Another F-35 vulnerability

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

g3143

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 00:16
  • Location: New York

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 18:00

Just found this article that talks about F-35 vulnerability to EW and cyberweapons.

What are your opinions on this topic?

Link: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 438890.xml
Offline

fat_cat

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2012, 16:49
  • Location: UK

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 18:40

http://wireframe.iyogi.com/news/every-m ... china.html

"In an interview with Ron Rosenbaum of Smithsonian magazine, Clarke said, “Every major company in the United States has already been penetrated by China”. He further added that the network of the fighter bomber F-35’s manufacturer could have been hacked and info about the aircraft stolen. There is also a possibility that the electronics and hardware imported from China could have logic bombs in the form of malicious security threats such as Trojans."

What was I saying the other day about being eaten alive by the Chinese. Screwed is an understatement.
(F-35 fanatic telling us its all lies in 3...2..1)
Offline

count_to_10

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2073
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 18:43

The advanced F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, for example, has a new vulnerability. Its wide-angle field-of-view radar can be attacked with cyberweapons through its active, electronically scanned array (AESA) antennas. Airborne cyber­weapons form data beams that can be packed with malware and directed into a target antenna.

Sounds theoretically possible, but only if the F-35 is trying to find code in the transitions it is receiving through it's radar and trying to run it.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2110
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 19:50

g3143 wrote:Just found this article that talks about F-35 vulnerability to EW and cyberweapons.

What are your opinions on this topic?

Link: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 438890.xml


I must have missed the other vulnerabilities, that you were referring to. As for this topic, I think these paragraphs are the most important take aways.
The veteran airborne EW specialist says the threat to radars and other systems using AESA antennas is less a looming catastrophe than simply another thrust and parry in the fencing match of EW that has been going on since before World War II. “As radars mature, the signals processing gets smarter and intrusion becomes less of an issue until some new technique is invented,” he says. “The benefit of our new systems is that they have multiple sensors covering different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum that allow sensor fusion to overcome point solutions with digital RF memory and
tremendous signal processing capability.”
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2110
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 19:52

“The only new issue is the attempted introduction of a virus or some other network attack element through the AESA,” says the EW specialist. “All are conduits for incoming signals. The question is how you process the signal to retain the value-added information and reject or exploit the hostile content. As in most systems, we have multiple layers of signals rejection.”

There are ways to attack an AESA radar on a dedicated one-to-one basis, says Lt. Gen. Herbert Carlisle, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for operations. However, that vulnerability can be mitigated by the fusion of multiple radars. If several aircraft with AESAs network themselves together, the radar being attacked can shut down and rely on information available on the network. Another option is to switch to infrared or electro-optical sensors.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post07 Apr 2012, 20:42

We'll have to see. The USAF was able to function before data-links, they can figure out how to do it again if they have to.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 754
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 00:07

1st503rdsgt wrote:We'll have to see. The USAF was able to function before data-links, they can figure out how to do it again if they have to.


But can they do it quickly enough, and how much institutional knowledge remains?

Two examples:

Hypothetical situation where virus introduced which messes up the functions of commercial telephone switches. "No, problem, just hire back the operators".

Example you can demonstrate yourself: Walk into the service department of a car dealer and watch a younger mechanic try and figure out what's wrong with a car if they can't get a trouble code from the diagnostic computer
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2271
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 01:29

You're kidding me, right? :doh:

So cancel all the Eagle and Viper AESA radar updates, eliminate all their data links and ground the Raptors?

Think our GPS sattelites aren't a target? Or our communications?

Think your Dish or Direct TV will be operable during WWIII for you to watch the nightly news? (I'm still running copper cable thank you.... but that's weather related!)

You that worried about the code in our fighters? Jets like the Viper that have had code in them, in one form or another for decades?

I realize that there is much more integration in the F-35, but come on.....

Why do you think the USAF has a Cyber Command?

TEG

"The sky is falling the sky is falling; news at 11, buy a subscription to our online news service and pay for our app for the latest!..."
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

sferrin

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1915
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 02:58

g3143 wrote:Just found this article that talks about F-35 vulnerability to EW and cyberweapons.

What are your opinions on this topic?

Link: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 438890.xml


Some people are gullible. :lol:
"There I was. . ."
Offline

Prinz_Eugn

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 927
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2008, 03:35

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 04:00

Newsflash: The F-35 isn't made out of Unobtanium; vulnerable to bullets and explosions.
"A visitor from Mars could easily pick out the civilized nations. They have the best implements of war."
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2271
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 04:24

Prinz_Eugn wrote:Newsflash: The F-35 isn't made out of Unobtanium; vulnerable to bullets and explosions.


and often more important, human error!

(no matter how few and far between)

Now the headline will read "F-35 Gravest Vulnerability Found, No Fix Available"

TEG
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2110
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post08 Apr 2012, 13:22

aaam wrote:
1st503rdsgt wrote:We'll have to see. The USAF was able to function before data-links, they can figure out how to do it again if they have to.


But can they do it quickly enough, and how much institutional knowledge remains?

Two examples:

Hypothetical situation where virus introduced which messes up the functions of commercial telephone switches. "No, problem, just hire back the operators".

Example you can demonstrate yourself: Walk into the service department of a car dealer and watch a younger mechanic try and figure out what's wrong with a car if they can't get a trouble code from the diagnostic computer


I just have to laugh, when I see folks assuming that the USAF/USN/USMC/etc... only train for best case scenarios, where they have good visibility, all of their equipment is working at 100%, and there is no EW to deal with. This critique is grasping at straws.
Offline

fat_cat

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2012, 16:49
  • Location: UK

Unread post09 Apr 2012, 13:13

wrightwing wrote:I just have to laugh, when I see folks assuming that the USAF/USN/USMC/etc... only train for best case scenarios, where they have good visibility, all of their equipment is working at 100%, and there is no EW to deal with. This critique is grasping at straws.


The warning came from the Deputy Defense Secretary, but what does he know :roll:
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2110
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Apr 2012, 14:41

fat_cat wrote:
wrightwing wrote:I just have to laugh, when I see folks assuming that the USAF/USN/USMC/etc... only train for best case scenarios, where they have good visibility, all of their equipment is working at 100%, and there is no EW to deal with. This critique is grasping at straws.


The warning came from the Deputy Defense Secretary, but what does he know :roll:

Did you bother reading the paragraphs that I posted, from the very same article? The very concerns addressed with regards to the vulnerabilities, are the sorts of capabilities that the F-35s will have against their foes, as well. The move along attitudes are to temper the sky is falling alarmism/hysteria that gets posted here.

Now consider this, the PAK FA, J-20, Rafale, Typhoon, etc... will all be in the same boat, which is why we develop countermeasures, and use encryption/security techniques, as well as practicing under less than ideal conditions, to get a realistic assessment of real world performance.
Offline

sewerrat

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2009, 18:03

Unread post09 Apr 2012, 15:30

wrightwing wrote:
fat_cat wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
I just have to laugh, when I see folks assuming that the USAF/USN/USMC/etc... only train for best case scenarios, where they have good visibility, all of their equipment is working at 100%, and there is no EW to deal with. This critique is grasping at straws.


The warning came from the Deputy Defense Secretary, but what does he know :roll:

Honestly, this whole "nothing to see here, move along" attitude on this site is most amusing, far more so infact than the stuff coming out of the mouths of the "Russia Big, Russia Strong" types.


Did you bother reading the paragraphs that I posted, from the very same article? The very concerns addressed with regards to the vulnerabilities, are the sorts of capabilities that the F-35s will have against their foes, as well. The move along attitudes are to temper the sky is falling alarmism/hysteria that gets posted here.

Now consider this, the PAK FA, J-20, Rafale, Typhoon, etc... will all be in the same boat, which is why we develop countermeasures, and use encryption/security techniques, as well as practicing under less than ideal conditions, to get a realistic assessment of real world performance.


I'd say the Pak Fa and J-20 are more vulnerable than the -35. Usually, people sabotage and sell secrets for either money, or because they're foriegn workers who came here with an agenda. The Russians and Chinese, with their lower incomes are more vulnerable to being paid off. I know a person in intelligence and we got to talking about code theft, and trojan viruses, and they told me its almost always done by transplant workers from other parts of the world... specifically, by name, China was mentioned as being the biggest cuplrit. Seems like there's an easy fix to this problem if someone had the courage to do what needs to be done.
Next

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests