IFF and crypto was Re: [SG2] APFCs in Stargrunt

for a limited time only, tom replies to two emails at once...

> On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Thomas Barclay wrote:

true. you might get away with only distributing the keys for the local
unit - if you deploy a battalion group (typical ds2 force?), give
everyone the keys for each IFF tag in the battalion. can't be more than 1000.

> > thus, before an IFF tag says anything, it makes sure the scanner is

my procedure only takes one signal from each party, as you're not actually
establishing public keys each time: you already have a database.

> that

use short keys? if they cycle every day, even 64 bits (or whatever that
equates to in the future) might be enough.

> I work with 800 band comms and they still are no blistering heck.

all true - the data rate is going to be a tough limit.

> And their may be denial attacks that work

very good point - even if they can't break it, they can make it useless.
oh well. i'm not saying this system is perfect (that's pretty much a given in
engineering!) but i think it's better than shouting "who goes there!" or
feeling people's boot laces.

> > also, the

oh come on! this requires comparing a couple of fairly short numbers! this
is not even remotely a tough operation. the only slow bits are the en/de
crypt and the signalling.

> and simultaneous scans suggests using multiple frequencies -

digital battlefield radio will provide all these services. if it doesn't,
it's no use for info-enabled warfare (full spectrum dominance and all
that).

> Any

ok, go to meson resonance! :-)

> > the message would include info on the wearer - whether he is alive

of course. this goes without saying - there must always be procedures to
handle broken gear.

> > the thing with IFF is that, unless your tag has a directional

erm... pass! how about a phased array? bury a cylinder around the arm, just
under the skin. some sort of conducting elastomer with organic conductors.

> > if

true, but i think the edge from decent IFF outweighs the stealth edge in most
battlefield cases. SpecOps is different, though.

> On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Adrian Johnson wrote:

true, so you'd have a backup. the battlefield tactical data net would include
a master time signal. all electronics would have their own clock,
synchronised every day (or whenever possible, ie no jamming / GPS is
up),
and some leeway would be allowed in matching timestamps. you trade security
for reliability.

yes, in general, space control is very, very handy, and knocking out
information infrastructure is getting mroe and more useful against
high-tech forces. if your main weapon is now information, the main
target
becomes the organs of information-gathering. the new bavarians have long
known this to be true.

> This system should be integral to the IFF unit and the interrogating

or rather, it should survive not having it, even if it is by having somewhat
degraded performance.

Tom