Tag Archives: MBDA

S.P.I.D.

Yes, we do love our acronyms. There was SPQR (Senātus Populusque Rōmānus), there is RADAR (Radio Detection and Ranging), there is FUBAR (Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition) and my favourite SPID (Stupid people in defence). The last one gets a new level of non-intelligence when we see the BBC article ‘Nato investigates hacker sale of missile firm data’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-62672184). The article alerts us to “Nato is assessing the impact of a data breach of classified military documents being sold by a hacker group online. The data includes blueprints of weapons being used by Nato allies in the Ukraine conflict.” And to show you just how stupid this is, lets take a look at ‘What did they not see?’, which I wrote on May 1st 2021. There I wrote “Ransomware gangs are now routinely targeting schools and hospitals. Hackers use malicious software to scramble and steal an organisation’s computer data”, in addition to this we have ‘Exposing lies?’ Which I wrote on July 23rd 2019. There I gave the readers “The FBI send their cyber experts and behold, they too agreed that it was North Korea. Even as we were extremely aware that they had no way of doing it, the FBI stood firm on their findings.” These elements matter. They matter because on July 30th 2021 I wrote ‘In retrospect’ where I gave the readers “It goes back when I designed an intrusion system that stayed one hop away from a router table between two points and to infect one of the routers to duplicate packages from that router on that path, one infection tended to not be enough, 2-3 infections needed to be made so that the traffic on that route between two points could be intercepted, I called it the Hop+1 solution, I came up with it whilst considering the non-Korean Sony hack. That  thought drove me to think of an approach to find the links.

So when we see ‘now’ (8 hours ago) that “The pan-European company, which is headquartered in France, said its information was hacked from a compromised external hard drive, adding that it was cooperating with authorities in Italy, where the data breach took place. It is understood investigations are centred around one of MBDA’s suppliers.” This is important because I learned basic issues like data at rest and data in movement A DECADE AGO, as such, how stupid were these people? And that is before we start digging into the ‘compromised external hard drive’ part, who got it compromised, where was IT, how did SE-Unix fail, or are these people even more stupid and they relied on Microsoft? So whilst we understand “a Nato spokesperson said: “We are assessing claims relating to data allegedly stolen from MBDA. We have no indication that any Nato network has been compromised.”” Yes, because admitting to a faulty network is a bad gig for all around. I reckon that this gets shovelled under any carpet as soon as possible, and the criminals? They get to fill their pockets. A stage that has a few issues from the get go and that is before we start digging into “Cyber criminals, operating on Russian and English forums, are selling 80GB of the stolen data for 15 Bitcoins (approximately £273,000) and claimed to have sold the stash to at least one unknown buyer so far.” There is still the issue whether the claim is true, who was the culprit and where did it all go? There are all kind of questions and that is not on the BBC or their fault. What one person claims is another person’s believe and yet another man’s doubt. But there is a rather large problem, the fact that there was an external hard drive, the fact that it allegedly was compromised implies that there are failing policies in place, there are failing IT divisions in play and there is a large amount of military IP in the open. There is a lack of questions and the fact that it is not front page news in EVERY paper is yet another matter. So when we take notice of “A former Nato official said: “There’s a lot of over-classification in Nato but these labels matter. They are applied by the originator of the information and NATO SECRET is not applied lightly.

“This really is the kind of information Nato doesn’t want out there in the public.”” We seem to see the change of a dance, what direction and which tempo is unknown to me. It gives a speculated view that there might be additional damage, but that is speculated and in light of one compromised device the question becomes how was this one undetected for so long and whatever more could be compromised? So when you take a dab at my hop+1 solution, consider that a compromised device indicates that some people of rank in that place were especially stupid. But that could just be me and I merely wonder how the relationship of mundane workers at place X versus the amount of SPID’s in that place becomes an interesting investigation. Merely because there are a whole range of players who would want that data and they are all willing to pay, so these hackers could end up with 10-50 times what they have now. 

Enjoy the day!

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Military, Science

Is it good news?

Yup we all see it at times, we are offered an apple, all whilst it is not, it could be an apple and some will say it is an apple, but the judges are our whether it is fruit at all. I get it, there are some speculations on a few items in the pond, but how did we get there?

BAE Tempest

These are a few of the thoughts I got when I was confronted with ‘RAF Tempest jet will ‘add £1bn to East of England economy’’ yesterday. You see, I am happy for the RAF, I really am, but when we look at the news, we get to see “A project to develop the RAF’s new fighter jet will bring at least £1.1bn of added value to the East of England economy”, as such we need to consider that in one place we see “added value”, that is not really the same is it? Adding to the economy and added value to the economy are not the same thing, should you wonder, ask the grocer, the baker and the milkman in the east of England, they will wonder as well, because if it actually boosts the economy, their business will get better, added value does not, it infers that change, but it will not.

Then we get to “PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PwC) report said the project would support a minimum of 22,000 “job years” in the region”, 22,000 if supporting work until at least 2035 will imply 1466 job years per year. Yet it is all speculation. It is a big deal, but it would have ben better if we would have gotten “PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PwC) report said the project would support a minimum of 22,000 “job years” up till 2045 at present expectations in the region”, this would give us a timeline with the expected setting of 880 jobs a year at present, but for some reason PwC was intentional vague here, so hw much jobs are saved and how much workforce are the people behind all this trying to import? 

So why does it matter?

It matters when you are considering “Leonardo UK already employs 1,000 people at its site in Capability Green in Luton researching and manufacturing advanced electronics for combat aircraft such as the RAF’s Typhoon fighter jet. Missiles expert MBDA has a workforce of about 3,000 in Stevenage and both firms said they were looking to increase the size of their local workforces”, it matters that one side gives us that there is expected space for for 880 jobs, all whilst the Typhoon is winding down and there we see 4,000 employed people, we do get that there is a mention of ‘they were looking to increase the size of their local workforces’, yet is that accounting for “The aircraft is being designed to include technology to provide pilotless flying”? It is a side that the Typhoon never had and we get that, but where will that part come from in the Tempest? So when you look at the stage, there is something off in ‘the project would support a minimum of 22,000 “job years” in the region’, as such, especially as that part took 15 seconds for MY brain to work out, I wonder what the BBC writer was thinking, who was also unmentioned in the article, I wonder why? 

So is it good news, or is it orchestrated bad news? The issue is that this was screaming from the moment I saw it and the BBC is not setting a stage with follow up questions? I would have thought that the Martin Bashir case was a rude awakening for the BBC, but no, I was wrong, this article shows that deception is still at the core of a few people, especially when the identity of the writer is missing. The Tempest could be good news on a few fronts, but in all this, it seems important to give out ALL the relevant information on matters that affect the people in the East of England, and it matters, as far as I am concerned, it will inflict levels of insecurity, especially when some of the parameters that make for the “job years” would have been added. 

What will happen in the East of England? Apparently, we will have to accept that time will tell, whether that telling is a good thing or an increasingly negative one has yet to be determined.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

Creation of the non-Humanitarian

It is a simple thing, according to many religions there are gods, in some cases they refer to the same being, yet there are two groups, the agnosts, they believe that there is something larger than all of us in the universe, but they are not sure about the name, the shape and where he or she is at. Then there are atheists, they categorically deny the existence of a stronger power and they have their reasoning in this. This happens and we shrug on people who are one or the other and we go on with our lives. 

Now what happens when these two groups enter humanitarian sides? 

There are then two groups, those who believe that there are humanitarian values to be found in some way but they have no idea what shape it takes and they will evolve into homo sapiens, the people that believe in self and ‘self’ alone. Weirdly enough these groups are created by human rights organisations. The article (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/11/bae-systems-accused-of-being-party-to-alleged-war-crimes) give a visible rise to all this. Companies like the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) are creating these two new waves.

Apart from the denial of the reality of what is happening, we see that they are groups that are just flaky, the fact that they attack one arms dealer and then go in denial of what is actually happening is just too weird. How can we believe in some humanitarian approach of being in denial, whilst we know that an alternative is available next door? It is a one sided approach to being in denial, others can buy weapons wherever they like, except from us. What these people don’t understand is the fact that dealing with a nation like Saudi Arabia would open doors for talks, would open doors for optional resolutions. When we look at the War in Yemen we see two things:

  1. At almost every turn we see the Saudi Coalition painted as a negative force
  2. At almost every turn the actions of Hezbollah and Iran in the Yemen region was not reported on and ignored.

These two points do not make good bedfellows, they have polarised views and to up all that I placed an image (that came from the Guardian article at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/jun/20/uk-arms-sales-to-saudi-arabia-for-use-in-yemen-declared-unlawful) with the view of the CAAT that I saw mattered, the view of two suspected teachers and two grandmothers, none of them with a proper global view, all just out there to stop UK Economy and having no idea why they are there in the first place.

It seems like a harsh view, yet the problem that everyone ignored is that the weapons that Houthis fired came from Iran, forces came from Hezbollah and both are Iranian fueled, they get there weapons most likely from Russian sources (partial speculation). 

So in all this, when we see people with such blinded agenda’s and no idea on the hard that they are instilling, how can we remain Humanitarian when we see such stupidity? I get it that there are people that are against the arms trade, yet at that point they are against ALL arms trade, that is fine, I get it some people hate weapons, so I am OK with that sentiment, yet the reality of Yemen is a lot more and to blatantly believe in #StopArmingSaudi without knowing what Iran and Hezbollah are up to is just stupid, it is like saying to the boy in the street, you should not defend yourself whilst he is being attacked by two bullies. I personally believe it to be a shortsighted view of pacifism. And I do not oppose Pacifism, The movie Mel Gibson ‘Hacksaw Ridge‘ shows us a real pacifist, he did not stay at home, he went to war as a medic and he did so without brandishing a weapon because of his views. A role beautifully played by Andrew Garfield. Now the world is no longer that simple, no longer that Black and White, Yet I wonder how those two teachers and those two grandmothers survive giving aid in Sanaa, even as they stopped BAE Systems, even as the achieved #StopArmingSaudi, when we see that Houthi forces are given new rockets and guns by Iran, whilst they are restocked by Hezbollah, will they survive with their narrow views? As we see that Houthi rebels are attacking aid workers, killing plenty in the process, none of those troops were supported by BAE Systems were they? 

How can we live in such ways with a limited mind?

So whilst we read “BAE Systems is cited in the complaint because the British arms giant is the principal supplier of Eurofighter Tornado and Typhoon jet aircraft to the Royal Saudi Air Force, which has conducted a string of deadly strikes Yemen, as is the UK arm of Raytheon, which manufactures Paveway IV guided missiles used in the conflict“, the question becomes are these Humanitarians meely humanitarians or are they opposing Saudi Arabia, are the anti-Muslim? And when we see “It also references Airbus companies in Spain and Germany, France’s Dassault and Thales, Italian group Leonardo, the Italian arm of Germany’s Rheinmetall and units of European missile manufacturer MBDA in France and Britain. Dassault supplies fighter aircraft to the UAE” I get a chill wondering whether these people are merely there to give Iran a free pass to prolong the suffering in Yemen, because that is what they are achieving. So whilst we get emotional over “A child injured in a deadly Saudi-led coalition airstrike in 2018“, all whilst we ignore the dozens of images that we see regarding the atrocities committed by Houthi forces all over Yemen, and that is not even the larger number of casualties committed by Houthi forces as they stopped humanitarian aid to civilian victims, that number goes towards 50.000 alone and will double by years end, in all this we seem to think that #StopArmingSaudi was the answer, all whilst the parties are ignoring the part that Iran plays in all this, any Humanitarian that is this short sighted is not a Humanitarian, they are merely part of the problem, that is the realisation that they need to make. I know they put on blinders and go with: ‘But what if we stop one, then the next, then the next‘ it is the ‘What If’ group of people that are the danger, this mess is a lot more complex than anything we know and there might be cause to interfere, but why not by having an international naval fleet who sinks ANY ship sailing towards Yemen carrying weapons? That too would have stopped the suffering to go on this long years ago. But that was not done, was it? 

The reality of the matter is that BAE Systems was not a bad organisation, the Saudi Government was not evil, and the mess we see in Yemen is caused through an uprising supported by Iran whilst the legitimate government asked Saudi Arabia, their neighbour to intervene, Iran is not even on that entire landmass, and Hezbollah is 4 countries away and a terrorist organisation. Is it not interesting how all those elements were overlooked by Humanitarian organisations?

There are even more factors visible, but I believe that they will muddy the view, the important factors are out there now, including the idea that places like CAAT are a reason to stop having any humanitarian views at all, what we do not realise is the mere fact is that the Humanitarian ideals are supposed to be: “having concern for or helping to improve the welfare and happiness of people. of or relating to ethical or theological humanitarianism“, what we see here is merely driving Corporatocratic ideals. Of course the people at CAAT will deny that this is so, yet their actions are very much driving corporatocratic ideals, just not in the UK. And when we see the one quote in the article when we read “arms made by 10 companies “contributed to the capacity” of the Saudi-led coalition in the conflict“, a stage where there is complete denial of the Iranian side of the matter, denial of the Hezbollah side of the matter, a stage that prolongs the armed conflict, we see the aside that opposes Humanitarian needs, we see a different side and the people all remain in denial, mainly because those two grandmothers looked so cute, two nana’s trying to #StopArmingSaudi

It is nice to know that Iran and Hezbollah did not get mentioned in that ordeal, you cannot have a one sided humanitarian approach, that is perhaps the strongest side of all and the 50,000 cadavers in Yemen are proof of that. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics