From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vsmx001.dclux.xion.oxcs.net (vsmx001.dclux.xion.oxcs.net [185.74.65.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 356C53B2A4 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 16:45:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from proxy-2.proxy.oxio.ns.xion.oxcs.net (proxy-2.proxy.oxio.ns.xion.oxcs.net [83.61.18.4]) by mx-out.dclux.xion.oxcs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1ADAC8C0BD3 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 20:45:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dclux.xion.oxcs.net; s=mail1; t=1665780316; bh=1jQSyVnvRbj0gz4eQv6YwkWpAKaW0ChK21bcjqKtF5E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=d7L0XKk8OPUjmNir+cp1ECDzVFi8rbnntOYAArwKvbY3iGRu1iTkUX9ISVEERJ0JW bgz5V5NcK201skW2CcNLZ6TKJvePrKzAZ3Sb28UOdOcS1TTg0DHKwci/vf92jqu6HR PaLX3C1kwVUCh6XZv+vEjxZvfWaB9wH9rcHvkHjdAuQOQ6MfapPD2zQZT0+8zhwD55 xSKbzyJYdZfBx1NrdHoHfznnH/y5EwxplVXuFmIbfktxflFWo+QQS8VQesYxK4XAf3 E9ZU1okm7avSgz5DJLyGnnLc6BrNEtfPIAVWMlOBrBWWdn12UDDHtTTFAhfu3Hn6Ow FvR4yfQJ+cl7g== Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 22:44:48 +0200 From: Mike Puchol To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Message-ID: <3263acfd-aa5d-4404-805d-0ed966185d5a@Spark> In-Reply-To: <87h706ntwi.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <8735bqpq1r.wl-jch@irif.fr> <65rp9416-298q-33n8-6p20-6195sqp691oq@ynat.uz> <87v8omo8r3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87h706ntwi.wl-jch@irif.fr> X-Readdle-Message-ID: 3263acfd-aa5d-4404-805d-0ed966185d5a@Spark MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="6349ca59_3352255a_52f5" X-VadeSecure-Status: LEGIT X-VADE-STATUS: LEGIT Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink no longer available to the Ukrainian army? X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 20:45:17 -0000 --6349ca59_3352255a_52f5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 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 , 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 --6349ca59_3352255a_52f5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
Pumping out R=46 at fairly high power levels, and p= ointing an antenna at a satellite, are both things very easy to do for so= meone like Russia. To then jam 500 MHz of spectrum all at once is not tha= t trivial, and one can get creative, eg by only attacking the reference s= ubcarriers in O=46DM, thus concentrating R=46 power on those, rather than= the whole channel.&=23160;

There are some papers written around jamming LTE by attacking specific re= sources instead of the whole band, making the attack less conspicuous, so= mething similar could be applied against Starlink. By not using brute for= ce, you also make the attack harder to detect and counter.

My view is that Russia is not worried about being noticed, and just appli= es brute force.

Best,

Mike
On Oct 14, 2022 at 20:26 +0200, Jul= iusz Chroboczek <jch=40irif.fr>, wrote:
Juliusz, see the Twitter thread I linked to= , it explains precisely the
jamming scenarios they could be facing, and how they are possible.
<= /blockquote>
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=3F 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=3F

-- Juliusz
--6349ca59_3352255a_52f5--