Mark Bigham (left) shows Raytheon's control system for unmanned aircraft. A key factor was making the system more intuitive - replacing keystrokes with a game console - on the theory that thumbs are the most accurate way to control a craft. (Lefteris Pitarakis/Associated Press)

On 17 December 2009, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Iraqi resistance (“insurgents”) had been intercepting video feeds from U.S. drones, by using cheap software like the Russian program, SkyGrabber, “to regularly capture drone video feeds” being beamed down to field commanders.

The British newspaper Guardian explains that the technology is quite simple:

SkyGrabber is a simple enough concept: grab the signals that spill from a satellite broadcast (or even narrowcast), aimed from a satellite towards a specific location, and turn them into TV feeds you can look at. Or as the website puts it: “You don’t have to keep an online internet connection. Just customise your satellite dish to selected satellite provider and start grabbing.”

The US drones would send their video up to a US military satellite (the “uplink”) that cannot be intercepted. The signal would then be beamed by that satellite or a linked one down to the controllers – who might be in Afghanistan or Iraq. Because that signal was unencrypted, anyone who tuned their satellite dish to the correct frequency and location in the sky could pick up the signal, and decode it. And because any satellite downlink signal spreads a little, the area where it can be picked up is potentially huge.

According to the WSJ report:

U.S. officials say there is no evidence that militants were able to take control of the drones or otherwise interfere with their flights. Still, the intercepts could give America’s enemies battlefield advantages…

The drone intercepts mark the emergence of a shadow cyber war within the U.S.-led conflicts overseas. They also point to a potentially serious vulnerability in Washington’s growing network of unmanned drones, which have become the American weapon of choice in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In what appeared to be a damage control exercise the New York Times, known (along with the Washington Post) to be structurally embedded with the U.S. military, claimed that “The communications involving high-value intelligence are indeed encrypted,” and that “Officials familiar with the separate Central Intelligence Agency drone program, which has killed militants with Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan, said it always used encryption.”

By contrast, the WSJ had reported that:

Predator drones are built by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. of San Diego. Some of its communications technology is proprietary, so widely used encryption systems aren’t readily compatible, said people familiar with the matter…

Fixing the security gap would have caused delays, according to current and former military officials. It would have added to the Predator’s price. Some officials worried that adding encryption would make it harder to quickly share time-sensitive data within the U.S. military, and with allies. “There’s a balance between pragmatics and sophistication,” said Mike Wynne, Air Force Secretary from 2005 to 2008.

The Air Force has staked its future on unmanned aerial vehicles. Drones account for 36% of the planes in the service’s proposed 2010 budget.

In a followup article, the WSJ reiterated its report that encryption was not common:

Drones aren’t the only U.S. systems that transmit unencrypted video signals. The military’s Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver, or Rover, is part of a widely used system that allows drones, helicopters and planes to transmit live video footage to nearby troops on the ground. Former military officials say the signals aren’t encrypted, which means the tactical information can be intercepted.

This is not the last we have heard of this. Rep. Norm Dicks (D., Wash.), vice chairman of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, has said reportedly that adequate encryption was a major concern, and there was “a very good chance we’re going to have hearings” on the matter next year.