The Ukraine War thread

[AlRums]

Absolutely not.

There is no guarantee of any American equipment working if the American government does not want it to.

I know there was a big thing about the UK demanding F-35 source code as part of the deal - I can't remember how that ended up.
A real possibility that the carriers are fancy helicopter carriers as the aircraft can't do anything.

The Americans didn't allow the passwords to access the software on the Chinooks they supplied back in 1997

MoD in £200m blunder over DIY software for Chinooks

Military chiefs were today accused of a £200million blunder by trying to design software for Chinook helicopters.

www.standard.co.uk

The problem with the F35 is the telemetry all going to the manufacturer, over the air updates failing (oxygen systems failing).

The F35 repairs of a major type are all run by and controlled by America.

It would not at all surprised if the US kept a capability to disable them with a kill switch.

Only Israel has got access to modify the source code to allow Israeli built weapons to integrate. I can only assume this means everyone else is dependent on buying American weapons.

Some countries are refusing to buy unless the source code is made available. Of course we fell for it again.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

The Americans didn't allow the passwords to access the software on the Chinooks they supplied back in 1997

MoD in £200m blunder over DIY software for Chinooks

Military chiefs were today accused of a £200million blunder by trying to design software for Chinook helicopters.

www.standard.co.uk

The problem with the F35 is the telemetry all going to the manufacturer, over the air updates failing (oxygen systems failing).

The F35 repairs of a major type are all run by and controlled by America.

It would not at all surprised if the US kept a capability to disable them with a kill switch.

Only Israel has got access to modify the source code to allow Israeli built weapons to integrate. I can only assume this means everyone else is dependent on buying American weapons.

Some countries are refusing to buy unless the source code is made available. Of course we fell for it again.

UK government getting bent over a barrel due to nativity and a willingness to sell out our nation to others? Say it isn't so!

 

[ncurd]

A kill switch you say...

I don't think any you know how aircraft or military equipment is built.

 

[ncurd]

Along with "just give them the source code" as if these things aren't so complex that anyone outside the development team could do anything with it in any shape or time not amounting to years.

Or that private companies ever give their IP away.

 

[BrokenWing]

The RAF had several software teams working on aircraft software so it’s happened in the past. Nothing as complex I guess.

 

[ncurd]

The RAF had several software teams working on aircraft software so it's happened in the past. Nothing as complex I guess.

A quick google suggests they are at best maintainence guys. Trying to solve quick bugs in the 'heat of battle' rather than anything complex.

I'll try to give some context I work on satellite communication systems for aircraft. Testing of which covered by regulatory standard DO-262 and software development under DO-178C. I work to DAL D which in a nutshell means the SW developed can have a minor effect to safety in terms of operation of the aircraft.

It takes the best part of a year from being code 'complete' to qualifying the equipment.

Every change has to assessed for its impact to the overall system. This change has to be documented and supplied to the customer and ready for independent audit.

Believe me you don't just apply a change to complex systems.

This also said I very doubt Lockheed or anyone is putting in kill switches. For the simple reason of Cyber Warfare...great you put a back door in to kill the aircraft. **** your enemy just attacked your systems remotely and activated it themselves....well done...

Cybersecurity on aircraft is massively increasing field. Working for a large American military supplier (albeit my work is commercial). I know the lengths that are currently being made to try to make any of this as difficult as possible.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I know I'm in a tiny minority here as it's playing with fire but I think European nations need to actually send in their armed forces to Ukraine to kick Russia out. For all their bluster, I don't believe Russia will use any WMDs and a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Russia will always hold the threat of using WMDS over people's heads too keep them compliant. As more nations get WMDs, this threat will be used more frequently if they see it works.

Draw a line in the sand now rather than wait until it's no longer possible.

 

[BrokenWing]

It takes the best part of a year from being code 'complete' to qualifying the equipment.

Every change has to assessed for its impact to the overall system. This change has to be documented and supplied to the customer and ready for independent audit.

Believe me you don't just apply a change to complex systems.

I know. I spent the majority of my 24 years in The RAF working on the E3 Sentry Software Team.

The software lifecycle was around 18 months.

Granted, it wasn’t going to affect the flight of the aircraft but it was still tested to the extent you’ve said.

 

[Amiga500]

A kill switch you say...

I don't think any you know how aircraft or military equipment is built.

Given I spent a few years at and around it and on DAL-A... I've a fair idea. An 18 month lifecycle would be fantastically short on most of what I'd seen and worked on.

How many different encryption subsystems are there within a military network to prevent data corruption from outside parties?

Within the F-35, there will be loads. Like from Radar backend to ICP. Do the UK control that? Not if they don't have source code. One signal to misalign the ciphers, or rather, one missing update to ensure they stay in sync, and your radar backend is now sending gibberish to your main avionics computer. Meaning effectively no radar. Same for any other sensor system.

From F-35 to other nodes on the network, there'll be more. Like MADL.
UK would probably be able to make Link-16 work as it has been around so long - but its regarded as non-discrete these days so you'd be broadcasting detectably.

 

[Saintjay]

I know I'm in a tiny minority here as it's playing with fire but I think European nations need to actually send in their armed forces to Ukraine to kick Russia out. For all their bluster, I don't believe Russia will use any WMDs and a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Russia will always hold the threat of using WMDS over people's heads too keep them compliant. As more nations get WMDs, this threat will be used more frequently if they see it works.

Draw a line in the sand now rather than wait until it's no longer possible.

I think most people would rather take a peace deal that's unpalatable for the Ukraine. Rather than see there's sons and daughters die in some far away land.

Same as those who call for conscription or national service. They love the idea as long as they're not in the call up criteria.

 

[ncurd]

One signal to misalign the ciphers, or rather, one missing update to ensure they stay in sync, and your radar backend is now sending gibberish to your main avionics computer. Meaning effectively no radar. Same for any other sensor system.

Your suggesting on SW one update the USA would total our entire system. Its potentially doable but your also suggesting the RAF would rollout updates to all aircraft immediately without test first. Which is equally preposterous.

 

[Which Tyler]

I know I'm in a tiny minority here as it's playing with fire but I think European nations need to actually send in their armed forces to Ukraine to kick Russia out. For all their bluster, I don't believe Russia will use any WMDs and a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Russia will always hold the threat of using WMDS over people's heads too keep them compliant. As more nations get WMDs, this threat will be used more frequently if they see it works.

Draw a line in the sand now rather than wait until it's no longer possible.

I'm close to that - I would have no problem whatsoever with Britain, France, Poland... sending troops to Western Ukraine, freeing up those Ukrainian troops to head East.
I fully accept that any fire on them would not trigger article 5, but I do think it's a thing we could realistically do.
Politically sensible though, I wouldn't know.

A kill switch you say...

I don't think any you know how aircraft or military equipment is built.

Presumably they have a fair few kill switches - or at least, a system that allows the big kill switch to do what you want it to do.

 

[Yulia]

I have lots of relatives in Ukraine and it's my second motherland,but I'm strongly against Poland sending troops there (because I live in Poland). If Brits and Frenchmen want to die and see their countries wiped off the map - it's their right. But not Poland, I love this country on the same level as I love Russia and Ukraine. Thankfully most of Polish people think the same and there are not that many who tend to suicide here

 

[BrokenWing]

Presumably they have a fair few kill switches - or at least, a system that allows the big kill switch to do what you want it to do.

Yeah, but they all kill the right people.

 

[Amiga500]

Your suggesting on SW one update the USA would total our entire system. Its potentially doable but your also suggesting the RAF would rollout updates to all aircraft immediately without test first. Which is equally preposterous.

No - its not an update as in a new software revision.
Its a failure to update ciphers in a timely fashion sees them expire and fall out of sync. With resulting failure of subsystems to communicate with each other.

If the US are generating the ciphers, then all it takes is stopping the supply.


Ask yourself this - if you don't have the source code and didn't compile it yourself - are you or are you not entirely dependent on the person that supplied the compiled item being honest?
Also ask yourself this - how much coverage of code do you think a blind test will achieve?
Do the UK have access to all the software requirements? And not merely an ITAR revision of the software requirements?
If they don't - how do they verify functionality? Best they can do is validate core functions only.

[You are right in that having source doesn't guarantee finding any Easter eggs. But not having source pretty much guarantees you won't.]

 

[Which Tyler]

Edging towards the worst case scenario

Trump has now banned UK from sharing any US military intelligence with Ukraine

Donald Trump, the US President, has already temporarily halted American military aid to Ukraine, a decision which sparked fears the country could soon run out of weapons

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[TRF_Olyy]

If Brits and Frenchmen want to die and see their countries wiped off the map

Russia aren't capable of that, they've shown their military incompetence in Ukraine

If the UK/France sent troops to Ukraine then Poland absolutely would, no doubt in my mind - only have to look at the changes in their military since Russia invaded Ukraine to see that

 

[ncurd]

No - its not an update as in a new software revision.
Its a failure to update ciphers in a timely fashion sees them expire and fall out of sync. With resulting failure of subsystems to communicate with each other.

If the US are generating the ciphers, then all it takes is stopping the supply.


Ask yourself this - if you don't have the source code and didn't compile it yourself - are you or are you not entirely dependent on the person that supplied the compiled item being honest?
Also ask yourself this - how much coverage of code do you think a blind test will achieve?
Do the UK have access to all the software requirements? And not merely an ITAR revision of the software requirements?
If they don't - how do they verify functionality? Best they can do is validate core functions only.

[You are right in that having source doesn't guarantee finding any Easter eggs. But not having source pretty much guarantees you won't.]

Okay I understand what your getting at.

If cipher updates are required or the system starts failing and you don't have control to be functionally independent of that you've failed at the quite basic procurement level.
Again if your procuring military equipment and allowing information to be classified from yourself you're failing at the procurement.

 

[General Melchett]

I think most people would rather take a peace deal that's unpalatable for the Ukraine. Rather than see there's sons and daughters die in some far away land.

Same as those who call for conscription or national service. They love the idea as long as they're not in the call up criteria.

I agree if we are looking at Ukraine in isolation and taking a short term view. The problem with this is that it emboldens Putin who will no doubt view Europe as weak and it'll allow him to regroup before having another crack at what's left of Ukraine and the Baltic states. It's clear he wants to reunify the old USSR and Europe needs to take its head out of the sand and start facing up to that reality.

I get that it's an extremely difficult decision but Europe needs to show some balls and prove that they're not to be ****** with. It's the only language Putin understands. The other benefit of sending troops into Ukraine is that it puts Manchild in a difficult position as pressure will grow on him to pick a side or broker a peace deal. If Europe does send peacekeeping troops in they need to do it unilaterally and not seek approval from the US. It'll also be a show of strength and middle finger to Manchild.

 

[Saintjay]

Russia aren't capable of that, they've shown their military incompetence in Ukraine

If the UK/France sent troops to Ukraine then Poland absolutely would, no doubt in my mind - only have to look at the changes in their military since Russia invaded Ukraine to see that

Really depends on if we are talking pushing Russia back or peace keeping.

I thought Poland had already ruled out deploying troops to Ukraine.

On the basis if a shooting match starts they need the military to protect there flank. Saying deploying troops to Ukriane stretched them to thin.

If the Poles start shooting at Russians in Ukraine surely they'd end up shooting them on there own border