Galileo Cracked

[epicstruggle]

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/521790/?sc=rsla

Because Galileo and GPS will share frequency bandwidths, Europe and the United States signed an agreement whereby some of Galileo's PRN codes must be "open source." Nevertheless, after broadcasting its first signals on Jan. 12, 2006, none of GIOVE-A's codes had been made public.

"In a very polite way, he said, 'Sorry, goodbye,'" recalled Psiaki. Next Psiaki contacted Oliver Montenbruck, a friend and colleague in Germany, and discovered that he also wanted the codes. "Even Europeans were being frustrated," said Psiaki. "Then it dawned on me: Maybe we can pull these things off the air, just with an antenna and lots of signal processing."


Within one week Psiaki's team developed a basic algorithm to extract the codes. Two weeks later they had their first signal from the satellite, but were thrown off track because the signal's repeat rate was twice that expected. By mid-March they derived their first estimates of the code, and -- with clever detective work and an important tip from Montenbruck -- published final versions on their Web site (<http://gps.ece.cornell.edu/galileo>) on April 1. The next day, NovAtel Inc., a Canadian-based major manufacturer of GPS receivers, downloaded the codes from the Web site and within 20 minutes began tracking GIOVE-A for the first time.

Interesting to say the least.

 

[Citrous]

That's classic. I don't really see the point however, with the GPS system already in place? I mean, GPS works all over the world doesn't it? Maybe I'm missing something simple here lol.

 

[nutball]

That's classic. I don't really see the point however, with the GPS system already in place? I mean, GPS works all over the world doesn't it? Maybe I'm missing something simple here lol.

GPS is American, ie. not French. Galileo is supposedly more accurate, being based on 10-year-old technology rather than 30-year-old technology. But fundamentally it's about politics.

 

[Beafy]

If GPS was a European thing, do you think the US wouldn't launch their own system ASAP? Nowadays it's a way to important infrastructure for it to rely on a foreign system.

 

[nutball]

Of course they would, and it is important that there's a system independent from GPS (so long at the two systems are inter-operable, which GPS and Galileo are).

But that doesn't change my assertion that Galileo is fundamentally about politics.

Nowadays it's a way to important infrastructure for it to rely on a foreign system.

The same can be said about the Internet -- it's too important to be left to the Yanks alone. Will we see multiple Internets in a few decades? I think we might well do.

 

[Beafy]

I don't disagree with you that it's all about politics...

The same can be said about the Internet -- it's too important to be left to the Yanks alone. Will we see multiple Internets in a few decades? I think we might well do.

I don't think you can compare these two. The only thing right now that gives the US authority are the name servers. Should anyone else decide that they don't want that US control anymore, a "second Internet" is basically just a flick of switch away: simply set up a name server system of your own. The new name servers can be a sub-set, superset, or whatever you want of the original name servers.
Launching a complete network of satellites is a whole different matter...

The question is: what is there to gain by having to different Internet-kind networks running in parallel, if they basically behave the same and the cost of switching is very low?

 

[epicstruggle]

The question is: what is there to gain by having to different Internet-kind networks running in parallel, if they basically behave the same and the cost of switching is very low?

censorship.

 

[Frank]

The "second internet" as mentioned is already running smoothly for everyone in the EU and around that. Not many lookups go beyond Amsterdam, unless you specifically require them to. And even the third one is up and running smoothly, in China. For the simple fact that they have less (32 bit) IP adresses than most large US companies or universities in total, to cover their entire country. If it doesn't work, you have to come up with something different.

Rerouting everything is simple, the most that could happen is that US based sites drop off the internet when they change their IP adress.

 

[Frank]

censorship.

For whom and which way? And what part is technical, and what part is politics?

Nobody can "rule" the internet. The most the US can do is cut all outside connections. Which would be a great boom to all foreign sites.

 

[Citrous]

Yeah, I knew that Galileo was European and not US based, but I still fail to see the real point of it. Politics would be the only reasonable explanation in my mind, or precision maybe. It's not like the US is going to shut off civilian GPS signals anytime soon or anything. I guess I could have been more clear as to my misunderstanding. Basically it seems like quite a large logistical undertaking when an already working publicly available system is in place. What I was mostly asking is whether or not there were some core technology differences between the two systems that would make Galileo economically viable over the current GPS standard.

 

[Frank]

Yeah, I knew that Galileo was European and not US based, but I still fail to see the real point of it. Politics would be the only reasonable explanation in my mind, or precision maybe. It's not like the US is going to shut off civilian GPS signals anytime soon or anything. I guess I could have been more clear as to my misunderstanding. Basically it seems like quite a large logistical undertaking when an already working publicly available system is in place. What I was mostly asking is whether or not there were some core technology differences between the two systems that would make Galileo economically viable over the current GPS standard.

Simple: because the US retains the right to shut it down whenever they please. And they made a lot of threatening noises demanding to be able to do the same with Galileio.

 

[Powderkeg]

Yeah, I knew that Galileo was European and not US based, but I still fail to see the real point of it. Politics would be the only reasonable explanation in my mind, or precision maybe. It's not like the US is going to shut off civilian GPS signals anytime soon or anything. I guess I could have been more clear as to my misunderstanding. Basically it seems like quite a large logistical undertaking when an already working publicly available system is in place. What I was mostly asking is whether or not there were some core technology differences between the two systems that would make Galileo economically viable over the current GPS standard.

GPS is first and foremost a military service. In times of war they most certainly do jam the civilian GPS signals in the theater of operation.

 

[Citrous]

Wow, I never knew they completely blocked civvie signals in certain areas during wartime, although it does make sense. I knew that GPS was foremost a military service, it actually has two completely different timecodes that it transmits, one is military only still as far as I know. It's doubtful that they will ever open that up to the public due to the extraordinary precision it has over the civilian method. Anyway, thanks for the info, obviously here in the US the GPS signals have never been blocked so it was news to me that they'd even do it, seeing as how they already have a much more precise version running simultaneously for military use.

One last thing, the US was asking for rights to shut down galileo signals in the same way as GPS? Or some European agency was asking for that right? I was just a mite confused as to which way you meant.

 

[KBeee]

Going by a pretty dodgy memory here...
But at 1 time the civilian use of GPS was "fuzzed" so positioning was only around 50 - 100 M for civilian use, therefore no good for route planning etc.
Then during the first Gulf war the fuzziness was turned off, and several new industries grew up around the new-found accuracy that GPS offered (think Tomtom)
But at the flick of a switch it could be fuzzed again - maybe some Companies and Countries don't want to be reliant on the goodwill of the US.

 

[WhiningKhan]

Going by a pretty dodgy memory here...
But at 1 time the civilian use of GPS was "fuzzed" so positioning was only around 50 - 100 M for civilian use, therefore no good for route planning etc.
Then during the first Gulf war the fuzziness was turned off, and several new industries grew up around the new-found accuracy that GPS offered (think Tomtom)
But at the flick of a switch it could be fuzzed again - maybe some Companies and Countries don't want to be reliant on the goodwill of the US.

Maybe they've temporarily removed it before, but selective access was 'permanently' removed in 2000. Here's some basic info of GPS.

edit: Removal of selective access from GPS was also a move for lowering general interest in Galileo. Look, now you have more accuracy, this is good enough - don't do a system of your own. After that, looks like someone diplomatically less competent took over the job...

Yes, US government wanted the rights to shutdown Galileo at will. Did they really think they could get such an agreement? Ironically, it backfired big time; Galileo project was about to be cancelled due to lack of funding (guess everybody was thinking that it's not needed as GPS already exists), but after US started its pressure campaign, politicians realized its strategic importance and wheels started rolling.

 

[_xxx_]

Still, US could shut it down or fuzzy it at will, so the point is clear methinks.

 

[Fruitfrenzy]

Still, US could shut it down or fuzzy it at will, so the point is clear methinks.

I believe the US Air Force have said that they reserve the right to shoot down any satellite that they believe is being used by an enemy during a conflict. I don't know how they plan to do that but the Galileo satellites may well be targets for them at some point.

 

[WhiningKhan]

I believe the US Air Force have said that they reserve the right to shoot down any satellite that they believe is being used by an enemy during a conflict. I don't know how they plan to do that but the Galileo satellites may well be targets for them at some point.

EU and US actually did agree eventually that they can jam each other's systems locally in a crisis situation. No need for blowing satellites up.

 

[Megadrive1988]

I believe the US Air Force have said that they reserve the right to shoot down any satellite that they believe is being used by an enemy during a conflict. I don't know how they plan to do that but the Galileo satellites may well be targets for them at some point.

easy. even tactical aircraft can destroy a satellite with an anti-satellite missile. the USAF demonstrated this over 20 years ago. I'm sure it would be even less of a challenge today.

 

[KimB]

The same can be said about the Internet -- it's too important to be left to the Yanks alone. Will we see multiple Internets in a few decades? I think we might well do.

Except I don't think that there's much that the US could possibly do to adversely affect the Internet outside our borders. This is nothing like the GPS system: the Internet is a distributed network, with parts of the hardware owned by many different entities.

Sure, the US still has regulatory rights for the Internet, but if our government ever attempted anything draconian, it'd be pretty easy for other nations to just break off their own networks and do their own thing.