ADA made me hate programming
in [ADA]
|
From: anon on 2 Jul 2010 21:54 In <m2bpapyatv.fsf(a)pushface.org>, Simon Wright <simon(a)pushface.org> writes: >anon(a)att.net writes: > >> In <4205a7a1-e193-4057-b19c-7ae4a3122a1b(a)32g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>, sjw <simon.j.wright(a)mac.com> writes: > >>>And what makes you think that the missile launch computer won't use IP >>>to talk to the target tracking sensor computers? >> >> The internet contains a swamp of hackers both domestic and foreign >> that would love to get it hands on a missle. You ever heard of >> terrorist. So, to control a missle on the internet is treason type of >> programming. > >I said "IP" which means "Internet Protocol". Never for one moment did I >suggest that such a system would be connected to the Internet. > >If two computers need to communicate and IP over Ethernet is suitable >(and that includes an awful lot of military systems) we would be wasting >the taxpayers' money and our own limited resources to roll our own comms >stack when we can get one off the shelf. I knew what you meant by "IP". But: 1. Once a missle is launched the any wired "IP" is no long a valid port. 2. Wireless IP is no good, do to hacking during flight. Do not want a hacker forcing a 180 degree turn or having that missle just land so they can use it against someone else. Do you? Which means that the system must be able to operate without human connection except for the system kill switch after launch. So, besides the radio port for the "Kill" command, the missle has to be disabled any and all humand connection, that include any and all IP subsystems. So, it must rely on the radio GPS system to calculate the position of itself and the target. Plus, the gov't is perfect for wasting tax payer money even if it borrowed from any country.
From: Marc A. Criley on 3 Jul 2010 09:16 On 07/02/2010 08:54 PM, anon(a)att.net wrote: > > I knew what you meant by "IP". But: > > 1. Once a missle is launched the any wired "IP" is no long a valid > port. > 2. Wireless IP is no good, do to hacking during flight. Do not want > a hacker forcing a 180 degree turn or having that missle just > land so they can use it against someone else. Do you? > > Which means that the system must be able to operate without human > connection except for the system kill switch after launch. So, besides > the radio port for the "Kill" command, the missle has to be disabled > any and all humand connection, that include any and all IP subsystems. > So, it must rely on the radio GPS system to calculate the position of > itself and the target. Wrong. As in "you are obviously completely unfamiliar with the field" wrong. Several active, deployed missile systems (such as the Patriot--http://www.army-technology.com/projects/patriot) utilize "IFTUs" (In-Flight Target Updates) for mid-course correction of the missile's trajectory towards its intended target. These updates are "radioed" to the missile from a ground station with up-to-date target information. The missile's seeker then guides the missile in for the final kill. There are other (cruise) missile systems such as the Tactical Tomahawk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109_Tomahawk#Tactical_Tomahawk) that loiter in an area of interest and then use in-flight retargeting for final targeting. Obviously the command links are well-encrypted to prevent hostiles from usurping control. Marc "Yes, by day I have been known to do rocket science" Criley
From: Simon Wright on 3 Jul 2010 17:43 anon(a)att.net writes: > In <m2bpapyatv.fsf(a)pushface.org>, Simon Wright <simon(a)pushface.org> writes: >>anon(a)att.net writes: >> >>> In <4205a7a1-e193-4057-b19c-7ae4a3122a1b(a)32g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>, sjw <simon.j.wright(a)mac.com> writes: >> >>>>And what makes you think that the missile launch computer won't use IP >>>>to talk to the target tracking sensor computers? >>> >>> The internet contains a swamp of hackers both domestic and foreign >>> that would love to get it hands on a missle. You ever heard of >>> terrorist. So, to control a missle on the internet is treason type of >>> programming. >> >>I said "IP" which means "Internet Protocol". Never for one moment did I >>suggest that such a system would be connected to the Internet. >> >>If two computers need to communicate and IP over Ethernet is suitable >>(and that includes an awful lot of military systems) we would be wasting >>the taxpayers' money and our own limited resources to roll our own comms >>stack when we can get one off the shelf. > > I knew what you meant by "IP". But: > > 1. Once a missle is launched the any wired "IP" is no long a valid > port. I should have also pointed out that I was talking about the missile launch computer talking to the target tracking computer, *not* about missile control computer to missile. And indeed in the system I'm working on IP *is* the comms stack for this purpose.
From: anon on 3 Jul 2010 17:50 In <e411d$4c2f383f$433a4efa$4211(a)API-DIGITAL.COM>, "Marc A. Criley" <mcNOSPAM(a)mckae.com> writes: >On 07/02/2010 08:54 PM, anon(a)att.net wrote: > >> >> I knew what you meant by "IP". But: >> >> 1. Once a missle is launched the any wired "IP" is no long a valid >> port. >> 2. Wireless IP is no good, do to hacking during flight. Do not want >> a hacker forcing a 180 degree turn or having that missle just >> land so they can use it against someone else. Do you? >> >> Which means that the system must be able to operate without human >> connection except for the system kill switch after launch. So, besides >> the radio port for the "Kill" command, the missle has to be disabled >> any and all humand connection, that include any and all IP subsystems. >> So, it must rely on the radio GPS system to calculate the position of >> itself and the target. > >Wrong. > >As in "you are obviously completely unfamiliar with the field" wrong. > >Several active, deployed missile systems (such as the >Patriot--http://www.army-technology.com/projects/patriot) utilize >"IFTUs" (In-Flight Target Updates) for mid-course correction of the >missile's trajectory towards its intended target. These updates are >"radioed" to the missile from a ground station with up-to-date target >information. The missile's seeker then guides the missile in for the >final kill. > >There are other (cruise) missile systems such as the Tactical Tomahawk >(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109_Tomahawk#Tactical_Tomahawk) that >loiter in an area of interest and then use in-flight retargeting for >final targeting. > >Obviously the command links are well-encrypted to prevent hostiles from >usurping control. > >Marc "Yes, by day I have been known to do rocket science" Criley The mid-course correction type of systems is outdated, and has been reported that it has been hacked. What the gov't wants a smart "AI" brain for its missiles, but the public reject this type of weapon. Plus there is no encryption that is perfect, only the amount of time a hacker needed to crack it and that's is the true security, aka "Time". But what we we talking about was the use of IP. And at the movements most embedded processors have built in serial port and some even come will parallel port, so why add extra layer of hardware and software with their problems when it is not needed. In simplistic terms just add a digital radio receiver and your good to go.
From: Simon Wright on 4 Jul 2010 07:40
anon(a)att.net writes: > But what we we talking about was the use of IP. And at the movements > most embedded processors have built in serial port and some even come > will parallel port, so why add extra layer of hardware and software > with their problems when it is not needed. In simplistic terms just > add a digital radio receiver and your good to go. AAARGH! The comms link to the missile doesn't use IP! Neither Marc nor I said it did! |