Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Makes Plans for GPS Shutdown
sailforsingapore writes "Apparently, President Bush is drawing up plans to disable sections of the GPS network in the event of a terrorist attack. The rationale seems to be that it would prevent said terrorists from using the GPS system to direct some sort of attack. The plan would shut down access not only to the GPS satellite network, but projects like the EU's Galileo. Ironically, this comes alongside the President's plan to strengthen the GPS network against deliberate jamming."
What is ironic about controlling when your technology can and cannot be used. It seems like a system for shutting it down when necessary would go hand in hand with a system for making sure other's can't shut it down arbitrarily.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
When Clinton allowed for more accurate GPS signals to be used by civilians, it sure seemed like they just flipped a switch one day and it was suddenly more accurate for everyone...
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Demand for compases and maps have gone up 80%.
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
Hmm so if you can't jam the system what do you do?
Yes! You make a fake terrorist attack, send a mailbomb or something to the white house, with some luck they will take that as a terrorist attack and shut down the system.
In the event of a terroist attack, cause large scale panic by shutting down a primary means of navigation.
What's next? Cutting off electricity so that the terrorists can't use it against people?
The ability to selectively disable the network has long been a feature though usually it's spoken of in terms of disabling it over a (non-USA) battlefield. The govt. would be stupid to do this in all but the most serious emergency and then only for the shortest possible time.
I wonder what the per-hour or per-day economic impact of disabling GPS over a heavily poplulated USA region?
A decent number of aircraft/airports that use GPS approaches would have to go back to more primitive instrument landings (more delays); many trucking/shipping companies rely on GPS for tracking goods. Then there are surveyers and agriculture and such that may use GPS augmented with some local beacon for high accuracy.
What other key economic uses of GPS are there?
WAAS was demilitarized some time ago. This allows for much greater accuracy.
Read more about it
http://www.garmin.com/aboutGPS/waas.html
The US and EU reached and agreement over mutual jamming capabilities:
These technical parameters will allow either side to effectively jam the other's signal in a small area, such as a battlefield, without shutting down the entire system.
It makes no mention of "how" they plan to do this. The mechanism could easily be simply to contact the EU, and, if neccesary present evidence that there will be a terrorist attack.
The EU and US may not get on with each other that well, but they're not going to be so churlish as to allow people to be killed by terrorists.
It's quite different when a service provider stops people from using its service than it is when some third group stops people from using said service.
A valid question . As far as I can see the only enemy the USa has is OBL and his gang, and there arent anywhere near as many of them as the media likes to imagine.
The iraqi insurgents are fighting for the US to get the fck out of their country. In fact OBl was fighting to get the US out of saudi. His man beef is with the saudis, not the USA.
As for saddam being an enemy... yeah right, he was gonna throw stones at the US? because he sure didnt have WMDs.
All thsi talk about mysterious 'enemies' is SO similar to the 'red menace' or the 'alien invaders' crap of the sixties. It seems the US govt loves its citizens to stay scared.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
What about all the other users? Ships and aircraft which may be relying on it? Public road users trying to find their way home? Its just asking to get more people pissed off with the US.. particularly since this system will block others systems like Galileo without permission..
Imagine some terrorist group is launching a dozen of home-made of cruise missile towards Washington. Bush has every reason to shut down the GPS. It makes sense to ask EU for a favour to shut down Galileo temporarily.
The problem is the Bush Administration is just so arrogant. The Pentagon has plan to do whatever, regardless of what they say they would or wouldn't do. I don't have a problem with this. But, that does not mean it is rational to threat the supposely allied EU countries for an attack of Galileo... Let's turn the table around. Imagine what would be Bush's reaction if the French Government say that kind of crap first....
I don't even need to mention other sovereignty countries... It is clear why Bush is hated by so many people around the world.
Terrorists tend to be very clever, sly and intelligent people. They work with limited resources, frequently in enemy territory against a much larger force.
Terrorists will not rely on GPS.
The military is increasing its' reliance on GPS.
therefore
Shutting down the GPS will have no negative effect on the terrorists, but will hamper the military (and probably civil emergency efforts too).
Finally, if the terrorists do mount an attack on us that somehow utilises GPS, it is unlikely we will know about it until after it has happened.
Just in case you need to know. Plans usually include things such as:
When - When would it be shut down
Why - Why would it be shut down
Where - Which areas would be shut down
How - How do we shut it down, and how do we operate without it.
Get a free ipod.
Yes, you do, because that's way more important to the US than the impact of a terrorist attack. You need to have friends if you want a healthy economy, and a healthy economy is of much bigger importance on the average person's life than preventing terrorism.
Unfortunately, people have a really skewed perception of risk.
On 9/11 , about 2800 people (exact number is still unclear) suffered a terrible death in the terrorist attacks. Yes it was horrible. No, we don't want it to happen again.
However, the current measures taken by the US government are going way too far, it's not worth reducing freedom for in any way whatsoever, the risk of being killed in a terrorist attack is extremely small. Yet, somehow, the perception of this risk is inflated enormously.
To put things in perspective, last year there were 41,600 traffic deaths in the U.S. (15,700 alcohol related).
It seems clear to me that unsafe driving and DUI is a MUCH bigger risk to the US people than a 9/11 style terrorist attack.
The amount of money and effort spent on "the war on terrorism" is way out of proportion in relation to the risk involved. At the same time, I hear nothing about a "war on unsafe driving" or a "war on DUI", on the contrary, the government even seems to be promoting the use of SUV's which are proven to be more unsafe then 'regular' cars.
The american people should wake up, kick the idiot out of the Big Chair(tm), and put someone there who has his/her priorities straight.
uh...now who is eating what the media tells us. "he hates us because he hates our freedom" is one of the most retarded things I've ever heard in my life.
how about..."he hates us because we backed him and trained him and his fellow rebels until he was no longer needed to fight the russkies. then we abandoned him and left him to fend for himself."
we have a pretty long history of sticking our nose in complex regional issues, then bailing out after we've got what we needed. read a history book sometime.
I work in the Testing & Evaluation of WAAS. WAAS and Selective Availability are not the same (or opposites). WAAS was never "militarized".
When Clinton ordered for the switch to be flipped (so to speak), what was done was the disabling of Selective Availability, which was a purposeful degradation of the civilian GPS signal (L1). The military had (and still has) a second (encrypted) signal that a military receiver must have a key to properly use (L2). Using that signal enhances their accuracy, whether or not Selective Availability is active.
WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) is something else. WAAS uses Geostationary Satellites to enhance (augment) GPS accuracy & precision in the USA. Not all GPS receivers use WAAS. Accuracy of a WAAS receiver is increased in either case (that is, with or without Selective Availability) relative to a non-WAAS receiver, but there is a noticeable difference from SA.
Not all GPS receivers use WAAS, but Selective Availability has been disabled, which affects all GPS receivers.
IMHO this is a military system that we civillians have been lucky enough to use around the world, and always remember that.
Don't you mean a military funded system that we CITIZENS have been given access to because we paid for it?
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
Where do you think the military got the money for GPS? Hint: It's as inevitable as death. Yep, you guessed it. Taxes. And you can bet a private enterprise global satellite navigational system would have been twice as good for a tenth of the money. So I wouldn't count myself too lucky.
I use a GPS when I fly and increasingly when I drive. But I don't bow down to the military industrial complex in gratitude. I paid for my share of the GPS system.
Do you feel lucky that your ISP lets you use their internet?
>> My ultraviolent Linux switch video.
Such as the US blocking the EU's Galilei service?
It's a mutual deal between the EU and the US. They can block each other for small areas, both sides agreed to this.
You (like many others in this thread, apparently) don't know how GPS works. There are a few points (not necessarily yours) that I'd like to touch on.
Our military will still be able to access the network, but civilian units will not. Others can't jam us, but we can remove their access. Even differential GPS won't help in that case.
The system was originally designed with this ability in place, as well as an accuracy restriction on civilian units, which was removed in the mid '90s. That restriction can be put back into effect at any time, however, just as the removal of service can be activated.
A few posts back, someone mentioned "black market" units that would offer military access during such a blackout. Those that exist do not work (to my knowledge): each military GPS is coded to the network, and each unit has a unique code to access the network. While I do not have sources at hand, I recall that attempts to spoof such codes were anticipated and protected (unlike, for example, MAC addresses).
As for private industry making GPS "10 times better at a 10th of the cost", it would never happen. The cost of designing, building and putting up 24-30 satellites orbitting at 22,000 miles and then maintaining them, as well as integrating all the security features would prohibit profit anywhere in the near term, even if users were charged a subscription fee. That is why its a great government project: people love it, but a decent profitable business model really isn't available for it.
And as for the "government taking away our rights" argument, well, GPS isn't your right, especially if the government wants to take it away to protect you from attack. Oh, and as far as tax money, it's not yours, it's the government's. That's why it's TAX money; they don't owe you access to every system they build with it, though you are entitled to know what they spend it on. Hopefully, in more cases than not, it will be projects that help the citizens of the country, directly or indirectly. Even if GPS were available to the military only, it would still be helping us indrectly as taxpayers. This in no way means that we are entitled to access to GPS, or that it is a"right" - it most certainly is not. Neither is driving a car or flying an airplane, incidently, as some would suggest.