Slashdot Mirror


US Military Blocks Data On Incoming Meteors

Hugh Pickens writes "Nature reports that the US military has abruptly ended an informal arrangement that allowed scientists access to data on incoming meteors from classified surveillance satellites, dealing a blow to the astronomers and planetary scientists who used the information to track space rocks. 'These systems are extremely useful,' says astronomer Peter Brown, at the University of Western Ontario. 'I think the scientific community benefited enormously.' Meteor data came from the Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite network consisting of infrared satellites in geosynchronous orbit to monitor the globe for missile launches or atmospheric nuclear blasts, forming the principal component of the United States' ballistic missile early-warning system. The satellites' effectiveness was demonstrated during Desert Storm, when DSP detected the launch of Iraqi Scud missiles and provided warning to civilian populations and coalition forces in Israel and Saudi Arabia. As a side benefit, the satellites could also precisely detect the time, position, altitude and brightness of meteors as they entered Earth's atmosphere, information the military didn't consider particularly useful, or classified. 'It was being dropped on the floor,' says former Air Force captain Brian Weeden. Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously. 'The decision may have been made that it was perhaps too difficult to disclose just these data.'"

37 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. Chicken Little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would too, do you want people running around like Chicken Little?

    1. Re:Chicken Little by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only if Arrowsmith provides the background music.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  2. "Blocks"? by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFS, the military stopped giving out unclassified information that was a byproduct of a military function - a windfall.

    "Blocks" means that the information would flow but for the military's action.

    The editors (snicker) should have used "stops" - more ambiguous and yet more accurate at the same time. But I guess that wouldn't generate the clicks, now would it?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:"Blocks"? by nametaken · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed.

      It's a shame, and obviously we don't know exactly what the situation is, but if speculation is correct... should I really be upset that the military doesn't want to allow the world to black-box the capabilities of its missile detection systems? Especially with a wacky bastard in Korea lobbing his test missiles in our direction?

    2. Re:"Blocks"? by Luyseyal · · Score: 3, Informative

      In all fairness, the article's subheading is "Satellite information on incoming meteors is blocked."

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    3. Re:"Blocks"? by ntijerino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I totally agree with the parent poster. It should have read something like 'no longer shares openly.' From what I can tell, the US military was under no obligation to share the data. It isn't like the military is jamming communications channels, or otherwise blocking data that would naturally be available.

      --
      Stick that in your compiler and debug it!
    4. Re:"Blocks"? by camperdave · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously.

      My guess is that it is an oversight on the part of whoever ordered the software.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    5. Re:"Blocks"? by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think "the situation" is that we have a US Navy destroyer tailing a North Korean freighter potentially carrying illegal missiles to a rouge military dictatorship, and North Korea has threatened to fire it's long range missiles (which they've recently been testing, along with detonating a nuclear bomb underground, all in the last 30-60 days) if we board or attempt to intercept. North Korea is looking for a fight, and it's not at all surprising that the US military has turned off the tap for public viewing of a missile tracking system.
       
      They selectively "detuned" civilian GPS during the gulf war. It's not at all shocking that they've cut off public access recently. If the Bush administration allowed this, then it's likely Obama will open the taps once the situation is resolved.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    6. Re:"Blocks"? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With everyone expecting a missile attack from North Korea, who would be able to say whether a strike on American soil actually originated from there?

      The Russians and Chinese, probably the British and French, possibly others.

      What, you think the USA is the only country with spy satellites watching for launches?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:"Blocks"? by SilverJets · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good try but if you read the article you would see that scientists accessing this data were told earlier this year. The US wasn't tailing a North Korean freighter then and could not have anticipated doing so at this time. So while the US military may wish to no longer disclose the capabilities of its satellites to Joe Public, it is not a result of the current situation near Korea.

    8. Re:"Blocks"? by mkramer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oversight? Hardly. It's damned expensive to produce unclassified content from a classified source.

      By default, it is assumed ALL data generated by a classified source is classified. To unclassify any of that information requires a highly-tested, bulletproof-design of software that can be shown that in the process of declassifying any part of the data, it is impossible that something classified accidently got in there.

      It's much cheaper to just leave everything classified at the same level as the piece of hardware/algorithms that produced it.

    9. Re:"Blocks"? by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your post is clear and lucid, except for the fact that it is wholly and completely wrong. The satellites in question look for infrared signatures on the Earth. They only detect meteors when they've already hit the atmosphere, by which time it's a bit late to do anything about them.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  3. Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by Torodung · · Score: 5, Funny

    I assume this means the mothership is now on final approach, and we don't want those scientists causing a panic.

    I, for one, welcome our new alien overlords. Advanced warning is only useful if you are against them. Join us.

    --
    Toro

    1. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, no one ever saw those movies.

      --
      No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
  4. Re:Good news everyone by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Meteors are coming, everyone panic.

    It should be noted that the system looks "down", not "up" - it only sees meteors after they've hit the atmosphere.

    So if one big enough to cause substantial damage arrives, the message will be more like "MeteBOOOM!" followed by a lot of static.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  5. Temporary by Demonantis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are most likely worried that the pictures might infer classified information or they think it had happened with the older system. Maybe you are able to map the positions of the satellites using the pictures. Its only a matter of time before things like that are figured out. The military will then likely declassify the information.

  6. The info become classified by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    after the government started a new secret weapon program collecting adamantium meteors.

  7. two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "north korea"

  8. Simple Reason: by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...they are hiding the Transformer invasion from us.
       

  9. North Korea by i_ate_god · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would think the problem is that North Korea is supposedly going to be sending a missile over to Hawaii. Perhaps meteor monitoring was simply a bad use of the satellites' time as the US military is gearing up to track North Korea's launch.

    Doesn't seem too far fetched to me...

    --
    I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    1. Re:North Korea by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pretty sure the meteor information is actually just waste data. False positives that the military has to detect and catalog whether they are given out the information or not.

  10. Re:Expensive software? by Octorian · · Score: 4, Funny

    You forgot the thousands of pages of architecture, systems engineering, regulations, requirements, and certification documents that support said code :-)

  11. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Congratulations, you just failed your NSA cert because you attempted to mix classified and non-classified processing in the same processor. If you want to handle classified data, a processor can only handle classified data, you cannot mix and match. In devices that are forced to mix and match (edge devices, like encryptors typically) you have to build your device in two halves and minimize the contact between the halves (typically they will be in separate metal boxes inside of the device, with a single wire connecting them. That single wire will eat up pages and pages of documentation when you try to get your device certified explaining how there is no possible way to leak information out of it (even in cases like slamming the crypto with bad traffic on the red side to cause it to slow down in some pattern that could be identified on the black side).

    Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.

  12. Re:Expensive software? by rhathar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, sure, I'll just need one more quick function from you. Please write something to determine whether the high speed ballistic object that just showed up on the satellite is a missile, plane, or meteor.

    Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type. Also, once you've identified the type of object, please determine classification. Accuracy of this product must be 100%.

    --
    http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
  13. Coast to Coast? by hwyhobo · · Score: 4, Funny

    the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear

    So, this entire thread is essentially just a bait for idle speculation and conspiracy theories. Art Bell would be proud.

    --
    End anonymous moderation and posting on /.
  14. Re:I have a solution by Skye16 · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's not the point. The point is if we can tell you what meteors are landing and where, it doesn't take an extensive amount of data for you to be able to pinpoint where those military satellites are in the sky. It doesn't take a lot for you to then calculate when you can be doing shit outside, and when you need to be under cover.

    The data they may be collecting may end up being unclassified, but the means they're using to collect it are likely classified fairly highly. Usually this information is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_.28SCI.29_and_Special_Access_Programs_.28SAP.29

    It makes sense. If it were possible to determine the capabilities of your sensors (whether we're talking from a satellite or a human informant) by putting together the bits and pieces of their unclassified information, you've effectively leaked highly classified information to well funded and highly motivated foreign entities.

    [opinion]At the end of the day, somebody is going to find out about your sensor and it's capabilities. You just do everything you can to make sure it's well past the usefulness of said sensor, so far beyond that the understanding of this information nets the "opponent" nothing[/opinion].

    As for writing software that would obfuscate this information enough that it wouldn't give away the methods of gathering it - sure, it sounds simple, and on a case by case basis, I'm sure you could do it. But can you do it for every single scenario even remotely conceivably imagined under the sun, for potentially large quantities of information, with guaranteed 0% failure rate?

    If so, I'm sure someone would like to hire you!

  15. Obligatory X-Files quote by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

    CHIEF KORETZ: Sir, I have flash traffic at 24-18. Repeated calls for ID go unanswered. And it's not in the orbital or suborbital inventory.

    MALE OFFICER #2: 24-18. Isn't that where...

    CHIEF KORETZ: Same exact spot, sir. Although I am reading a much larger craft his time.

    MALE OFFICER #2: Meteor, Ms. Koretz.

    CHIEF KORETZ: A much larger meteor, sir. Hold on a second. (Putting hand to earpiece) We have a confirm. Whitmarsh Air Force Base is tracking...

    MALE OFFICER #2: Where is it?

    CHIEF KORETZ: Well, sir. The - meteor - seems to be hovering over a small town in Eastern Wisconsin.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  16. Re:I have a solution by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Satelites ain't actually invisible and they are also kinda hard to hide. What keeps me from watching the sky and telling when they pass overhead? Shouldn't take more than a few days and a halfway decent telescope to find out what's up. No pun intended.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. My vote: Retasking by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it is probable that the military has re-assigned the satellites so that more are looking in the direction of North Korea and possibly Iran. It would make a lot of sense to point the satellites in that direction and keep it secret.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  18. Re:Message to scientists: by PPH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Reply from scientists: Get your own damned neutrino detectors.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  19. Re:I have a solution by Skye16 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The question is "is that space debris? is that a commercial satellite? is that even WORKING?"

    On top of that, I imagine they paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light (just hypothesizing here, but I know I'd do it if I were them), to make it hard to see. Also, what about during the day?

    If you figure every piece of space debris is watching you, you probably won't be doing much outside, ever.

    The point is, someone is trying to put together information about sensor capabilities from the unclassified data (hell, maybe even we do it to other countries, and that's why we know to protect it ourselves), and that's why the DoD decided being able to pass that shit around wasn't worth it in comparison to possibly compromising the loss of capability.

  20. Clarification by T+Murphy · · Score: 4, Informative

    The satellites were picking up data on meteors as they hit the atmosphere. This has nothing to do with the search for large objects that may or may not hit the earth.

    This is technically made clear by the use of the word meteor, as opposed to asteroid, but I only remembered that as I type this so I expect I am not the only one that could have used a clarifying sentence in the summary.

  21. Terrible bug by tibman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if( object.type=TYPE_METEOR ) {
            object.isClassified = false;
    } else {
            object.isClassified = true;
    }

    You just declassified EVERYTHING, including nuclear missiles.

    --
    http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    1. Re:Terrible bug by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Leave him alone, he works for Diebold.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  22. Re:Expensive software? by sdpuppy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.

    Does this mean I'm fired?

    Nah, you've fulfilled government criteria for promotion.

    Unless you object, you will be bumped up a level your salary will now increase by 1.5x.

  23. Re:Not really by mkramer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Once touched by a classified process, the non-classified data becomes classified, until you painstakingly prove that it is not.

  24. The dumber and more embarassing. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The dumber and more embarrassing the various bits of conspiracy nonsense in evidence, the bigger and more remarkable the secret being covered up by the dissemination of said ridiculous bits of conspiracy nonsense. . .

    The best way to make people look the other way is to make them cringe.

    Psyche 1 oh 1.

    -FL