The Internet and The War

John Jorsett writes "Wired Magazine has an interesting article on the realities of the use of communication and navigation technology in the Iraq war. Particularly intriguing is the use of chat rooms to engage experts thousands of miles away in helping to solve problems at the troop level in the field. And if you think your admin job is tough, try running your servers in 125 degree heat in a sandstorm."

Comments

Can't be true.

[caluml]

Suspect chemical attack, he types into a Microsoft Chat session running on the tactical Internet, the military's battlefield communications system.

Tell me this isn't true? The US military resort to Microsoft Chat to communicate a possible chemical attack? Surely they'd have some custom chat software with some heavy duty encryption in it?

Re:OMG

[caluml]

every friendly tank, plane, ship, and soldier in the world in real time,

I think "every" might be a slight exaduration. But seriously, does that extend to allied forces, cos we (British) always seem to take a lot of hits from people allegedly on the same side as us. :o(

And also, it's all very well having two soldeirs guarding it, but what happens if a missile lands right on top of them. You need them separated by a few miles.

RTFA

[(54)T-Dub]

"Welcome to Siprnet," he says. GCCS runs over Siprnet - the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network - in the same way that Web applications run over the public Internet. The difference with "Sipper" is that it's basically a far-flung local area network. To maximize security, it doesn't connect with the Internet proper. But it links Centcom to the battlefield and, among other things, allows Franks to talk to Rumsfeld and President Bush via two-way videoconference every evening.

Re:RTFA

[caluml]

Hard on the outside, soft on the inside?
And what happens when an Iraqi captures one of these Sipper sets? He can listen in to Rumsfeld and Bush?
Encryption should be between the two endpoints, IMO, like IPSec.

Re:RTFA

[KrispyKringle]

Again, according to the article, procedure is that if a humvee or truck equipped with one of these units is surrounded, the driver is to turn off the ignition, which shuts down the computer, requireing a password to restart. However, you obviously have to wonder what happens if, say, the driver is sniped but the computer left intact. Some sort of timed logout, while-using-biometric-authentication, or deadman switch seems the best answer, I suppose. Of course, the same vulnerability applies to radios, apparently without many ill effects.

Re:RTFA

[Svobodin]

On the FBCB2 project, SOP was to "zero" the harddrive using a built-in switch, then smash the screen if compromise was certain. But even if they were to get hold of one, and if the average Iraqi is anywhere near as smart as the average American GI, it'd take him a while to make sense of the damned thing. In that time, we're busy pushing out new comsec to secure any future transmissions.

Better watch that EULA!

[phillymjs]

So what happens if a bunch of soldiers in the field die due to a failure of/flaw in a Microsoft product? Will Microsoft get off scot-free because of their "no liability" language in their EULA? Would there suddenly be knee-jerk laws passed concerning software reliability?

Discuss.

~Philly

Re:Chat rooms?

[DeltaSigma]

Sure, I suppose. Are we talking IRC, or AOL though?

I mean, go to debian's IRC server, idle in the debian chat for an hour so everyone who could have possibly cared that you joined has now forgotten, then ask some linux question.

And despite the current debate, fanboy-raving, intellectual discussion, or A/S/L exchange (okay I haven't seen that there), you'll get an immediate and helpful answer, or a request for clarification.

As a linux newbie I've come to rely heavily on the helpful people in the debian IRC channel. Hell, half the reason I haven't even tried another distribution is because I've never experienced technical support of such calibur.

It's strange to hear that, and believe me it's strange to say it, that an IRC channel could be your best tech support experience ever, but it's true.

pla, the best advice I can give to you is to go out and search for good room/channel/group. "Normal" human beings might be outnumbered by the A/S/L transgendered males (so to speak), but there's bound to be a gathering of your liking out there somewhere.

Re:Get real.

[caluml]

the Chinese got inside our spyplanes and didn't get jack squat out of it.

You're very certain of that.

Re:OMG

[(54)T-Dub]

Further down in the article the exaggeration is revealed:

About a quarter of the trucks in this convoy have GCCS

The system is still really powerfull though:

One zoom out and I'm looking at the entire Baghdad region. Another zoom out and I see all of Iraq, with forces dotted in the north and heavily clumped around the capital in the center. One more click and I'm looking at the entire sphere of Central Command, from the edge of Libya to Pakistan. I see forces in Turkey, and clustered in Iraq and Kuwait. I feel like a four-star general. I'm sitting in the Iraqi desert looking at troop movements across 25 countries.

Embedded...

[cruppel]

The news ruined the word "embedded" for me...Embedded reporters watching soldiers fight, take a piss, talk about this war like it had been going on for even two months, watching them do whatever...I will always hear that word from now on and think of soldiers doing mundane things.

As for them using "Microsoft Chat" or whatever they called it, that's just plain irresponsible. If people have trouble using computers for simple email every day then why on God's (sandy) earth do they think those same technologies will hold up in much more mission-critical military conditions?

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Planesdragon]

The military better watch itself -- if they start relying too heavily on technology, soldiers will lose the fundamental skills that make them unique.

Yeah, like swordfighting--er...

I mean, yeah, like how to fire a musket line--no, wait...

Trenches! Must not forget trenches!

The history of war is a history of technology progressing, progressing, and progressing. The "war-fighter" (i.e., "solider, salior, marine, or pilot") doesn't have a job of reading maps and following trails--their job is to fight and win.

Sure, your networked rifle squad could lose its GPS uplink--but that's no different than having your map burnt away from you.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[JDWTopGuy]

I commend you on the good writing, you should consider writing a short story or something.

But how stupid do you think the military is? IF the soldier was THAT dependent on the device, he/she would be supplied with a backup. Anybody with military experience please correct/confirm this, but don't many soldiers in the field carry some kind of handgun in addition to whatever rifle/machinegun/etc is their primary weapon?

Anyway, I really don't think they're going to be that dependent anytime soon because of the exact danger you detail here. As the whole world saw in the recent whooping of Saddam's regime, much of war can now be fought via air/special ops., which make the environment much safer for ground troops. Granted, we had a massive advantage in Iraq (Iraqi forces weren't 100% loyal, the regime didn't have the ability to strike us at home with anything, etc.), so it would be different if we were fighting say, China, but nonetheless, ground war is safer for us now than in WW2 (duh!). It's possible that by the time we move in on the ground, there's not much left to do, other than claim & protect the area.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[echucker]

A concept that I'd always idly wondered about at a younger age....

Weapons (and armor) are constantly in a race to stay ahead of each other. Longbows vs. cavalry, the zweihander vs. the pike, mail vs. slashing weapons.... As technology advances, it must always be retroactively effective against previous applications. Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Planesdragon]

As technology advances, it must always be retroactively effective against previous applications. Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

You don't think that they consider hurling rocks?

What, exactly, do you think small arms fire is? Don't expect firearms to go away any sooner than the sword did--and, remember that, in essential fashion, the sword is still a standard piece of equipment in many military units.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[Redking]

No, the average grunt still has an M-16A2. One out of a four soldiers carries the M203 grenade launcher and one person out of an eight man squad carries a M249 SAW (hench, Squad Automatic Weapon). Four squads roughly make up a platoon sized element and in each platoon there are one or two M60 (7.62 cal crew based machine gun) gunners depending on the mission and expected opposition.

Its plenty of firepower to cover your ass if something goes wrong with your weapon. Typical battle drills are done so that soldiers can diagnose weapon problems in under 30 seconds. Very rarely will a soldier have to switch weapons and they can't exactly pick up another soldier's weapons and use them in combat right away because they have to zero the weapon sights to their personal line of sight.

Oh and don't put down the bayonet. ;)

Re:Soldier Skills.

[av8tors32]

Ever try to navigate off a map in the middle of a desert. Its a lot harder than you might think since there are no permanent terrain features to reference. Wanna make it harder? Try doing 25 ft off the ground traveling at 125mph.

The reason we manuvered through the desert so quickly? GPS!