Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Defence thin client computers

The Australian Department of Defence is reported to be planning to deploy 500 thin client computers by the end of 2011. Defence CTO Matt Yannopoulous mentioned thin clients in his talk at the ACS Canberra branch conference recently. Thin clients also feature in the "Defence Next Generation Desktop Project" (issued 22 April 2010).

It should be noted that thin client computing is not new to defence. Melbourne based electronics manufacturer Labtam, produced advanced thin client workstations (then called "X terminals") in the 1990s. These were sold to the Department of Defence and the ANU. The business was later sold to Tektronix Inc. IBM had a contract to supply Defence with hardware, but the Australian made units were superior. I was working in HQ ADF at the time and recall I recall writing a speech for the then Minister for Defence Support, about these terminals being made in Victoria (which the Minister's office liked).

Labels: , , ,

Friday, April 23, 2010

Defence Next Generation Desktop Project

The Australian Department of Defence has issued a request for Expression of Interest for the "Defence Next Generation Desktop Project" (CIOG 198/10, 22-Apr-2010). The NGD Project aims to provide a simplified desktop interface for defence users and lower costs. Companies have to respond to the EoI to be considered for the RFT. A briefing on the RFI will be conducted in Canberra 5 May 2010.

There are three PDF documents provided via the government tender system:
  1. ITR Conditions (515Kbytes)
  2. Information provided to Requestors (860Kbytes)
  3. Information to be provided by Requestors
Part 2: Information provided to Requestors, describes what Defence wants from the system:
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ..... 2
1.1 Purpose ....2
1.2 Background...2
1.3 Document Structure......3
1.4 Acquisition Objective ....4
1.5 Acquisition Process ......4
2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT .... 5
2.1 Overview...5
2.2 Desktop Delivery ......5
2.3 Virtualisation .....6
2.4 Applications ......6
2.5 Desktop Security Environment .....6
2.6 Existing Network...7
3 APPENDIX I – STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENT ..... 8
3.1 Intent.....8
3.2 Contracting Model ....8
3.3 Requirements ...9
3.4 Desktop Delivery ....10
3.5 Application Presentation.....12
3.6 Desktop Security Environment – Multi-Level Security ...13
3.7 Integration...14
3.8 Implementation ...15
3.9 Project Management ......17
3.10 Support ...18
3.11 Commonwealth Activities ...18
4 APPENDIX II – APPLICATION LISTING... 19
5 APPENDIX III – ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENT INFORMATION...... 20
5.1 Existing Thick -Client Specification ....20
5.2 Existing Server Specification ......20
5.3 Current End-User Devices......20
5.4 Current Peripherals ....20
5.5 Current Capacity Profile .....20 ...

2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...
2.2 Desktop Delivery
2.2.1 The current Defence desktop delivery method uses two alternative mechanisms to deliver a desktop to a user:
(a) traditional PC thick client environment; or
(b) server-based computing (SBC) using Citrix XenApp 4.5.

2.2.2 The majority of Defence Information Environment (DIE) users across Defence connect via traditional PC-based technology using the SOE 125 desktop platform. The SOE 125 platform uses the Windows 2003 server back-end and Windows XP desktop solution.

2.2.3 Presently SBC users on the DIE equate to approximately ten percent of the user base.

These users fall into four categories:
(a) remote access users (DREAMS);
(b) Defence thin-client system (DTCS) users;
(c) users of point solutions for applications (such as the Defence Estate Management system and Aircraft Inventory Management System); and
(d) users who support non-Windows-based systems, for example Linux and Sparc.

2.2.4 The sites using the DTCS are based on a use case scenario. DTCS technology is used in almost all locations outside Australia as the delivery system of choice.

2.2.5 Defence has implemented a roaming system so that a user’s desktop environment is not associated with a specific hardware device. A user can access their desktop environment from any machine, provided it meets minimum requirements for physical and other security issues for both security networks (Defence Restricted Network [DRN] and Defence Secret Network [DSN]).
: : : : PART 2: Information for Requestors

2.3 Virtualisation

2.3.1 The use of virtualisation technologies is mainly contained within Defence’s Central Data Centre (CDC). The CDC is operated by the Defence Computing Bureau (DCB). Server virtualisation is currently managed using VMware and Citrix products and application virtualisation is managed via Citrix technology. There are up to 1,000 server infrastructure devices within Defence facilities and an additional 700 virtualised servers on this infrastructure.

2.4 Applications
2.4.1 Local
2.4.2 The majority of Defence users have a desktop or laptop running Microsoft Windows XP.

These users are provided with standard Microsoft Office 2003
applications, file and print services and most users access at least one corporate application hosted in the CDC. In addition, these users may require access via the DRN and/or DSN to other systems hosted either in the CDC or a variety of locations around Australia.

2.4.3 Other applications presented locally may include, but are not limited to, Adobe Acrobat, Apple QuickTime and Macromedia Flash Player.

2.4.4 Defence uses a wide range of applications; an indication of which is provided at APPENDIX II – .

2.4.5 Corporate
2.4.6 The DCB currently delivers a large number of enterprise applications hosted centrally to users across the DIE. Some applications use the Citrix Published Application and Citrix Application Streaming mechanisms to deliver these applications.

2.4.7 Most applications are delivered by a traditional client server model. These may include, but are not restricted to, ADFPAY (in-house), OpenPlan Professional, PMKeys (PeopleSoft), Roman (SAP) and SDSS/MIMS (logistics management).

2.4.8 Defence uses a wide range of applications; an indication of which is provided at APPENDIX II – .

2.5 Desktop Security Environment
2.5.1 Services are delivered primarily through two major network environments: the DRN being the largest and the DSN being the second largest. To meet the requirements of the Protective Security Manual (PSM), Information Security Manual (ISM) and Defence Security Manual (DSM), using traditional technology solutions, these two environments are physically separated and consist of a wide variety of information systems, communication equipment, hardware, software and application components. Both networks utilise a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Active Directory (AD) for user authentication.

2.5.2 There are approximately 75,000 users of the DRN. Approximately 20 percent of these are also users of the DSN. The majority of Defence ICT users can be put into three groups:

(a) those who use only the DRN;
(b) those who use both the DRN and the DSN; and
(c) a limited numbers of users who use only the DSN.

2.5.3 The current architecture requires users of both networks to have individual desktops for accessing each network, resulting in duplication of hardware for those users.

2.6 Existing Network
2.6.1 The Defence Wide Area Communications Network (DWACN) is a major sub-system of the Defence Strategic Communications Network (DSCN) and provides core transport services for the majority of Defence electronic communication nationally and internationally. It provides voice and data communication services to over 300 sites. Services include the carriage of some 31 IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) and voice communications to 150 sites. The DRN and DSN represent two VPNs. Figure 1 shows the DWACN within the context of the broader Defence Strategic Communications Network (DSCN).

2.6.2 Defence utilises the TCP/IP suite of communication protocols.
2.6.3 The current bandwidth of the Defence network for the DRN and DSN across all locations ranges between 512kB to 1GB.

PART 2: Information for Requestors

3 APPENDIX I – STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENT
3.1 Intent
3.1.1 The Commonwealth’s intention in undertaking this NGD project acquisition process is to identify the most suitable Contractor/s capable of supporting the NGD project. In order to support the NGD project, the successful Contractor/s will need to provide:

(a) technical design, supply and installation of a solution which covers desktop delivery, application presentation and a single desktop security environment;
(b) implementation of the pilot and proposed solution;
(c) integration of the solution with Defence’s current environment;
(d) implementation and project management of the pilot and solution; and
(e) support of the system components and pilot.

3.1.2 Key to this will be the Contractor/s:
(a) capability to provide a solution which meets the requirements of the project;
(b) experience in providing a similar solution in a similarly complex environment;
(c) ability to deliver a complex project within tight timeframes, to a high level of quality; and
(d) assessed level of risk in delivering the solution.


From: Part 2: Information provided to Requestors, Defence Next Generation Desktop Project, CIOG, Department of Defence, 198/10, 22-Apr-2010




The "Glossary of Terms and Acronyms" in part provides an insight into the thinking on Defence:

Term: Meaning
ABN: Australian Business Number
ACN: Australian Company Number
ADO: Australian Defence Organisation
APS: Australian Public Service
ARBN: Australian Registered Body Number
C4I: Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence
CDC: Central Data Centre
CIOG: Chief Information Officer Group ...
Confidential ITR: Confidential information pertaining to this ITR ...
Criminal Code: Division 137 of the Criminal Code available from http://www.comlaw.gov.au
CV: Curriculum vitae
Data Centre Consolidation: Project to reduce Defence’s data centre numbers to less than ten...
DCB: Defence Computing Bureau
Defence: The Department of Defence
DIE: Defence Information Environment
DOSD: Defence Online Services Domain
DPPM: Defence Procurement Policy Manual (1 April 2010 edition) available from
: http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/gc/dppm.cfm
DREAMS: Defence Remote Electronic Access and Mobility Service
DRN: Defence Restricted Network
DSCN: Defence Strategic Communications Network
DSM: Defence Security Manual
DSN: Defence Secret Network
DTCS: Defence thin-client system
DTSN: Defence Top Secret Network
DVN: Defence voice network
DWACN: Defence wide area communications network
FedLink: Secure communications network between Australian Government agencies
Fair Work Act (Cth) 2009 Fair Work Act (Cth) 2009 is available from www.deewr.gov.au/fairworkprinciples
ICT: Information and communication technology
ILSP: Integrated logistics support plan ...
IP VPN: Internet protocol virtual private network
ISM: Information Security Manual
ITR: Invitation to Register Interest ...
JORN: Jindalee Over-the-horizon Radar Network
KPI: Key performance indicator.
LAN: Local area network
L2 VPN: Layer 2 virtual private network
NGD: Next Generation Desktop ...
OGO: Other government organisations ...
PSM: Protective Security Manual
PSTN: Public switched telephone network ...
RFT: Request for tender
SBC: Server-based computing ...
SOE: Standard operating environment
SRP: Strategic Reform Program ...
TACINT: Tactical interface
TCP/IP: Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol ...
VoATM: Voice over asynchronous transfer mode
VPN: Virtual private network
VTC: Video teleconferencing.

From: Part 1, Defence Next Generation Desktop Project, CIOG, Department of Defence, 198/10, 22-Apr-2010

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Adelaide North Terrace Cultural Precinct

My last day in South Australia I spent in the Adelaide North Terrace Cultural Precinct. North Terrace runs east west on the northern edge of the Adelaide central business district, next to the Torrens River. Within a kilometer along the terrace are campuses of the Universities of Adelaide and South Australia, the State Library, Museum and Art Gallery.

I stayed in the Hotel Richmond, which is located in an arcade between the main shopping precinct (Rundle Mall) at the front and North Terrace behind.

On the next corner is the Centre for Defence Communications & Information Networking (DSIC), where I met the director, Dr Bruce Northcote who was giving a talk that evening to the ACS. The previous evening I had given a talk on how the IT industry could help defence. The building housing DSIC has a learning commons on the ground floor, with informal computer equipped meeting spaces for students.

As befits a high technology university building, the one housing DSIC had the most complicated lift buttons I have ever seen: to call am lift, rather than pressing a button for "up", you enter the floor you wish to go to. Presumably the lift control system then optimises the traffic.

I walked through the Adelaide University grounds to the banks of the Torrens Rive, where there are kilometres of cycling and walking tracks. A short walk up the river and around the corner was the State Library of South Australia. In the cafe I happened across Dr Genevieve Bell , Intel Fellow, Digital Home Group Director, User Experience Group, Intel Corporation, who talked in Canberra last week.

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, April 17, 2010

High Technology Tourist Attractions in Adelaide

Any suggestions for what the Net Traveller should see in Adelaide? I will be there Sunday 18th to Tuesday 20 April 2010. I have a meeting most of Sunday and Monday and will be giving a talk Monday 19 April on "Engaging the Defence Sector with Open Source". But I have Tuesday free.

On my last visit to Adelaide, as well as being trained in the Moodle and Mahara e-learning tools, I rode the Glenelg Tram from the beach to the city, then onto theAdelaide O-Bahn. The O-Bahn is the world's longest guided bus-way (until Cambridge England get theirs to work). The tram has been extended to the Entertainment Centre, which tourism boss, Ian Darbyshire seems very proud of, so I will take a ride on that.

Unfortunately I will be leaving just before Dr Bruce Northcote's talk on Defence Communications & Information Networking Tuesday 20th April 2010 at 6pm (RSVP). DSIC is a venture between the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia for defence systems integration research with industry.

ps: This is the one time of the year that the people who teach the ACS Computer Professional Education Program get to see each other. The courses are run online, the tutors and mentors are scattered all around Australia (some in other countries). We have weekly online text based real time "staff meetings", but it is also good to get together in person occasionally. The operation is in transition from a small tutoring group which can be run mostly on personal contact to a virtual higher education institution which requires more formal procedures. It is interesting, if at at times a little frustrating, to be part of the transition.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, April 09, 2010

Engaging the Defence Sector with Open Source

Tom Worthington and other Defence personnel on the USS Blue RidgeOpenSA have invited me to speak on "Engaging the Defence Sector with Open Source: Commons for Collins or GPL for Growlers?" in Adelaide, 19 April 2010. Defence programs have traditionally used custom designed computer systems with custom programming tailored to each new defence system. However, there is now more use of commercial off the shelf equipment, which includes scope for more use of open source software. The subtitle of the talk refers to the Collins Class Submarine follow-on project and the acquisition of 12 F/A-18G "Growler"electronic warfare aircraft by Australia. These systems have the potential to use open source software.
Engaging the Defence Sector with Open Source
Tom Worthington

5pm 19th April 2010
“The Thinking Space” Science Exchange, 56 Exchange Place, Adelaide SA 5000

Free for member companies, up to 2 reps; $10 for additional reps. $20 for non-members; membership may be applied and paid for at the event.

Free and open source software has obvious benefits, but it can be difficult to explain these to organisations such as the Department of Defence. A brief guide to technology in the defence organisation will be given by a former senior ICT policy advisor. Tips on what to say to who and how to contact defence IT personnel and decision makers will be provided.

Tom Worthington took a temporary six month posting at the Defence Department and stayed for nine years, with time in both the military Headquarters Australian Defence Force and the civilian Defence Material Organisation. During that time he got to fly in military aircraft and occasionally wear a borrowed uniform at wargames, but spent most time advising on restructuring IT projects, including incorporation of Unix into the Defence computing environment.

Tom provided technical leadership and represented Defence at interdepartmental and industry committees. He was prepared the first Defence policy on Internet information services and managed the first Defence web site and and Ministerial site. He advised on technologies and products for the Defence Common Operating Environment.

Since leaving Defence, Tom has been an independent IT consultant and teaches at the Australian National University. He is an honorary life member, fellow and former president of the ACS, as well as a member of ACM and IEEE-CS. He designed the ACS/ANU/OUA Green Technology Strategies course.

RSVP by COB Friday 16th April 2010 to Angela Anderson at Loftus, either by phone 8304 8888, or by email
rsvp(a)opensa.org.au

http://opensa.org.au

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, April 04, 2010

Open Source for Submarine Sonar

I am giving a talk on in Adelaide 19 April, tentatively titled "Engaging with Defence on Open Source: Commons for Collins or GPL for Growlers?". So I found of interest the article
Open season: submarine sonars build on commercial imperatives (Janes, March 2010), about the use of commercial off the shelf equipment by US companies. This discusses the U.S. Navy's ARCI Program for upgrading old sonar systems.

This might be applied under the new Australian defence strategic reform initiative. There is already a Collins Submarine Communication Replacement (SEA1439 Phase 5B2). These could make use of low cost, off the shelf computer equipment and open source software.
Ongoing Innovation: Modernization and Incorporation of Technology

The Submarine Force is making significant, rapid improvements in acoustic sensors and processing by using commercial technology implemented through innovative system design and acquisition processes. In real-world exercises and operations, both the TB-29 towed array and Acoustic Rapid COTs Insertion Sonar system (ARCI) demonstrate the ability to restore a remarkable acoustic advantage to U.S. submarines. Use of COTS in ARCI (and in a modified TB-29 array) results in substantially reduced costs with significantly improved processing capability. For example, each ARCI shipset costs about 20% of the price of its predecessor, yet improves processing power by an order of magnitude. A key advantage of ARCI is the Advanced Processor Build (APB), which uses improved processing capability to provide new tactical capabilities and powerful new algorithms that have resulted in much improved towed array detection ranges in testing and actual fleet operations to date. Additionally, the ARCI program improves the commonality/interface among submarine systems while enabling future upgrades to be installed significantly quicker. An aggressive phased installation plan will provide continuously improved versions of ARCI across the entire submarine force by FY06.

Connectivity with other naval and joint forces is essential to effective decision-making, operations, and warfighting with submarines. Consequently, another major priority for the Submarine Force is the modernization of submarine communications capabilities. The submarine High Data Rate (HDR) antenna is the top C4I initiative and is the Navy's first multi-band dish antenna. The HDR antenna will provide worldwide high data rate satellite communications capability and enable access to a variety of systems including the secure, survivable Joint Milstar Satellite Program in the Extremely High Frequency (EHF) band and the Global Broadcast Service (GBS). All SSNs will have HDR antennas by FY04, thereby greatly enhancing SSN connectivity with the Battlegroup. Another development, the Multi-element Buoyant Cable Antenna (MBCA), will enable UHF transmit and receive capability while submerged at speed and depth. These initiatives are key to providing the data throughput necessary for network-centric operations in the 21st century.

From: Submarine Themes: Submarine Innovation, Submarine innovation, including an aggressive long-term technological development and insertion program, promises to dramatically improve submarine capabilities in the 21st century, Submarine Warfare Division, OPNAV Staff, 2001

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Collins Submarine Communication Replacement

The Defence Materiel Organisation has issued a Request for Expression of Interest for replacement of the COLLINS Class Submarine External Communication Systems.
SEA1439 Phase 5B2 Communications and Electronic Warfare Improvement Program
ATM ID ITR D08051/CEWIP
Agency: Defence Materiel Organisation
Category: 43190000 - Communications Devices and Accessories
Close Date & Time: 23-Apr-2010 12:00 pm (ACT Local time) ...
ATM Type: Expression of Interest

Description
The Commonwealth, as represented by the Submarine Combat System SPO, has a requirement to gather information in relation to Export Controls, ITAR requirements, Defence Security and WGS certification from potential suppliers for the replacement of the COLLINS Class Submarine External Communication Systems. ...

From: SEA1439 Phase 5B2 Communications and Electronic Warfare Improvement Program, Defence Materiel Organisation,Department of Defence, 29-Mar-2010

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Australian Robot Aircraft Launched from US Stealth Warship

The Australian developed Aerosonde UAV has been succesfully launced and recorved from the US stealth warship M80 Stletto, according to Janes International Defence Review ("Aerosonde Mark 4.7 UAS proves shipborne capability", March 2010). The AAI Aerosonde Mk 4.7 is one option for the US Navy/US Marine Corp's Small Tactical UAS (STUAS)/Tier II programme. The Aerosone carries visable and infrared sensors and a laser range finder/pointer. The Aerosonde is small enough to be lifted by one person but can fly for 12 hours and an earlier model flew accross the Atlantic Ocean.

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Web 2 War

In "Using Web 2.0 as a Weapon" (Professional Notes, Proceedings of the US Naval Institute, February 2010), Lieutenant Randal T. Jones discusses how RSS feeds, blogs, Wikis and mash ups are being used by the military. The Lieutenant points to the US Army Knowledge Online (AKO) as an example of a secure intranet with RSS feeds and blogs. He cites the US intelligence Intellipedia as an example of a successful classified Wiki and the Army's Tactical Ground Reporting Network (TiGRNET) as a mash-up. I could not find any publicly available references to TiGRNet, but it may be similar to the Tactical Ground Reporting System (TIGR).

However, this use of technology is not all one sided. Later in the same journal, Norman Friedman ("Stealing Signals") reports that from 2004 insurgents in Iraq were intercepting video from US Predator UAVs and have been doing so in Afghanistan as late as 2009. What is not clear is why these signals were being transmitted unencrypted or if they were of any practical value to the insurgents. A few fleeting images from a UAV would be of little value. But Web 2.0 technology is now available to anyone with a smart phone and this could make scattered images of far higher intelligence value.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, February 25, 2010

From Research to the Real World

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where former student Kevin Moore from General Dynamics Mediaware is talking about Commercialising Research: Real-world Applications and Challenges of Digital Video. His company's applications include processing video from the US Predator UAV aircraft used by the US military in Afghanistan and sport video at the Beijing Olympics.

Dr. Moore is discussing how an idea from a research project becomes a commercial product. He pointed out that licensing the intellectual property from a research organisation may take years and require a share of the company or licensing fees . Mediaware obtained government and defence start-up grants, but even so the founders did not take salaries initially and the company started out in a very modest office. The company moved from selling consumer vdeo software to "prosumers". Customers were not just the usual home video market, but also lawyers and professionals. The company is modestly successful, with 90% of the revenue from outside of Australia. In 2008 the company was purchased by General Dynamics, but still operates out of Canberra.

Dr. Moore suggested not "chasing the market" but instead concentrate what real customers need. He used the example of the product InStream. The market was for regioanl TV broadcasters who needed to insert local advertisments into TV content for new HD TV. Existing prodycts ere designed for capital city stations and not affordable for small stations. The traditional was to implement this would be to decode the MPEG video, insert the ads and recode. Mediaware produced a software based system to insert the ads.

From prototype to product took 18 months. This was used by Prime for the Beijing Olympics and won an award. Despite this success, the product still does not have another customer. One problem is that potential customers do not believe that such a product is technically possible and therefore there is not a demand.One obvious use I can see for this technology is to insert information into the video stream from UAV surveillance aircraft.

Dr. Moore then showed examples of JPEG2000 for Wide Area Airborne Surveillance. Military manned and unmanned aircraft in Afghanistan are recording very large amounts of video data over wide areas. This is creating a large data management problem. Mediaware are working on systems to manage this. He commented on the difficulty of collecting requirements from users where the application is highly classified. Another issues is to adjust the quality of the video to suit the avialable military bandwidth.

Dr. Moore then invited the ANU students to apply for a job.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Processing Predator UAV Video

Kevin Moore from Canberra company General Dynamics Mediaware will talk at the ANU in Canberra today about how they compress video, in: Commercialising Research: Real-world Applications and Challenges of Digital Video. Applications include processing video from the US Predator UAV aircraft used by the US military in Afghanistan and the Beijing Olympics. Mediaware hires ANU students to work on software.
Seminar Details
Commercialising Research: Real-world Applications and Challenges of Digital Video
Kevin Moore (General Dynamics Mediaware)
COMPUTER VISION AND ROBOTICS SERIES

DATE: 2010-02-25
TIME: 16:00:00 - 17:00:00
LOCATION: RSISE Seminar Room, ground floor, building 115, cnr. North and Daley Roads, ANU
CONTACT: Jochen.Trumpf@anu.edu.au

ABSTRACT:
MPEG video compression and transmission standards are a major enabling technology driving the digital broadcast and distribution industries. Digital television, IPTV DVDs and Blu-ray Discs all use variants of MPEG to transmit and display content. General Dynamics Mediaware is a Canberra company that has been engaged in research and implementation of MPEG technologies for over ten years, and has emerged as a leading global developer and supplier of compressed digital video processing solutions to the Broadcast and Defence industries.

In this presentation, we will introduce Mediaware's unique compressed-domain frame-accurate MPEG repurposing technologies, whose commercial applications include

- Real-time splicing systems deployed by Prime TV across the Australia's East Coast, facilitating the HD TV broadcast of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games;

- Stream capturing, analysing, annotation, editing software integrated in General Dynamics Multi-Int Analysis and Archive System, and in General Atomics Predator ground station.

We will describe MPEG-4 AVC/H.264, the standard used in HD TV, Blu-ray DVD and by services such as YouTube and iTunes, and present some of the technical challenges of compressed-domain editing given its computational complexity.
BIO:
Dr Kevin Moore is the Chief Technology Officer of General Dynamics Mediaware and is responsible for identifying and developing Mediaware's product and technology strategic vision.

Joining Mediaware in 1998 shortly after it was founded, Kevin was part of the engineering team responsible for the development of Mediaware's core capabilities in native MPEG and H.264/AVC editing, compressed domain scene change detection, video playback, stream capture, and helped build the first two generations of desktop editing products.

Prior to joining Mediaware, Kevin spent 7 years as a Research Scientist at CSIRO, Australia's national science agency, working on a range of image processing and scientific data visualization projects. Kevin has BSc and PhD degrees in Computer Science from the Australian NationalUniversity, and a broad background in video and image processing, high performance computing and software engineering.

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Simpler Collins class submarine replacement

The Australian Government is considering a Collins class submarine replacement. Twelve larger, longer range vessels are proposed, which can carry special forces and deliver strategic weapons on land. This is overly ambitious, given that currently only one of the six Collins class submarines is operational. The greater complexity of the proposed replacement the project has minimal of success and it is unlikely that any of the twelve submarines would become operational, if they were built.

An alternative approach would be to prioritise what is required and build simpler, smaller vessels. The primary mission of the submarines is surveillance, secondary is to attack shipping. Accommodation of special forces can be done by providing dual purpose space which can be used for storage or people on a particular mission. Strategic attack of land targets using missiles is not a priority.

Assuming the current Collins class submarines could be made reliable, their capacity to carry special forces and their range could be increased by reducing the weapons systems and loads. Halving the number of torpedo tubes and halving the maximum load of weapons would free up about 50m3 of space, for more supplies or special forces. Using precision guided weapons, less should be needed for any mission.

However, problems would remain with the Collins class. A better alternative would be to build a proven design, with the minimum of modifications. As an example, the German Type 214 submarine is built in several countries. It has a crew of half the Collins class. The 214 design could have half its torpedo tubes and half the weapons storage removed to add more room for stores. The submarine could be lengthened by 6m to add more room. The speed would be reduced, but that is acceptable given the primary mission of the submarine is surveillance.

In addition Australian designed and built Joint High Speed Vessels could resupply the submarines in friendly ports or at sea. The US Defence Department has confirmed it will order two more of these vessels. A fleet of twelve type 214 submarines and six JHSVs to support them would cost less and use a smaller crew than twelve improved Collins class vessels, be faster to bring into service and more likely to actually work.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Electronic warfare and radar imaging aircraft

Boeing EA-18G GrowlerProfessor Chris Baker talked on "Aspects of imaging radar" at The Australian National University, 28 January 2010. He pointed out that high performance computers now allow synthetic radar images to be created on-board aircraft, where previously hours of processing on a ground station would be required. It occurs to me that this could be applied to the Super Hornet EA-18G Growler aircraft the Australian government has ordered. These aircraft could then be used in conditions not suitable for the Boeing Wedgetail.

The EA-18G Growler is designed for electronic warfare. What the Australian Government has ordered is twelve Super Hornet aircraft to be fitted with extra wiring to allow radio transmitters and receivers to be attached to the aircraft. The receivers detect transmissions from enemy communications and radar. The transmitters then send false signals to confuse the enemy. However, Australia has not ordered any electronic warfare equipment for the aircraft, just the wiring. It is likely the USA will not permit Australia to have the most sophisticated equipment for the aircraft, nor allow Australia to modify the software and equipment for local conditions. It is likely that DSTO will develop local equipment for the aircraft.

As the EA-18G aircraft will be equipped with radar frequency transmitters and receivers, these could also be used to provide 360 degree radar coverage around the aircraft. Australia has ordered four Boeing Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft with very large radars and processing capacity. But these are modified airliners and so are slow and vulnerable to attack. The EA-18G is much smaller and faster, but would not normally be considered for a flying radar picket, due to limited space for antennas and processing computers. But as Professor Baker pointed out in his talk, processing power can now be fitted into a much smaller space and can overcome many limitations of the antenna size. High performance computers can be built from video game chips and podcasting can be used to send the resulting images directly to troops on the ground.

Labels: , ,

Friday, January 22, 2010

Joint High Speed Vessel for US Marines

AAV launched from the well deck of a US shipAccording to a news report, General James Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, is looking at using the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) as a Marine troop carrier. He is concerned that new US Navy transport ships lack a well deck to launch their equipment at sea. But it occurs to me that the Marines simply drive their Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV) off the ramp of the well deck, they don't flood the deck unless unloading a landing craft. The JHSV is designed with a rear ramp to unload Abrams main battle tanks. The ramp could be lowered into the water and the Marines drive their AAVs off the end. This would also have the advantage that the AAVs could be launched when the ship is underway. It may be possible to recover the AAV's replacement the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) at speed on water.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Australian High Speed Ship to Transport Haiti Aid

High speed catamaran Alakai sister ship to Huakai in HawaiiThe US government is deploying the Australian designed 113 metre high speed catamaran “Huakai” to assist with Haiti relief. Completed last year as a vehicle ferry for Hawaii, the ship can carry up to 800 tonnes at 40 knots. It has a shallow draft of 3.7 m, water jets and 20 metre ramp, allowing it to dock and unload without assictance. It is likely the ship will shuttle between Haiti, Guantanamo Bay and Miami.

A similar operation was carried out by the high speed catamaran HMAS Jervis Bay, operating between Darwin and East Timor from 1999 to 2001. Like Huakai, this was a surplus commercial ferry taken up for government use. The US military were impressed with this and leased a number of Australian designed catermarans.

The US Department of Defence has contracted Austal (who built the Huakai), to build up to ten similar "Joint High Speed Vessels" (JHSV) for military transport. The first named “Fortitude” (JHSV 1) is being constructed in the USA. Tjhis will be followed by Vigilant (JHSV 2) and Spearhead (JHSV 3).

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Imaging radar seminar

Chris J Baker will talk on "Aspects of imaging radar" 28 January 2010 at The Australian National University. Prior to becoming Dean of Engineering and Computer Science at ANU, Chris Baker held the Thales chair of intelligent radar systems at University College London.

APPLIED SIGNAL PROCESSING SERIES

Aspects of imaging radar

Chris J Baker (The Australian National University)

DATE: 2010-01-28
TIME: 11:00:00 - 12:00:00
LOCATION: RSISE Seminar Room, ground floor, building 115, cnr. North and Daley Roads, ANU



ABSTRACT:
Improving the resolving ability of a radar systems leads to an increase in information content in the received echo. Perhaps the clearest example of this is two dimensional SAR imaging which provides a map like picture of the surface of the earth. As resolution is increased still further it becomes possible to identify smaller and smaller objects. This seminar begins by exploring the concept of resolution and then goes on to examine techniques for generating high resolution in radar systems including imaging radar. Subsequently, the topic of automatic target classification is introduced very much from a practical systems perspective, reviewing techniques and outlining the current state of the art. Throughout real world examples exploiting data derived from advanced experimental systems are used to demonstrate actual radar and classification performance.

BIO:
Chris Baker is the Dean of the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the Australian National University (ANU). Prior to this he held the Thales-Royal Academy of Engineering Chair of intelligent radar systems based at University College London. He has been actively engaged in radar system research since 1984 and is the author of over two hundred publications. His research interests include, Coherent radar techniques, radar signal processing, radar signal interpretation, Electronically scanned radar systems, natural echo locating systems and radar imaging. He is the recipient of the IEE Mountbatten premium (twice), the IEE Institute premium and is a fellow of the IEE. Until 2008 he was the chairman of the IEE Radar, Sonar and Navigation systems professional network. He is a visiting Professor at the University of Cape Town, Cranfield University, University College London and Adelaide University.

Labels: , ,

Monday, December 14, 2009

Computer stabilised platform for replenishment at sea

A new option for underway replenishment (UNREP/RAS) of ships is the Ampelmann self stabilising platform. This has computer controlled jacks which compensate for the motion of the ship. This could be used to transfer crew and cargo from a ship to a Collins class submarine, as well as other vessels.

It may be possible to apply the same technology to the jack supported ramps fitted to the the Australian designed Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) being built for the US navy. This would allow the ships to transfer cargo, vehicles and personnel at sea while underway. For safety reasons it might be prudent to use remote controlled fork lift trucks for most cargo transfer.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Defence Budget Audit Needs Needs More ICT

The Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, has released the "2008 Defence Budget Audit" (Pappas Review by George Pappas). Amongst other savings, the report identifies 15 to 30% of possible savings in operating costs for ICT. However, it does not detail this further nor look at the much larger savings (which would be in the billions) by the more effective use of ICT to run Defence. A reduction in ICT spending may be a false economy if it prevents an overall saving in defence, which could be as much as 15% of the total budget.

Rather than the process driven approach which has been tried in Defence many times and failed, I suggest a behaviour driven approach. This would retrain defence staff, both civilian and military with the new skills they need and provide direct incentives for them to use those skills effectively. Also they staff would be provided with the tools to work effectively, particularly ICT systems.

As an example, the audit report identifies video conferencing as a technology for savings, by replacing air travel. However, if staff are not trained in how to use video conference effectively and are not given incentives to use it, the technology will remain underused. At best video conferencing will be used to replace some unproductive face to face meetings with unproductive virtual ones.

Available are:
  1. DEFENCE BUDGET AUDIT RELEASED, Media Release, John Faulkner , Minister for Defence, MIN49/09, 17 November 2009
  2. Response to the Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009
  3. Executive Summary, Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009
  4. Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009
The report recommended changes to Defence operations to reduce cost and increase effectiveness. The Government has accepted many of the recommendations, including to reduce the number of ICT contractors used. Recommendations to close smaller defence bases will be delayed until after the next election.

The executive summary states:
Capturing efficiency while reforming ICT. A holistic ICT transformation is planned to significantly improve the quality of the ICT infrastructure provided to Defence. While the current focus on the transformation effort is primarily on quality, there should be an increased focus on capturing the significant efficiencies in the process.

These reforms could save Defence 15 to 30% per year in operating costs, dependent on the future ICT strategy. These savings are estimated at $215 million per year, but have not been analysed in detail because the ICT strategy is beyond the scope of this review.

From: Executive Summary, Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009
Several of the more general recommendations also relate to the use of ICT more effectively (excerpt appended).

Extensive documentation has been provided for the audit, with an executive summary (8 pages), full report (308 pages) and government response (4 pages). One flaw in this is that the response is a secured PDF document which cannot have text copied from it, making analysis difficult.

More seriously, the report itself is provided in the form of a bitmap images with no accompanying text. As a result it is not possible to search the document nor copy text from the document (copying has been barred for this document in any case). Where a document is only available in hard copy form it may be necessary to scan it in for online distribution. PDF has an option to provide an optical character recognition version of the document for searching, which has not been done in this case. Also this document has not been generated from a paper original, it is from a digital original. Those who produced the PDF version will have had to make a deliberate decision not to provide it in an easy to search text format and so as to limit access to the document by the public. Such action by a public servant is unethical and may be contrary to Australian law. In any case the document provided does not meet the Disability Discrimination Act Advisory Notes issued by the Australian Human Rights Commission likely placing the Department of Defence in breech of the Act.

From the Executive Summary, Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009:
Reducing the cost of Defence inputs can be achieved in three ways:
  • Reducing non-equipment procurement costs. Defence procures a wide range of commercial products and services such as building services, travel and relocation services. Clear opportunities exist to reduce these costs by:
  • Procuring more competitively priced products and services. For example, unbundling routes and removing price arbitrage on removal contracts.
  • Changing the specifications for what is required to obtain less costly products, where doing so will not compromise capability. For example, increasing the procurement requirement that military clothing is imported from low cost countries.
  • Changing patterns of use. For example, making greater use of Defence’s extensive video-conference network rather than undertaking single day travel.
  • These improvements can save Defence between $326 and $518 million per year in non-equipment expenditure.
  • Reducing the cost of major equipment procurement.
Although a longterm task, there are significant opportunities to reduce the cost of major equipment procurement through:
  • Procuring a higher proportion of MOTS equipment
  • Increasing the level of competition for major equipment acquisition and sustainment contracts
  • Reviewing the proportion of local sourcing which is not justified by strategic requirements.
Purchasing a greater proportion of MOTS (which the most recent Defence Capability Plan (DCP) plans for) and increasing the level of competition on major contracts (which partially overlaps with savings identified in the lean backbone section) could ease cost pressures by $345 to $660 million, but these are not ‘banked’ as savings.
  • Reducing the cost of combat capability through the use of Reserves.
    Beyond support functions, there is also an opportunity to deliver the same military capability at a lower cost through a flexible surge model. This model makes expanded use of Reserves and deployable contractors.
    These changes could reduce the cost of combat capability by ~$50 million per year.
The total productivity dividend from all of these measures is in the range of $1.3 to $1.8 billion per year, and a one-off saving of $218 to $398 million. The extent of reform required to capture these savings will take 3 to 5 years. The operational cost savings already identified by Defence (as part of the Defence Savings Plan, also know as ‘E2’) have been integrated with or replaced by the Audit savings, which provide analytical substance, much greater detail and show where Defence can go further to realise additional savings.

Removing the long-term structural inefficiencies of a fragmented estate. This can be achieved by starting the process of consolidating estates into an efficient superbase model, laying the foundation for the next ‘S’ curve in Defence productivity. A superbase model would dramatically reduce subscale base costs,
extensive travel and relocation expenses, and the costs associated with managing a complicated supply-chain network.
The estimated yearly savings from a superbase model that would meet Australia’s strategic requirements would increase over time (assuming a staged consolidation), and could reach $700 to $1,050 million by 2035 (in 2008 dollars). ...

From: Executive Summary, Defence Budget Audit, Department of Defence, 17 November 2009

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Strategic and technical options for new Australian submarines

HMAS Rankin Collins class submarineIn his 2009 Annual Burgmann College Lecture, the Prime Minister proposed a National Security College be set up by the Australian Government and the Australian National University. This would train senior civilian and military officers in strategic matters, including collaborative culture. A practical exercise which the new students could undertake is the design of the new Collins class submarine replacement, combining strategic and technical options in the one process.

The Australian Defence Force (ADF) has proposed 12 submarines at a cost of $A25 billion (project SEA 1000). However, there is no proven design for such submarines. Even if they could be built, it is not clear the Australian Government could use such a powerful weapon system effectively. Therefore it would be useful for a mixed team of policy specialists, military and technical specialists to consider what capabilities are feasible and how they might be used.

The preferred ADF option is for a larger version of the current Collins class Australian-built diesel-electric submarines. Even if this is the best option, there are still many details to consider. As an example, one option is to use automation to reduce the crew of the submarine, allowing for more capability in a smaller space. That would require an analysis of what is possible with computer based systems to run a submarine. With effective use of automaton, it may be possible to provide all the desired capability in a submarine the same size as the current Collins class.

There are rapid advances being made in s (robot miniature submarines). It is likely these will be used for missions currently undertaken by manned submarines. It is likely the Collins class replacement will be equipped to launch and recover several types of AUVs, but what types and for what missions? This will require a knowledge of robotics and AI.

The primary mission of the submarines will be to collect information and to attack shipping. With the development of long range accurate cruse missiles, the submarines may also act as a strategic deterrent. However, Australia does not have a process for making the rapid political decision needed to use such a deterrent. This would require consideration of the political process to be used, as well as how consultations would be made with advisers and the technical communications infrastructure to do that. Even the USA, which has invested considerable resources on strategic decision making over decades, found its decision systems unable to cope with a relatively small scale attack on 11 September 2001.

The Australian Department of Defence issued a Request for Tender for a "Headquarters Joint Operations Command (HQJOC) Telepresence System". Government agencies are also investing in telepresence systems. However, this would require not only technical compatibility between the military and civilian systems, but also compatible meeting procedures. While the military have long practiced the use of such technology for decision making, this usually does not involve civilian decision makers. Also new systems such as instant messaging on mobile devices create new options and well as creating a risk of subverting established processes. Scenarios could be investigated using tools such as the Delphi Decision Maker.

New options are emerging, such as use of the National Broadband Network, which will be a high speed, relatively secure and reliable network. The "Defence Information and Communications Technology Strategy 2009" makes no mention 0f the NBN.

The ADF has envisioned the Collins class replacement as having a very long range. This is in part due to the long transit times from Australian submarine bases to likely patrol areas. An alternative would be to provide floating support facilities, which could undertake some replenishment at sea and major work at a friendly port.

Replenishment at sea (Underway replenishment UNREP) is not favoured by submariners, due to limited space in a submarine making loading slow and dangerous, with most supplies being loaded by hand down narrow hatches. However, with the design of a new submarine comes the opportunity to incorporate containerised, automated stores handling. This would allow rapid transfer using automated cranes and helicopters.

The RAN's new Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock ships will be equipped for rapid stores transfer, as will the Australian designed Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) being built for the US navy. On a smaller scale the Austal Multi-Role Vessel could be used with an unmanned helicopter, such as the Kaman Aerospace Corporation K-MAX, for Vertical Replenishment (VERTREP). However, studies of the technical feasibility, strategic and political implications of this would be needed.

Standard unit loads would prove challenging to accommodate in a submarine. MIL-STD-1660 specifies a 1,016 mm × 1,219 mm 1,814 kg unit load and the "Joint Modular Intermodal Container" (JMIC) is 51.75”L X 43.75”W X 43”H which would be difficult to load into and move about in a submarine. However, the benefits for solving this problem would be substantial. Containerisation of stores and equipment has begun to change the design, operation and strategic uses of surface warships, such as the Absalon class command ship. The same could be applied to submarines, making them quicker to load, replenish and reconfigure.

Proving access ways to accommodate standard unit loads would also allow equipment on the submarine to be palletised and easily replaced. This would allow equipment to be swapped out for maintenance and for different missions. One application of this would be for power. The Collins class vessels have experienced problems with the Hedemora diesel engines. These cannot be easily replaced due to their size. Smaller palletised power units could be removed for service.

Labels: , ,

Friday, October 16, 2009

Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar

Cover: Cyberdeterrence and CyberwarCyberdeterrence and Cyberwar (Martin C. Libicki) is a RAND report for the US Airforce which details the difficulties of dealing with attacks on military and civilian computer infrastructure. It argues that the traditional military doctrine of a threat of a cyber attack to deter an aggressor will not be effective in cyberwarfare. Also conventional military force will have limited value in responding to a cyberattack, due to the difficulty of identifying the attacker.

The book is available as a free e-book: Summary Only (File size 0.3 Mbytes) and Full Document (1.8 Mbytes, 240 Pages), as well as a printed paperback.
Contents

Preface iii
Figures ix
Tables xi
Summary xiii
Acknowledgements xxi
Abbreviations xxiii

Chapter One
Introduction 1
Purpose 5
Basic Concepts and Monograph Organization 6

Chapter Two
A Conceptual Framework 11
The Mechanisms of Cyberspace 12
External Threats 13
Internal Threats 20
Insiders 20
Supply Chain 21
In Sum 22
Defining Cyberattack 23
Defining Cyberdeterrence 27

Chapter Three
why Cyberdeterrence Is Different 39
Do We Know Who Did It? 41
vi Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar
Can We Hold Their Assets at Risk? 52
Can We Do So Repeatedly? 56
If Retaliation Does Not Deter, Can It at Least Disarm? 59
Will Third Parties Join the Fight? 62
Does Retaliation Send the Right Message to Our Own Side? 64
Do We Have a Threshold for Response? 65
Can We Avoid Escalation? 69
What If the Attacker Has Little Worth Hitting? 70
Yet the Will to Retaliate Is More Credible for Cyberspace 71
A Good Defense Adds Further Credibility 73

Chapter Four
why the Purpose of the Original Cyberattack Matters 75
Error 76
Oops 76
No, You Started It 77
Rogue Operators 78
The Command-and-Control Problem 78
Coercion 79
Force 82
Other 86
Implications 90

Chapter FIve
A Strategy of response 91
Should the Target Reveal the Cyberattack? 92
When Should Attribution Be Announced? 93
Should Cyberretaliation Be Obvious? 94
Is Retaliation Better Late Than Never? 96
Retaliating Against State-Tolerated Freelance Hackers 98
What About Retaliating Against CNE? 102
Should Deterrence Be Extended to Friends? 104
Should a Deterrence Policy Be Explicit? 106
Can Insouciance Defeat the Attacker’s Strategy? 108
Confrontation Without Retaliation 109
The Attacker’s Perspective 112
Signaling to a Close 114

Chapter Six
Strategic Cyberwar 117
The Purpose of Cyberwar 118
The Plausibility of Cyberwar 121
The Limits of Cyberwar 122
The Conduct of Cyberwar 125
Cyberwar as a Warning Against Cyberwar 126
Preserving a Second-Strike Capability 127
Sub-Rosa Cyberwar? 128
A Government Role in Defending Against Cyberwar 129
Managing the Effects of Cyberwar 131
Terminating Cyberwar 135
Conclusions 137

Chapter Seven
Operational Cyberwar 139
Cyberwar as a Bolt from the Blue 143
Dampening the Ardor for Network-Centric Operations 149
Attacks on Civilian Targets 153
Organizing for Operational Cyberwar 154
Conclusions 158

Chapter eight
Cyberdefense 159
The Goal of Cyberdefense 160
Architecture 165
Policy 167
Strategy 169
Operations 170
Hardware 171
Deception 171
Red Teaming 173
Conclusions 173

Chapter Nine
Tricky Terrain 175
viii Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar

Appendixes
A. what Constitutes an Act of war in Cyberspace? 179
B. The Calculus of explicit versus Implicit Deterrence 183
C. The Dim Prospects for Cyber Arms Control 199
references 203 ...
Summary

The establishment of the 24th Air Force and U.S. Cyber Command marks the ascent of cyberspace as a military domain. As such, it joins the historic domains of land, sea, air, and space. All this might lead to a belief that the historic constructs of war—force, offense, defense, deterrence—can be applied to cyberspace with little modification.

Not so. Instead, cyberspace must be understood in its own terms, and policy decisions being made for these and other new commands must reflect such understanding. Attempts to transfer policy constructs from other forms of warfare will not only fail but also hinder policy and planning.

What follows focuses on the policy dimensions of cyberwar: what it means, what it entails, and whether threats can deter it or defense can mitigate its effects. The Air Force must consider these issues as it creates new capabilities.

Cyberattacks Are Possible Only Because Systems Have Flaws

As long as nations rely on computer networks as a foundation for military and economic power and as long as such computer networks are accessible to the outside, they are at risk. Hackers can steal information, issue phony commands to information systems to cause them to malfunction, and inject phony information to lead men and machines to reach false conclusions and make bad (or no) decisions. ...

Operational Cyberwar Has an Important Niche Role, but Only That

For operational cyberwar—acting against military targets during a war—to work, its targets have to be accessible and have vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities have to be exploited in ways the attacker finds useful. It also helps if effects can be monitored. ...

Strategic Cyberwar Is Unlikely to Be Decisive

No one knows how destructive any one strategic cyberwar attack would be. Estimates of the damage from today’s cyberattacks within the United States range from hundreds of billions of dollars to just a few billion dollars per year. ...

Cyberdeterrence May Not Work as Well as Nuclear Deterrence

The ambiguities of cyberdeterrence contrast starkly with the clarities of nuclear deterrence. In the Cold War nuclear realm, attribution of attack was not a problem; the prospect of battle damage was clear; the 1,000th bomb could be as powerful as the first; counterforce was possible; there were no third parties to worry about; private firms were not expected to defend themselves; any hostile nuclear use crossed an acknowledged threshold; no higher levels of war existed; and both sides
always had a lot to lose. Although the threat of retaliation may dissuade cyberattackers, the difficulties and risks suggest the perils of making threats to respond, at least in kind. Indeed, an explicit deterrence posture that encounters a cyberattack with obvious effect but nonobvious source creates a painful dilemma: respond and maybe get it wrong, or refrain and see other deterrence postures lose credibility. ...

Can retaliators hold assets at risk?

It is possible to understand the target’s architecture and test attack software in vivo and still not know how the target will respond under attack. Systems vary by the microsecond. Undiscovered system processes may detect and override errant operations or alert human operators. How long a system malfunctions (and thus how costly the attack is) will depend on how well its administrators understand what went wrong and can respond to the problem. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that attackers in cyberspace will have assets that can be put at risk through cyberspace. ...

will third parties stay out of the way?

Cyberattack tools are widely available. If nonstate actors jump into such confrontations, they could complicate attribution or determining whether retaliation made the original attackers back off.

Might retaliation send the wrong message?

Most of the critical U.S. infrastructure is private. An explicit deterrence policy may frame cyberattacks as acts of war, which would indemnify infrastructure owners from third-party liability, thereby reducing their incentive
to invest in cybersecurity. ...

Responses to Cyberattack Must Weigh Many Factors

In many ways, cyberwar is the manipulation of ambiguity. Not only do successful cyberattacks threaten the redibility of untouched systems (who knows that they have not been corrupted?) but the entire enterprise is beset with ambiguities. Questions arise in cyberwar that have
few counterparts in other media.

what was the attacker trying to achieve?

Because cyberwar can rarely break things much less take things, the more-obvious motives of war do not apply. If the attacker means to coerce but keep its identity hidden, will the message be clear? If the attack was meant to disarm its target but does so only temporarily, what did the attacker want to accomplish in the interim?

Military Cyberdefense Is Like but Not Equal to Civilian Cyberdefense

Because military networks mostly use the same hardware and software as civilian networks, they have mostly the same vulnerabilities. Their defense resembles nothing so much as the defense of civilian networks—
a well-practiced art. But military networks have unique features ...

Implications for the Air Force

The United States and, by extension, the U.S. Air Force, should not make strategic cyberwar a priority investment area. Strategic cyberwar, by itself, would annoy but not disarm an adversary. Any adversary that merits a strategic cyberwar campaign to be subdued also likely possesses the capability to strike back in ways that may be more than annoying. ...

From: Cyberdeterrence and Cyberwar, Martin C. Libicki, RAND, 2009

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

War 2.o Live TV with smaller display

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion. Some on low bandwidth and low performance computers may have difficulty with the full live content (I have suggested a lower frame rate video stream be provided), so I have broken out the components: Live TV, Chat, Social Stream and Media stream. Here is the Live TV, reduced to 100 x 80 pixels:Live TV : Ustream

Labels: , , , , , ,

War 2.0 Media Stream

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion. Some on low bandwidth and low performance computers may have difficulty with the full live content (I have suggested a lower frame rate video stream be provided), so I have broken out the components: Live TV, Chat, Social Stream and Media stream. Here is the Media Stream:

Broadcasting Live with Ustream.TV

Labels: , , , , , ,

War 2.0 Social Stream

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion. Some on low bandwidth and low performance computers may have difficulty with the full live content (I have suggested a lower frame rate video stream be provided), so I have broken out the components: Live TV, Chat, Social Stream and Media stream. Here is the Social Stream:

Labels: , , , , , ,

War 2.0 Chat

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion. Some on low bandwidth and low performance computers may have difficulty with the full live content (I have suggested a lower frame rate video stream be provided), so I have broken out the components: Live TV, Chat, Social Stream and Media stream. Here is the Chat:

Labels: , , , , , ,

War 2.0 live TV stream

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion. Some on low bandwidth and low performance computers may have difficulty with the full live content (I have suggested a lower frame rate video stream be provided), so I have broken out the components: Live TV, Chat, Social Stream and Media stream. Here is the Live TV:Live TV : Ustream

Labels: , , , , , ,

War 2.0 streamed live now

The symposium "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" is being streamed live from the ANU in Canberra for the next two days. As well as
Video, there is a Twitter discussion.

I hope to take part in the symposium via the web (from Web Directions South), relating some of my experience setting the Australian Defence Force's policy for the use of the web and Internet.

Last night the "Timeline Project" was demonstrated at Google Sydney. This used a timeline updating a map of Europe in World War 2. Military organisations traditionally document battles in the battalion dairy. This timeline mapping technique could be used for an electronic diary. This week ABC Media Watch criticised the Australian Department of Defence for providing minimal information for the public about what is happening in Afghanistan. Perhaps as well as a war artist, there could be a war blogger, providng a timeline map of what is happening. I might ask the symposium about this.

The Department of International Relations of the Australian National University is hosting a two day symposium on "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" in Canberra, 7 to 8 October 2009. The program includes Brigadier Brian Dawson (Director General of Australian Defence Force Public Affairs), Eric Beecher (Crikey.com), Professor Hugh White (ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre) and Mehran Mortezai (Iranian student and Twitterer). The venue is the new hit-tech Hedley Bull Centre at the ANU.

War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media

Today, war is conducted not only by the dispatch of Tomahawks in the air or Kalashnikovs and suicide attacks on the ground but also by means of bytes, tweets, digital images, and social networking forums. (New) media technology, in other words, has become a medium of war and diplomacy.

This multidisciplinary two-day symposium on 7-8 October hosted by the Department of International Relations at the ANU will map the shifting arena of war, conflict, terrorism, and violence in an intensely mediated age. The symposium will bring together international relations academics, media scholars and media practitioners, policymakers and defence staff. It will explore cultural, political, strategic, and technological transformations in media platforms and media participation and assess their impact on policy, publics, and outcomes of political conflict.

The symposium addresses questions such as: What is 'new' about new media? How have the transformations in media technology influenced media-military relations? How have these transformations impacted upon traditional media actors? How are war, conflict, terrorism and violence represented; what are the consequences of these representations? In what ways has new media technology empowered marginalised voices in war, conflict, and terrorism? And how has the transformation of the media landscape impacted on the way states conduct their foreign policy? ...

From: War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media, ANU, 2009


Symposium Program


7 October
9:15 - 9:30Introduction
9:30 - 10:45Keynote address by James Der Derian
From the Image of War to the War of Images
(Live webcast from Brown University)
10:45 - 11:15Morning tea
11:15 - 12:45Panel One: Traditional Voices
Responding to New Toys, New Challenges
Kate Geraghty, Sydney Morning Herald photographer
Prakash Mirchandani, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, ANU
Bill Paterson, Ambassador for Counter-terrorism
Peter Mantello, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, Japan
Brigadier Brian Dawson, Director General Public Affairs, ADF
12:45 - 1:45Lunch
1:45 - 3:00Keynote address by Eric Beecher, Crikey.com
The Changing Media Landscape
3:00 - 3:30Afternoon tea
3:30 - 5:00Panel Two: New Voices
New Media Empowering New Actors
Lisa Goldman, political blogger from Tel Aviv
Sophie McNeill, SBS Dateline video journalist
Mark Andrejevic, University of Queensland
Matthew Hornsey, University of Queensland
Nicholas Farrelly, ANU
Mehran Mortezai, Iranian student and Twitterer
5:00 - 6:30Reception

8 October
9:30 - 10:45Keynote address by Paul McGeough, Sydney Morning Herald
A Correspondent's Journey
10:45 - 11:15Morning tea
11:15 - 12:45Panel Three: War 2.0 - What are We Facing?
How is New Media Shaping Conflict?
Thomas Rid, Authors of War 2.0
Peter Leahy, University of Canberra
Seb Kaempf, University of Queensland
Julie Posetti, University of Canberra
Hugh White, ANU
12:45 - 1:45Lunch
1:45 - 3:00Concluding Plenary
Politics by Other Means?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Hawkei Australian Light Protected Vehicle

Thales Australia has released images of a mock-up of its Hawkei Protected Mobility Vehicle proposed for the Australian Army under the LAND 121 Phase 4 program. This is a smaller vehicle than the Bushmaster and designed to replace un-armoured Landrovers.

The Hawkei is claimed to "... become a fully integrated node on the network centric battlefield" with C4I (Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence). However, apart from having sufficient electrical generating capacity, it is not clear how a vehicle could have C4I fundamental to the design. Computer and telecommunications change much faster than vehicle designs. If the Hawkei had C4I closely integrated, the design would be obsolete with eighteen months.

Labels: , , ,

War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media, Canberra,

The Department of International Relations of the Australian National University is hosting a two day symposium on "War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media" in Canberra, 7 to 8 October 2009. There is a modest $50 registration fee ($15 for students). The program includes Brigadier Brian Dawson (Director General of Australian Defence Force Public Affairs), Eric Beecher (Crikey.com), Professor Hugh White (ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre) and Mehran Mortezai (Iranian student and Twitterer). The venue is the new hit-tech Hedley Bull Centre at the ANU. I hope to take part in the symposium via the web (from Web Directions South), relating some of my experience setting the Australian Defence Force's policy for the use of the web and Internet.

War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media

Today, war is conducted not only by the dispatch of Tomahawks in the air or Kalashnikovs and suicide attacks on the ground but also by means of bytes, tweets, digital images, and social networking forums. (New) media technology, in other words, has become a medium of war and diplomacy.

This multidisciplinary two-day symposium on 7-8 October hosted by the Department of International Relations at the ANU will map the shifting arena of war, conflict, terrorism, and violence in an intensely mediated age. The symposium will bring together international relations academics, media scholars and media practitioners, policymakers and defence staff. It will explore cultural, political, strategic, and technological transformations in media platforms and media participation and assess their impact on policy, publics, and outcomes of political conflict.

The symposium addresses questions such as: What is 'new' about new media? How have the transformations in media technology influenced media-military relations? How have these transformations impacted upon traditional media actors? How are war, conflict, terrorism and violence represented; what are the consequences of these representations? In what ways has new media technology empowered marginalised voices in war, conflict, and terrorism? And how has the transformation of the media landscape impacted on the way states conduct their foreign policy? ...

From: War 2.0: Political Violence & New Media, ANU, 2009

Symposium Program


7 October
9:15 - 9:30Introduction
9:30 - 10:45Keynote address by James Der Derian
From the Image of War to the War of Images
(Live webcast from Brown University)
10:45 - 11:15Morning tea
11:15 - 12:45Panel One: Traditional Voices
Responding to New Toys, New Challenges
Kate Geraghty, Sydney Morning Herald photographer
Prakash Mirchandani, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, ANU
Bill Paterson, Ambassador for Counter-terrorism
Peter Mantello, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, Japan
Brigadier Brian Dawson, Director General Public Affairs, ADF
12:45 - 1:45Lunch
1:45 - 3:00Keynote address by Eric Beecher, Crikey.com
The Changing Media Landscape
3:00 - 3:30Afternoon tea
3:30 - 5:00Panel Two: New Voices
New Media Empowering New Actors
Lisa Goldman, political blogger from Tel Aviv
Sophie McNeill, SBS Dateline video journalist
Mark Andrejevic, University of Queensland
Matthew Hornsey, University of Queensland
Nicholas Farrelly, ANU
Mehran Mortezai, Iranian student and Twitterer
5:00 - 6:30Reception

8 October
9:30 - 10:45Keynote address by Paul McGeough, Sydney Morning Herald
A Correspondent's Journey
10:45 - 11:15Morning tea
11:15 - 12:45Panel Three: War 2.0 - What are We Facing?
How is New Media Shaping Conflict?
Thomas Rid, Authors of War 2.0
Peter Leahy, University of Canberra
Seb Kaempf, University of Queensland
Julie Posetti, University of Canberra
Hugh White, ANU
12:45 - 1:45Lunch
1:45 - 3:00Concluding Plenary
Politics by Other Means?

Labels: , , , , ,