Technology

She

So she was an NCO and the writter was clueless. Ok.

And for that kind of opsec fuckup there really shouldn't there be discharge/prison time ?

First off, not an officer, a high ranking enlisted(E-8) personal was the culprit.

Typically, anything E-4 or higher is considered a Non-Commisioned Officer.

EDIT further clarification: from my experience in the Canadian Army, what "Officers" means depends on context. Most often (and what !Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de probably meant) it means just Commissioned Officers. Other times, it's anyone in leadership, including NCOs.

Yeah true, but tiktok

Many people are bad at delayed gratification and long term thinking.

Was gonna call you out for messing that up; warrant officers are officers, they just started out as enlisted men.

Then I realized we are talking navy ranks, and my best knowledge of that is from halo.

The link below this parent with the pics shows tweets from Musk saying the point of naming it STINKY is to encourage customizing the name. I guess not everyone knew their LinkSys ID # in the dorms and/or doesn't immediately turn their wifi into a pun. Just in case anyone else found that default name to be suspicious. They're supposedly now back to just starlink

But why was it hard? Surely they're accessing it w/ wifi, and scanning for wi-fi networks really isn't that hard. A military ship should have a good handle on what networks they expect, and they should be able to easily triangulate where the signal is coming from.

Also, military ships should have really strict accounting for what is brought on board. A Starlink receiver isn't particularly small, and it should be plainly obvious to security when that comes on-board.

I think it's awesome that Starlink is so accessible for the average joe, but that's a completely different topic than what's allowed on military property. This sounds like a pretty big, embarassing security fail for the US military, and more people than this individual should be reprimanded, if not fired.

The degree of incompetence needed for SIGINT/ELINT operations to fail to discover such a transceiver for 6+ months strains credibility.

I'm guessing this is a ruse to convince adversaries that the Navy can't detect Starlink transceivers even when they are aboard their own ships. This is much more likely to be disinformation intended to drive adversaries to use Starlink than it is to be a legitimate failure of intelligence gathering.

Here's a more in-depth article, with pictures.

Multiple people were involved, and it was probably mounted in a location where other people were unlikely to know that it was out of place.

Yeah, same. It's not like there were windows they could point it out of, so it would have to be exposed and somehow disguised.

Lol, in college, some guy on my floor wasn't happy with the dorm's cable TV because it didn't have NFL Sunday Ticket and brought his DirecTV dish/receiver from home. His room was facing the right way, so he was able to set the dish up in the room next to the window. This sortof reminds me of that but without the national security implications.

Yes, it is a likely risk. Having an unauthorized broadcast signal is a security risk because it can be used to locate and target the ship, allows for crew to communicate with the outside world without the oversight that they would normally have, and is outside the control of the ship's command.

There are many valid reasons for the military to be limited to authorized channels for communication.

Very yes. They could reveal their location for starters, which could spoil a mission and put lives at risk, but if they use the same device on both this and the ships network, you risk compromising the ship's network or even the Navy itself, giving our enemies all kinds of sensitive info.

We are in the midst of a world war being waged in cyberspace and the US is losing. Incidents like this are a genuine threat.

That could come later.

For now it just means reassigned to a desk somewhere not too far from MPs.