It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia lifts ban on delivering missile-defence system to Iran

page: 12
11
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: dragonridr

so you are saying stuxnet was an April fools joke?


Stuxnet had nothing to do with air defense what so ever it was a virus that was released to destroy cetrifuges. THIS WAS AFTER THE IRAQ WAR!!!!

The virus he wad referring to was supposedly put into Iraqs air defense system and the only reason the US was able to take out the strongest air defense system in the region in 12 hrs is because it wasn't active. The truth ot was functioning fine the US airforce is very good at taking out sam sights.




posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

attacking the controllers for industrial and military computers via a penetrative virus installed in a printer has everything todo with it.

these things are all happening.

"gobbling windows round the edges" is just a tiny bit of bull added to make the facts lack credibility.

everything else about it is known to exist or be probably true.



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: dragonridr

attacking the controllers for industrial and military computers via a penetrative virus installed in a printer has everything todo with it.

these things are all happening.

"gobbling windows round the edges" is just a tiny bit of bull added to make the facts lack credibility.

everything else about it is known to exist or be probably true.


Just the fact you think countries attach their Sam sights to the Internet is funny enough. No you can't hack into a countries air defense systems. You can jam them you could if you got access to it insert a virus but when they ran systems checks they would know something is wrong. Like when they were not getting radar returns and they would remove it. Trying to put a virus on a missile system is stupid.



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

who said anything about the internet?

Why cant the US and UK "hack" their own air defense systems? After all, they sold Saddam the hardware in the first place.
edit on 22-4-2015 by mSparks43 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: dragonridr

who said anything about the internet?


Ok wow computers are really confusing to you aren't they first there isn't a missile system on the planet that runs windows. The virus was said to be connected to a printer on a network. This virus worked it's way out from there to infect their Sam siyes turning them off. Most of the Soviet hardware uses something called Kronos for military uses. It isn't comparable with windows at all. Main reason they use it also very hard to attack Since they operate as stand alone units. Since Iraqs air defence wad made up of mostly french and Russian missile systems putting a windows virus on a computer in some office will have zero effect .

There Sam Sites were functioning just fine until they were blown up. But by all means prove me wrong how did this virus effect there sams. And what about the French systems two viruses?? You can use viruses to attack infrastructure shut down power plant etc. But as far as attacking individual Sams or tanks etc it's impossible. About ALL YOU Can Do Is Hit It With An EM burst and hope you cause the system to reset.



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

sorry.
All completely wrong.
www.irongeek.com.../bsidescleveland2014/plunder-pillage-and-print-the-art-of-leverage-multifunction-printers-during-penetration- testing-deral-heiland

www.youtube.com...
edit on 22-4-2015 by mSparks43 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: dragonridr

sorry.
All completely wrong.
www.irongeek.com.../bsidescleveland2014/plunder-pillage-and-print-the-art-of-leverage-multifunction-printers-during-penetration- testing-deral-heiland

www.youtube.com...


This has zero to do with air defense systems or how they operate by the way just curious what they would use an HP printer for on a missile system night as well add a coffee maker to I guess wow really?



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

You wish.
Not identical, but it highlights the point that a printer is a valid attack vector for attacking military networks.
breach the C&C, shut down the sam system.
(Dell is currently in trouble because the snowden leaks included dell including malicious NSA hardware on their servers shipped from the factory)
SAMs dont function independantly, they get a "stand down" from C&C and they will stand down.
edit on 22-4-2015 by mSparks43 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: dragonridr

You wish.
Not identical, but it highlights the point that a printer is a valid attack vector for attacking military networks.
breach the C&C, shut down the sam system.
(Dell is currently in trouble because the snowden leaks included dell including malicious hardware on their servers shipped from the factory)
SAMs dont function independantly, they get a "stand down" from C&C and they will stand down.


Yeah its called a radio and the operator turns it off. there's a switch to activate the radar and one to fire the missile. You are buying into Internet fantasy. An operator all ways has the final say so on missile launch unless it's a droans. Than yes you can jack into there signal but again not with a printer. The only thing that requires compurer authorization is nukes. And again alot of proc autumn's are taken to prevent then from being hacked mostly not connected to an outside network. Militaries aren't stupid 99 percent is proprietary software. They don't go to your local computer store and grab a windows pc.

They are designed by the very nature to withstand EMP Pulses and even hacking. Again they are secured stand alone units. They do not accept commands over the radio they can't do software changes the operating systems are hired wired on to chipS. It requires direct access with password identifications. For example let's say we wanted to update the software on radars for an F15. They first go into the plane access it's software either change the chip or reprogram it. You cannot do this any other way same with missiles you have to access the chip directly.

And Im pretty sure they would notice a virus in there program since it has to be tested first. If however they did a software up grade and didn't get the results they would put the old program back and start over. Again proprietary software.



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

depnds what the standown is.

C&C identifying all potential targets as friendly. Which one will he shoot?

Anyway, not interested in getting into the details of exactly how such a virus would work, there are simply hundreds of different ways by which a malicious printer in central command can cripple sam capability.

In the same way a simple USB stick can infect industrial machinery to cause high velocity centrifuges (not connected to the internet) to blow up.

And the take away message is the same. Be you a small firm, Sony, or a military organisation.
Hardware and software should always be treated as untrusted unless it has internal security signoff by someone who knows what they are doing..

We've not even touched on the possibility of using a buffer overrun in the radio equipement to install a virus directly on a piece of equipment wirelessly.
edit on 22-4-2015 by mSparks43 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 03:30 AM
link   
Avoiding that no hardware is compatible between Iraq's SAM systems and Printers.. (Printers would not "share" any kind of internal system, USB sticks weren't a thing, etc. Also: vmyths.com...)

It had much more to do with U.S. air capabilities, airframes, and Iraqi training.
I'm confused why you think it's so hard to do well against SAM installations. They've been taken out very easily before by plenty of western air forces without some kind of magic virus. Israel bombing Syrian facilities, for instance - never even noticed.



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
I ahve found something that sound slike Sprayable Chaff that can linger in air.

New form of Chaff

Interesting. so we could technically drop this into zones we are going to attack from space. or in secret with commercial aircraft in their exaust.



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
What kind of warranty do these missiles have?

www.youtube.com...

edit on 23-4-2015 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Really? False info then. Thanks..



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Losses:
A-12: 5
M-21: 1
YF-12: 2
SR-71A: 11
SR-71B: 1

All were accidents.



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

Losses:
A-12: 5
M-21: 1
YF-12: 2
SR-71A: 11
SR-71B: 1

All were accidents.


SR71 was a hard aircraft to fly your a rocket with wings here's a list of each that was lost and why.
www.sr-71.org...



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

I always thought it was funny that they took the back half of a YF-12 and Frankensteined the SR-71C.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dragonridr

I always thought it was funny that they took the back half of a YF-12 and Frankensteined the SR-71C.


Yes it is biggest problem was maintainanice they required alot and something as simple as leaving a tool on it could cause damage.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Ferros

sams change the game. because a successful campaign requires total domination of the skies. particularly high altitude out of the range of aaa.

without that you lose ground troops fast. and western citizens don't tolerate losses of their men and boys unless they really care about winning.

look how astonished you are to think even one sr71 was lost to a sam.

it's just one plane. but loosing that and the nighthawk completely changed the battlefield during the cold war.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: mSparks43

Prove an SR-71 was shot down. Because according to people a lot more likely to know it never happened. The Blackbird never flew over Soviet or Russian territory during its life, so that's a hell of an extraordinary claim. So prove it. And not, I saw it on a TV show.

Losing a Nighthawk didn't change anything. It was known that they were at risk, just not as much risk as legacy aircraft. Losing one aircraft, when they flew thousands of combat missions didn't "completely change the battlefield".
edit on 4/24/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join