Slashdot Mirror
Keeping a Cellphone System Going In a War
dogsbreath writes "An Al Jazeera article provides fascinating insight about how engineers for one of the Libyan cell providers in the rebel held East have kept the system going in the middle of a civil insurrection. Administering a now-free cellular system in a war zone brings new meaning to the term BOFH as the engineers deal with bandwidth hogs and prioritize international traffic.
A technical decision to keep a copy of the user database (the HLR) in Benghazi was crucial to keeping people's phones on line. There are reasons besides earthquakes and Tsunamis to keep your data backed up in geographically diverse locations. The report expands on and corrects the WSJ article covered on Slashdot before."
Letting an insurgency take control and use your communications infrastructure against you sounds more like a reason not to back up your data in geographically diverse locations. Regardless of whether you support the rebels or not, this sounds more like a reason to secure and protect backups so that they can't be used without authorization unless you're in favor of helping out groups that are focused on destroying your government and and possibly killing you.
How many wrongs can you get in 1 sentence?
LTE is not GSM, it is 3GPP Long Term Evolution, so "GSM networks like LTE" is an oxymoron.
We sure as hell use HLRs on the GSM network we run.
All engineers take note of what they did and how they did it, it's up to us to do the same thing if something like that happens in our country.
This is interesting (and it's better reporting than we get from most sources, thank you, Al Jezeera). Basically, modern network infrastructure is controlled by a relatively small number of technical staff. Even if a government manages to cut the major fiber optic backbones, there is enough expertise and equipment in the world to 'work around' that problem.
Ghaddaffi (or how ever you spell it) made the mistake of allowing a small mobile provider to keep control of it's subscriber database. They used that info, along with a cobbled together satellite and land line network to patch things up well enough to essentially be a command and control system for the opposition.
Could the US Government be more effective in a general meelee in the US itself? Perhaps. The US military has a higher degree of technical competence than Libya's but if there really was a new 'civil war' level of discontent, there would be defections left and right.
The Internet is designed to route around damage. This is taking it to another level. May you live in interesting times, indeed.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
The title of keeping the system running is completely inaccurate. They didn't keep it up. They preformed a network coup d'etat. It was really pretty cool. There are a couple write-ups around the internet on tech cellar type blog but I don't have any links handy.
They basically brought a few key pieces of equipment in from outside the country, stole a few key peaces of info like subscriber database from the, at the time, shutdown system and then brought most of the towers back up linked into a new OAM system. Really, check it out, largest scale network coup d'etat I have ever read about.
True: free minutes but the service level is severely compromised. Plus the high calibre AA guns poking holes in the people around you can be a bit offputting. 8-P
Were I in a cryptologic division of some security service, I would certainly wish to consider ensuring that the cellular infrastructure be maintained during an insurgency; especially where insurgents might be naive enough to not realize that I could thus not only sniff their voice and data traffic, but also triangulate locations, and through traffic analysis, discern their strength, force array and command structure.
The US also has missiles designed to lock onto transceivers and destroy them. Your satellite uplink might not last long.
These work best in a relatively 'quiet' RF environment. In the US, there would be lots of uplinks and it would be relatively difficult to get the 'right' one. But you're correct, the US does have significant anti-pretty-damned-much-everything capability. The big question would be, if the shit hits the fan and you have a general civil-war type conflict, how much can you expect the military to do? Further, while we do have anti RF devices, we don't have that many of them.
Just a little Armchair Armageddon thinking on a Saturday morning.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
The big question would be, if the shit hits the fan and you have a general civil-war type conflict, how much can you expect the military to do?
I used to think that in the event of a widespread insurgency or revolution, a country's military would stand down rather than gun down thousands. But after what happened in Libya, I am no longer confident that this is the case. It's like the Milgram experiment on a bigger and deadlier scale.
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]