who didn't consider the consequences of their actions (who does when they're a teenager anyway). I'm kind of glad there wasn't a public internet when I was growing up.

If someone can find a way to make lots of money by doing something akin to creating an anonymized internet (TOR but much more mainstream and not so damned laggy) then it will shift the balance back to us plebes. Assuming encryption isn't already crackable (the math suggests this is still the case) then at the very least you wouldn't have all your daily crap being fed into a federal database. Those farkers do need to be reined in... it's not good for society in general to live under such surveillance.
 
2014-01-06 09:03:07 AM  
"We have requested the French to change these components and also consulted with the Russian and Chinese firms."

Call their bluff. Anyone who claims to be considering switching over to Russian or Chinese products because of "concerns about spying" is either a complete moron who deserves what they get or...

Abu Dhabi's questioning of the satellite deal could be a way of putting pressure on Paris to get a better offer for the Dassault Aviation Rafale fighter.

Winner winner chicken dinner.
 
2014-01-06 09:08:25 AM  
*shrug* Competition is supposed to be the cure for all ills. Maybe if the invisible hands of the market flip the bird just hard enough, someone will get the NSA to back the fark off.
 
2014-01-06 09:13:20 AM  

b0rscht: If you are a bad guy and they want to find you, all the PGP and SSH in the world won't protect you from things like keyloggers, infrared cameras, surveillance satellites, and boots-on-the-ground spying.


This is why actual, for-real spies still use one time pads and shortwave radio transmissions to receive messages from the home office.

Sure, the NSA can and does intercept all of the transmissions, but it can't decode any of them, and while they can tell where the transmitter is via Radio Direction Finding (RDF), it's impossible to find out who is receiving those transmissions*.


*At least, it is now with modern superheterodyne receivers.  Back when receivers were regenerative, the local oscillator in the receiver would transmit a weak signal that could be tracked with sensitive enough equipment, and that LO freq would tell you what freq the receiver was likely listening to, but even then, it's short range, just a few miles at most.  It could also be done with some older superhets, I believe, but at much shorter range.  I doubt it would be effective today.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-06 09:27:51 AM  
When I think of trusting France, I think of the report that France revealed codes the Royal Navy could use to take out Exocet missiles during the Falklands war.

Any export of this class is likely to have a back door, and you have to pick which supplier you trust not to abuse it.
 
2014-01-06 09:42:48 AM  

ZAZ: When I think of trusting France, I think of the report that France revealed codes the Royal Navy could use to take out Exocet missiles during the Falklands war.

Any export of this class is likely to have a back door, and you have to pick which supplier you trust not to abuse it.


news.bbcimg.co.uk



I think of the British finding out that aluminum will burn at a sufficiently high temperature.
 
2014-01-06 09:44:53 AM  

ZAZ: you have to pick which supplier you trust not to abuse it


...and this is where the Iraq War cost us and all the refusal to "cowtow" to the rest of the world is going to bite us in the ass. The world doesn't trust us any more because we invaded a country that didn't attack us. Our reaction to 9/11 is going to haunt us for the rest of our history and it's important to connect this to that so we understand the consequences next time.
 
2014-01-06 09:59:10 AM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: ZAZ: When I think of trusting France, I think of the report that France revealed codes the Royal Navy could use to take out Exocet missiles during the Falklands war.

Any export of this class is likely to have a back door, and you have to pick which supplier you trust not to abuse it.

[news.bbcimg.co.uk image 624x351]

I think of the British finding out that aluminum will burn at a sufficiently high temperature.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_%28D80%29
The sinking of Sheffield is sometimes blamed on a superstructure made wholly or partially from aluminium, the melting point and ignition temperature of which are significantly lower than those of steel. However, this is incorrect as Sheffield's superstructure was made entirely of steel.[15] The confusion is related to the US and British Navies abandoning aluminium after several fires in the 1970s involving ships that had aluminium superstructures. The sinking of the Type 21 frigates Antelope and Ardent, both of which had aluminium superstructures, probably also had an effect on this belief though these cases are again incorrect and the presence of aluminium had nothing to do with their loss.
 
2014-01-06 10:00:45 AM  
If the UAE think the Russians or Chinese won't put backdoors in comparable equipment they're dumber than I thought.
 
2014-01-06 10:01:09 AM  
Kibbler
2014-01-06 08:27:27 AM


Nothing is going to rein in the spying. Nothing. They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business". And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why. In fact, it never happened. In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.

^ Pretty much this.
 
2014-01-06 10:15:54 AM  

Kibbler: Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.


hat is already happening. The NSA spying on the state-owned Brazilian oil company is one example. Purely economic espionage on behalf of the private interests that want to buy out the company.
 
2014-01-06 10:16:52 AM  

wesmon: Kibbler: Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.

hat is already happening. The NSA spying on the state-owned Brazilian oil company is one example. Purely economic espionage on behalf of the private interests that want to buy out the company.


"That is already happening," even.
 
2014-01-06 10:22:44 AM  
The United States has become very proficient at f*cking people in the back door.  even its own Citizens.


ain't Freedom great!!
 
2014-01-06 10:27:11 AM  

Marmilman: FTFA:
"...UAE officials in late 2012 said they had narrowed the Falcon Eye competition from 11 bidders and their backing governments to proposals from US and French teams.
The UAE source said the French team won the bid due to the US State Department's restrictions on the use of the system, often referred to as "shutter control."..."

The UAE is buying the satellite from FRANCE, subby.



the parts in question are American made parts, snubby.   stay Patriototic, though!
 
2014-01-06 10:27:25 AM  

wesmon: wesmon: Kibbler: Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.

hat is already happening. The NSA spying on the state-owned Brazilian oil company is one example. Purely economic espionage on behalf of the private interests that want to buy out the company.

"That is already happening," even.


Yep. That's the sad part - such capabilities weren't implemented for a "just in case" scenario, but were implemented for several already-active scenarios, already exploited for a variety of purposes.
 
2014-01-06 10:28:12 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: So the UAE is pulling a Snowden by running to the Chinese and the Russians?



better the enemy you know than the one you don't know and can't for the life of you figure out.
 
2014-01-06 10:34:58 AM  

MooseUpNorth: *shrug* Competition is supposed to be the cure for all ills. Maybe if the invisible hands of the market flip the bird just hard enough, someone will get the NSA to back the fark off.



that's myth.  every company wants to dominate their industry and eliminate competition so they can do as they please and charge what they like. its all about Control

the government's job is to insure that monopoly's are not allowed to flourish because they eliminate competition and hurt the economy/consumer.  our government no longer does that because our Legislators have been bought off by the ones who don't like "regulation".  they've convinced the dumb american that the government is evil and trying to destroy america.

ain't freedom great!!
 
2014-01-06 10:40:46 AM  

Linux_Yes: that's myth.


Yup. I was, of course, being mildly sarcastic.
 
2014-01-06 11:08:36 AM  

MooseUpNorth: Linux_Yes: that's myth.

Yup. I was, of course, being mildly sarcastic.



 its hard to read the nuances sometimes.   (:
 
2014-01-06 11:10:41 AM  

wesmon: Kibbler: Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.

hat is already happening. The NSA spying on the state-owned Brazilian oil company is one example. Purely economic espionage on behalf of the private interests that want to buy out the company.


Do you have a citation showing that this was purely economic?

Francisco Roberto de Albuquerque, the controlling shareholders' representative on the Petrobras board, was fairly high up in the military up until his election to the board in 2007. This being a state-run company, there are probably other connections with the military.
 
2014-01-06 11:18:08 AM  

StopLurkListen: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: ZAZ: When I think of trusting France, I think of the report that France revealed codes the Royal Navy could use to take out Exocet missiles during the Falklands war.

Any export of this class is likely to have a back door, and you have to pick which supplier you trust not to abuse it.

[news.bbcimg.co.uk image 624x351]

I think of the British finding out that aluminum will burn at a sufficiently high temperature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_%28D80%29
The sinking of Sheffield is sometimes blamed on a superstructure made wholly or partially from aluminium, the melting point and ignition temperature of which are significantly lower than those of steel. However, this is incorrect as Sheffield's superstructure was made entirely of steel.[15] The confusion is related to the US and British Navies abandoning aluminium after several fires in the 1970s involving ships that had aluminium superstructures. The sinking of the Type 21 frigates Antelope and Ardent, both of which had aluminium superstructures, probably also had an effect on this belief though these cases are again incorrect and the presence of aluminium had nothing to do with their loss.


When it comes to military battles, I think Wikipedia is sometimes used as a psyops by the military.

Last I had heard, the report on the Sheffield sinking was still classified and only a partial report released due to pressure from the families of the deceased sailors.

Covering up a deficiency in the building of the ship (and it's sister ships) would be the first thing I would do on Wikipedia.

The Sheffield was launched in 1971, so the British Navy move to abandon aluminum super structures in the late 70's as a sort of proof is strangely out of date.
 
2014-01-06 11:25:46 AM  

draypresct: wesmon: Kibbler: Nothing is going to rein in the spying.  Nothing.  They will never give it up.

And it won't be long before we hear how the "government" and "business" have started to overlap, and access to this information is doled out to "good friends" of the "government" in "business".  And the judges will say it's legal, because fark you, that's why.  In fact, it never happened.  In fact, if you print that again, you go to jail.

hat is already happening. The NSA spying on the state-owned Brazilian oil company is one example. Purely economic espionage on behalf of the private interests that want to buy out the company.

Do you have a citation showing that this was purely economic?

Francisco Roberto de Albuquerque, the controlling shareholders' representative on the Petrobras board, was fairly high up in the military up until his election to the board in 2007. This being a state-run company, there are probably other connections with the military.


Access to oil is a military objective.

The DoD uses 360,000 barrels of oil each day.
 
2014-01-06 11:41:31 AM  
stuff like this is going to drive the US tech industry out of the country
 
2014-01-06 01:28:11 PM  

b0rscht: Keep a low profile, and don't shoot yourself in the foot ... find a way to make lots of money by doing something akin to creating an anonymized internet (TOR but much more mainstream and not so damned laggy) then it will shift the balance back to us plebes.


I ain't no engineer, but it's not possible to both 'keep a low profile' and 'create an anonymized internet' at the same time in the US market, unless and until the illegality of the general warrants has first been firmly established.  If such a system becomes "much more mainstream" than TOR, then by definition it and its creators will have a high profile.  If the attempt is to operate it as if it is not subject to the jurisdiction of any government, the US and others will treat it as a criminal enterprise -- a major obstacle for any startup.  If the attempt is to operate it as a privacy-protective service offered in compliance with the laws of some local jurisdiction such as the US, then it will face the same hurdles as Lavabit.
 
2014-01-06 01:49:16 PM  
I always assumed this was why Microsoft wasn't worried about piracy in China, they just wanted them all using the things with the backdoor killswitch.
 
2014-01-06 04:59:41 PM  
Americans: You are becoming a joke.
 
2014-01-06 05:36:48 PM  

dittybopper: Having said that, I'm OK with it, if that sort of economic pressure helps Congress and the courts to reign in the domestic spying part of the NSA.  The two are unrelated, of course, but often Congress takes action based upon perception, not actual objective reality.


The government has a long history of farking the economy, destroying jobs and bankrupting businesses. What makes you think that they would stop now?
 
2014-01-07 03:11:24 AM  

devildog123: FTFY. If you think Chinese and Russian firms aren't doing the same thing, you are one of the most naive human beings alive.


Can't UL or somebody like that take a random sampling of things like new router equipment, reverse-engineer it, and objectively get a sense of how much of this is going on and by which countries?  Satellites might be a stretch, but relatively cheaper targeted items like network hardware or even just laptops would work.

Obviously they would have to obtain the samples carefully--maybe by approaching various firms who already bought the equipment (but had not yet installed it) and offering them above market price for 1 or a few units.  Also, the lab might have to be based on some "neutral" country, like Switzerland.

We can speculate all day about whether this is going on all the time by everyone, and I'm sure it is, but it would be nice to have an actual study done.
 
2014-01-07 07:28:07 AM  

DrPainMD: dittybopper: Having said that, I'm OK with it, if that sort of economic pressure helps Congress and the courts to reign in the domestic spying part of the NSA.  The two are unrelated, of course, but often Congress takes action based upon perception, not actual objective reality.

The government has a long history of farking the economy, destroying jobs and bankrupting businesses. What makes you think that they would stop now?


How is that at odds with what I said?
 
rpm
2014-01-07 09:25:19 AM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Can't UL or somebody like that take a random sampling of things like new router equipment, reverse-engineer it, and objectively get a sense of how much of this is going on and by which countries?  Satellites might be a stretch, but relatively cheaper targeted items like network hardware or even just laptops would work.


I think that's a great idea, but I don't think it's practical. Reverse engineer chips containing millions of transistors? Possible, but we'll probably be running quantum computers by the time the first piece of equipment is done.
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report