Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Communications Hardware

Undersea Cable Cut Circumstances Examined 79

Posted by Soulskill from the putting-away-the-tinfoil-hats dept.
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Wired has a good review of all the recent undersea cable cuts and why it's suspicious, but unlikely to be a conspiracy. So far, there are only four cut cables (the 'fifth' was weeks ago) in two different locations. Of course, a cable is damaged once every three days, on average, and there are 25 ships that do nothing but repair them. While the timing and locations are a little odd, Iran has been online the whole time, even if some of their routers weren't, and none of the conspiracy theories really add up. In a recent interview, TeleGeography Analyst Eric Schoonover said, 'I think that this is more along the lines of coincidence.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Undersea Cable Cut Circumstances Examined More

Undersea Cable Cut Circumstances Examined

Comments Filter:

  • In Soviet Russia.. (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    cable cut you.

  • Every three days? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Yetihehe ( 971185 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:04AM (#22347030)
    I didn't know that a cable is cut every three days, nobody speaks about it too much. Good thing we have redundancy. In such case those recent cable cuts are not so strange. Either this, or NSA is realy busy with cable wiretapping ;)

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by n3tcat ( 664243 )
      Well just remember that is an average. More than likely they go weeks without damage, and then one ship drags and cuts 4 cables in one go.
    • FTFS: Of course, a cable is damaged once every three days, on average
    • Every three days?

      That suggests to me that there's maybe some management issues. What an incredibly dumb waste of money. The Seas and Oceans are huge areas, much of which is still unknown about them. Huge empty wildernesses...

      And yet the cables are laid in what seems to be busy shipping channels in easy anchor reach?

      Is this really the best we can do? It cannot be.

      • Re:Every three days? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Yetihehe ( 971185 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:12AM (#22347420)

        And yet the cables are laid in what seems to be busy shipping channels in easy anchor reach?
        Cities with a port are typically big cities with many people. If you have cables in wilderness, how would you get techies there? How would you find those willing to work far from civilization? You would also need to connect endpoints in wilderness to something on land (typically, to big cities where there are backbone endpoints).
        • Somewhere I saw a map of submarine cable routes and many of them follow coastlines. It must be much cheaper to lay cable in water, despite the cost of repairs. So cables comes to shore near population centres because it is cheaper than doing the last 50 or 100 km on land.

          • Re:Every three days? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Nutria ( 679911 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:01AM (#22347764)
            Somewhere I saw a map of submarine cable routes and many of them follow coastlines. It must be much cheaper to lay cable in water, despite the cost of repairs.

            There are many cables that run around Africa. Many parts of Africa are (to say the least) politically volatile, making it dangerous to lay the cable, and vulnerable to blackmail (pay us $$$ or we cut the cable). Also, laying it over desert, mountains, jungle, etc is obviously highly difficult. Riding on a ship, paying out cable is much simpler and cheaper.

            I'm sure that the same technical challenges apply in southern Asia.

            • Riding on a ship, paying out cable is much simpler and cheaper.

              That may be, but we're playing right into the hands of the laser-wearing sharks who now have an easy way to tap into our global communications net and spy on us as they firm up their plans for conquest of the world's land masses.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Grishnakh ( 216268 )
          How would you find those willing to work far from civilization? You would also need to connect endpoints in wilderness to something on land (typically, to big cities where there are backbone endpoints).

          Pay me enough, and I'll be happy to work far from civilization, as long as I have fast internet access. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

      • Sure the Ocean is huge, but there's also underwater volcanoes and mountains and really, really deep places. I'm sure they picked the optimal route to get the cables to each country. The cables could have definitely taken a shorter route through Canada, Alaska, the Bering Straits, through Russia, and then branch off to everywhere else. I think the major driving factor was the cost of labor for laying all that cable if done that way and the complications involved in negotiating the passage of cables throug

      • The cables in this case were actually cut in a restricted area. No busy shipping lane involved.

        Don't forget economics as well, the actual best we can do is a cost effective problem. Laying down 50 cables is going to be a good bit cheaper than laying one titanium pipeline. And the titanium will break sometimes too!

    • Reading comprehension (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A cable is damaged, not cut, every three days. How can you immediately mis-quote something you just read? Moron!

      • A cable is ... cut, every three days. ...can you immediately mis-quote something you just read? (I am a) Moron!
        Doesn't seem so tough to me.

  • Poisson distribution (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    3 days average makes an expected 4 cable cut time of 12 days (I'm guessing) with a standard deviation of 3.46. Cutting 4 cables in 2 days puts this value 2.89 standard deviations away for a probability of around 0.1%. Of course my math might be wrong since I don't normally play with Poisson distributed values. But if that 0.1% value is right, this was highly unlikely. Most scientists reject things greater than 2.5 standard deviations away.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by doctor_nation ( 924358 )
      You have no idea what the distribution of cut rates is so there is no way to make an assumption of standard deviation. The average could be three because it's 0 in one 12 day period and 6 in another. Also consider that there are over 52 12 day periods per year, multiplied by the number of years, etc. The odds of hitting a royal flush are tiny, but that doesn't mean it never happens. Statistics are not truth.
      • Not counting overlap there are fifty-two (and a bit) seven day periods in a year, and they're commonly known as "weeks" ;)

        Including overlap then there are about 365 rolling twelve day periods in a year.

        Interesting maths in the GP, though, even if it is assuming that the average is a consistent occurrence rather than an approximate averaging over a much longer period.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Technician ( 215283 )
      Most scientists reject things greater than 2.5 standard deviations away.

      Unless the cause is understood. For example, a few floods here and there are way out of the standard deviation for normal rainfall. Detroit has exceeded their snow removal budget this year several times over. Storm conditions are understood and can cause rainfall and snowbanks outside the 2.5 standard deviation. There is a standard for normal weather. The insurance industry has to deal with the outliers.

    • well, seeing as the paranoid around us would be reporting every cut, we'll assume those 4 are the only ones since the date of the first cut, since the first one was cut on Jan 29th, (thereabouts too lazy to find the exact date) and it is currently Feb 8th. which was ~11 days ago, one more day, and and we're right back at the average.

      Also there were only 3 cables cut in the two day period (two are close together) the 4th was cut some days afterwards.

    • Is it just me or are other people reading this as "poison distribution" as well? :D I've read the topic, I've even replied to it, and I remember doing poisson and spearman's rank etc in Stats, but I still see poison :D

      New conspiracy theory: People in the Middle East are getting poisoned by having their Internet removed and their Net cables cut!

      Who cares how it is done, it's a conspiracy, it came from a reputable news source (Slashdot - it's reputable enough for a conspiracy ;) ) and it only needs to sound t

  • Traditional conspiracy breeding ground (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jugalator ( 259273 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:16AM (#22347102) Journal
    I think there's the traditional conspiracy breeding ground at work here: lack of knowledge. I understand that can surely come off as a "high horse" opinion, so I might add that I also lacked this knowledge, more specifically in that cable cuts are this common. I think there's nothing wrong in admitting this; the problem starts when "lack of knowledge" turn into "ignorance".

    Anyway, when media started reporting these cables being damaged at around the same times, the only newsworthy thing was really the coincidence, not that cables were being damaged. While at the same time, the public reading these stories (and quite likely the journalists themselves) thought that even the cable cuts themselves were uncommon ("why would this otherwise be reported as news?"), and now there was so many of them too! Apply the extra confusion on when the "fifth" cut took place, and you have the conspiracies floating around as they do now. I think it's still even commonly reported that Iran has been harmed a lot, neglecting the wide scale trouble Asia has got from this.

    So all in all, from reading up on these things and being willing to be influenced by facts, I've pretty much discarded these conspiracy theories and think it's all just a widespread problem for many more regions than Iran, and also looks like a coincidence on top of that.
    • I agree !

      Although I have to say that it might be a conspiracy to fool the gulf region and India into thinking IRAN is behind it since IRAN is not affected.

      Nothing too small for the Bush administration to do. Yet, they don't have to bother themselves so much into cutting under the sea cables for increasing enemosity in the region.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Alsee ( 515537 )
      Ok, say I take take all this mumbojumbo about cables and statistics mathamalogical stuff and say this is all just an insignificant coincidence...

      But if three days from now there's a story about a SIXTH cable cut, then it's definitely a conspiracy!

      -
    • Okay, you make a good argument. I do have one question for you. Why did they get reported? If a cable gets cut on the order of one cut every 3 days, or even once every two weeks, all the other 20+ cuts in the past year have not been reported. So why is there all this reporting?

      I've got some theories, but you'd just call that a conspiracy nut thing.

      In either case, it is **unusual** that so many would be reported in such a short length of time. I'm betting there is less 'real' evidence of what really happened
      • "A spike in the data means the data needs to be looked at, that's all I'm saying."

        That's what the OP is also saying, his point however is that a genuine skeptic is willing to attack their own assumptions.

      • Because it happened in a region with low redundancy and high news value.

        When one of the many trans-atlantic or trans-pacific are cut nobody notices because there is so much redundancy, but the Indian Ocean has far fewer cables so a few cuts can wipe out a large fraction of total capacity.

        The fact that it happened in the Middle East makes it more likely to attract attention because that region is a hotbed of real and imagined conspiracies.

    • So.. what you're saying is that there was a conspiracy in the reporting of otherwise mundane events? </grin>

  • "Only" 4 cuts? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kaos07 ( 1113443 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:25AM (#22347152)

    I like how the article summary attempts to put us all at ease by remarking there have "only" been 4 cuts, as opposed to 5. It then tries to further reassure us by claiming there's a cut somewhere around the world every three days. Be that as it may, we have four cuts in the same vicinity affected the same countries, in the same week and there were no ships in the area. Ships are, of course, the major cause for accidental cable cuts.

    So it all may be a big coincidence. But we should not forget that while 4 cuts in the same area in the same week IS slightly suspicious, this is heightened by the fact they were in an area (The Middle East; specifically Iran) which has been topical for a while due to the extreme and occasionally vitriolic levels of rhetoric spouted by both Western leaders and Middle-Eastern leaders. In addition to this, the cuts occurred during the week Iran was to launch its new Oil Bourse which was to trade oil using non-dollar currencies such as the Euro.

    So yes, it could be a coincidence but there are a few strange factors. I don't think it's a good idea as of yet to immediately pronounce these cuts are a "conspiracy" or an "accident" because there are still a lot of unanswered questions. Specifically, what actually caused the cuts? Because of this I'm wary of articles coming out so soon declaring everything is okay, it's not a conspiracy.

    It almost seems like a form of placation.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Xest ( 935314 )
      "Be that as it may, we have four cuts in the same vicinity affected the same countries, in the same week and there were no ships in the area. Ships are, of course, the major cause for accidental cable cuts."

      Same vicinity? You mean two in the Mediteranean and two in the Persian Gulf? There were two sets of two cuts. Each set was quite far apart with the cuts in each set being very close to each other.

      Do you have any evidence ships are the major cause of accidental cable cuts? I'm not saying you're wrong, but

      • Further to my last post... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Xest ( 935314 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:23AM (#22347960)
        It would appear even shark and fish bites can break the cables:

        http://www.iscpc.org/publications/About_Cables_in_PDF_Format.pdf [iscpc.org]

        But they are also prone to breaking from bad weather such as storms. So it would seem there's any number of possible causes for a cable to break, ship anchors are only one such reason.

        According to this very PDF in shallow waters less than 100m less than 10% of cable breaks are the result of natural activity, whilst at depths over 1000m the faults are more often caused by natural hazards. It seems most faults are the result of anchoring and fishing - 70% worth but of course 30% of faults are still caused by natural hazards.

        It's reasonable in this case that the two areas effected were hit with two separate incidents, one could reasonably be a trawler for example causing two cuts in the Persian gulf whilst some natural event could've caused the breaks near Egypt or vice versa.

        When you get all the facts it really doesn't seem so unreasonable that this really is just coincidence and not some big conspiracy theory. I'll admit I was beginning to feel it was a pretty big coincidence, but only when I didn't have all the information and only when I was also being fed false information (i.e. the lies about Iran being cut off from the net). Now I've got more information I think it's pretty reasonable to believe there's no conspiracy here, particularly as there isn't a conspiracy theory regarding the situation yet that doesn't actually make sense when you look at the overall picture yet.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kaos07 ( 1113443 )
          Your theory about a trawler causing the cuts in the Persian gulf sounds highly plausible. Except that the Egyptian government released a statement declaring that no ships were in the area before or after the time the cable was cut.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by isaac ( 2852 )

            Your theory about a trawler causing the cuts in the Persian gulf sounds highly plausible. Except that the Egyptian government released a statement declaring that no ships were in the area before or after the time the cable was cut.

            I don't know whether there's a story here or not, but I do know that consistently in the absence of independent observers and a functioning free press - and often in their presence - governments will say what is believed to be in their own best interest regardless of what you or I

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Xest ( 935314 )
            May I suggest you take a look at a map of the world?

            Egypt doesn't have any coast that borders the persian gulf. It borders only the red sea and the Mediteranean, the cable cuts relating to Egypt were in the Mediteranean to the North.

            If you don't even know the absolute basics of the region like that then how can you possibly believe you have enough knowledge to be convinced there is some kind of conspiracy going on?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ChinggisK ( 1133009 )
      Okay, say it is a conspiracy, what is the purpose of this conspiracy? Are we trying to keep 14-year old Hamad in Tehran from updating his MySpace? It's not like if the US cuts Iran off from the internet that they can just secretly go in and conquer the country without anyone noticing. Iran still has satellite access, or if all else fails, good old-fashioned 'walk across the border to tell their nearest buddy to let people know what's going on' access. Not to mention that it might be a little difficult t

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Xiph ( 723935 )
        If there was a conspiracy, and I don't think it's very likely that there is, then the target would be the launch of the Iranian oil bourse, which trades in currencies other than US-Dollar

      • Re:"Only" 4 cuts? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Captain Splendid ( 673276 ) * <capsplendid@@@gmail...com> on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:54AM (#22348402) Homepage Journal
        what is the purpose of this conspiracy?

        To run splices. If they did that normally, cable operators would notice something immediately. With a cable cut, there's nothing to measure, and everybody's attention is diverted elsewhere, so they can do the splice with comfort, ease, and no detection.

        Nobody was trying to 'stop' anything. Just get a little more control.
      • Another possibility, as others have suggested, this could be another government other than the US doing this. Israel is one of many that have been suggested.

        I hope it is all just a coincidence. I'm not one for conspiracy theories as I find most of them lacking in evidence. But if we see a few more cable cuts or major hostile actions in the area then I think there is a good chance we are seeing spy agencies at work here.

      • If a conspiracy, here is the likely motive (Score:5, Informative)

        by spun ( 1352 ) <loverevolutionary@@@yahoo...com> on Friday February 08, 2008 @03:56PM (#22353070) Journal
        Disruption of the planned opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse [wikipedia.org] this week. Suspicious, the Iranians were about to start trading oil in Euros on the 11th. That would send the dollar into a tailspin and all but destroy the US's already shaky credit rating in the rest of the world.

        It wouldn't take much to disrupt trading. This also explains why the cuts were reported so widely. It's a message to would be Euro oil traders: the US is simply not going to allow this to happen. We will do anything it takes to disrupt non-dollar trade in oil. The dollar must remain the world's reserve currency if our economic house of cards is to remain standing. The Iranian Oil Bourse is potentially more damaging to the US than an Iranian nuke.

  • right..... (Score:5, Funny)

    by djupedal ( 584558 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:27AM (#22347166)
    "'I think that this is more along the lines of coincidence.'"

    And I think an 'abandoned' 5-ton anchor found at one of the cut sites, when no ships were reported in the area, is _not_ along the lines of coincidence...

    "Try this one..." SNIP
    Egypt! Damn!
    "nope...that's not it"
    "okok....cut this one!" SNIP
    Dubai?! Dang!
    "Don't worry, we'll get it soon - cut this other one!" SNIP
    Iran?!!! Finally! "Ok, good work, let's go home!"

  • coincidence (Score:3, Insightful)

    by INeededALogin ( 771371 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:29AM (#22347176) Journal
    There are no coincidences, Delia. Only the illusion of coincidence.
    V for Vendetta

    I can believe that this is a normal occurrence that the media has just decided to start emphasizing. This happens often in the United States. One abduction gets a lot of media play making the media emphasize every abduction that happens for the next month. Its a sad world, but our news comes in cycles as to what is important.

  • Non-Conspiracy Theory (Score:3, Insightful)

    by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @08:33AM (#22347186) Journal
    Saying it's probably just a strange/rare coincidence, without any evidence what it was or wasn't, is just as loony as the nut job conspiracy theories... In other words, this article is a whole lot of nothing, while Wired tries to fill page space.

    It's true none of the proposed conspiracy theories pan out, but that's pretty much just par for the course. But hey, at least they're trying. Dismissing it all as "coincidence" is about the same as saying it's a nondescript "conspiracy".

    It might as well be possible that there's (*gasp*) something we don't know about the ocean environment that is occurring to cause this, rather than it just being a statistical anomaly.

    • Re:Non-Conspiracy Theory (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:49AM (#22348334)
      rather than it just being a statistical anomaly.

      While the article doesn't (and can't) have all of the facts related to the cable damage in question, the main fact that they're presenting is that this is not a statistical anomoly. This stuff happens all the time, didn't cut any country off from the net, and really doesn't amount to anything. If there's anything that's interesting here, it's that there is so little technically informed reporting in the world (as aimed at the wider media audience) that any report by any of the networks that focuses on something that can be spun as somehow ominous gets put into the hyperbolic spin cycle by everyone else, ricochets around the blogs at high speed, and becomes a circus of ignorance... just right for the conspiracy nut cases. And anyone with some political axe to grind - say, the types who blame Bush personally for a favorite parking space not being available that morning - are going to just eat stuff like this up. Even the ones that know better (about the reality of undersea cable damage as a routine thing being tended to by expensive fleets of ships, every day of the year) are still willing to feed the wider ignorance by stamping their feet and screaming "black helicopters! new world order! teh fascists!" just for the sport of it. Embarassing.
  • it's psyops: the psychological manipulation of not a person, but country, in this case, the whole of iran. you make someone feel vulnerable and insecure and paranoid by severing their communication with the outside world. someone at mossad noticed how feeble and vulnerable iran's internet access was, and did a litle power maneuver

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by suineg ( 647189 )
      Who's to say that it isn't the other way around?

      What better way to make us look like the bad guy and not really effect yourself very much?

      What better way to make sure your people aren't leaking information to the US?

      Just thoughts with no founding but who knows.
      • but seeing that my own comment was quite the substantative jaunt into paranoid schizophrenia land, i would be hypocritical to criticize your assertion, even if i think it is even more paranoid than mine

        i would reply by criticizing my own assertion: a good argument against my assertion would be that once mossad did this, iran would make dang sure it never happened again. in other words, it is a maneuver you can only do once. after that, your enemy will make sure it never happens again. in which case, it woul
  • If our local news suddenly reported murders every night, we would think the crime rate had gone up. If they started reporting wire cuts every night, we would think someone was cutting them on purpose.

  • Did you ever consider... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Did you ever consider that instead of some government conspiracy it could be that maybe someone wanted to sell some cable? Yeah you heard me. A business conspiracy. With profit as the motive. I know, I know. It totally goes against the whole "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" vibe you all got going on here in the hive mind. Crazy idea I know... but I'm just saying... profit motive... think about it.

    1) Cut cables.
    2) ?
    3) Obtain contract to install new, improved, m

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Ant P. ( 974313 )
      Here's the general formula:

      1) USA vandalises rest of world indiscriminately
      2) ?
      3) USA offers to repair damage by selling its own services for "only" several billion per month
      4) Profit!
  • If only it bothered me if we (the US) actually did try to bump Iran of the internet....

    For some reason, it doesn't.

    and, btw, to the previous poster, I seriously doubt they'd have to guess which lines to cut if they were doing it on purpose (though that is funny). I'd also point out it's more likely that someone over 'there' is doing the cutting than the US. But then again, we are the evil empire blah blah blah.

    EK

  • Proof of Concept? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BobMcD ( 601576 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:34AM (#22348118)

    While the timing and locations are a little odd, Iran has been online the whole time, even if some of their routers weren't, and none of the conspiracy theories really add up.
    In my line of work, that's called a 'Proof of Concept'. You make a significant enough impact to verify that your idea is sound, without actually impacting production at all. You gain invaluable insight when you do these, as there is nothing quite like the really real world for testing.

    In this particular example, were it such a PoC, we learned a minimum of:

    1) How quickly the media took the story
    2) What the public's reaction to the news was
    3) What kind of response to expect from those impacted by the cuts
    4) (Possibly) What kinds of cuts are more effective than others
    5) (Possibly) What behaviors are deemed suspicious, and what gets labeled as 'normal'

    There are probably quite a few more, as well.

    The coolest part is, even if it was a giant coincidence, most of the above can be learned anyway. This would lead me to believe that we can expect to see more of this in the future.

    • even if it was a giant coincidence, most of the above can be learned anyway.
      Only problem is, if it was a coincidence, it misses the point of a proof of concept - proving that you can actually do it. They didn't hire freighters and run them with cables down, so they didn't find out if it's feasible for them to try it. If it was a proof of concept it had the unfortunate effect of alerting all of the affected parties to the existence of the threat, whatever that is supposed to be.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by BobMcD ( 601576 )
        Not to be too cheeky, but you seem to be saying that if it was a coincidence then it was not a proof of concept. To that I can only say, 'duh'... However, there would STILL be much to be learned.

  • The creation of FLAG - Wired Dec 1996 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jdmonin ( 124516 ) on Friday February 08, 2008 @11:34AM (#22348912) Homepage
    I'm surprised this Wired story doesn't mention the awesome, in-depth article Neil Stephenson wrote in 1996 that chronicled the birth and construction of the FLAG cable: Mother Earth Mother Board [wired.com] - The hacker tourist ventures forth across the wide and wondrous meatspace of three continents, chronicling the laying of the longest wire on Earth.
  • Is that you?

    Somebody might get xfered if it were.
  • If the media report some incidence(s) over and over for a few weeks, many people feel that "something is going on", but they don't think that such incidents could happen everyday and that for some reason the media pick up the stories selectively now. You cannot measure anything by how much media coverage it gets. All we hear from the media are stories about "another cable cut" but nobody tells us the average incidences of cuts in the last few years and their daily distribution within the year.

Slashdot Top Deals

Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.

Close