Slashdot Mirror
The Search for Secret Shuttle Parts
Slashdot readers have been submitting this story about the search
for secret shuttle parts with all sorts of insane conspiracy theories attached to their cut & paste of the URL. It's apparently just the box that handled encryption for messages, so of course Uncle Sam wants it back. Quite the needle in a haystack tho.
So this is going to be the next spam, get your secret shuttle part, only $30
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
If its for encryption, it probably uses the same technology/techniques that the DOD uses and probably also has military secrets which shoudln't "fall into the wrong hands".
Spy novelists are salivating right now with such story line.
Before you start searching the ground start looking on eBay. Maybe its easier to find stuff there....
You have to be kidding.
Secret Government Property?
They should have disguised it as an 8-track tape player.
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
It was bound to happen. It allways takes a week or so before the theories start popping up.
Anyway I think it was the Aliens with the Communists conspiering to destroy the Anti-terror pact by exposing that the space shuttle doesnt go into space ata all and instead just flies around the place.
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
I imagine that what the government is worried about is someone using this device to impersonate shuttle control from the ground. A terrorist's dream...if the shuttle ever flies again, that is.
If the government doens't know of any flaws in AES, Blowfish, RSA, etc., then why would they bother using a "top secret" crypto box instead of just the publicly available algorithms?
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Slashdot readers have been submitting this story about the search for secret shuttle parts with all sorts of insane conspiracy theories attached to their cut & paste of the URL. It's apparently just the box that handled encryption for messages...
A Slashdot editor actually READ a submitted article, and posted comments that seem reasonable and logically thought out?
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Any system that requires the encryption system to be secret can't be that much good. I can understand why they want to find it, but worst case is they switch over to another system of which the US must have dozens of suitable candidates.
It's an encryption unit. It encrypts stuff. So what?! They probably change these things now and then anyway for security reasons, plus I would imagine all the craft use different keys and encryption etc. Then again, the Nazis using Enigma used keys like 'Hitler' - nothing like being too cryptic.
The thing that gets me the most though, is the fact that people are selling parts on eBay. It had to happen I suppose, but its just what I would see as being incredibly sick. Are people really that much of a slave to the mighty Dollar that they must do that? Totally sick.
people would have learned by now that putting "Secret Government Property" on a box is not a good idea. Write "Spectrographic Differential Analyzer" on it and everybody will just think that it's a really boring and useless piece of scientific equipment and leave it alone.
And of course, there's no better way to keep people from being interested in opening a little black box than to write "Secret Government Property" on the faceplate.
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
NASA has put forth numerous lies about the space program, such as spreading the idea that the "Moon": is not a ridiculous liberal myth.
.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
I don't believe a word spewed from the mouths of those bureacrats.
Have you been stalked by Seth today?
If you have a box and it performs encryption, then in this day and age the security of future transmissions on this box (oh say, to keep terrorist froming saying "Ok shuttle, now lets fly into the sun") should not be reliant on the security of the box itself! This is the same failed tatic that took out the Germans in World War II and DECSS; its security by obscurity. A combonation of public key cryptography to exchange symetric keys to do quick 3DES should be more than adequate for the lenghth of time that the shuttle mission is over and hence time to choose a new key!
If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
Ok, the veil of secrecy is off - it's a black-box text conversion device. To encrypt communications, it takes the first letter of the word, moves it to the end of the word, and adds an "ay". This type of encryption is also going to be replacing CSS for DVD's, so there's a lot of money being poured into finding it now. ;) Shhhh....
wow i didn't know rush limbaugh read slashdot
1) This has been written hundreds of times before in the comments. :)
2) It is not Informative, it is Pathetic.
The Shuttle has crypto boxes on board to support DOD missions that require secure air-to-ground voice communications links. This isn't as much of an issue as it used to be since the military has lost interest in using the Shuttle to launch military satellites.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Sometimes I think people need to realize that even with all the "straight-talk" and analyzation ther were seven people burned alive that didn't do anything wrong except want to explore the unknown and make strives for science. These seven people were family members, friends, teachers, and of a rare breed of astronaut who had joined the handful before them to enter space. Many have been lost in the name of science and discovery, but to assume that maybe they're lives were lost in vain would be to me one of the worst things ever.
Take a step back, realize what's being said and move on, they're collecting the wreckage because someone or a whole lot of someones are going to be losing their jobs because of this. NASA does everything right, and this was something done wrong. For every scientist in NASA there are thousands at the door ready to take their place and for every astronaut there are thousands ready to take their place. NASA is the home of the eleet and the best of the best, failure or mistakes are not taken lightly.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
No "escape pods" are attached to ISS. One Soyuz craft, capable of ferrying down 3 people, is docked at the station. Russia is obligated to swap out that Souz every 6 months.
Russia also uses their unmanned Progress craft to send up small amounts of supplies on a regular basis, and to remove some of the station's waste. The craft then burns up on re-entry.
Using the Russian craft effectively limits the station's capabilities. Since the Soyuz is the only way to get the crew off the station in an emergency, that means no more than 3 people can be onboard, which is about one-half the intended crew complement, I believe. Fewer people means fewer results.
The cargo-capacity of Progress, only a small fraction of the Shuttle's, is simply insufficient to resupply the station in the long term.
And, of course, remember that tthe station is not yet complete. Only the Shuttle can do that job.
Don't forget that the Shuttle's intended design was crippled by the Nixon Administration's budget crew and that, ever since, the U.S. has been operating a human space flight program that manages to combine lack of direction (no President since Kennedy has provided even an ounce of space leadership) with rigidity and feigned purpose.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
One, it's only an assumption that this "secret" thing is an encryption device. If we knew what it is, it wouldn't be secret anymore, eh?
Two, military aircraft fly every day chocked full of classified hardware and software. And, sometimes they crash. The argument that the possibility of a crash should preclude the use of classified devices is wrong and inane.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Lets see the space shuttle was designed in part to ferry secret military sats to space. Of course it has an secret equimpment on board.
What is really funny is that people were surprised that the government reacted so harshly to items appearing on E-bay. And people were suprised when the Men in Black(R) show up demanding the items back.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
That one is quite easy to explain. Most parts of the shuttle are not dangerous at all, but if the government warns the stupid public that even the smallest part can kill you, people are just a little less likely to move, steal, or otherwise disturb parts.
Most people are sheepish, and if someone tells them that something is dangerous, they'll be too petrified in fear to actually think for themselves. This is evidenced in the public's reaction to various major events.
One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
While it is a crash investigation and it is illegal to withhold what you know, if this top secret piece of decryption hardware fell on your lawn, you legal own it as it is on your property and you have salvaged it.
Like it or not this is the case and the media and the police saying otherwise is starting to bother me.
One little note, just because it is your property doesn't mean you are able to withhold access to it to the crash investigation, after all, that's exactly what it is. It is illegal for you to impede the investigation, but at the end of it they are required to return your property to you.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
You mean the range safety system? Sorry, well documented.
The NSDs provide the spark to ignite the CDF, which in turn ignites the LSC for shuttle vehicle destruction. The safe and arm device provides mechanical isolation between the NSDs and the CDF before launch and during the SRB separation sequence.
The mechanism is installed in the SRB's and the ET. Once away, there is no destruct capability documented. And why document one, but not another?
Score: (-1, Plagiarism)
J
It's a conspiracy theory to assume anything negative about the type of encryption being used based on the information in these articles.
Everyone keeps asking about why the government is using top secret hardware to do encryption when they could just be using some standard encryption technique, people are complaining about security through obscurity, etc.
It could just be the storage media that holds their private key.
Anyone who stores their private keys on ThumbDrives or carries SmartCards has this kind of "top secret" hardware.
-T
When I'm looking for stuff I always look at google and ebay first. If it isn't there, it doesn't exist.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
The ciphers fall into three types. Type 1 are the most classified, details not known. Has ciphers such as BATON, JUNIPER, MAYFLY, CRAYON. Type 2 falls in between, contains stuff like KEA and SKIPJACK, some details known (for instance SKIPJACK is now declassified). Type 3 contains all the rest, roughly Why some of the ciphers are secret is because their design will indirectly reveal ways to attack the ciphers (naturally the ciphers have been designed to resist such attacks). Such ways to attack are known by the designers of the classified ciphers (that means the NSA) but possibly not by the academia. For example, DES was resistant to a form of attack not known previously outside NSA (possibly other intelligence agencies too who use the Echelon walk-around to go around legal restrictions when spying on their own citizens (this means you are country A, you spy inside country B and give the results to the spooks of country A). So having secret ciphers is a matter of protecting the "intellectual property" of the spooks.
There could also be other technical innovations, as the module is likely made tamperproof. If somebody has more information (or pointers) about the aforementioned classified ciphers, please post it here.
As for why the shuttle communications are encrypted, could it be because there's some things going on in there you don't want people to know (not ETs but like designing chemical weapons reagents and watching certain countries).
Hit the nail on the head, it's likely the encryption device, that sits between the radio input and the transmitter proper.
The reason they want it back is that is IS a CCI, and therefore by beuracratic law and common sense, must be recovered and accounted for.
As to the key not being intact, odds are the device was in use when crew perished. Likely they didn't zeroize (official term, no shit) the key. If the unit is intact, so is the key. Fortunately, the key storage space is "tamper proof" that would self destruct the storage area on any attempt to crack it open.
Striving to achieve a lower state of conciousness
Article VIII
A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return.
Plus the applicable U.S. code
"Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof; or..."
NASA has never relinquished control of the spacecraft, in case you hadn't noticed.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I suffer fools lightly...
I suppose it's a good thing for the US government that the crash happened on home territory. When landing, the shuttle passes first over a great deal of sea (Pacific Ocean) and then lots of US soil.
Imagine a scenario where the geographical circumstances would not be so favourable and the parts of the shuttle would have fallen and crashed into another (perhaps less friendly) country. Would the US kidly ask for the debris to be returned, or would they engage into a secret undercover recovery operation in order to retrieve these top secret components?
What if this operation would have to be so extensive, that it could not be held secret? To what lengths do you think the US government would go in order to re-acquire the parts?
Just curious. Are they using WEP? Is that what they are trying to keep secret?
The launch failure of Intelsat 708 in China a few years back raised some concerns about crypto material falling into the 'wrong hands'. Seriously, you don't need any sinister motives for hunting down classified material... the paperwork alone from its loss would probably be more trouble than a massive ground search. =]
Here's an excerpt from the Intelsat 708 investigation that might shed some light on the subject.
The Intelsat 708 Encryption Boards Were Never Recovered
The Intelsat 708 satellite carried two FAC-3R encryption boards, one in each of its command processor units. These boards are considered Controlled Cryptographic Items by the Department of Defense, and the algorithm is classified "Secret."
Encryption boards are used to protect the command and control links between the ground station and satellite. They are required even on satellites that carry unclassified U.S. Government communications traffic. These devices do not encrypt the communications traffic that is otherwise processed by the satellite payload.373
Shortly after the Intelsat 708 launch failure, Loral's Communications Security custodian reported to the Department of Defense that the status of the encryption boards was being changed to "destroyed."
This was not seen as unusual by Department of Defense, however, because its prescribed policy requires that encryption boards be reported as "destroyed" when they are launched into orbit.
The Department of Defense did not require Loral to produce any evidence that the FAC-3R boards were in fact destroyed.374
After recovering debris from the crash site, Loral engineers grossly estimated the percentages of various subsystems and components that had been recovered.375 In that estimate, Loral engineer Muhammad Wahdy estimated that 30% of the command processors were recovered.376 Loral personnel then packaged the debris and shipped it to Palo Alto, where engineers examined the debris to specifically determine if the encryption boards were recovered.377
That examination determined that the FAC-3R boards were not, in fact, recovered from the crash site.378
The two FAC-3R encryption boards used on the Intelsat 708 satellite were mounted near the hydrazine propellant tanks and most likely were destroyed in the explosion. Additionally, the two FAC-3R boards had no distinguishing markings other than a serial number, making it extremely difficult to locate them amongst the crash debris.379
It is not known, however, whether the FAC-3R boards were recovered by the PRC. If they were, it would be difficult for the PRC to determine the cryptographic algorithm that was imprinted on them.
Reverse-engineering of a damaged board would be even more difficult. Any successful reverse-engineering would be resource intensive for the PRC.
If the PRC were able to determine the cryptographic algorithm contained on the FAC-3R board, it would gain insight into the state of the U.S. military in the 1960s, although such algorithms remain in use today.380
When the National Security Agency designs and recommends algorithms for use in equipment, it assumes that the equipment will be lost or compromised sometime during its operational lifetime. The National Security Agency relies on unique cryptographic keys for each separate satellite to keep command and control links secure. Because the FAC-3R boards on Intelsat 708 were uniquely keyed, the National Security Agency remains convinced that there is no risk to other satellite systems, now or in the future, resulting from having not recovering the FAC-3R boards from the PRC.381
I don't see how most of that is a problem... it's covered pretty clearly in the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. But then, I haven't read the book. (Yeah, practical concerns like getting out without a ladder are certainly an issue, though!)
h tm - the relevant part is Article V:
You can read the text of the treaty at http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/SpaceLaw/outersptxt.
States Parties to the Treaty shall regard astronauts as envoys of mankind in outer space and shall render to them all possible assistance in the event of accident, distress, or emergency landing on the territory of another State Party or on the high seas. When astronauts make such a landing, they shall be safely and promptly returned to the State of registry of their space vehicle.
In carrying on activities in outer space and on celestial bodies, the astronauts of one State Party shall render all possible assistance to the astronauts of other States Parties.
States Parties to the Treaty shall immediately inform the other States Parties to the Treaty or the Secretary-General of the United Nations of any phenomena they discover in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, which could constitute a danger to the life or health of astronauts.
I was watching the incident which lead directly to the withdrawal of publicly accessible 24 live (non encrypted or artificially delayed) audio visual broadcasts from space - I used to have a constant feed streaming where I worked and at home (as I also had a permanent connection at home too).
If you'd actually seen the broadcast you'd know it had nothing to do with UFO's or 'Space debris being pushed around by thrusters' as you put it (this is related to an entirely different reported incident and has nothing to do with why they cancelled some of the live a/v feeds, it didn't even happen at the same time). Additionally, the concern astronauts expressed about the space debris was not that it might be a UFO, but rather it might be part of the ISS or the shuttle which was, to them, of much more immediate concern.
I remember the actual incident quite vividly and it had everything to do with dust and small particles, some of which were suspected to be metallic by the crew, being pushed around by the air filters on board the ISS - as it was this which lead to complaints from the crew.
Needless to say, the crew were not happy about this situation - particularly as a complaint regarding this issue had already been made, yet it had been seen to be ignored by mission control. NASA ground control attempted to disregard the importance of the complaint, they even seemed to doubt it's credibility (I hypothesise that in such an incident some ground staff may have downgraded the severity of the complaint in the own minds and put down to the perception of an understandable crankiness of a crew living in close, cramped quarters for months at a time).
It was the appearance of disharmony and complaints from the crew which lead to the decision not to have 24 hour 'live' streaming as it was decided that this was not in the best interests of NASA, or the ISS, from a public relations perspective.
In their defence, the crew on board the ISS had been wound up even further as the communications to the ground kept breaking up and cutting out due to interference, which forced them to have to keep repeating their report. They also had other on going issues which give them cause for complaint, but I don't remember what they were.
Personally I do not think they were being particularly cranky - certainly I'd expect to see much more negative retoric in an office environment over issues considerably less trivial than small flakes of metal in the air conditioning, but I can only assume that NASA feels the significance of the project demands a greater sense of sensitivity that most work environments. Overall, I think the withdrawal of the video on these grounds was a mistake, as it has hurt NASA and ISS public relations rather than helped (due the relative triviality of the incident).
Of course there may be other reasons which lead to the cutting of the a/v feed, but this was the incident and reason cited by NASA at the time...
* IIRC this happend in the first half of 2000, but I could be wrong about that as I often find I get time periods mixed up.
Here is some many people don't talk about but any rocket that does up into space has a remote selfdistruct system.
No they don't, from an engineering and risk assessment perspective that simply makes no sense to me.
Rockets are either designed to be:
1) Re-usable.
Take the SRB's (Solid Rocket Boosters) or the Baikal (the reusable part of the new Russian Angara rocket) - they are reusable, that is: specifically designed to be reused. They are supposed to return to earth once they are spent, ready to be reused, bolted on to new second stage apparatus and fired back into space time after time.
Putting self-destruct systems in case they fall back to earth (which is something it's designed to do deliberately) would be silly. Particularly as the SRB's are (a) fitted with parachutes for a nice soft landing and (b) only launched so that they fall back to earth over the sea (where there aren't any cities).
2) Disintegrate.
Though they are not really rockets, ET's (External Tank's - i.e. the big orange thing an Orbiter is attached to) are designed to self distruct in earths atmosphere when their role is complete. I use this as an example to demonstrate that if don't want your 'Rocket' to self-destruct then it's fairly simple to have it disintegrate (burn-up) on re-entry.
In fact, as we've just seen, getting things to NOT burn up on re-entry is the problem.
Moving on...
I'd also like to point out that not only is the Orbiter not a 'rocket', but that if you really have as much knowledge as you want us to believe then I'm surprised that you didn't call the Orbiter an Orbiter and instead only ever referred to it in your posts as a 'shuttle' (which seems an odd, though not entirely unprecedented, thing for someone in the field - bearing in mind it was on it's return trip).
If as you suggest, self-destruct systems exist on rockets and Orbiters, why not on satellites? After all, satellites like Skylab clearly lack such systems (as was demonstrated by Skylabs ungracious 'landing' over Australia) - this odd proclivity towards putting self-destruct systems on space craft, while simultaneously discriminating against satellites makes little sense.
Additionally I'd point out, that it is extremely difficult to hit any precise target with an Orbiter, even with the aid of OMS/RCS (Orbital Manoeuvring System/Reaction Control System) and the avionics system, hence the unusual landing pattern that all Orbiter's follow - it's a difficult enough task just getting to the runway. In fact only one human has ever landed an Orbiter without the aid of the avionics system (and this individual had hundreds of flights logged).
This is relevant because hitting a target as big as a city with a returning Orbiter _ON_PURPOSE_ would be a difficult task for any pilot. Hitting a built up area, let alone any people, purely through random chance would take a miracle.
Besides which - did you not see the chunks of the Orbiter that came down? They were massive - some of the pieces that fell (which were numbered in the thousands) were easily the size of an engine block.
Explain to be how this is better - and in any way safer - than letting the Orbiter come down in once big piece?*
*= Especially when there is an inflight crew escape system (which was fitted after the Challenger incident in 86) - which would mean even if the Orbiter was heading off course the crew would still have the chance to slide along the escape rail and parachute out when they reach a low enough altitude (assuming the Orbiter was not spining or rolling).
Written instructions given to the searchers in Bronson showed a picture of a faceplate from the device, which in white letters on a black background spelled out "Secret Government Property."
I love how they just stamp "Secret Government Property" on this box and expect it to be left alone if it was ever found somewhere just lying around. Come on, if you really wanted to keep something safe, would you just stamp that on it? Thats like leaving a sack of money in the street with a giant "$$" on it. Who wouldn't take it? Wouldn't it just have been easier to leave it a plain black box, that wouldn't draw too much attention?
SIGFAULT
As for the launch: Florida is as much to the south and thus as close to the equator as possible in the USA. When launching a rocket into space, I understand that they take use of the slingshot effect that the Earth's rotation causes. At the equator this effect is maximal, so being nearer to it is advantageous.
For the landing: My understanding is that any space vehicle that approcaches Earth flies from East to West in order to match the rotation direction of Earth. If the vehicle would approcah from the other direction, the difference in speeds between the revolving Earth and the approaching object would be too large, making the needed retardation (= heat factor when entering the atmosphere) unnecessary great. I'm not sure though whether the optimal landing zone would be near the equator. Probably depends on the trajectory.
"Mr. Annan! Mr. Annan! There's no air up here!"