Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications China The Military

China Building Cyberweapons To Hijack Enemy Satellites, Says US Leak (arstechnica.com) 38

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: China is building sophisticated cyber weapons to "seize control" of enemy satellites, rendering them useless for data signals or surveillance during wartime, according to a leaked US intelligence report. The US assesses that China's push to develop capabilities to "deny, exploit or hijack" enemy satellites is a core part of its goal to control information, which Beijing considers to be a key "war-fighting domain." The CIA-marked document, which was issued this year and has been reviewed by the Financial Times, was one of dozens allegedly shared by a 21-year-old US Air Guardsman in the most significant American intelligence disclosures in more than a decade. A cyber capability of this nature would far exceed anything Russia has deployed in Ukraine, where electronic warfare teams have taken a brute-force approach with little effect.

These attacks, first developed in the 1980s, attempt to drown out signals between low-orbit SpaceX satellites and their on-ground terminals by broadcasting on similar frequencies from truck-borne jamming systems such as the Tirada-2. China's more ambitious cyber attacks aim to mimic the signals that enemy satellites receive from their operators, tricking them into either being taken over completely or malfunctioning during crucial moments in combat. The classified US document said this cyber capability would allow China "to seize control of a satellite, rendering it ineffective to support communications, weapons, or intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems." The US has never disclosed whether it has similar capabilities.

Taiwan, which has taken note of how indispensable satellite communications have been to the Ukrainian military, is seeking to build out communications infrastructure that can survive an attack from China. It is courting investors to establish its own satellite provider, while experimenting with non-geostationary satellite receivers in 700 locations around Taiwan to guarantee bandwidth in the event of war or disasters, the Financial Times reported in January. China's goals, according to the leaked assessment, [...] would seek to knock out the ability of satellites -- which tend to operate in interconnected clusters -- to communicate with each other, to relay signals and orders to weapons systems, or to send back visual and intercepted electronic data, according to experts.
"China understands the superiority that the United States has in the space and cyber domains, so they are very interested in not only improving their own capabilities but in capitalizing on what we refer to as a first-mover advantage in both domains," said Moore, now a visiting professor at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee.

"They are working on all the capabilities that they want to have from a defensive and offensive standpoint, and from an ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] standpoint. They're firing on all cylinders," he said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Building Cyberweapons To Hijack Enemy Satellites, Says US Leak

Comments Filter:
  • And keep polishing your musket!

  • Duh! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by banbeans ( 122547 ) on Saturday April 22, 2023 @12:25AM (#63468996)

    Its not like the US hasn't been doing the same thing for decades.

    • by migos ( 10321981 )
      Whataboutism is getting old. No one says it's not ok for China to do it. TFA is just talking about China's capabilities.
      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by Ferocitus ( 4353621 )

        Whataboutism is getting old. No one says it's not ok for China to do it.

        Pointing out American government duplicity, hypocrisy and outright lies never gets old.

        TFA is just talking about China's capabilities.

        With the intention of frightening Americans.
        You *can* make a difference: buy another gun, install more locks on your doors, don't use TikTok or chopsticks, vote for geriatrics!

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Of course it's not Ok for China to do it. It's a dictatorship. No dictatorship is legitimate. They are all gigantic hostage situations.

  • by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Saturday April 22, 2023 @12:55AM (#63469020) Journal

    This China move seems directed at Starlink, among others.

    I've seen a lot of people dinging Musk when he:
      - Limited the coverage of Starlink connections from Ukraine to the Russian side of the war zone in a way that would prevent it from being used to run drones and other weapon systems.
      - Asked the Pentagon to help fund the use of Starlink for the Ukrainian military.
    These made sense to me, as follows:

    By helping Ukraine retain internet connectivity, internally when Russia was already disrupting their other services as part of their attack on Ukraine's utility infrastructure, and simultaneously limiting service in Russia according to US government mandates on his US-based company, Musk was ticking off Russia. But he was also limiting Starlink service to being a communication utility rather than a weapons system. This put Starlink squarely under the WW II precedents that let, for instance, Ericsson (the European equivalent of the US' pre-divesiature Bell monopoly), which continued to provide telephone service withiin and between the Axis and Allies in WW II). A Russian state-level attack on the Starlink satellite infrastructure would be an attack on the West.

    But by allowing its use as a weapon system he'd make it a legimate target, and a Russian attack on the system would be fair game. So Musk would be at much higher risk that his network would be sabotaged or directly attacked, and he'd have to spend a lot to defend it - on cybersecurity, extra launches, and what-have-you. So if he's to let it become a weapons system and target he can't finance it out of the goodness of his heart and depth of his investor's pockets. He has a duty to his investors and non-warring customers to seek funding and do the work.

    It looks like, if it comes down to a China-Taiwan showdown, China is going to consider just keeping communication up with the "Rebellious Province" to be an act of war, and go after such infrastructures. At this stage Russia is an also-ran but China is trying to replace the US as the top World Superpower and may have already pulled ahead. So what's "legitimate warfare" becomes something like the Mongol Table Manners joke:

      Q: How does a Mongol eat his dinner.
      A: Any way he wants.

    • Typos:

      I've seen a lot of people dinging Musk when he:
      - Provided ground stations and service to Ukraine, but then:
      - Limited the coverage of Starlink connections from Ukraine to the Russian side of the war zone in a way that would prevent it from being used to run drones and other weapon systems , and
      - Asked the Pentagon to help fund the use of Starlink for the Ukrainian military.

      By helping Ukraine retain internet connectivity, internally and externally ...

    • Russia doesn't care what's a legitimate target or not. They will happily bomb civilian targets. Your analysis depends on Russia behaving itself, so it can safely be ignored.

      • Russia doesn't care what's a legitimate target or not. They will happily bomb civilian targets. Your analysis depends on Russia behaving itself, so it can safely be ignored.

        Pffft!
        Ukraine puts military hardware and personnel in civilian buildings, Russia bombs them.
        Luhansk and Donetsk split from Ukraine, and Ukraine bombs their cities.
        Ukrainians have been suckered into this ridiculous war: they will lose most of their country, and end up land-locked, poor and in debt. God Bless America!

        • There was no military hardware in the Theatre full of children that was clearly marked as being full of children.
          The fatality rate of the separatist regions by year has been something like 4900, 30,30,20,20,20,20.
          Likewise, no nation is going to allow groups of it's citizens to secede- especially when that region is full of an enemy nation's "vacationing" soldiers.

          • Likewise, no nation is going to allow groups of it's citizens to secede- especially when that region is full of an enemy nation's "vacationing" soldiers.

            That doesn't excuse the Ukrainian army who are still shelling Donetsk civilians.

            There were many opportunities over the last 9 years to negotiate for peace. Now it's too late and it looks like Ukraine will collapse, the EU will have to pay Russia premium prices for resources, and China's BRI will eventually make it to Odesa. America handed that to their enemies on a plate, bless 'em.

    • At this stage Russia is an also-ran but China is trying to replace the US as the top World Superpower and may have already pulled ahead.

      They should with Russia enriching them. [youtu.be]

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      You would hope that Musk is investing heavily in Starlink security regardless of military threats, lest some Russian teenager or North Korean hacker manages to p0wn thousands of his satellites.

      There is a decent possibility that the NSA or GCHQ already has exploits for Starlink, as well as China. It's not as if they would tell us if they did.

    • Starlink has to geofence itself in order to meet ITAR regulations. The situation is taken out of context.
  • if not why not - projection much?
  • by HamidPayaamAbbasi ( 7143815 ) on Saturday April 22, 2023 @07:46AM (#63469282)
    This article is not worth reading, it is written by military defense contractors to further loot and plunder the American people with useless military and warfare nonsense that does nothing but line their own pockets.
    • Slashdot is used to build up background knowledge in the population in preparation for some effort. Many stories are not placed as mere disinterested info gathering.

      Remember this the next time you hear some heart tug for a class action suit or some political thing that would have no place on News for Nerds.

  • They're not going to launch a blinding first strike on Allied assets, since they know the logical assumption would be that full-spectrum military attack was imminent and would be met with overwhelming Fail Safe measures by default. The goal of their capability would instead be degrading situational awareness in a statistical way, creating significant enough gaps to exploit strategically (as in, long-term) rather than tactically with actual military assaults.
    • So planned obsolescence and limited warranties as a weapon of war?

      • Not that subtle. The likely idea is creating sustained gaps in awareness, infiltrating control, and then leveraging it over time to manipulate governments. Of course, that's just in theory. Reality is messy, and the CCP would be taking a huge gamble that it's far less likely to survive than would a worldwide, roots-deep economic, cultural, philosophical, and military alliance. It can't claim any kind of relationship that strong with anyone, and offers no apparent moral argument for itself (unlike strate
        • The risk I see is that Zhi is slowly going the way of all presidents for life. He's becoming increasingly isolated from reality and being fed what he wishes was true. In another 10 years, he'll be as disconnected as Putin was before the Ukrainian invasion. And that's basically delusional and functionally insane. That Zhi and that China might do anything.

          • The very moment Putin came to power, Russia was plunged into one blood-drenched rampage and propaganda sewage spill after another, so he hasn't actually changed at all; just kept being himself with escalating costs to the world. That doesn't seem to have ever happened with Xi. His power consolidation wasn't built on conspicuous tsunamis of blood, and his regime's propaganda is mostly passive-aggressive (very unlike Kremlin shrillness and sadism).

            Real and drastic behavior changes this late in a regime w
    • Scenario 1) goads on purpose: what better way to weaken an adversary than with a proxy war. Of course to those not paying attention it will 'look like' it was all China's fault for starting the war.
      Scenario 2) goads from sheer stupidity and bipartisanism posturing.
      China: if Taiwan declarers independence we will attack
      Tiffany: let's declare Taiwan independent! https://tiffany.house.gov/medi... [house.gov]
      • Not entirely unfair. If you look at who in the US came up with the whole idea of making China into an economic superpower at our expense, it was mostly blood-soaked neocon schemers looking to tailor-make their own Enemy. Of course they also wanted cheap labor in the short and medium-term, but their spurious economic arguments came out of thin air when the Soviet Union collapsed (and thereby Defense budgets).

        There's not much we've ever been able to do about such assholes in our politics, but if China wa
  • I don't see how this is supposed to work during war time for more than a short time. Within a few days, most of the jammers would be gone.

    It might work for short bursts to blind during key movements. Such as in the few hours at the start of a Taiwan invasion.

  • How is this news? You would be stupid not to try to develop cyberweapons like that. The US is doing exactly the same thing, even worse as it's also developing cyberweapons to take down/block allies satellites.
  • Been collecting the humor on this since yesterday from friends:

    Can you imagine the cyber attack venues? An U.S. intrepid satellite operator (let's say an Air National Guardsman or a soon to retire Navy Chief) gets the following phishing emails:

    "Click here to refuel your satellite."

    "Nigerian prince satellite funds are locked, Need $1000 to open and account to transfer funds."

    "Your satellite's warranty is about to expire. Click here to renew your coverage."

    This one is linkedin style: "

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Working...