Starlink and Ukraine War discussion

[Grendal]

Although I am a huge Shotwell admirer, in this case I think she is splitting hairs and her position is not defensible (Pun unintended). To try to say that some Starlink military uses are okay and others are not is not justifiable, in my opinion. Modern warfare requires reliable high speed communications capability. Starlink provides that. SpaceX enabled Starlink use in Ukraine and everyone could foresee that Starlink would then be used by the military.

I am very disappointed in Shotwell’s statements in this instance.

I think as President and COO of SpaceX, it is her job to not directly antagonize a foreign power. She has to cooperate with various world governments (especially the USA) and directly saying that they are allowing Ukraine to use their equipment for offensive purposes against Russia would be frowned upon. It is the Federal Government's job to dictate what is allowed and not allowed for an American company in a conflict area. Russia and Putin could choose to interpret her statements as SpaceX (meaning the USA itself) is intervening in their conflict and choose to eliminate what they perceive as a threat. So her statements make sense to me. Nothing she said can be taken as a direct threat.

JMHO.

 

[petit_bateau]

I think as President and COO of SpaceX, it is her job to not directly antagonize a foreign power. She has to cooperate with various world governments (especially the USA) and directly saying that they are allowing Ukraine to use their equipment for offensive purposes against Russia would be frowned upon. It is the Federal Government's job to dictate what is allowed and not allowed for an American company in a conflict area. Russia and Putin could choose to interpret her statements as SpaceX (meaning the USA itself) is intervening in their conflict and choose to eliminate what they perceive as a threat. So her statements make sense to me. Nothing she said can be taken as a direct threat.

JMHO.

I agree that the public positioning for SpaceX is awkward. In my personal opinion silence would be the better policy.

However to be fair Ukraine has only used Starlink to strike at Russian targets which are within Ukraine's territory and territorial waters. Those are the essence of defensive actions: literally if the Russians weren't inside Ukraine they would not be targets. There is no way anyone can spin those into being offensive actions.

 

[nwdiver]

In my personal opinion silence would be the better policy.

Hopefully there's more layers here. Ukraine has been pretty good at shaping the narrative. I would imagine the idea starlink use is being limited is a helpful narrative for Ukraine.

 

[Joe F]

I don’t know much about consumer grade drones but I assume that your drone controller has a range limit of less than 1 kilometer. Ukraine is likely using drones that they want to be able to control remotely over distances of multiple kilometers, tens of kilometers, or much farther.

Right. 12 km though for mine. And I second the Hawaiian Island test, although I've not flown that far from a mountain top.

 

[Grendal]

Pentagon working with SpaceX to cut off Russian military's illicit use of Starlink internet

Pentagon working with SpaceX to cut off Russian military's illicit use of Starlink internet

spacenews.com

 

[scaesare]

Pentagon working with SpaceX to cut off Russian military's illicit use of Starlink internet

Pentagon working with SpaceX to cut off Russian military's illicit use of Starlink internet

spacenews.com

I assume geo-location for stuff works reasonably well until you get close to the battle lines...

 

[CyberGus]

I assume geo-location for stuff works reasonably well until you get close to the battle lines...

Block users with a login of "Ivan" or a password of "Put1n_r0cks!"

 

[mongo]

I assume geo-location for stuff works reasonably well until you get close to the battle lines...

The trend is your friend. Unless captured, the positional history of that terminal should indicate which group controls it.

 

[ICUDoc]

The trend is your friend. Unless captured, the positional history of that terminal should indicate which group controls it.

Isnt the problem simply one of knowing which group controls which territory at which time?
ie very very difficult to know

 

[JB47394]

Isnt the problem simply one of knowing which group controls which territory at which time?
ie very very difficult to know

SpaceX could go by position for the uncontested areas, then send a message to all others, informing the operators to send a message up a secure chain of command to reactivate their terminal. Russians would see the message, but have no recourse to activating their terminals.

If SpaceX sees any terminals activate that are clearly on the Russian side, they'll be able to communicate how they got activated, possibly revealing a security breach in the Ukrainian chain of command.

The process of activation could be repeated at intervals to clear out any captured terminals that aren't reported (e.g. because the operators are all dead).

 

[scaesare]

SpaceX could go by position for the uncontested areas, then send a message to all others, informing the operators to send a message up a secure chain of command to reactivate their terminal. Russians would see the message, but have no recourse to activating their terminals.

If SpaceX sees any terminals activate that are clearly on the Russian side, they'll be able to communicate how they got activated, possibly revealing a security breach in the Ukrainian chain of command.

The process of activation could be repeated at intervals to clear out any captured terminals that aren't reported (e.g. because the operators are all dead).

I was thinking about what they could do for the areas near the front where geo-locations could change rapidly...

I was thinking of some method of 2FA, which your chain of command essentially is... but it would seem that it would have to be very quick, or risk comms dropouts. Perhaps a variable re-auth window depending on criticality/location...

 

[BioSehnsucht]

Might be handier if they just route all traffic into a DMZ that Ukraine has control of, and they can sniff where traffic is going to determine whether the traffic is likely friendly, and give Ukraine the ability to remove turn on/off individual units. Basically give them all the tools to both monitor and control the terminals, and then SpaceX doesn't need to be involved.

 

[mspohr]

Loading…

www.nytimes.com

As Russian troops made gains this month near Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, they deployed stronger electronic weapons and more sophisticated tools to degrade Starlink service, Ukrainian officials said. The advances pose a major threat to Ukraine, which has often managed to outmaneuver the Russian military with the help of frontline connectivity and other technology, but has been on the defensive against the renewed Russian advance.

The new outages appeared to be the first time the Russians have caused widespread disruptions of Starlink. If they continue to succeed, it could mark a tactical shift in the conflict, highlighting Ukraine’s vulnerability and dependence on the service provided by Mr. Musk’s company. As the United States and other governments work with SpaceX, the disruptions raise broader questions about Starlink’s reliability against a technically sophisticated adversary
.

 

[SO16]

Loading…

www.nytimes.com

As Russian troops made gains this month near Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, they deployed stronger electronic weapons and more sophisticated tools to degrade Starlink service, Ukrainian officials said. The advances pose a major threat to Ukraine, which has often managed to outmaneuver the Russian military with the help of frontline connectivity and other technology, but has been on the defensive against the renewed Russian advance.

The new outages appeared to be the first time the Russians have caused widespread disruptions of Starlink. If they continue to succeed, it could mark a tactical shift in the conflict, highlighting Ukraine’s vulnerability and dependence on the service provided by Mr. Musk’s company. As the United States and other governments work with SpaceX, the disruptions raise broader questions about Starlink’s reliability against a technically sophisticated adversary
.

So… the NYT makes it sound like Starlink is inferior to other govt options but yet the US govt is relying on Starlink because the other govt options are terrible.

 

[mongo]

So… the NYT makes it sound like Starlink is inferior to other govt options but yet the US govt is relying on Starlink because the other govt options are terrible.

It can't stop working if it never worked in the first place...

 

[mspohr]

So… the NYT makes it sound like Starlink is inferior to other govt options but yet the US govt is relying on Starlink because the other govt options are terrible.

I think the article points out that other options (texting, etc.) are not nearly as good as Starlink but also points out that Starlink is vulnerable.

 

[RDoc]

Considering that Starlink wasn't intended as a military system operating in a contested environment it's pretty amazing it works as well as it does. Apparently some systems designed for military use like JDAM and the Small Diameter Bomb don't work very well at all.

 

[Electroman]

So… the NYT makes it sound like Starlink is inferior to other govt options but yet the US govt is relying on Starlink because the other govt options are terrible.

The objective here is to give a negative color on Musk and his companies.. never mind this war would have been long over in favor of Russians, without Starlink.

 

[Max Spaghetti]

Considering that Starlink wasn't intended as a military system operating in a contested environment it's pretty amazing it works as well as it does.

To the best of my limited knowledge, it's worked perfectly. I haven't heard of any successful jamming attempts by the Russians.

The only issue I have heard of is that Elon got annoyed when they started affixing them to uncrewed surface vessels and he geo-blocked them for that purpose. Basically, it seems he was happy for the service to be used for wartime communications, but drew the line at dishy effectively becoming part of an integrated tracking system for a kamikaze sea drone.

Keep in mind that Starlink has a separate parallel service that is intended as a military system called Starshield. The details are scarce for obvious reasons, but presumably it would be hardened against jamming and include high-level encryption at a minimum, and I doubt the Ukraine military has access to it.

 

[mongo]

To the best of my limited knowledge, it's worked perfectly. I haven't heard of any successful jamming attempts by the Russians.

The only issue I have heard of is that Elon got annoyed when they started affixing them to uncrewed surface vessels and he geo-blocked them for that purpose. Basically, it seems he was happy for the service to be used for wartime communications, but drew the line at dishy effectively becoming part of an integrated tracking system for a kamikaze sea drone.

Keep in mind that Starlink has a separate parallel service that is intended as a military system called Starshield. The details are scarce for obvious reasons, but presumably it would be hardened against jamming and include high-level encryption at a minimum, and I doubt the Ukraine military has access to it.

It was reported that Starlink went down during the most recent Russian advance into Ukraine.