US Stealth UAV RQ-170 downed in IRAN

[Obambam]

Sure much more than what China has done. Another thing China can thank US for. And 'yer welcome' ahead of time.

We don't have to thank US for it. Perhaps this is an indirect way to cut down its debt?

 

[gambit]

I don't know why this is considered such a big deal. I think what is more amazing is the lack of losses the Americans have suffered in their extensive use of Drones. The Iranians may be able to gain technical know how, but I find that unlikely...to gain something from an aircraft so advanced, the local industry must also be on a similar plain.
The Iranians had access to f-14s and accomplished very little in the form of moving it's development forward...the reason was the aircraft being far too advanced for the Iranian industry. They may have been able to manufacture spares locally, but the electronics, the engine, and the weaponry were still foreign. The same must apply to this drone. The Iranians haven't been too successful in manufacturing capable drones in the past; this may provide a better direction to go into, but won't exactly pull Iranian UAV development to the forefront of technological development.

Thank you, sir, for reasonable thoughts.

 

[Abii]

Thank you, sir, for reasonable thoughts.

now he's thanking people for having similar or close opinion as him. lmao
my vietnamese forumer, you have now hit a new low
how's the weather down there?

 

[gambit]

Well, all I am saying is that if the information security is such that it would allow what you call "common Windows based 'script kiddie' crap" then I suspect it would be wide open to a detirmined, well funded, capable adversary.

The human will ALWAYS be the weakest point or link in a network or series of security protocols and procedures. This is why intelligence services invested so much time and effort into their human assets. The drones' autopilot are FPGAs and their programming cannot be tampered with. These FPGAs are 'commercial off the shelf components' (COTS) program that the US undertook a long time ago in order to reduce time and financial burdens of military weaponry. In fact, it would be foolish for ANYONE, friendly or adversarial, to tamper with them, even if accessible. One wrong line of code and the drone could not take off, let alone deviate from planned course in-flight to head for a new home. This is why it is difficult to believe in the first place that Iran can crack into this drone's real time two-way control link and reprogram the flight control system. Better off to invest in an American traitor who can alter ONE drone's mission plan to steal it.

---------- Post added at 06:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------

now he's thanking people for having similar or close opinion as him. lmao
my vietnamese forumer, you have now hit a new low
how's the weather down there?

Of course I appreciate TRUE objectivity. Unlike you, of course. Must be tough to see a non-American be critical of Iran where it hurts.

 

[oFFbEAT]

From the news so far....it seems that Iran has done something worthwhile.

It is now clear that the drone is in Iran's hand.

Now, if they can reverse engineer the techs......it will certainly give them an edge over many countries.
Certain techs. are very hard to reverse engineer.

 

[lt.fridz]

The human will ALWAYS be the weakest point or link in a network or series of security protocols and procedures. This is why intelligence services invested so much time and effort into their human assets. The drones' autopilot are FPGAs and their programming cannot be tampered with. These FPGAs are 'commercial off the shelf components' (COTS) program that the US undertook a long time ago in order to reduce time and financial burdens of military weaponry. In fact, it would be foolish for ANYONE, friendly or adversarial, to tamper with them, even if accessible. One wrong line of code and the drone could not take off, let alone deviate from planned course in-flight to head for a new home. This is why it is difficult to believe in the first place that Iran can crack into this drone's real time two-way control link and reprogram the flight control system. Better off to invest in an American traitor who can alter ONE drone's mission plan to steal it.
...

I cannot agree with your opinion that FPGAs can not be tampered with. Surely if they were made by humans they can be tampered with by a capable, resourceful organization. In addition, if this is COTS then information on their design can be considered common knowledge.

Just look at any gadget that comes out these days, the iPhone, most android phones, they are regularly compromised by very smart amateurs, even though they are designed to be difficult to tamper with. If ordinary, non-funded people can achieve this, then a large organization specialized in cyber-warfare, like the Chinese military is believed to have, would be quite capable to achieve what I described (or even the Iranians).

 

[gambit]

Here is something that is considerably more reasonable and palatable than what we have seen so far in these mostly baseless speculations...

Lost UAV likely malfunctioned, analysts say - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

“The RQ-170 has a RTB [Return to Base] feature,” Thompson said. “In the event of a loss of the command link, the aircraft will automatically return to its point of origin and land itself.”

The very fact that the aircraft was lost suggests a malfunction rather than a shoot-down, Thompson said.

The RQ-4 Global Hawk has a similar built-in automatic feature to find and land at a divert airfield if the link is lost. The lost link, airfield diversion issue and the inability of UAVs to avoid other aircraft traffic are bones of contention between the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration.

As such, the incident highlights a fundamental problem that plagues current unmanned aircraft, which is that they have little in the way of active defenses and very little situational awareness, Thompson said.

The highlighted paragraphs give valuable insights on how these things are designed and operated.

Let us take the lower highlighted paragraph first...

The lost link, airfield diversion issue and the inability of UAVs to avoid other aircraft traffic are bones of contention between the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration.

Why is a UAV unable to avoid companion air traffic? Because the thing has no 'situational awareness' as pilots say. So if such a drone lost its link, assuming all other conditions are valid for it to act autonomously to save itself, it would either return to base or FIND the nearest 'safe harbor' and land. If there are competing air traffic, it would be oblivious to them. Its flight would force other aircrafts to divert themselves, despite the possibility that they may have priority and/or right-of-way. So understandably, the FAA does not like unmanned drones flying around.

But if the operating theater is someplace where there would be no or scant air traffic, would this matter? Of course not, but the programming for this possibility would not change. What is there to change? If there is no or few competing air traffic, what do we care about their priorities or 'right-of-way'?

So why did this RQ-170 failed to RTB and instead possibly landed in an Iranian airfield, generously assuming such a successful landing occurred? Fuel consideration is a good start. We do not know how long has this particular drone been airborne. We do not know if it had a full fuel load because may be the mission for that day does not require an all-day loiter affair, so why fill it up to the brim? If low fuel is a consideration, then it would appropriate for this drone to search for the nearest 'safe harbor' to land, regardless of its RTB programming. And if this is true, that mean we know more about Iranian airfields than thought.

---------- Post added at 06:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:31 PM ----------

I cannot agree with your opinion that FPGAs can not be tampered with. Surely if they were made by humans they can be tampered with by a capable, resourceful organization. In addition, if this is COTS then information on their design can be considered common knowledge.

Just look at any gadget that comes out these days, the iPhone, most android phones, they are regularly compromised by very smart amateurs, even though they are designed to be difficult to tamper with. If ordinary, non-funded people can achieve this, then a large organization specialized in cyber-warfare, like the Chinese military is believed to have, would be quite capable to achieve what I described (or even the Iranians).

Cell phones are equipped with NAND FLASH memory type for ease of data manipulation. I work for a major FLASH manufacturer.

 

[Abii]

my god!
this vietnamese dude believes every crap that the Americans churn out. Doesn't matter how stupid. Can you just explain to me how the Iranians found a random stealth drone in some random mountains if the drone simply went of course and landed in Iran by itself.

 

[gambit]

my god!
this vietnamese dude believes every crap that the Americans churn out. Doesn't matter how stupid.

So far, American crap certainly smells better than Iranian crap.

 

[lt.fridz]

Here is something that is considerably more reasonable and palatable than what we have seen so far in these mostly baseless speculations...

Lost UAV likely malfunctioned, analysts say - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

...

I find it quite amusing how the Americans are quick to blame failure on "Malfunction" rather than other peoples ingenuity. It seems they find it easier to believe they screwed up than somebody outsmarted them!

But if you look at the facts objectively, this can not be a coincidence.

If the thing has a list of 'safe harbor' as you mentioned, then the question is, who sets these 'safe harbors'? And is it conceivable that some malware might have added a new 'safe harbor' in Iran, and deleted other ones? This sounds not like some dangerous tampering but rather some routine programming of the drone.

If the adversary then jammed communications it would land at the nearest 'safe harbor' which happens to be the one in Iran, added by the adversary. Sounds easy, if you have access to the uploading mechanism, and the lack of computer security at Creech Air Force base makes this not very far-fetched.

 

[Abii]

So far, American crap certainly smells better than Iranian crap.

how did our armed forces found a random stealth drone in some random mountain, hours after it crashed if the drone simply went of course and landed in Iran, without Iranians being responsible for anything.

explain that to me Vietnamese boy

 

[lt.fridz]

...

Cell phones are equipped with NAND FLASH memory type for ease of data manipulation. I work for a major FLASH manufacturer.

My point about phones being compromised is that the challenge of reverse engineering their firmware shows that "untamperable" firmware is being tampered all the time by various people. The technology of the memory is irrelevant, as long as it is programmable.

 

[SinoChallenger]

US special forces are supposed to destroy the drone after it lands in Iran to prevent capture. But US special forces must have been deterred by heavy Iranian military presence already at the landing site. Iran already knew the drone was coming and was waiting for it! Therefore, it was an intentional hacking, not a random malfunction.

 

[gambit]

I find it quite amusing how the Americans are quick to blame failure on "Malfunction" rather than other peoples ingenuity. It seems they find it easier to believe they screwed up than somebody outsmarted them!

Because when it comes to man-made devices, fail-to-operate-as-intended often came from device malfunctions than from human causes, and when the human is at fault, the evidences are aplenty. I take it you do not have an engineering background or work with machines much?

But if you look at the facts objectively, this can not be a coincidence.

No, if you look at the facts objectively, there are genuine coincidences and there are false ones, and in this case we do not have enough evidences to support the latter. The fact that people jump so quickly upon the human based causes tell me more about their personal biases than to their objectivity.

If the thing has a list of 'safe harbor' as you mentioned, then the question is, who sets these 'safe harbors'?

We do.

And is it conceivable that some malware might have added a new 'safe harbor' in Iran, and deleted other ones? This sounds not like some dangerous tampering but rather some routine programming of the drone.

If the adversary then jammed communications it would land at the nearest 'safe harbor' which happens to be the one in Iran, added by the adversary. Sounds easy, if you have access to the uploading mechanism, and the lack of computer security at Creech Air Force base makes this not very far-fetched.

If you want to mess with FPGA programming, here is a good start...

FPGA programming step by step

Loading

Finally, just as embedded programs are often embedded in physical ROM, flash, or downloaded live, FPGA programs (compiled, synthesized, placed, and routed) must be embedded in the physical FPGAs. The actual programming file may be a .HEX or similar. Programmers typically download or burn the bits from these files into the hardware. If nonvolatile, this is a one-time proposition. If not, it's a download-at-power-up proposition. Many variations exist with FPGAs as with microprocessor-based embedded systems, but in the end, in a functioning microprocessor-based product, the bits compiled, linked, and loaded must "get into" the physical memory to control the gates of the processor, and in an FPGA-based functioning product, the bits compiled, synthesized, placed, and routed, must "get into" the FPGA, to implement the gates of the system.

This is not NAND FLASH where the OS can do the job for you in data manipulation. I do not mess with FPGA but I know people in robotics who does. This is not something you can do over-the-air (OTA) or at best you should not do OTA even if possible. But am willing to be corrected about this. Just show me a credible source.

---------- Post added at 06:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 PM ----------

how did our armed forces found a random stealth drone in some random mountain, hours after it crashed if the drone simply went of course and landed in Iran, without Iranians being responsible for anything.

explain that to me Vietnamese boy

Figure that one out for yourself, Iranian punk. I already educated you enough.

---------- Post added at 06:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:56 PM ----------

My point about phones being compromised is that the challenge of reverse engineering their firmware shows that "untamperable" firmware is being tampered all the time by various people. The technology of the memory is irrelevant, as long as it is programmable.

FPGA programming can be programmed to self destruct.

 

[Abii]

haha
I've managed to shut him up

from now on, everytime you post garbage, I will just keep asking the same question until you admit that you're a troll and an idiot.

"how did our armed forces found a random stealth drone in some random mountain, hours after it crashed if the drone simply went of course and landed in Iran, without Iranians being responsible for anything.

explain that to me Vietnamese boy"