Correlate

Level 6
When the Air Force showed up at the Defcon hacker conference in Las Vegas last month, it didn’t come empty-handed. It brought along an F-15 fighter-jet data system—one that security researchers thoroughly dismantled, finding serious vulnerabilities along the way. The USAF was so pleased with the result that it has decided to up the ante. Next year, it’s bringing a satellite.


That’s a promise from Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology, and logistics. While sending elite hackers after an orbiting satellite—and its ground station—might sound ambitious, it’s in keeping with Roper’s commitment to fundamentally changing how his branch of the military attacks its cybersecurity challenges.
 

Lightning_Brian

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
I was reading about this the other day. Quite interesting the USAF is going through with this. I'm also happy to see the United States Military taking a hard line stance about cybersecurity in general. My hope is that the US continues to make sure their technologies are secure. Internal and external audits, pen testing, and vulnerability testing are some of the most fundamental ways to ensure things are secure.

All in all, I say it is good for the US to be doing this stuff more publicly.

What are your thoughts - all?

~Brian
 

Burrito

Level 20
Verified
Generally, the most sensitive info is protected, because it's not reachable from the internet. There are separate networks for Secret and Top Secret info. Just talking about hacking..

And there are exceptions to this.

But.... there is plenty of sensitive but unclassified info on the internet that gets penetrated regularly.

So, uh, this is bad.

Specifically, with the Air Force and satellites, sure, this is good. But it sorta misses the point. The same countries that might be able to hack or deny a satellite have anti-satellite capabilities that can kill a satellite. And at that point.... worrying about hacking is sorta silly.
 

Lightning_Brian

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
Generally, the most sensitive info is protected, because it's not reachable from the internet. There are separate networks for Secret and Top Secret info. Just talking about hacking..

And there are exceptions to this.

But.... there is plenty of sensitive but unclassified info on the internet that gets penetrated regularly.

So, uh, this is bad.

Specifically, with the Air Force and satellites, sure, this is good. But it sorta misses the point. The same countries that might be able to hack or deny a satellite have ASAT capabilities that can kill a satellite. And at that point.... worrying about hacking is sorta silly.
I agree @Burrito there is much more than just hacking to worry about here. Just about everything has what I call a "kill switch" or something that will take it down/and out.

Overall, taking a stance of being more proactive and protective of stuff isn't a bad thing. Its just that there are multi facets involved that should be looked into here too. I'm glad you brought this up.

~Brian
 

Burrito

Level 20
Verified
Hi Burrito Would this be a good exercise test or not
It would.

So normally, an internal Red Team (friendly hackers) would attack at a certain place and time.

To open it up further to allow more divergence in the attack and in the attackers is generally a good thing.

The assumption is that most independent hackers would not do as well as the Red Teams. But testing this hypothesis with constraints is a good thing.