• Technology

    Stealth Reborn

    By Dawn Stover Posted on 1.9.2009 13 Comments

    The B-2 stealth bomber, assisted by midair refuelings, can fly a 44-hour mission to the other side of the world, take out targets using laser-guided smart munitions, then sneak out of enemy territory undetected. Yet it runs on Intel 286 processors -- state of the art in 1982, but these days, not so much.

    1.13.2009 at 09:41am - Comment by martin5519

    Hello, Little message for cyberscriber of Alabama. As what you would probably call an expert in IT Security, it would be very very difficult to "crack the code" to take over one of these airplanes. First off, today's encryption algorighms are extremely strong. There are public and private algorithms. First, the military may use three or four of these which means you'd have to break each individual one. The public ones such as AES192 are modern algorithms (combined with RSA for key distribution) often utilized for Virtual Private Networks for governments. You can get products today that can, for example, encrypt your hard drive with three different algorithms. Furthermore, private encryption algorithms are not known which means that a hacker would have to study how it work which could take a HUGE amount of time. The military can often use private encryption algorithms which really makes this a lot more difficult. There are two schools of thoughts on public vs. private. Public has been "tested" by the public INternet user community and therefore these algorithms are highly scrutinized. Private ones are less scrutinized and, therefore, potentially subject to more bugs. Finally, the frequencies used to remote manage these military devices (I am not an expert on wireless or military) are most likely rotational or maybe these use multiple at a times. The only way I could think (realistically - in a war time scenario) to do something to these planes is to blast the airwaves on thousands (if not millions) of frequencies with higher amplitude (stronger signal) than the military. Consider the military could be further away, it could be possible to have a wireless device which is closer maybe generating 100,000 watts. If your signal strenght is stronger, you'll be jamming the airwaves and the aircraft would not be able to get instructions from base. It is possible that engineers have though about this and may have included fail-safe mechanisms such as having the aircraft fly home immediately if it fail to received a "heartbeat" instruction every 30 seconds. If there is no such fail safe... then it could be possible that the military would no longer control the aircraft and the aircraft could simply crash. There's a funny thing about this though....... if you're deflecting / absorbing radar, how could you get a wirelss signal through? Maybe because it's not RADAR? IF that's the case, could you not use some other wireless device that uses something different than RADAR to see the airplane? ANyways... fun stuff.



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg