Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australia Cracked US Combat Aircraft Codes

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the end-run-around-the-bureaucracy dept.

SpamSlapper writes "Former defense minister Kim Beazley has told how Australia cracked top-secret American combat aircraft codes in the 1980s to enable the shooting down of enemy aircraft. The radar on Australia's US-made Hornets could not identify most potentially hostile aircraft in the region — they were set up for European threats — but despite many requests, the codes were not provided, so 'In the end we spied on them and we extracted the codes ourselves.' The Americans knew what the Australians were doing and were intrigued by the progress they made."

10 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Procurement by Ajehals · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whoever arranged the procurement of those aircraft in the first place wasn't terribly smart. Who would spend Millions of AU$'s on something that in effect doesn't work, and not just some feature is missing, but the primary use of the thing is impaired, oh and the supplier wont help. As for cracking the codes, when can we expect the Australians to release the cracks? I hate the fact I cant use the F18 I bought on Ebay to shoot down Asia Pacific Rim based Aircraft..

    1. Re:Procurement by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Whoever arranged the procurement of those aircraft in the first place wasn't terribly smart. Who would spend Millions of AU$'s on something that in effect doesn't work

      There are export controls on military hardware and crypto. News at eleven. You buy the plane. You adapt it to your needs.

    2. Re:Procurement by kryten_nl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They cracked the iPod, how difficult could a F-18 be?

      --
      For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
    3. Re:Procurement by Ajehals · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Granted, but if you are A) A military ally B) A political ally C) A major Trading partner, and D) Allowed to buy modern war planes, you'd think you could organise ot so that the aircraft do what you want. At the end of the day military hardware is pretty much a buyers market (if you have the cash). On a side note does anyone know what happened with the promised waiver of the USA's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) with regards to the UK?

    4. Re:Procurement by Marsmensch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're absolutely right, but this happens a lot with US arms exports which are normally crippled (on purpose) and have poor post sale support. This is done on purpose by the americans to maintain greater leverage in influencing politics in different regions. It's not what you would expect from a good ally, but it is a clever strategy.

      Another example of this are F-16's sold to Chile recently. The codes and procedures for the onboard computers where not provided, something the other models which competed for the bid offered. In the end Chile chose the "bad" option of buying the F16's because it buckled to US pressure. If a war breaks out, and the US doesn't support Chile's stance, they're screwed.

      This means US systems are usually a bad option to buy. They may be very good systems when the americans use them, but you won't get the full spectrum of features, but the decision to buy weapons is made at a very high level in governments and usually factors in other elements, like US goodwill to some other policy objective, so these are not necessarily irrational choices.

      --
      Slashdot: news from nerds.
  3. Thrilling story by Bromskloss · · Score: 1, Insightful

    More cool spy stories, please! I once managed to figure out the code to a locked briefcase, bought second hand. That small feat was a thrill. I would have loved being part of this! Outsmarting somone is enormously satisfying.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  4. cracked the codes or obtained them through spying? by z0idberg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "We spied on them and we extracted the codes,"


    So did they managed to crack the codes or did they spy on the US and somehow obtain the codes? I read TFA and still can't figure out which.

    I expect it was they cracked the codes as seeing as "Americans knew what the Australians were doing and were intrigued by the progress they made.". I don't imagine the seppos would feel "intrigued" about being spied on.
  5. not enough info by sam_paris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I actually RTFA and there is not information on how the Australians cracked the codes, how they spied on the Americans or how the Americans knew about this and why it was so intriguing.

    It was to answer those questions that I actually read TFA, so tell me, what use is TFA without the answer to those questions?

  6. Export aircraft by Bullfish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Though this information has only been released 20 years later, you can bet that any country buying export aircraft from another is going to have their people make adjustments to both the airframe and electronics (including software) to suit their pupose. No one is going to pay a barrel of money for aircraft and not adapt them for their needs. They are also not going to say what they did (for a long while) as that info will no doubt be classified. Ditto the originating country's aircraft will have features that are not exported for the same reasons.