On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Steve Stroh via Starlink < [email protected]> wrote:
> On the battlefield, high power continuous jamming such as you describe > tends not to last very long. There are special missiles (HARM - High speed > AntiRadiation Missile) to remedy that situation. They home in on a jamming > transmitter like a beacon. > this is called "ballistic anti-jam" :-)))) > > One of the stellar attributes about Starlink is that it’s using phased > array antennas on both user terminals and satellites, proving a “tight > beam”. I’m speculating, but my guess is that clever programming is > configuring the satellite beams to be contoured to ignore contested areas > where jamming is being attempted. An additional speculation is that > Starlink is programming both the satellites and user terminals to > continuously authenticate each other’s transmission, allowing them to > ignore spoofing attempts. > > Not to mention that the directional nature of the beams allows for a > positional reality check. If a terminal is attempted to be used by the > enemy and the terminal’s internal GPS is spoofed to say it’s well within > Ukraine (good guy territory) rather than its real location outside Ukraine > (bad guy territory), the satellite can discern that a terminal really isn’t > where it’s reporting it is, and that terminal gets (permanently?) > deauthorized. > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 13:45 Mike Puchol via Starlink < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Pumping out RF at fairly high power levels, and pointing an antenna at a >> satellite, are both things very easy to do for someone like Russia. To then >> jam 500 MHz of spectrum all at once is not that trivial, and one can get >> creative, eg by only attacking the reference subcarriers in OFDM, thus >> concentrating RF power on those, rather than the whole channel. >> >> There are some papers written around jamming LTE by attacking specific >> resources instead of the whole band, making the attack less conspicuous, >> something similar could be applied against Starlink. By not using brute >> force, you also make the attack harder to detect and counter. >> >> My view is that Russia is not worried about being noticed, and just >> applies brute force. >> >> Best, >> >> Mike >> On Oct 14, 2022 at 20:26 +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>, wrote: >> >> Juliusz, see the Twitter thread I linked to, it explains precisely the >> jamming scenarios they could be facing, and how they are possible. >> >> >> I saw it after I wrote my question, and it does explain a lot. Thanks. >> >> Do you have an idea how difficult it is to actually do in practice? Is it >> a simple matter of plugging a second-hand VSAT dish to an old amateur >> radio rig, or do you actually need to be a research lab of the Moscow >> Academy of Sciences to do it? >> >> -- Juliusz >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> > -- > Steve Stroh N8GNJ (he / him / his) > Editor > Zero Retries Newsletter - https://zeroretries.substack.com > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > -- Please send any postal/overnight deliveries to: Vint Cerf Google, LLC 1900 Reston Metro Plaza, 16th Floor Reston, VA 20190 +1 (571) 213 1346 until further notice
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Starlink mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
