There has been a lot of furor over the "drone hacking" issue. For those not familiar with the issue, here is a very broad background.
Our unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) transmit real-time surveillance video for the benefit of our troops in theater. They help to provide continuous surveillance of sites that we may or may not target kinetically, to gather intelligence in certain points of interest, to provide higher echelon commanders with a better picture of current operations, or just about any other use that one can contemplate for a real-time streaming video in the sky. Some, such as the Predator, also have the capability to fire a Hellfire missile at whatever unfortunate individual happens to be on candid camera.
It has been reported recently that the video feeds from the UAVs are not encrypted and that any random Ahmed can obtain his own streaming video from the aircraft with little more than a $26 copy of some software available online. The stream can be received by way of any cheap satellite dish, which are ubiquitous and readily available anywhere in the Arab/Persian/[insert]stani world. There have been screams of outrage over this apparent breach of security. The issue was highlighted at Danger Room and the Wall Street Journal. Many newspapers and national security blogs have had a collective reaction that I would describe as a combination of cardiac arrest and atomic wedge. It is like someone started clutching his chest and the first responder grabbed the waistband of the victim’s underpants and just gave a giant, two-handed thrust.
This reaction, in my opinion, is a bit absurd. That is not to say it is not understandable. I understand the reaction perfectly. Most people are unfamiliar with the military, in general, and damn near everybody is unfamiliar with how military operations unfold. You can even exclude a large portion of people currently serving in the military from the group that has a good grasp of all of the planning considerations that go into long-term operations. And, just to be clear, I am not asserting that I am all that well versed. I know enough to know that I know little.
Based upon my rudimentary knowledge/experience, I can think of about half a dozen ways that this can be (could have been / was) exploited by our forces in Iraq or Afghanistan. Obviously I am not going to list them. Rather, I will just list a few words: deception, counter-deception, disrupt, condition, reconnaissance.
Anytime something like this comes to light, I am amazed to behold the speed with which people in the media and blogosphere fall all over one another to be the first, the loudest, and/or the most self-righteous in condemning "incompetence" or "stupidity" about decision makers when those pundits often have no idea how many, or what types, of variables go into a decision to act, not act, and whether to publicize said action or inaction.
Okay, so people are ignorant, over-reacting, and simple-minded, right? Well, that was not my point. I am not frustrated at the behavior or reactions – just amazed. The relative ease with which people can be played like fiddles probably has a lot to do with whether information like this is released. I will just say that I always hesitate to point fingers when information like the "security breach" of the UAV is released. Whenever information is put out that purports to reveal how incompetent we are, I always stop and think about why it was released, rather than immediately jumping on the "stupid bureaucrats" bandwagon.