OpSec issues from Ukraine War
Sorry Pr00ne, your attitude to security and the safety of serving personnel on the fringes of a war zone is disgraceful.
You fail to grasp the basics here.
I'm out of this discussion, I have said my piece.
All I ask is that before ANYONE posts ANYTHING on here, facebook, twitter etc they THINK about what harm they could cause. Every single snippet of intel "could" be useful.
You fail to grasp the basics here.
I'm out of this discussion, I have said my piece.
All I ask is that before ANYONE posts ANYTHING on here, facebook, twitter etc they THINK about what harm they could cause. Every single snippet of intel "could" be useful.
My post was in response to the OP who was having a go at "spotters" posting info and opinions. Whilst I still maintain that most Opsec was in fact rubbish, and designed to conceal embarrassment and wrong doing in high places, so much so that it seemed to glory in hiding information from the public and press that was known, or sometimes even provided, to the likes of the Soviets. Opsec clearly has its place, but not in the clumsy hamfisted way it was applied in my day, and in 2022 needs to recognise the reality of the modern world with social media and instant communication, and an informed and sophisticated public who will no longer tolerate secrecy for secrecy sake.
Sorry Pr00ne, your attitude to security and the safety of serving personnel on the fringes of a war zone is disgraceful.
You fail to grasp the basics here.
I'm out of this discussion, I have said my piece.
All I ask is that before ANYONE posts ANYTHING on here, facebook, twitter etc they THINK about what harm they could cause. Every single snippet of intel "could" be useful.
You fail to grasp the basics here.
I'm out of this discussion, I have said my piece.
All I ask is that before ANYONE posts ANYTHING on here, facebook, twitter etc they THINK about what harm they could cause. Every single snippet of intel "could" be useful.
My post was in response to the OP who was having a go at "spotters" posting info and opinions. Whilst I still maintain that most Opsec was in fact rubbish, and designed to conceal embarrassment and wrong doing in high places, so much so that it seemed to glory in hiding information from the public and press that was known, or sometimes even provided, to the likes of the Soviets. Opsec clearly has its place, but not in the clumsy hamfisted way it was applied in my day, and in 2022 needs to recognise the reality of the modern world with social media and instant communication, and an informed and sophisticated public who will no longer tolerate secrecy for secrecy sake.
So, here's an example of how far things have gone now.
All in the public domain - widely known about and discussed, so no new revelations.
Civilians doing their own detailed MASINT on synthetic aperture radar.
https://www.bellingcat.com/resources...radar-systems/
I find it astonishing, and also have no doubt that military radar operators are well aware of this.
Note the five day revisit of the satellites mentioned further down in the article, so it's not real time.
All in the public domain - widely known about and discussed, so no new revelations.
Civilians doing their own detailed MASINT on synthetic aperture radar.
https://www.bellingcat.com/resources...radar-systems/
I find it astonishing, and also have no doubt that military radar operators are well aware of this.
Note the five day revisit of the satellites mentioned further down in the article, so it's not real time.
Thread Starter
I didn't intend to start this thread; my post was in response to something on the 'Ukraine' thread, but the PPRuNe admin decided to use it to open this thread.... Which came as a surprise.
Nevertheless, there are some good views on this thread. And there are others.....
Nevertheless, there are some good views on this thread. And there are others.....
I suspect we're not really doing any work for Russia in aggregating and posting material that they're not already aware of.
There is a heightened general knowledge of previously classified technologies, organisations etc.
There is a heightened general knowledge of previously classified technologies, organisations etc.
"by using it in a discussion on a site like this, to show superior knowledge"
Yes but on Pprune almost any post is immediately followed by posters disagreeing, correcting, suggesting some other explanation, or commenting in even more detail (often wandering miles off subject).
Concise reportage and conclusions are not found on PPrune
How do the Russians (for example) decide who is putting up an informed view and which are noise from someone who retired 40 years ago? We can't................ and I doubt they can - the odd nugget is drowned by a bucket load of ... something else
Yes but on Pprune almost any post is immediately followed by posters disagreeing, correcting, suggesting some other explanation, or commenting in even more detail (often wandering miles off subject).
Concise reportage and conclusions are not found on PPrune
How do the Russians (for example) decide who is putting up an informed view and which are noise from someone who retired 40 years ago? We can't................ and I doubt they can - the odd nugget is drowned by a bucket load of ... something else
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,883
Received 2,826 Likes
on
1,205 Posts
Someone needs to throttle the BBC reporting live from a railway station and reporting movements.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,883
Received 2,826 Likes
on
1,205 Posts
I am serious. And no you dont need to go back to 1942 either.
Remember the BBC during the Falklands?
Additional information that did not need to be published not only told the Argentinians their bombs were not exploding, but went on to give them the bloody solution.
Images posted of US patriot sites shared online within hours of deployment, not hard to get a grid on that.
Yes, i accept that we live in a digital information age and stuff is "out there" but don't hand it over on a plate!
Like I said, some folk need to rethink the "potentially" useful information they share willy-nilly from the comfort of their man-caves.
Remember the BBC during the Falklands?
Additional information that did not need to be published not only told the Argentinians their bombs were not exploding, but went on to give them the bloody solution.
Images posted of US patriot sites shared online within hours of deployment, not hard to get a grid on that.
Yes, i accept that we live in a digital information age and stuff is "out there" but don't hand it over on a plate!
Like I said, some folk need to rethink the "potentially" useful information they share willy-nilly from the comfort of their man-caves.
The german ACT, (DFS) has an internetsite wich shows the traffic in the lower airspace.
It is suposed to be used for noise complains.
That site is down, since the beginning of the war.
https://stanlytrack3.dfs.de/st3/STANLY_Track3.html
It is suposed to be used for noise complains.
That site is down, since the beginning of the war.
https://stanlytrack3.dfs.de/st3/STANLY_Track3.html
I agree with much that is said here re opsec on SPECIFIC events, eg the idiot who identified the GR4s accompanying the tanker northbound. However, even I who have been out of "the loop" for 25 years can put two and two together and assume that where there are tankers in a seeming towline over Eastern Europe for hours on end that there will be some sort of tactical asset depending on them, especially as the strategic assets don't go anywhere near them. As they are showing up on ADSB I can only assume that NATO wants the Russians to know they are there otherwise I suspect their mode S would be quickly switched off, as are most of the tactical assets in the UK airspace. Now, if I can work that out perhaps Ivan, whose sole job is to gather intel on what is where and when, can also work it out and that all the BEDEWINDOW criers on here could maybe understand that and stop calling people with an interest in this sort of thing names?
I agree with much that is said here re opsec on SPECIFIC events, eg the idiot who identified the GR4s accompanying the tanker northbound. However, even I who have been out of "the loop" for 25 years can put two and two together and assume that where there are tankers in a seeming towline over Eastern Europe for hours on end that there will be some sort of tactical asset depending on them, especially as the strategic assets don't go anywhere near them. As they are showing up on ADSB I can only assume that NATO wants the Russians to know they are there otherwise I suspect their mode S would be quickly switched off, as are most of the tactical assets in the UK airspace. Now, if I can work that out perhaps Ivan, whose sole job is to gather intel on what is where and when, can also work it out and that all the BEDEWINDOW criers on here could maybe understand that and stop calling people with an interest in this sort of thing names?
Over inflated sense of self worth.
Whilst I agree with the idea that ‘loose lips sink ships’ this thread does make me smile. If Russia’s intelligence services are in the position where Pprune is the first place they have heard a snippet of useful information then I would suggest we truly have nothing to fear from them.
That being said I will continue to make zero comments about any military matters in Ukraine. Mainly because I have absolutely nothing of interest to add.
BV
That being said I will continue to make zero comments about any military matters in Ukraine. Mainly because I have absolutely nothing of interest to add.
BV
For goodness sake the MoD had invited news camera teams onboard the Voyager filming the Typhoons alongside! It was on media across the globe from GB News to CNN via Al Jazeera. There have been official press releases from the MoD on the enhanced NATO patrols that the RAF is carrying out. it is NOT a secret!!!!!!!!
Well there you go - I don't remember that from the time.
If the MOD did indeed discuss fusing details of Argentine bombs at a press briefing - then that's just laughably incompetent.
Does anyone have a source for that - open source, mind.
I'm not trying to be some sort of smart arse here - I can imagine how utterly galling it must be to see something sensitive inadvertently exposed.
Seriously, what I'm trying to point out is that you can't blame the public these days - it's an Opsec issue.
The velocity of information is such now that I wonder about the utility of D notices.
By the time someone's drafted the damn thing, called a broadcaster and served it - the whole world probably already knows.
If the MOD did indeed discuss fusing details of Argentine bombs at a press briefing - then that's just laughably incompetent.
Does anyone have a source for that - open source, mind.
I'm not trying to be some sort of smart arse here - I can imagine how utterly galling it must be to see something sensitive inadvertently exposed.
Seriously, what I'm trying to point out is that you can't blame the public these days - it's an Opsec issue.
The velocity of information is such now that I wonder about the utility of D notices.
By the time someone's drafted the damn thing, called a broadcaster and served it - the whole world probably already knows.