The Underwater Cables That Carry the Internet Are in Trouble (bloomberg.com) 39
The roughly 500 fiber-optic cables lying on the ocean floor carry more than 95% of all internet data -- not satellites, as many might assume -- and they face growing threats from natural disasters, terrorists and nation-states capable of disrupting global communications by dragging anchors or deploying submarines against the infrastructure.
The cables are protected by layers of copper, steel, and plastics, but they remain vulnerable at multiple points: earthquakes can disturb them on the seafloor, and the connections where cables meet land-based infrastructure present targets for bad actors. National actors including Russia, China and the US possess the capability to attack these cables.
A bipartisan Senate bill co-sponsored by Democrat Jeanne Shaheen and Republican John Barrasso is under consideration. The legislation would require a report to Congress within six months on Chinese and Russian sabotage efforts, mandate sanctions against foreign parties responsible for attacks, and direct the US to provide more resources for cable protection and repair.
The cables are protected by layers of copper, steel, and plastics, but they remain vulnerable at multiple points: earthquakes can disturb them on the seafloor, and the connections where cables meet land-based infrastructure present targets for bad actors. National actors including Russia, China and the US possess the capability to attack these cables.
A bipartisan Senate bill co-sponsored by Democrat Jeanne Shaheen and Republican John Barrasso is under consideration. The legislation would require a report to Congress within six months on Chinese and Russian sabotage efforts, mandate sanctions against foreign parties responsible for attacks, and direct the US to provide more resources for cable protection and repair.
Re:Easy Fix... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Easy Fix... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reportedly, none of that is public, the business of tapping a fiber line underwater is considerably more fiddly, and enough mines might make that a hassle; but it would also make install and repair far more expensive and probably just theatre when you consi
Re:Easy Fix... (Score:4, Interesting)
There's not even a point to that anymore. Tapping those cables worked back in the day because everyone thought they were so untouchable that they didn't bother to encrypt the message traffic. Now? Ever since the US Navy demonstrated to the world that the cables CAN be reached and they CAN be tapped; you can take it to the bank that everything, particularly the military and government traffic that would merit tapping them in the first place, is encrypted to a fare-thee-well.
So unless the NSA has a quantum computer at Fort Meade no one knows about that can break all conventional encryption; there's not much point to the taps anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
You could use CAPTOR mines, placed along the cable's shallows and reprogrammed to fire if the adjacent cable section is cut. That little ASW torpedo isn't likely to *sink* a full-sized surface combatant. But it should be enough to muck up the prop and rudder such that the cable-cutting vessel will wallow around in one place long enough to round up a Super Hornet or Eurofighter to put a few Harpoons into the stack of crap.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, make them self-destructing? yyyyYYYEAH.
Or just lay down tripwires a few hundred feet from the real cables. Something that will trigger an alarm. Maybe something that traces the offending anchor line back to the boat and does something like explode a glitter bomb, play a recording of very stern warning message, attach a homing device, etc.
So... (Score:3)
The legislation would require a report to Congress within six months on Chinese and Russian sabotage efforts
Does this mean the US won't have to report on their own sabotage efforts to congress?
Re: (Score:1)
"Epstein diddit"
Re: (Score:2)
"Epstein diddit"
I knew it! He's probably down there right now in the Titan submersible plotting revenge.
Very difficult to defend (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
too much hassle. build a shadow fleet of well-armed fast interceptors with untraceable munitions and sink the saboteurs.
Re: (Score:3)
too much hassle. build a shadow fleet of well-armed fast interceptors with untraceable munitions and sink the saboteurs.
To intercept them you still have to identify them, which you can't do until after they perform the sabotage. Given that, what's the benefit in sinking them rather than seizing them? Sinking them gains you nothing, seizing them gains you the sabotage vessel. It probably won't be worth much, but more than nothing. I guess sinking them saves the cost of imprisoning the crew, but I'd rather imprison them for a few years than murder them.
Re: (Score:2)
You can do preemptive targeting or you can let them get away with it a couple times and track them.
There aren't many who have fleets big enough to pull this off and most of the ones that do are allies or not enemies.
Seizing them is a big headache, you're responsible for the boat & crew and the attendant diplomatic headaches.
Same goes for imprisoning them and after a few years they'll be back doing sabotage.
Sending a clear FAFO message will certainly deter prospective pirates
satellites (Score:1)
> not satellites, as many might assume
I'm sorry... WHAT?!
What idiots think that most of global communications are transmitted via satellites??
Re:satellites (Score:5, Funny)
> not satellites, as many might assume
I'm sorry... WHAT?!
What idiots think that most of global communications are transmitted via satellites??
You can be assured Elon will weigh in
There is a whole (shorter) book on this very topic (Score:3, Informative)
Make the Web Webby Again! (Score:3)
That's the problem: they are not a web. The original idea of the internet was to have a web of connections so that a few cables or nodes going bad wouldn't stop data movement, it would route around the bad spots via going through adjacent parts of the web. Seems we have to return to the original vision.
Technically they usually route around damaged sea cables via a larger scale redundancy, such as through another continent, but the webbiness needs to be per sea based on the rate of damage so far.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It will take a really annoying or long outage before people notice they've been screwed by Big Money.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the way the internet works on land these days, over any distance. Your multiple carriers all turn out to depend on the same infrastructure.
Maybe host more locally? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Local CDNs do nothing for real time data (banking transactions, for example). But for the average bandwidth consumer, I suppose it doesn't matter where the TikTok chicks twerking originates from.
95% figure is incorrect. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But "95% of international traffic" is not the same as "95% of traffic". You are slicing the wrong pie, Happy Thanksgiving!
Re: (Score:1)
They're also very tasty (Score:2)
According to sharks.
"not satellites, as many might assume" (Score:2)
Who are those "many" who would assume that? Other than Bloomberg writers, I mean.
Make them national territory (Score:3)
If sabotage becomes an explicit act of war on US/EU/Russian/Chinese territory it might cause some hesitation on all sides.
By "threats" you mean Russia & China... (Score:3)
Russia and China have been caught repeatedly destroying undersea cables by dragging anchors "accidentally". There is no "accidentally" dragging an anchor any considerable distance.
These cables are designed to be robust and long lasting (because replacement is expensive and a pain in the ass). Any damage is almost always intentional.
The concept is not new. (Score:1)