asymetric warfare

Fred J. McCall wrote:
(phil hunt) wrote:
:On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:41:35 GMT, Fred J. McCall
::co-ordination = radio
:In which case we're going to KNOW when you're spooling up to shoot and
:you'll be dead before everybody gets rolled out and ready.
:
:Hasve you never heard of encryption, or are you trolling?

Hasve [sic] you never heard of traffic analysis, or are you trolling?

Done properly, especially with one time pad encryption,
one can handle this sort of situation.

Consider... the use of CD-R's for pads. They give you 650
megabytes of storage. Assume one message of 1k contents
per minute is sent; that works out to a bit over 43 megabytes
of pad per month, or about 518 megabytes per year. Each receiving
station can have its own pad and its own recipient keying.

The messages are sent, every minute, every hour, every day.
Most of the time they decrypt to "Nothing is happening,
the wind is west at ten kilometers per hour in central
Bagwabadad, the temperature is twenty three celsius,
our fearless leader wishes you good will guarding our
important sacred borders, have a nice day. [spaces padding
out to 1k total chars]"

Which the computer at the launch site merely notes in a log
and ignores (or, prints out a receipt note on a dot matrix
printer or something, so that people can see that messages
are coming in and being decoded).

There's no traffic analysis to do: there's always a message
of 1k contents going out to each recipient station every
minute, and it's under a one time pad key so you can't tell
what it is unless you bust into the station and copy its
CD-ROM.

And then, you invade, and instead of the weather report
all the stations get code "ZERO ZERO ZERO FIRE WHEN READY GRIDLI"

This is all pretty easy to jam, since the frequencies are
all known beforehand, but that general *approach* is very
hard to penetrate with traffic analysis.


-george william herbert

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
news
ess (phil hunt) wrote:



:Usingn the right
rogramming tools is important, for example the right lasnguasge or
more likely) set of languages. On which lanugages to use, Paul
:Graham's essays on language design, and the way Lisp makes it easy
:for you to in effect write your own specialised language for the job
:in hand, are apposite.

Again, this is wonderful until someone has to enhance or maintain the
result. EVERY effort written in a 'one-off' special purpose language?
Ugh!


He wants to use lisp for real time software !

Yikes

:Concentration on software quality involves lack of caring about
ther criteria, so forcing employees to wear strangulation devices,
r unnecessarily attending work at particular hours, are
:counterproductive in themselves as well as being symptomatic of
:wider PHB-ism.

I don't know how to break it do you, but the last time I wore a tie
was around a year ago (I was briefing an O-6 - even so, the tie was a
mistake, which I didn't repeat the last time I went to brief one). I
generally wear polo shirts to work (and pretty much work when I feel
like it - the problems which you find so easy seem to consume an awful
lot of time before they are acceptably solved, so they let me work as
many hours as I want (up to a limit where the company starts worrying
about burn-out)).


As a software engineer I have to say this joker seems to know nothing
about the business. The only people wh wear ties in our company
are the accountants.

Keith

(George William Herbert) wrote:

:And then, you invade, and instead of the weather report
:all the stations get code "ZERO ZERO ZERO FIRE WHEN READY GRIDLI"
:
:This is all pretty easy to jam, since the frequencies are
:all known beforehand, but that general *approach* is very
:hard to penetrate with traffic analysis.

It's also pretty easy to locate a station that is transmitting all the
time and just take it down. Note that the station also has to be some
sort of intel hub if it is going to be passing out target coordinates.
Again, it's suddenly easier to find and silence.

If you don't broadcast all the time, traffic analysis tells a lot. If
you do broadcast all the time and the other guy owns the sky (and if
the other guy is the US and you are a 2nd tier nation, you have to
assume that the other guy WILL own the sky), you can bend over and
kiss your ass goodbye. You've just made the ATO.

--
"You keep talking about slaying like it's a job. It's not.
It's who you are."
-- Kendra, the Vampire Slayer

(George William Herbert) wrote:

This is all pretty easy to jam, since the frequencies are
all known beforehand, but that general *approach* is very
hard to penetrate with traffic analysis.

note: This is more-or-less how the SSBN comm system works in fact.

It's hard to penetrate with traffic analysis, yes. However a station
transmitting 24/7 is a station that's easily located, and a station
that will eat a gross of ordinance at H hour + .01 second.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

" :If they can be mass-produced for $10,000 each, then a $1 bn
rocurement -- and the sort of countries we're talking about
:typically sign bigger weapons contracts than that -- would buy
:100,000 missiles.

I think you need to go look at this again. Hell, why not assume they
cost $1 each and can be made by kindergardeners?

A civilian is making a cruise missile in his garage in New Zealand for less
then 5000 dollars. I dont have the web site but from memory it has a range
of 500k (?), accurate to about 10m (uses GPS which of course is not secure
in a war zone) and sends live TV feed back to base. Not suitable for a
military weapon of course but indicates how far and cheap off-the-shelf
civilian technology can get you these days. Scary thought if some terrorists
were clever enough to come up with like this.

Damo


--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:45:07 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote:

(George William Herbert) wrote:

This is all pretty easy to jam, since the frequencies are
all known beforehand, but that general *approach* is very
hard to penetrate with traffic analysis.

note: This is more-or-less how the SSBN comm system works in fact.

It's hard to penetrate with traffic analysis, yes. However a station
transmitting 24/7 is a station that's easily located, and a station
that will eat a gross of ordinance at H hour + .01 second.

So everyobody goes on red alert as soon as the primary station stops
broadcasting, and the targetting information has to be sent by the
second backup station.

To anticipate some objections, yes, if you get all the backup
stations, you will prevent the sending of the targeting information
(as well as any other sort of C&C activity).

Damo wrote:

A civilian is making a cruise missile in his garage in New Zealand for
less
then 5000 dollars.

He has apparently been thwarted by his own government, although his news
page isn't terribly clear:

http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/

Quite frankly, I'm not terribly impressed with his comments; he
half-invokes conspiracy theory arguments which one hardly would need to
consider. It's common sense that, hey, you're probably violating about
a thousand different regulations with the project; the government would
have to be completely stupid not to take interest in stopping the
project for any number of common sense reasons.

--
__ Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
/ \ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && &tSftDotIotE
\__/ When angry, count four; when very angry, swear.
-- Mark Twain

I think almost everyone is missing the point about assymetric warfare. All
the comments are based on US/NATO type equipment standards, and military
objectives. The whole point of assymetric warfare is that you don't follow
the standards, you go for what you can achieve where you can achieve it with
what you can get. 9/11 was a classic example.

If some one out there is planning on using cruise missiles for example, he
wont build them to Tomahawk standards, he wont select tomahawk like targets
and so on.

Assymetric warfare is about doing the unexpected, with the unexpected by
surprise, that negates the defences and allows success.

If you haven't got the budget of the US, you dont try to emulate them and
expect to win, you have to think out of 'our' box.

Peter

In article ,
says...
Bernardz wrote:

:Say I built heaps of multiple-rocket launchers built an improved WW2, V1
:jet to hit a city say at 200 miles and then targeted them at an US ally
:cities.
:
:Aiming would be pretty trivial, most modern cities are pretty big anyway
:and so what if a a lot miss? Its not like they cost me much anyway each
:missile.
:
:My missiles shot down are a lot cheaper then the anti missiles the US
:uses anyway.
:
:The make sure that this US ally is aware of your capability. That might
:keep the US out of the conflict.

You've got to build them somewhere.

I presume that they would be built long before the conflict started.


They have to launch from
somewhere. Both of those 'somewheres' can be targeted and obliterated
in pretty short order.

We could not do it in Iraq. Mobile launchers are very difficult to take
out.




:This strategy seems to work for the North Koreans.

Well, no. What works for the North Koreans is a bunch of artillery
and a huge army sitting poised to attack South Korea, whose capital is
right up there by the border.

Its a bit of both. In the event of a conflict the army gives the North
Koreans time to attack Seoul by long range artillery and rocket
launchers. Most of their artillery is short and medium range artillery
built to hit the DMZ and the area south of it, it cannot reach Seoul.


Jane's International Defense Review however states that

North Korean long range artillery can deliver 1,5kT of high explosives
in Seoul within one hour using 28,152 artillery rounds and rockets.

1,5kT/hour mean 36kT/day, which is something like 2 Nagasaki-size atom
bombs a day.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oplan-5027.htm

States that "North Korea has about 500 long-range artillery tubes within
range of Seoul...is within range of the 170mm Koksan gun and two hundred
240mm multiple-rocket launchers...The proximity of these long-range
systems to the Demilitarized Zone threatens all of Seoul with
devastating attacks."

Such an attack might result in a 100,000 dead in Seoul in the first day.

IRBMs and nuclear warheads help, too.



Agreed. Particularly as they maybe able to hit Japan.



--
The rich and the poor want the same thing, money.

21st saying of Bernard

Am Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:35:15 +0000, schrieb
ess (phil hunt) :

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 06:17:02 GMT, Kevin Brooks wrote:

"phil hunt" wrote in message
g...
Even
LCCM's are fairly high technology, and 'dead reckoning' isn't as easy
as it sounds.

Why not?

Accumulated error, for one thing; you can't count on GPS for positional
updates.

Say the error is 1%. Then it'd be 1 km off on a 100 km journey.
That's close enough for terminal homing to



Just to give some figures: GPS will give you 5 to 30 meters accuracy
(as long as the US lets you have it). Galileo will give you about the
same accuracy. I suppose the US can jam both. I'd guess if they could
not, they would not have increased the accuracy publicly available and
would make much more of a fuss about Galileo.

Loran will give you about 500 to 1000m, on a good day. But as others
have pointed out, your Loran will be killed at once. Dead reckoning is
much, much worse. As long as you can't effectively counter the
influence of the wind, you will not be anywhere near the intended
target.
Owe
--
My from-adress is valid and being read.
www.owejessen.de