Hugh Pickens writes "Nature reports that the US military has abruptly ended an informal arrangement that allowed scientists access to data on incoming meteors from classified surveillance satellites, dealing a blow to the astronomers and planetary scientists who used the information to track space rocks. 'These systems are extremely useful,' says astronomer Peter Brown, at the University of Western Ontario. 'I think the scientific community benefited enormously.' Meteor data came from the Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite network consisting of infrared satellites in geosynchronous orbit to monitor the globe for missile launches or atmospheric nuclear blasts, forming the principal component of the United States' ballistic missile early-warning system. The satellites' effectiveness was demonstrated during Desert Storm, when DSP detected the launch of Iraqi Scud missiles and provided warning to civilian populations and coalition forces in Israel and Saudi Arabia. As a side benefit, the satellites could also precisely detect the time, position, altitude and brightness of meteors as they entered Earth's atmosphere, information the military didn't consider particularly useful, or classified. 'It was being dropped on the floor,' says former Air Force captain Brian Weeden. Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously. 'The decision may have been made that it was perhaps too difficult to disclose just these data.'"
From TFS, the military stopped giving out unclassified information that was a byproduct of a military function - a windfall.
"Blocks" means that the information would flow but for the military's action.
The editors (snicker) should have used "stops" - more ambiguous and yet more accurate at the same time. But I guess that wouldn't generate the clicks, now would it?
It's a shame, and obviously we don't know exactly what the situation is, but if speculation is correct... should I really be upset that the military doesn't want to allow the world to black-box the capabilities of its missile detection systems? Especially with a wacky bastard in Korea lobbing his test missiles in our direction?
To add another voice of agreement: for all the times I've seen "national security" thrown about in order to censor something that has nothing to do with the subject, this is one of the first times I would say that it absolutely could be a matter pertaining to the security of the nation (and in this case they didn't even use the term!). It is a shame, but it's also very much understandable.
More importantly, this is one of the few times that I have heard of unclassified data obtained by a classified program being distributed. Seems odd that there is a reliance or expectation for this data, considering it originates with a classified satellite system, let alone which is directly related to national security.
I think "the situation" is that we have a US Navy destroyer tailing a North Korean freighter potentially carrying illegal missiles to a rouge military dictatorship, and North Korea has threatened to fire it's long range missiles (which they've recently been testing, along with detonating a nuclear bomb underground, all in the last 30-60 days) if we board or attempt to intercept. North Korea is looking for a fight, and it's not at all surprising that the US military has turned off the tap for public viewing
Good try but if you read the article you would see that scientists accessing this data were told earlier this year. The US wasn't tailing a North Korean freighter then and could not have anticipated doing so at this time. So while the US military may wish to no longer disclose the capabilities of its satellites to Joe Public, it is not a result of the current situation near Korea.
I totally agree with the parent poster. It should have read something like 'no longer shares openly.' From what I can tell, the US military was under no obligation to share the data. It isn't like the military is jamming communications channels, or otherwise blocking data that would naturally be available.
Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously.
My guess is that it is an oversight on the part of whoever ordered the software.
Oversight? Hardly. It's damned expensive to produce unclassified content from a classified source.
By default, it is assumed ALL data generated by a classified source is classified. To unclassify any of that information requires a highly-tested, bulletproof-design of software that can be shown that in the process of declassifying any part of the data, it is impossible that something classified accidently got in there.
It's much cheaper to just leave everything classified at the same level as the piece of h
That's not the point. The point is if we can tell you what meteors are landing and where, it doesn't take an extensive amount of data for you to be able to pinpoint where those military satellites are in the sky. It doesn't take a lot for you to then calculate when you can be doing shit outside, and when you need to be under cover.
It makes sense. If it were possible to determine the capabilities of your sensors (whether we're talking from a satellite or a human informant) by putting together the bits and pieces of their unclassified information, you've effectively leaked highly classified information to well funded and highly motivated foreign entities.
[opinion]At the end of the day, somebody is going to find out about your sensor and it's capabilities. You just do everything you can to make sure it's well past the usefulness of said sensor, so far beyond that the understanding of this information nets the "opponent" nothing[/opinion].
As for writing software that would obfuscate this information enough that it wouldn't give away the methods of gathering it - sure, it sounds simple, and on a case by case basis, I'm sure you could do it. But can you do it for every single scenario even remotely conceivably imagined under the sun, for potentially large quantities of information, with guaranteed 0% failure rate?
Satelites ain't actually invisible and they are also kinda hard to hide. What keeps me from watching the sky and telling when they pass overhead? Shouldn't take more than a few days and a halfway decent telescope to find out what's up. No pun intended.
The question is "is that space debris? is that a commercial satellite? is that even WORKING?"
On top of that, I imagine they paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light (just hypothesizing here, but I know I'd do it if I were them), to make it hard to see. Also, what about during the day?
If you figure every piece of space debris is watching you, you probably won't be doing much outside, ever.
The point is, someone is trying to put together information about sensor capabilities from t
These sats are in geosynchronous orbit. In fact if the satellite launch detection system had a dark window where it wasn't getting coverage then it would be completely useless.
They are most likely worried that the pictures might infer classified information or they think it had happened with the older system. Maybe you are able to map the positions of the satellites using the pictures. Its only a matter of time before things like that are figured out. The military will then likely declassify the information.
Well of course it leaked information. After all, all an evil dictator would need to do is launch a missile, then wait to see if the launch showed up in the meteor report or if his country was turned into a glassy bowl. If the latter, try a different way of launching a missile.
On a more serious note, if you had a separate meteor detection system, you COULD identify the locations and such of the satellites by comparing your data. For instance, my satellite at location x picked up the explosion at time t.00
Not to mention the fairly recently [msn.com] demonstrated satellite killing ability on the part of the Chinese.. seems that keeping the location of new satellites secret for as long as possible would be a nice idea.
You know that really pissed me off in the movie. Being an old comic guy, the whole deal was Adamantium was an attempt at Vibranium. It just ruined the whole damn movie up until the adamantium bullet which took the movie from aweful to just plain brain rotting stupid.
I would think the problem is that North Korea is supposedly going to be sending a missile over to Hawaii. Perhaps meteor monitoring was simply a bad use of the satellites' time as the US military is gearing up to track North Korea's launch.
Pretty sure the meteor information is actually just waste data. False positives that the military has to detect and catalog whether they are given out the information or not.
So Dear Leader Kim must be behind this - no one else would be so intent on wasting the military's resources. Of course that means the North Koreans aren't as advanced as we thought, as they are merely throwing rocks at us.
I think it is probable that the military has re-assigned the satellites so that more are looking in the direction of North Korea and possibly Iran. It would make a lot of sense to point the satellites in that direction and keep it secret.
The satellites were picking up data on meteors as they hit the atmosphere. This has nothing to do with the search for large objects that may or may not hit the earth.
This is technically made clear by the use of the word meteor, as opposed to asteroid, but I only remembered that as I type this so I expect I am not the only one that could have used a clarifying sentence in the summary.
Given that we, and the world, know that meteors striking the atmosphere cause these infrared satellites to go off, what stops a rogue nation from figuring out when the Perseids or Leonids would be impacting above their country and using that as a launch window? I mean, what's an extra blip in all that noise?
The dumber and more embarrassing the various bits of conspiracy nonsense in evidence, the bigger and more remarkable the secret being covered up by the dissemination of said ridiculous bits of conspiracy nonsense. . .
The best way to make people look the other way is to make them cringe.
You forgot the thousands of pages of architecture, systems engineering, regulations, requirements, and certification documents that support said code:-)
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday June 22 2009, @12:03PM (#28424607)
Congratulations, you just failed your NSA cert because you attempted to mix classified and non-classified processing in the same processor. If you want to handle classified data, a processor can only handle classified data, you cannot mix and match. In devices that are forced to mix and match (edge devices, like encryptors typically) you have to build your device in two halves and minimize the contact between the halves (typically they will be in separate metal boxes inside of the device, with a single wire connecting them. That single wire will eat up pages and pages of documentation when you try to get your device certified explaining how there is no possible way to leak information out of it (even in cases like slamming the crypto with bad traffic on the red side to cause it to slow down in some pattern that could be identified on the black side).
Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.
Sure, sure, I'll just need one more quick function from you. Please write something to determine whether the high speed ballistic object that just showed up on the satellite is a missile, plane, or meteor.
Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type. Also, once you've identified the type of object, please determine classification. Accuracy of this product must be 100%.
"Classified" is too often abused, that includes things that perhaps should automatically belong to the General Public. Public funds used to pay for things that end up privately patented or copyrighted is also another form of stealing from the public.
Besides, if you have to hide it then you must be doing something wrong is a fairer assumption on a government then it is on a free person.
Are you arguing that the satellites that detect foreign missile launches and nuclear tests aren't actually related to national security, and their results should be publicly available to other nations?
Chicken Little (Score:2, Insightful)
I would too, do you want people running around like Chicken Little?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Only if Arrowsmith provides the background music.
Re: (Score:2)
"Blocks"? (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFS, the military stopped giving out unclassified information that was a byproduct of a military function - a windfall.
"Blocks" means that the information would flow but for the military's action.
The editors (snicker) should have used "stops" - more ambiguous and yet more accurate at the same time. But I guess that wouldn't generate the clicks, now would it?
Re:"Blocks"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed.
It's a shame, and obviously we don't know exactly what the situation is, but if speculation is correct... should I really be upset that the military doesn't want to allow the world to black-box the capabilities of its missile detection systems? Especially with a wacky bastard in Korea lobbing his test missiles in our direction?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
To add another voice of agreement: for all the times I've seen "national security" thrown about in order to censor something that has nothing to do with the subject, this is one of the first times I would say that it absolutely could be a matter pertaining to the security of the nation (and in this case they didn't even use the term!). It is a shame, but it's also very much understandable.
Re: (Score:2)
More importantly, this is one of the few times that I have heard of unclassified data obtained by a classified program being distributed. Seems odd that there is a reliance or expectation for this data, considering it originates with a classified satellite system, let alone which is directly related to national security.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think "the situation" is that we have a US Navy destroyer tailing a North Korean freighter potentially carrying illegal missiles to a rouge military dictatorship, and North Korea has threatened to fire it's long range missiles (which they've recently been testing, along with detonating a nuclear bomb underground, all in the last 30-60 days) if we board or attempt to intercept. North Korea is looking for a fight, and it's not at all surprising that the US military has turned off the tap for public viewing
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Good try but if you read the article you would see that scientists accessing this data were told earlier this year. The US wasn't tailing a North Korean freighter then and could not have anticipated doing so at this time. So while the US military may wish to no longer disclose the capabilities of its satellites to Joe Public, it is not a result of the current situation near Korea.
Re:"Blocks"? (Score:5, Insightful)
With everyone expecting a missile attack from North Korea, who would be able to say whether a strike on American soil actually originated from there?
The Russians and Chinese, probably the British and French, possibly others.
What, you think the USA is the only country with spy satellites watching for launches?
Parent
Re:"Blocks"? (Score:4, Informative)
In all fairness, the article's subheading is "Satellite information on incoming meteors is blocked."
-l
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I totally agree with the parent poster. It should have read something like 'no longer shares openly.' From what I can tell, the US military was under no obligation to share the data. It isn't like the military is jamming communications channels, or otherwise blocking data that would naturally be available.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My guess is that it is an oversight on the part of whoever ordered the software.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oversight? Hardly. It's damned expensive to produce unclassified content from a classified source.
By default, it is assumed ALL data generated by a classified source is classified. To unclassify any of that information requires a highly-tested, bulletproof-design of software that can be shown that in the process of declassifying any part of the data, it is impossible that something classified accidently got in there.
It's much cheaper to just leave everything classified at the same level as the piece of h
Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore (Score:5, Funny)
I assume this means the mothership is now on final approach, and we don't want those scientists causing a panic.
I, for one, welcome our new alien overlords. Advanced warning is only useful if you are against them. Join us.
--
Toro
Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
I have a solution (Score:2)
Then update the rows for the non-Classified ones.
But seriously, "Expensive software"? Isn't most of this stuff custom-built anyway?
Re:I have a solution (Score:4, Informative)
That's not the point. The point is if we can tell you what meteors are landing and where, it doesn't take an extensive amount of data for you to be able to pinpoint where those military satellites are in the sky. It doesn't take a lot for you to then calculate when you can be doing shit outside, and when you need to be under cover.
The data they may be collecting may end up being unclassified, but the means they're using to collect it are likely classified fairly highly. Usually this information is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_.28SCI.29_and_Special_Access_Programs_.28SAP.29 [wikipedia.org]
It makes sense. If it were possible to determine the capabilities of your sensors (whether we're talking from a satellite or a human informant) by putting together the bits and pieces of their unclassified information, you've effectively leaked highly classified information to well funded and highly motivated foreign entities.
[opinion]At the end of the day, somebody is going to find out about your sensor and it's capabilities. You just do everything you can to make sure it's well past the usefulness of said sensor, so far beyond that the understanding of this information nets the "opponent" nothing[/opinion].
As for writing software that would obfuscate this information enough that it wouldn't give away the methods of gathering it - sure, it sounds simple, and on a case by case basis, I'm sure you could do it. But can you do it for every single scenario even remotely conceivably imagined under the sun, for potentially large quantities of information, with guaranteed 0% failure rate?
If so, I'm sure someone would like to hire you!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Satelites ain't actually invisible and they are also kinda hard to hide. What keeps me from watching the sky and telling when they pass overhead? Shouldn't take more than a few days and a halfway decent telescope to find out what's up. No pun intended.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The question is "is that space debris? is that a commercial satellite? is that even WORKING?"
On top of that, I imagine they paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light (just hypothesizing here, but I know I'd do it if I were them), to make it hard to see. Also, what about during the day?
If you figure every piece of space debris is watching you, you probably won't be doing much outside, ever.
The point is, someone is trying to put together information about sensor capabilities from t
Re: (Score:2)
These sats are in geosynchronous orbit. In fact if the satellite launch detection system had a dark window where it wasn't getting coverage then it would be completely useless.
Temporary (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well of course it leaked information. After all, all an evil dictator would need to do is launch a missile, then wait to see if the launch showed up in the meteor report or if his country was turned into a glassy bowl. If the latter, try a different way of launching a missile.
On a more serious note, if you had a separate meteor detection system, you COULD identify the locations and such of the satellites by comparing your data. For instance, my satellite at location x picked up the explosion at time t.00
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention the fairly recently [msn.com] demonstrated satellite killing ability on the part of the Chinese.. seems that keeping the location of new satellites secret for as long as possible would be a nice idea.
The info become classified (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You know that really pissed me off in the movie. Being an old comic guy, the whole deal was Adamantium was an attempt at Vibranium. It just ruined the whole damn movie up until the adamantium bullet which took the movie from aweful to just plain brain rotting stupid.
How the hell can you screw up Wolverine?
Re: (Score:2)
How the hell can you screw up Wolverine?
You answered yourself: an adamantium bullet.
If that ruined the movie for anyone: you're welcome.
two words (Score:3, Insightful)
"north korea"
Simple Reason: (Score:2, Funny)
...they are hiding the Transformer invasion from us.
Large UFO fleet of is going to visit us soon.. (Score:2)
North Korea (Score:5, Interesting)
I would think the problem is that North Korea is supposedly going to be sending a missile over to Hawaii. Perhaps meteor monitoring was simply a bad use of the satellites' time as the US military is gearing up to track North Korea's launch.
Doesn't seem too far fetched to me...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Pretty sure the meteor information is actually just waste data. False positives that the military has to detect and catalog whether they are given out the information or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Coast to Coast? (Score:5, Funny)
So, this entire thread is essentially just a bait for idle speculation and conspiracy theories. Art Bell would be proud.
Or it could be (Score:2)
that we are preparing for a strike, counterstrike situation w/ N. Korea or Iran.
Obligatory X-Files quote (Score:4, Funny)
CHIEF KORETZ: Sir, I have flash traffic at 24-18. Repeated calls for ID go unanswered. And it's not in the orbital or suborbital inventory.
MALE OFFICER #2: 24-18. Isn't that where...
CHIEF KORETZ: Same exact spot, sir. Although I am reading a much larger craft his time.
MALE OFFICER #2: Meteor, Ms. Koretz.
CHIEF KORETZ: A much larger meteor, sir. Hold on a second. (Putting hand to earpiece) We have a confirm. Whitmarsh Air Force Base is tracking...
MALE OFFICER #2: Where is it?
CHIEF KORETZ: Well, sir. The - meteor - seems to be hovering over a small town in Eastern Wisconsin.
My vote: Retasking (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is probable that the military has re-assigned the satellites so that more are looking in the direction of North Korea and possibly Iran. It would make a lot of sense to point the satellites in that direction and keep it secret.
Invaders! (Score:2)
Clarification (Score:5, Informative)
This is technically made clear by the use of the word meteor, as opposed to asteroid, but I only remembered that as I type this so I expect I am not the only one that could have used a clarifying sentence in the summary.
Dumb question incoming. (Score:2)
The dumber and more embarassing. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
The dumber and more embarrassing the various bits of conspiracy nonsense in evidence, the bigger and more remarkable the secret being covered up by the dissemination of said ridiculous bits of conspiracy nonsense. . .
The best way to make people look the other way is to make them cringe.
Psyche 1 oh 1.
-FL
Re:Good news everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be noted that the system looks "down", not "up" - it only sees meteors after they've hit the atmosphere.
So if one big enough to cause substantial damage arrives, the message will be more like "MeteBOOOM!" followed by a lot of static.
Parent
Re:Expensive software? (Score:5, Funny)
You forgot the thousands of pages of architecture, systems engineering, regulations, requirements, and certification documents that support said code :-)
Parent
Re:Expensive software? (Score:5, Informative)
Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.
Does this mean I'm fired?
Nah, you've fulfilled government criteria for promotion.
Unless you object, you will be bumped up a level your salary will now increase by 1.5x.
Re:Expensive software? (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type. Also, once you've identified the type of object, please determine classification. Accuracy of this product must be 100%.
Parent
Terrible bug (Score:4, Insightful)
if( object.type=TYPE_METEOR ) {
object.isClassified = false;
} else {
object.isClassified = true;
}
You just declassified EVERYTHING, including nuclear missiles.
Parent
Re:Terrible bug (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
We paid for them.
"Classified" is too often abused, that includes things that perhaps should automatically belong to the General Public. Public funds used to pay for things that end up privately patented or copyrighted is also another form of stealing from the public.
Besides, if you have to hide it then you must be doing something wrong is a fairer assumption on a government then it is on a free person.
Are you arguing that the satellites that detect foreign missile launches and nuclear tests aren't actually related to national security, and their results should be publicly available to other nations?