YouTube Used for Whistleblowing 407
fightmaster writes "A Lockheed Martin engineer with concerns about the safety and security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats turned to YouTube in order to publicize concerns he felt were being ignored by his employer and the government. From the article: 'The 41-year-old Lockheed Martin engineer had complained to his bosses. He had told his story to government investigators. He had called congressmen. But when no one seemed to be stepping up to correct what he saw as critical security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats, De Kort did just about the only thing left he could think of to get action: He made a video and posted it on YouTube.com.'"
This might be usefull: (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This might be usefull: (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally think it is rather commendable, and while I think the short term will be rough for him, hopefully it can bring to light other issues that the coast guard has been glossing over. My dad was in the navy and road an icebreaker on a trip up near the North Pole. If equipment was not rated to survive in the cold weather, they were basically useless to the crew.
Keep it up, you have media attention now, and thanks to midterm elections, something might actually be done about it.
YouTube Video Link (Score:5, Informative)
It actually took me three tries to find it, entitled: "Homeland Security - Coast Guard Issues [youtube.com]"
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:YouTube Video Link (Score:4, Funny)
You see, the Internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material. Ten movies streaming across that Internet and what happens to your own personal Internet? I just the other day got, an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday and I just got it yesterday.
Re:YouTube Video Link (Score:4, Interesting)
And the real problem... who will take action? It's not anybody's job to fix fvck-ups.
There are tons of outstanding engineers and managers who really care at Lockheed and the other companies involved. This project probably didn't get many of them.
Here's my own personal similar story. Remember the BFV (Bradley Fighting Vehicle... which eventually became a good unit, I think). One of my first jobs was building the analog circuit to integrate the signal from gas gyros in a 'pistol' control. The tank commander would in theory pull the pistol and shoot it at an enemy. The result would be the gun turning automatically and sighting in on the target. The probem was that the gas-gyros drifted... a LOT. By the time you made a system semi-useful, it was only good for a few seconds out of the 'holster' at a time. The electronics took up a cubic foot INSIDE the BFV, and generated a LOT of heat. There was no way that system was going to be reliable.
I recommended that they give the tank commander a joy-stick instead (reliable, low heat, low volume, darned cheap). Guess how far that went
Re:YouTube Video Link (Score:4, Funny)
Wow a TubeCast! (Score:4, Funny)
Or he could have just sent an anonymous tip to the press who would have loved to pick up on something like this...
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:5, Informative)
1) Not enough security cameras
2) Bad (unshielded) communications cables
3) Equipment won't survive the extreme temperatures
4) No one cares, billions of dollars and national security at risk.
But, some of us really do prefer reading (and apparently, transcribing), and since google couldn't find me a transcript, here's one I made while waiting for my WoW trial to download, heh.
---
Before I begin, I want to tell you that making videos like this is not something I do as a profession, so please bear with the crudeness of the effort, and my reading from a prepared statement.
What I'm going to tell you is going to seem preposterous and unbelievable, and may be very hard for you to believe that our government and the largest defense contract in the world is capable of such alarming incompetence, and can make ethical compromises as glaring as what I'm going to describe. Having said that, I assure you that everything I'm stating here is accurate. I have resorted to creating this video because I've exhausted every avenue I can think of, and in spite of the negative effects it has had or will have on me and my family, I feel very strongly that I need to take this step in order to resolve these issues.
The purpose of this video is to ask for your assistance in helping me resolve several serious safety and security issues relating to homeland security. Specifically, the U.S. Coast Guard.
Several years ago, I was Lockheed Martin's C4ISR system engineering lead for the 123 project on the Deepwater program. The purpose of this effort was to upgrade the Coast Guard's fleet of 110-foot patrol boats, to not only lengthen their servicable life, but to add space onto the rear of the boat to accomodate the Zodiac rescue boat, and to install modern command, control, communication, computer information, and surveillance systems on these boats to prepare them for a post-9/11 world.
My responsibilities on this effort were to ensure the designs we created fulfilled requirements, and to complete the installation and delivery of the first boat. During my tenure on this project, several critical safety and security problems arose.
These issues included:
-The camera surveillance system.
We had a requirement to provide a camera surveillance system for the boats. The purpose of the system was to permit the Coast Guard to monitor these boats while in a Coast Guard port, without having to have a watch-stander on board. The main purpose of the system is to ensure that no one can access or board the boats without being seen.
The implementation that Lockheed Martin proposed, and that was finally accepted by the Coast Guard, left two extremely large blind spots leading directly to the pilot house, or the bridge, of the ship. These blind spots are over 10 feet wide on the deck, and extend to hundreds of feet wide at the horizon. I have an engineering rendering of the blind spots. [holds up image depicting blind spots] Here is the forward part of the boat, and the covered zones are here in the lighter color. As you can see here, and here, there are two very large blind spots leading all the way to the horizon that the crew cannot see, and they lead right up and into the bridge.
While this problem could have been easily remedied by simply providing another camera to fill the blind spots, Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Coast Guard decided to deliver these boats without the extra camera. This situation leaves the boats and the crew in a position where someone could access the boat without beeing seen. While it is possible to augment the cameras with a watch stander, that situation puts the Coast Guard in the exact position they originally tried to avoid, with the additional expense of a system that does not meet their needs.
The next issue:
-Environmental survivability of the equipment.
Just prior to the installation of the systems on the ship, we were fina
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:5, Funny)
I think we all know that with the internet and all the videos available now, attention spans are getting far too short ...
Way too long. Anyone have a summary?
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You think the media would have posted this? The media is more concerned with the (now cleared) Jon Bennett Ramsey suspect, a plane that crashed after flying off a short runway, and some polygamist that somehow ended up on the FBI most wanted list (I still wonder how that polygamist beat out all those serial child molesters, mass murderers, and terrorists).
And despite this being out there now, e
I saw this a little while ago.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should LM shoulder all the blame and punishment? The Coast Guard was made well aware of the issues, but chose to push the project through anyways and quietly-but-knowingly accepted the faulty products.
Say a car salesman offers you $10k for your car. On the way there, you realize that you're leaking brake fluid, slowly but surely. So you're upfront about it when you finally get the car to the lot...and the
Re: (Score:2)
America's Independence was Fitting Punishment (Score:5, Funny)
So far from England, the Green and Pleasant land, America struggles under inferior governance.
Because of their inferior education, Americans have inferior intellects. This corruption began before the country broke away from British governance. The colonists believed their British brothers had added more tax to their their tea when in fact the wise governors in England had enabled the colonists to purchase tea at a lower price than even smugglers could offer. This allowed the colonists, whose economy had suffered due to their grumblings against Britain, to purchase superior British tea without breaking superior British law.
Our superior tools, dentistry, and teas have made Britain the proud ruler of the world it is today. Our enemies crumble at our feet, as emphasized in the way we single-handedly defeated Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti and hanged, drew, and quartered him at Tyburn.
I have heard CNN and Fox News have been lapse in reporting this to Americans. No surprise, they are inferior news corporations. If you had been watching BBC News, you would know this already.
Re:Lockheed Martin is an inferior company (Score:4, Insightful)
It was also the company that is bailing out Raytheon on the Zumwalt class destroyers ( DD(X) / DD-21 ). Politics screwed that decision, almost forcing the contract to Raytheon who didn't have the capability to really design the ship. Realizing this Raytheon subcontracted Lockheed to do a lot of the work...
Again, inferior compaired to who? Now I do think that this might have some merit, but if no one cared at the Coast Guard, the people who are ordering the ships, I don't think there is anything more to say. In the end, they are the ones who need to say that it is unacceptible. They are the ones who need to say that we want X% of money back due to not meeting X requirement(s). Once they had been notified by this engineer of the concerns, I don't know what more you can say. Do we know if Lockheed themselves brought this up to the Coast Guard? As the engineer states, he no longer works on the program, and wouldn't be privy to that knowledge. If Lockheed brought the matter up to the Coast Guard and the Coast Guard didn't care, this is all a big nothing in my opinion. Yes, improvements could be made, but we can say that about everything out there. It all comes down to costs to make the improvements. If the Coast Guard would rather have the ships as is now instead of waiting x months for redesign, re-fit, then so be it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A Fine Example... (Score:5, Insightful)
in the long run,I tip my hat off to you. Sometimes you gotta grab life by the horns, to do the right thing.
Regards,
MBC1977,
(US Marine, College Student, and Good Guy!)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, interesting thing about the Federal Whistleblower Act is that it only protects Federal employees.
Contractors to the Federal Government are NOT protected.
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Insightful)
People with real strength of character that do the right thing despite all the peer pressure in the world are often punished by our system and the cowards within it. It took 30 years for the military to recognize Hugh Thompson.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thompson,_Jr [wikipedia.org].
Or Sibel Edmonds, former FBI translator, is another good example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds [wikipedia.org]
In both cases, they are/were both punished for their roles by the very people they called out. This engineer will face a similiar time, I imagine. If not openly, they will find a unrelated reason to fire him within 6 months if not immediately. Or put him in a crappy closet as an office (same thing happened to my principle whose contract guaranteed they couldn't fire him for anything short of being a murderer. My school district once was paying 14 principles at the same time because of crap like this, but alas that's a different story...)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Insightful)
In the end this must be said. This man is upholding the highest standards of what an "Engineer" is. If he ever faces legal action, I will gladly donate to his cause. Also, I would hope that the National Society of Professional Engineers [nspe.org] (NSPE) should not only suggest many good lawyers, but they should offer much assistance to this man as possible.
He is in the most difficult place an Engineer could be. Chose between your family(supporting them with a career) or his duty as an Engineer.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If what this guy is saying in his video is true, Lucy's got some 'splainin' to do.
On the other hand, this guy could be a flake or he could be lying.
Very often, on these kinds of contracts, it turns ou
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Interesting)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:3)
(imispgh is apparently the guy in the video, judging by his other posts, FYI)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Interesting)
Couple of old sayings come to mind (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, the standard pointing gesture highlights the intense scrutiny the whistleblower will face.
Spend your silver bullet wisely.
I sincerely hope that follow-on work isn't hard to come by.
If YouTube had existed in time for some space-shuttle engineers, we might not have had two birds transferred to NADA.
Re:Couple of old sayings come to mind (Score:4, Interesting)
You don't need Youtube to expose things. Free Geocities websites have been available for a decade or so. The popularity and exposure of the Internet perhaps came too late for Challenger, but as Columbia was orbiting there were emails going between engineers and management, saying the launch videos show something hitting the orbiter, let's have a big telescope look at it in orbit to see if it's okay. Management nixed the idea, though it had been done on early shuttle flights when tiles were a concern. If these concerns had been made public on a Geocities page, perhaps things would have been different.
Microsoft kills (Score:3, Interesting)
Management nixed the idea, because they never "got it" in the first place. And in this particular case, it was
Too you (Score:5, Funny)
How does he walk with balls that big? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, this dude has some balls, if not much sense. Tip for all you would-be whistleblowers: make sure you have the facts, the media, and God (not necessarily) overwhelmingly on your side before you start. Otherwise, you're just screwed. I hope the guy can find another job, or get a book deal. De Kort, thanks for taking one for the team.
Re: (Score:2)
Possible Retribution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Once Again, Internet Levels Playing Field (Score:3, Interesting)
Power to the people!
2 cents,
QueenB
Re:Once Again, Internet Levels Playing Field (Score:4, Interesting)
Feh (Score:2)
"United States" Congress is inferior (Score:4, Funny)
Britain will use this knowledge when it moves to take back its colonies.
De Kort is correct: his government is incompetent. The solution is obvious: Americans, subject yourselves to superior British rule.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And lo ! Its Lockheed Martin again (Score:5, Insightful)
The SAME company who caused around 150-200 air service pilots to lose their lives around the world flying their faulty f104s.
The SAME company which recently admitted their wrong doing.
The SAME company, which is at it AGAIN.
Sad but true (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's a hint: If a company is in the business of making, marketing, and selling bombs, they have 0% respect for human life.
Try and keep that in mind
His points... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Blind spot in watch cameras.
OK, thanks for pointing those out. Now we can board the boats and steal them. Yes, this is an issue, and one that should be fixable, but extra cameras will also affect the systems that digitize and monitor them, as well. Still, this system should be fixed, but it's not a major thing, and now you've just told anybody who's interested (in a bad way) how to take advantage of the flaw. Thanks.
2. FLIR Equipment not rated for -40 deg
My problem with this is, working in automotive systems, we regularly see this requirement, and it's more of a "spec" thing. Most electronics are fine in cold weather... short of devices with moving parts (hard drive, for example). Just because the FLIR is not "rated" at -40 doesn't mean it can't handle such temperatures, only that one or more components (chips, capacitors, resistors, etc...) in the system are not CERTIFIED to operate at the wide range of temperatures. Certification for this requirement is often an expensive process and often, certified and uncertified parts are identical in everything but price (or availability, more often). I think he's a little bit out there on this one.
3. Use of non-shielded cable in "secure" communications systems.
This one is a bit ridiculous, and shows his paranoia. The cables failed "visual" - of course, because they are not shielded. He concludes that because they are not shielded, they MUST have failed the electronic test, and because they officially passed, somebody must have cheated. While Tempest-class (back in my days as a Marine) cables were shielded out the ying-yang, and there was, even back in the 80's some amazing intel gathering stuff out there (pull phone conversations from a telephone wire, 30 feet from the pole, wirelessly, for example)... we are talking about CUTTERS. ON THE SEA. Effectiveness of devices that can isolate and monitor any given cable line over more than 100 feet falls off dramatically, particularly in a signal-rich (i.e. "noisy") environment. I'm guessing the electronic test DID pass, which is why it was allowed to be built with the unshielded cable. Still, why couldn't they have provided proper shielded cable? It's not like a huge price difference, and if availability was an issue here, what about simple external mesh around the cable runs?
Like I said, I see he has concerns, but this is really the wrong way to deal with it, and puts our Coast Guards at much greater jeopardy than the things he's addressing!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This might be enlightening for you:
Security through obscurity [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Every day, we see a new virus "concept" but the person who discovers a flaw generally doesn't give away enough details (hopefully) for script kiddies to start immediately taking advantage of the discovery.
My point was by announcing the problem, and giving away more than enough detail, he's essentially given anybody with access to Coast Guard docks the road map to enter their 100ft cut
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That means they added several things all of which could fail in intended temperatures. It could be stuff that fails in extreme heat or humidity too.
All in all though I found it kind of amusing that the guy making the video thinks people will find it shocking. Personally I expect govt contractors do this kind of stuff
Re:His points... (Score:4, Interesting)
As one guy on a big team, he's not going to see a lot of testing.... but my main point was that temperature ranges for "Automotive spec" cover down to -40, and often, we are faced with being unable to get the part rated at the spec; this isn't because the part not rated for the spec won't work, and work reliably, it's because automotive temp ratings require a LOT of certification, and costs a LOT of money. You can build a motherboard with every chip and part, except ONE CAPACITOR, rated for automotive temp, and the motherboard technically FAILS the rating, even if it can pass the temperature extremes in an environmental testing box and under duration. So here, I sympathize with Lockheed Martin's team based on my own experience, and also know that none of the systems I've been a part of for automotive (same temperature extremes he quotes) have EVER failed because of temperature extremes - and that's hundreds of thousands in vehicles world wide (Canada to Saudi Arabia).
Humidity is another problem, and again, certification is very long, expensive, and many suppliers forego this. Sometimes, it's impossible to build a system with rated components simply because of avialability - the parts you need just have never been certified. That is a big difference from components that CANNOT operate at those ranges.
Re:He's going to be arrested. (Score:2)
Unfortunately, I think he's going to be arrested for treason for the very reasons you mentioned. I thought this as soon as I saw him put up a diagram of the camera's blindspot. He's violating United States national security in a very big way.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As someone who DESIGNS things that ACTUALLY ARE required to work at -40 deg C, I can say that it is MORE than a specsmanship thing.
To put it simply, a system is more than the sum of its components. Every part in your system could even be certified to operate at -40 C, but unless the whole system is designed th
Watch the show again dimwit (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh another point, all tactical systems that handle classified material and are not in special facilities, e.g. a SCIF [fas.org], need to be protected against TEMPEST [wikipedia.org] / COMSEC & all that jazz. This is common knowledge for anyone with a SIGINT [wikipedia.org] background in the mil/intel arena.
Obviously a cutter [uscg.mil] is built for shallow water work. That means near to shores not way out in the Atlantic Ocean. Big Antenna on the shore, camo'd in the trees, picks up classified comms - not unrealistic.
There is no such thing as paranoia when it comes to protecting classified material.
Initially, I was considered as written by an amateur, but then I noticed that part about you being a Marine. Figures!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Problem (1) indicates that the system has a critical design flaw -- one that defeats its sole purpose.
Problem (2) shows that Lockheed Martin didn't follow the specs and actually refused to test some subsystems for compliance. If the engineer
Re:His points... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:His points... (Score:4, Informative)
Ah, another new poster discovers that Slashdot's "HTML formatted" doesn't add <br>s. You want "Plain Old Text" which, strangely enough, allows normal HTML formatting but keeps your paragraphs.:)
You also might want to mention that you're the person who posted the video as well, for those who don't bother comparing your username to the video poster's user name.
But anyway, with the paragraphs readded:
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Damn.. Wrong whistle (Score:2, Offtopic)
Sadly, I'm disapointed.
Re: (Score:2)
That guy certainly blew HIS job.
not a suprise - Lockheed Martin (Score:2)
Many government contractors go out of their way to shaft the US government, all in the name of the dollar. I hate these unethical bastards!
Surprise? (Score:4, Informative)
No. Not even close. I think it's quite obvious that they're capable of such alarming incompetence. Consider: Katrina. WMD/Iraq. 9/11. Diebold. No-bid contracts. Overbilling.
There's really not much more that needs to be said.
And guess what (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Somebody call Hollywood! (Score:2)
That made money, right?
Screw media (Score:4, Funny)
"I will not share my name on this video to avoid harassment to my family".
From the article:
"Michael De Kort was frustrated."
For all you tinfoil-hat people (Score:3, Informative)
Here [llnwd.net] is a direct link to the .flv file, if you want to archive it in case it mysteriously disappears from YouTube.
ignorance is abundant (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a DoD Contract Program Manager (Score:5, Informative)
First, most defense contracts of the type described are so called "Cost Plus" contracts. That means that the Government and the contractor share the financial risk of executing the program. The government agrees to reimburse the contractor for whatever the actuals costs of executing the program are plus a pre-negotiated profit. The government retains complete control over the contract, regularly audits the contractor's financial data to establish the actual costs, and reserves the right to modify or cancel the contract at any time.
The DoD also has standard military specifications (mil-specs), and the -40 to +140 deg. temperature range cited in the video sound like a standard mil-spec to me. Now, if you are the government and I tell you the cost of refitting ships with FLIR that operates at -40, you might decide you don't really want that feature and grant a waver on the mil-spec. Why would you do that ? Well, you might know that the ship's engines won't work at that temperature either because the fuel oil will be too viscus. Why go to added expense for one component if another critical component won't work anyway ?
The government is in complete control. When the government insists on over-specifying systems, you get the notorious $1000 hammer. The classic example was a spec that required every component of an aircraft be able to survive 72 instantaneous Gs (a very hard landing). Do you have any idea how expensive coffee pots that can survive that many Gs are ? Guess what, you paid for them. The smarter decision would be to replace a $13 coffee pot after every such "crash". I assure you that the coffee pot is a lot cheaper than the pilot's back surgery.
Similarly, blind spots in camera coverage can be inexpensively corrected, and the Coast Guard may have elected to pay a low cost small business supplier to correct the problem instead of paying a large defense contractor's rates. Again, the government has control over all of these decisions.
Finally, if the cabling passes the TEMPEST tests, then it passes. It is entirely possible that the hull of the ship makes a very effective Faraday cage, and additional shielding on the cables is a wasted expense. Again, the government may actually be saving you money.
I don't know if the accusations have merit or not. I just wanted to point out that everything accused might be true and still be both ethical and down right sensible.
Re:I am a DoD Contract Program Manager (Score:4, Interesting)
Things may not be what they seem (Score:4, Informative)
We had a whistleblower where I work a few years back. He claimed some sort of technical problem in one of our products.
The problem was, and I was in a position to know, he was absolutely, completely wrong. But he kept up and kept up like it was a mental illness or something.
So I tend not to automatically side with the so called whistleblowers until I have better info.
Alaska Airlines Flight 261 (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flig
What isn't listed in this Wikipedia was the guy that reported all the problems. His story is told in the National Geographic Channel's Air Crash Investigation about the crash. (it was on last night)
So at what point does this become a violation... (Score:2)
rv (Score:2)
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Insightful)
If the employer AND the government AND the congressman AND apparently no one else will listen to this boob, maybe, just maybe, his issue ain't that important and he should quit bellyaching.
Does this also apply to engineers of electronic voting systems?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How about the fact that they've already been deployed, and fixing the problem will thus be expensive and inconvenient for the government/coast guard, and the contractor doesn't want egg on their face. Seems like a couple of good incentives to me.
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:4, Insightful)
Your international calls are eavesdropped on by the NSA, an agency specifically not permitted to conduct surveillance on US citizens. Your domestic calls are traffic-analysed for "patterns indicating terrorism". Your ISP, telephone and library records are browsed by law enforcement not only without a warrant, but with punishments for the librarians/engineers/companies responsible if they tip you off.
You're holding hundreds of foreign nationals in legal limbo in a concentration camp, where they're regularly humiliated and tortured with complete administration approval. They're subject to secret trials without legal protection, and "due process" isn't even paid lip-service. The CIA has been caught illegally flying suspects to authoritarian regimes through your allies airports without permission so they can be "properly" tortured without US personnel being directly held responsible.
The PATRIOT act powers, far from only being used to catch terrorists (as promised) have been used to harrass holidaymakers, arrest peaceful demonstrators and deny innocent people flights and passports. In addition, said powers were recently renewed and made permanent, even though they were firmly promised to be "only temporary" when introduced after 9/11.
Your democratic system is hopelessly corrupt - one party controls (and is consolidating its hold) on all three branches of your government, your representatives are either corrupt or powerless in the face of the Whitehouse, judicial oversight of the executive branch has been gutted, your leaders are known to have broken the law multiple times and that's not even counting the constant background noise of corrupt representatives (to be fair, more Republicans than Democrats, but still both) being outed in dodgy financial deals and abuses of power. Your elections would embarrass a south american banana republic, with Diebold and ES&S machines showing all kinds of voting irregularities (when people haven't been erroneously thrown off the voting rolls for daring to have a similar name to a convicted felon), machines so easy to hack a chimpanzee has been videoed doing it and programmers testifying the systems are insecure by design, and that they were paid to produce election-subverting tools for Republican party members.
You've lost the rights to: not be searched without due cause, not permit law enforcement entry into your home without "good reason" to believe a crime is being committed, the right to free speech and the majority of rights ensuring your privacy.
And that's without even touching on the deliberate treason by the current administration outing an undercover CIA operative for political gains, "clamping down on terrorism" by selling off your ports to a middle-eastern company with decidedly dodgy connections, an illegal war in Iraq, thousands of US soldiers and tens of thousands of innocent foreign nationals dead, an army so unpopular it can't recruit enough people to mintain parity and so financially fucked it can't afford proper equipment for the people they already have.
Plus, y'know, Creationism/ID being taught as "science", the environment, your entire foreign policy making you a pariah in the international scene and all the other fun things that haven't changed a bit since 9/11.
Need I go on?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm as hot as you on the media sensationalising trivial occurrances, and the damage the inevitable knee-jerk reactions by short-sighted citizens and bandwagon-jumping representatives. I think this is one of the major problems with modern society in the West - we're hearing news from all four corners of the earth, but we've got brains evolved for living in small groups of 100-150 people, so at a subsconscious level we assume anything we hear happening to anyone must be happening to peo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Let me restate what that means. The shuttle, to save some dollars
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Insightful)
You idiot.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Completely Offtopic (Score:5, Funny)
I know boobs are for looking at... fondling... sucking... but I never tried listening to one. Or two.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It all hinges on the merit of the claims, which we can't validate.
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you even watch the video?
Basically the entire project he was working on was a sham. Not only were the systems not designed to specifications but were flawed in such a way as that if they did fail they would do so catastrophically.
Do you even know what FLIR is? It's how they know navigate and identify targets in low-level light conditions or fog (which, I hope I don't have to tell you is very common on coastlines). It's very simple, if the FLIR system fails (and according to him it will at low temperatures), people can die--either from collisions or friendly fire. If what he's saying is true, he should be making a stink.
Furthermore, the security camera issue is huge too. It's one thing to have blind spots. It's quite another to have two symmetrical approach angles that lead right ONTO the ship which can't be seen. Again, a failure due to this design flaw could lead to either the capture or deaths of American servicemen. And it could've been fixed by only adding one more camera.
As far as the non-TEMPEST compliance goes--I don't know. As I understand it, TEMPEST is literally tin-foil hat paranoid, but honestly there's no reason not to use something as simple as shielded cables is that's all that's preventing compliance.
Regardless, this is just another example of how government incompetence combined with corporate greed serves to hurt the American taxpayer and unnecessarily puts the lives of our service-men and women at risk. If you don't think there's a connection between this very believable story and deadly screw-ups like the lack of armored vehicles in Iraq or the Ospreys crashes, you're the boob--not the whistleblower.
-Grym
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Informative)
If you dont meet TEMPEST standards, there is a high chance someone can intercept 'unencrypted' information either within the 'encrypted' information or on its own, or simply 'sense' it on a power line to the building. (also look up Van Eck phreaking)
There are a few considerations to help ensure the system will pass a TEMPEST test:
- Proper physical separation of Red and Black.
- Suitable filtering of power supplies.
- Propper shielding (parent got that one)
- Propper termination of shielding into correct EMI Backshells
- Correct assembly and termination of backshells
- More about what I've said Here [fas.org] [PDF]
Basically if you skimp on any of these to save a few dollars (and it aint cheap), the bad guys can intercept your communications (COMINT) [wikipedia.org], which means your likely to get your ass handed to you on a plate...
PS: All of what Ii've said above is unclass and is in the public domain....
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:4, Informative)
Tempest was not only a secret Government study, it is also an acronym: Telecommunications Electronics Material Protected from Emanating Spurious Transmissions.
Cheers...
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:4, Informative)
- If passing through unshielde cables, internal ship comunications, commands and sensor data can be read from a distance using a proper (directional) antena, a good low noise amp, an analog to digital converter (ADC), a notebook and some software.
This might not be an issue if the patrol boat is facing a couple of guys with AK-47s in a rubber boat, but it can be an issue if facing another nation's navy or a drug baron (both of which having the means and the smarts to take advantage of such a vulnerability).
Tempest attacks are only a "tin-foil crowd" thing when we're talking about non-descript individuals shielding their computer screens against "being read from a distance" even if such individuals are highly unlikely to be under surveilance by an organization with the right means and know-how.
It's way more likelly that the right persons (or should i say the wrong persons) are interested in intercepting internal communications of ships used in war or for security purposes (even if they are hardly aircraft carriers) than in reading the porn and unix commands of a non-descript geek with a little too much paranoia.
Or putting things another way, the higher the value of a target, the more likelly it is that complicated, expensive and/or specialized techniques are used against it.
As an engineer... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As an engineer... (Score:5, Informative)
Notice, the first fundamental canon is: Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
The third is: Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
If we go down to the specific Rules of Practice:
If engineers' judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate. This is what he was worried about. However, the "normal" people to inform were ignoring him and he didn't know any other way to get this information to the people who would be affected - not only the Coast Guard personnel, but the public that will be sharing the waters with them, and the People of the United States who are the ultimate client.
Engineers shall not reveal facts, data, or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or this Code. As a Person of the United States, he has my consent. As do all other Engineers who have concerns. Also, the previous rule requires him to do this.
Engineers shall not aid or abet the unlawful practice of engineering by a person or firm. Which he did not. Sorry he lost his position. Hopefully something good will come around for him.
Now, I hope he gets a lot of money for speaking engagements at different Engineering conferences. He chose the difficult road, but proved he is an Engineer. If Ethics were easy, we wouldn't need to write them all down in Codes of Ethics.
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:5, Insightful)
What does any of that have to do with any of the issues in question here? Interesting, Maybe. Relevent, no.
The guy's employers disagree with him that there is a problem. Simply because he's a "little guy" doesn't make him right. Apperently, no one else on the project agrees with him. But just because he's going up against the "big bad Lockheed Martin" doesn't make him right. We have no proof at all that anything he says is anything more than opinion.
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:4, Insightful)
The guy has basically destroyed his career and probably ruined himself financially to present this information, so I would think it's something he feels pretty strongly about.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, when your nightshift manager starts building insecure and poor quality taxpayer funded quesadillas, THEN make a video.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that these ships are intended to be used by the coast guard in the gulf of Mexico, I don't see the problem.
It's not a technical problem, a financial one. If the Coast Guard wrote the requirement that the equipment be certified to -40, you can be damn sure LM is charging them the cost of certified components, even though they (allegedly) don't all meet spec.
3. Unshielded cables.
WTF is he talking about? The only way to sniff data from an unshielded cable is if you
Re:rebuttal (Score:4, Insightful)
You might also do well to actually watch the video. Only the first batch of retrofitted ships are on regular patrol in the Gulf of Mexico. Eventually all the 123-foot Cutters, including those used in the Arctic and The Persian Gulf will receive the same retrofits.
Re:rebuttal (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This guys is not a RF engineer. (Score:4, Insightful)