Slashdot Mirror


Australia Cracked US Combat Aircraft Codes

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."

58 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Fortunately for America... by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Austria" is a friendly OPEC member.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    1. Re:Fortunately for America... by Ajehals · · Score: 4, Funny

      I just read your post (after posting my own) and had a sudden heart stopping moment that I had read Austria as Australia, as a Brit I assume that would be unforgivable, after all everyone knows that those Australians in their leather pants and kiwi accents are totally different from the BBQ obsessed, Cricket incompetent Austrians.

    2. Re:Fortunately for America... by Scrameustache · · Score: 5, Funny

      as a Brit [...] Cricket incompetent Austrians. To be fair, cricket is a made up sport without any real rules that the British and their colonies play in order to confuse outsiders.

      We're on to you...
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    3. Re:Fortunately for America... by Byzboy · · Score: 2, Funny
      Whoosh

      The sound of the joke as it passes over your head.

    4. Re:Fortunately for America... by Stefanwulf · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, I for one will only play sports that people didn't just make up. You know, the ones without arbitrarily defined rules.

    5. Re:Fortunately for America... by Ajehals · · Score: 2, Funny

      I was looking forward to doing that. You sir, have ruined my day.

      I would demand satisfaction, but it turns out that is complicated via the medium of the internet.

    6. Re:Fortunately for America... by phoenixwade · · Score: 4, Funny

      Australian's have ozzie accents :) After thinking long and hard on this, I realized that none of the Aussie's i've met sounded like they were in the middle of a two week drug binge.
      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    7. Re:Fortunately for America... by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pah!

      Cricket is easy. You have two teams of eleven.

      The team that is in go out to bat, and the team that are out go out to field.

      When all of the team that is in get out, the team that's out goes in.

      Repeat. Endlessly.

      Brockian Ultra Cricket is the same but involves Universes, or something, instead of balls.

      What's not like about a sport with a position called 'Silly Mid-Off'?

    8. Re:Fortunately for America... by kalirion · · Score: 4, Funny

      To be fair, cricket is a made up sport without any real rules that the British and their colonies play in order to confuse outsiders.

      If only you knew the true horrors of the origins of cricket..... That's one reason the rest of the universe looks down on humans. To make a game based on the Krikkit Wars.....

    9. Re:Fortunately for America... by IngramJames · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're half right.

      Actually, cricket is an excuse to lie in the sun all day drinking beer while watching other people do gentle excerise. The rules are there so that anyone who questions what you're doing will eventually give up and go away by the time you're explaining the rule for Leg Before Wicket - if not sooner. Anyone who has taken the time to learn the rules enjoys lazing in the sunshine, so you're safe from them.

      The only flaw in this otherwise superb idea is that Britain doesn't actually get any sunshine.

      --
      'No rational religion claims "supernatural" exists, that's an atheist slander.' - seen on slashdot.
    10. Re:Fortunately for America... by tpv · · Score: 2, Funny
      Your sample size appears to be a bit small.

      I can assure that quite a good proportion of our country is, in fact, in the middle of a two week drug binge.

      --
      Read more of this story at Slashdot.Read more of this story at Slashdot.Read more of this story at Slashdot.
  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 gardyloo · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's OK --- DVD John will get that sorted out in a few days.

    2. Re:Procurement by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a different article that puts his words into context:
      http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=569118

      His comments came "In his farewell speech to parliament before retiring"

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. 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.

    4. 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.
    5. Re:Procurement by t123 · · Score: 5, Informative
      This is the Australian defence force we're talking about, the one that spent AU$1 billion on helicopters for the navy that don't:
      1. Fly at night
      2. Fly in bad weather
      3. Fly over water
    6. 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?

    7. Re:Procurement by Xiaran · · Score: 5, Funny

      I suspect Australia(disclaimer Im Australian) thought that as the US and Australia are very close allies the USAF might give us the ability to use the aircraft we purchased. But hey we followed the US into Iraq so what the hell do we know :)

    8. Re:Procurement by Spookticus · · Score: 3, Funny

      In soviet Russia marked post scroll-button you and replies to reverse you

    9. Re:Procurement by roseblood · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've already got it sorted out. Ready?

      UP UP DOWN DOWN LEFT RIGHT A B SELECT START

      [This text brought to you by the "lameness filter" that says I was YELLING too much in this comment.]

      --
      There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    10. Re:Procurement by Protonk · · Score: 5, Informative

      Read the original comment:

      The export restrictions on military hardware doesn't just stop Joe Shmoe from buying an F-18. It helps to create an entire bureaucracy around the sale of same items. Let's take an example of something that isn't strictly military, but dual-use.

      Hughes aircraft puts up a satellite on a Chinese launch vehicle (rocket) because it is cheaper than the US alternative and the launch window is more favorable (only so many launch vehicles fly at any given time). Rocket blows up in the air. Hughes aircraft gives the Chinese some pointers in ground control as to what caused the failure and how to avoid it in the future. partially becausee the ground operators were just THERE, partially because Hughes wants to put other satellites up later on the same kind of vehicle, and they don't want a 120 million dollar fireball for their efforts.

      OOPS. Turns out that that 'advice' improved a dual use technology, and that the State Department (and Congress, blah, blah) wasn't too happy about it.

      How did we figure out which bits of information were allowed or forbidden? It isn't just as simple as "are you an ally? Are you buying our stuff? Ok, go nuts." there is a complex (read: clumsy) enforcement scheme designed to stop information from leaving US borders. We all know this as what stopped cryptosystems from being exported--even though they weren't military-created or robust in any way.

      Export enforcement schemes are complex and unwieldy. There is a strong incentive to streamline these restrictions (from Defense Corporations), but also strong incentives to strengthen them (From organizations like the state dept, the NSA, and from Congresscritters who get elected by raising up bogeymen).

    11. 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.
    12. Re:Procurement by archen · · Score: 2, Funny

      A good excuse to stay at home and drink beer... why wouldn't the Aussies buy this?

  3. Re:hm by biocute · · Score: 4, Funny

    Former defense minister. It's easy to be forgotten if you're too quiet.

    Back on topic, this is what you got for not using open source aircrafts.

  4. Understandable by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mr Beazley said the Americans knew what the Australians were doing and were intrigued by the progress they made.
    So, we knew that they knew that we cracked the aircraft codes. But did they know that we knew that they knew? It also begs for the question that if they did, did we know that they knew that we knew that they knew?
    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:Understandable by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And, for God's sake, what is the plural of nemesis?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Understandable by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Informative

      And, for God's sake, what is the plural of nemesis?


      Nemeses.

      Chris Mattern
  5. Cartoony image by packetmon · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Americans kept saying they'd provide the codes, but never did. Pictures tall kid dangling candy over another kids head. "Here you go" kid jumps... "Sucker..." "Here you go!" kid jumps again... "Sucker..."

  6. Re:DMCA violation by Nenya247 · · Score: 2, Informative

    It won't apply in Australian jurisdiction. Though I would like to see how well DMCA fares if the US ends up unable to export weapons systems due to customers going to suppliers who support their products and do not engage in strong-arm legislative programs to prevent such things.

  7. Just wondering... by corser · · Score: 5, Funny

    does the DMCA apply retroactively? If so, then Australia can never step foot in the US again.

  8. We were ALL impressed by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Americans knew what the Australians were doing and were intrigued by the progress they made.

    Well, keep in mind that there was a huge Aussie fad in America in the mid-late 80's. We were ALL surprised at how much progress they made at the time. If it hadn't been for the unfortunate "Yahoo Serious" setback in 1988, who knows what they could have ultimately done.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  9. Here is the secret code by Seumas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Up
    Up
    Down
    Down
    Left
    Right
    Left
    Right
    B
    A
    START

    1. Re:Here is the secret code by spitek · · Score: 2, Informative

      AND ITS A B Select Start For the Love of God!

    2. Re:Here is the secret code by log0n · · Score: 3, Funny

      20 years later and it still makes me laugh :-)

  10. 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.
  11. Human Rights Violation by E++99 · · Score: 3, Funny

    'In the end we spied on them and we extracted the codes ourselves.'

    This is a massive violation of human rights. The US DOD has many Australians in it, who may have therefore been spied on by the Australian government without a warrant. Therefore Australia is a police state.

  12. Intrigued? by InvisblePinkUnicorn · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Oh look at them, they're trying to crack our codes..."

    "Oh look, they're actually succeeding. How intriguing!"

    "Hey, wait a sec, they're pointing those missiles at use. I continue to be intrigued!"

  13. Re:Impotance? by vlchung · · Score: 5, Informative

    The timing is not important - the story was told in Parliament as part of his farewell speech.

    Kim Beazley, former opposition leader (crude US translation - Minority Leader combined with non-incumbent party presidential candidate) is retiring from politics, and with an election due soon, today was the last day parliament would be sitting before the election. This made today the last time he'll set foot in the parliament as a member of the House of Reps (hence farewell speeches containing a lot of retrospectives). During his time, he was Defense Minister when Labor was last in power (the party / coalition with the most seats in the House of Reps).

  14. Re:Impotance? by j-pimp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Because its more than 20 years old and historians can use FOIA requests to study this.

    --
    --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
  15. the USA didn't do anything about it by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    because at the time, all Australian aircraft fuel was under seige by Lord Humongous in the desert, and Crocodile Dundee was MIA on a walkabout

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  16. Happening again with the F-35? by aktzin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This reminds me of news reports about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It's meant to replace the F-16 and also be available for export to allied nations starting with the UK. Unfortunately for the potential buyers, the US government wasn't offering to share all the technical details and source code that our allies would need to fully operate and maintain the aircraft. With a quick Google search I just found this article from last year saying the US and UK came to an agreement, don't know what's happened since then. I vaguely remember the Royal Air Force and Navy threatened to cancel their orders and just buy Eurofighter Typhoons instead.

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f35-jsf-program-us-uk-reach-technology-transfer-agreement-02495/
    --
    Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
  17. 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?

    1. Re:not enough info by sarathmenon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Rule No. 1: Never RTFA. never ever.
      Rule No.2: See above.

      --
      Microsoft: "You've got questions. We've got dancing paperclips."
  18. 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.

  19. Re:.. And as usual.. by skyshard · · Score: 4, Funny

    whoooooooooooooooooooosh! did i just see something pass overhead?

  20. Re:Thrilling story by Xtense · · Score: 5, Funny

    Outsmarting somone is enormously satisfying. If this is true, then you won't mind me being satisfied over nitpicking a typo, eh? :)
    --
    "We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams [...]."
  21. They needed to protect Qantas from the US Navy by tetranz · · Score: 2, Interesting
  22. Re:Thrilling story by irtza · · Score: 4, Funny

    no, I don't think this is a type. Search for somone and u will see that somone is often requested to fix things in numberable fields. Somone is quite smart, so I would be satisfied outsmarting somone. 138,000 search results on google and I am only now hearing of somone. Unbelievable!

    --
    When all else fails, try.
  23. Re:Impotance? by ZuluZero · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think the post meant to say "Impotence" - the inability to shoot when desired.

  24. Take up lockpicking .. by cheros · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Best go to the MIT site then and pick up Matt Blaize's document about picking locks.

    Just one word of warning: a Samsonite briefcase with 4 digit digital lock has actually MORE than 10000 different combinations, the true number of possible combinations of that lock is 11111, which is why a bunch of hackers on a hacker weekend spend the whole weekend trying to open it and didn't succeed (very evil grin) - I hadn't corrected their assumption that it had 10000 combinations :-).

    Not that you need that long - it has a far more basic vulnerability in the electronics by which you can open it in under 10 seconds :-).

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    1. Re:Take up lockpicking .. by rapid_snail · · Score: 2, Informative

      The total number of combinations is 11110 because you don't need to use all the available positions. For example you could just use one position to enter a number between 0-9 instead to 0009. So the actual number of combinations is 10+100+1000+10000=11110.

  25. Re:.. And as usual.. by internewt · · Score: 4, Funny

    whoooooooooooooooooooosh! did i just see something pass overhead? Yeah, a hornet with crippled radar ;)
    --
    Car analogies break down.
  26. Pony Up, AU by neckjonez · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd say you owe us at least a couple slabs of VBs!

  27. Paris Air Show by cinderblock · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was at the Paris Air Show a few years ago. One company had on display a MIG cockpit. They had retrofitted it with modern avionics.

    The problem was that the display model, that was at the show, was running Windows and had BSODed. I wonder how many they sold...

  28. Re:.. And as usual.. by HermDog · · Score: 2, Funny

    I thought we were doing it in alphabetical order, but obviously not.

    When I was in high school so many years ago, I spent a couple of summer weeks in Europe on one of those tours that shows you everything you can see from a bus. On the flight up to JFK (the one in New York) for our departure to Brussels, one of my classmates commented on how much she was looking forward to visiting Austria. Now I have nothing against Austria, and it turned out to be the country where one of my most memorable experiences on the trip occurred, but at the time I could not imagine why a high school student from North Carolina would have any particular reason to look forward to being in Austria. Maybe she liked mountains. So I asked.

    She was looking forward to the accent. I was impressed. To this day I don't think I would be able to distinguish an Austrian from a German by accent.

    "You know. The way Olivia Newton-John talks."

    Oh.

    --
    JADBP
  29. Re:Cricket Rules by Mikkeles · · Score: 4, Funny
    Here you go:

    You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he is out. When they are all out, the side that's been out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out, he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who are all out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.


    (Floating around the net :^)

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  30. Unfortunately, that isn't helpful... by patio11 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... as Ozzie doesn't sound like he is in the middle of a two week druge binge, either. Two weeks isn't a binge for him, that is more of a "light appetizer before the main course".