OpSec issues from Ukraine War
 

As somebody has already said - why don't you idiot spotters stop posting information of value to a hostile regime?

Salute!

Thank you, Beagle. Guess I won't post the practice flight paths of the Ukranian attack on the Crimea sea ports, huh?

Gums sends...

Oh ya. I forgot. The Russians don’t have access to the super secret FR24.

It doesn’t take more than a few brain cells to realise that the fact that they are broadcasting means they WANT to be noticed.

Agree damn there are some dumb asses here. Like the 4 Pegasus that flew from Wichita to Morona Airbase south east of Sevil about 12 hours ago( about 1 hour separation between them). If it was top secret why were they broadcasting ADSB from take off to landing

If the vitriol regarding FR24 is aimed at my post #3424, then I am rather surprised. As others have pointed out, the website and all the information it contains is freely available to anyone with an internet connection. The latest Fr24 blog update has an entry highlighting NATO airborne activity in eastern Europe with examples of some of the aircraft types involved.

BTW, if the comments were aimed at my post I should add that I am not a 'spotter', but having said that, why the denigration of a hobby/pastime enjoyed by many?

I am ex-RAF (the 'ex' bit occurring a long time ago), have an on-going mild interest in aviation related activities including (obviously) that of the military persuasion.

The question I posed in all innocence was regarding overflights or otherwise of a fellow NATO member. Seemed a fair question to me.

Congratulations on being a ****ty human being. I would use a much stronger australianism against you but pretty sure that would get at least modded but probably banned

If you dont like people talking about open source info then get the **** off the internet

The problem is not FR24. As has been pointed out, sometimes the aircraft want to be seen, and sometimes they don't.

The problem is with the many "enthusiast" groups sharing and broadcasting additional information.

Ie " just seen 3 typhoons leave xyz, " or " i see the b52s are starting up". I am sure they would post up the pilots name and address if they thought it would garner a few extra FB likes.

If you don't understand that every little additional snippet "could" be useful to someone somewhere, then you need to have a rethink.

Oh come on, are you serious?!
It's 2022 - not 1942 - information of all sorts is incredibly widely available.
That horse hasn't just bolted and in the next paddock - it's on another racetrack entirely!
If Air Forces truly want to preserve iron clad OPSEC these days, they stage and launch well away from prying eyes, or gas up and divert in flight to the real target and/or they fight at night.
And we find out about it later.... multiple examples in the past, and I'm sure they're happening even as we speak.
They wouldn't be so dopey as to put themselves in a situation where being visually observed or exposed by sharing of online data would compromise an operation.
Lyneham Lad and others have done nothing wrong.
Unless of course you're the VVS, in which case you probably don't give a rats... BearNet broadcasting in the clear on shortwave for all and sundry to listen to.

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.

I agree fully. There is so much OS available, it may well be that the pertinent information is missed by those who would use it against us. It does not need signposting by those who think they are being clever. That post with info on it may be the last link in the chain, or the last piece of the jigsaw the hostile int gatherers need.
The 1942 adages of 'loose talk costs lives' and 'walls have ears' still hold good today. Just because YOU know the information to be correct and relevant does not mean the enemy does.
Think carefully before posting.

Thank you, someone who understands.


If you have additional information, you have two choices; share it or keep it to yourself.

Sharing it carries a potential unintended consequence.
Keeping mute does not. So why take that risk, no matter how slight it may be?

It really is that simple.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c118e0f00f.jpg
and then there's this . . .

The BBC told the world because somebody at MOD told the whole press coups in the UK about it in an MOD Press Briefing.

Careless talk costs lives! Just because the MOD did it in 1982 to a press gathering does not mean it was correct! Because of that failure of Opsec, the Argentinian Airforce adjusted the fusing of their bombs so they would work and cost British lives. Just because the info comes from a reliable source does not mean the releasing of the, now intelligence, is right. Speculation is one thing, spreading information you know to be correct to prove a point is another. Satcos Whipping Boy and Beagle have it in a nutshell. Just think to yourself, " if I were a hostile Intelligence gatherer, would this information be useful to me?" and the answer is yes, DON'T POST IT!

How about if we share misinformation?

Thank you and sorry for my rants, unfortunately, once the offending post is there it is too late - it will be seen. Keeping the cat in the bag is much easier than trying to put it back in - pointing out the folly of posting such info, or indeed misinformation, which may also be useful as negative information can prove to be positive, is very much in keeping with the topic of the thread. I will now withdraw stumps.

Your link's not working Sue.
Satco - I think your Polish Patriot example is a bit of a reach if that's what you're referring to?
If I remember correctly - right next to the perimeter fence on a major airbase in clear view of a road... if they didn't want that disclosed or were relying on the general public to remember that loose lips sink ships... then they're very naive.
We live in an age when organisations like Bellingcat do an extraordinary job of mining open source, geolocation you name it.
As you well know, Maxar and other satellite operators have resolution so good that the military use them to supplement their own IMINT.
And with respect - your Falklands example was over 40 years ago - hard to believe - but I remember it well.
It was pre Internet and pre widespread use of mobile phones; the information environment back then was profoundly different.
Seen in that context, Whitehall was quite right to be outraged about the disclosure of the fuzing failures, as was H Jones who threatened to sue the BBC Governors for revealing the Goose Green objective.
Guess we'll just have to disagree.
My view is that anyone who complains about OSINT compromising operational security these days needs to get real.
And I regret to say - I think that includes VSOs who from time to time complain about retired military pundits theorising on strategy and tactics.
The media just ignore the complainers... having worked for the despised BBC I can vouch for the editorial reaction if you tried to argue that open source information shouldn't be shared or that retired VSOs shouldn't be asked, "what might happen next?"
Now - sharing genuinely classified information - execrable and fully worth the 30 years in the slammer.
But material that's already there in plain light of day?
Sorry folks - I think once it's been seen and it becomes digital it's open season, on the plate and garnished.
And any operational planner should factor that into their decision making - it's just the reality we live in.

Mods, my question was genuine.
There is concern among some here that posting information could be harmful to friendly forces.
My question may have appeared flippant, however, if genuine intelligence can be gathered here, is it also possible to misinform unfriendly forces in the same way?

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.

In the Falklands case it seems MOD announced those details in a press conference - the plain implication being that MOD was good for these details to be made public.

Really this was a MOD INFOSEC error. Beyond death and taxes, the only certainty is that the press will immediately broadcast whatever is told them. The responsibility for assessing whether certain information can be safely released rests with the military authorities.
​​

It is an issue on facebook certainly.
people posting information they may see as harmless when in reality it carries risk. It must carry risk making it more widely available.
it may be open-source but why give it out on a plate.

Everyone on here will have a digital trail of birthday, place of birth, wife's name, pet's name etc and we all accept that and do.our best to mitigate any risks to ourselves. All of this info is "out there" so if I understand this correctly none of you who cannot see the problem would be happy for anyone to compile that data and publish it in one place for all the world to see?

When the facebook aviation groups are challenged on what they allow to be published 99% get it and stop it from happening. There remains the 1% who are only in it for the clicks and likes and don't care about what the consequences could be, no matter how unlikely.

If it "could" help an enemy/terrorist/subversive then don't post it.

I would suggest that OS information is hurting the Russians far more than the Ukrainians. They seem to be doing a very good job of leveraging OS sources to locate and kill Russian armor. I believe the first engagement on day 1 was when the Ukrainians used Google maps reports of "traffic jams" at obscure cross roads as cueing :ok:

Hovis, I didn't take your post to be flippant at all. It is a valid question, just too busy tracking down moved posts to answer LOL.

My question would be "How do you know it is misinformation, and not actually what is happening?" I suggest leaving that to the intel experts to work on.

Back to Falklands and Goose Green...
The Argentinian defenders heard the BBC broadcast that an attack on Goose Green was imminent and the officer in charge took it as a spoof expecting it to divert resources from a real other attack position; he told his chaps at Goose to relax.
edited to add...

On the original discussion in the other thread there was an FR24 screenshot of a single voyager routing northwest. That post was accompanied with the additional bit of info - (with FGR4) . which was not painting.

WHY did that have to be added? Does the poster not see the potential harm in doing so?

It was the cold open of a Saturday Night Live showing a press conference at the start of Gulf War I (I think) where the journalists were asking obviously inappropriate questions like "Where are we most vulnerable?" and "Give us some examples of the passwords American forces might use". Don't know why the link didn't work, but I'm sure if you search Youtube you'll find it

SNL - usually as funny as a serious medical diagnosis IMO, but this time is was pretty amusing

Even the videos of missile hits / near misses are potentially very useful in thinking about tactics.

(Very) amateur military historian that I am, I have recently been reading of WWII aircraft not returning over PNG. Was it weather, lack of fuel, AAA damage, fighter interception,’other’? The other side telling you what they knew helped plan your next raid.

Equally lies & deception worked too.

I remember watching a Ukrainian aircraft tracking across Europe several weeks ago before it went dark several hundred miles from their borders.

There might well be operational reasons why tankers and the like haven’t gone dark to show Russia they are there and are active and in the cases of tankers on racetracks to say we are here and although you cannot see them we are not alone, or maybe they are but either way you cannot see that fact.

The internet can be good and bad, I should imagine Ukraine is scouring it for films uploaded by their countrymen showing Russian movements in theatre so they can work out who and what is where.

Even if all the information you post is freely available on the internet - by compiling it in a post and spreading it, potentially even translating or interpreting it, you are still effectively doing the job of an opposition intelligence gatherer for them, for free.

The more places this stuff gets posted, the quicker it is to find, the less likely it is to be missed, the less time is spent looking for it. Obviously, aviation related information tends to be as time critical as it can get.

Acting as a literal resource for a hostile power, even if only in a minor role. I don't see any way to justify that.

/not as a mod
Gentlemen and ladies:
I feel that BEagle's instincts are correct.
The world is a different place than the one a lot of us grew up in, as regards OPSEC
However
most of us were well trained in how important Not Tipping Off the opposing forces is.

1. If you served, you understand what I am referring to.
2. If you didn't, please take your posts to Jet Blast.

None of us knows when things may take a turn for the worse (and we all hope that they don't!)
With that in mind, a bit of discretion should be considered before one chooses to post ~something~ on the internet.
All things considered, the above leads to this guiding principle: think before you post.
The information age has made information into a kind of weapon, whether we like it or not.
To whom are you willing to hand a weapon?
Please carry on, but also please do so mindfully.

While complaining about “secrets” being exposed via Flightradar24 is laughable, post #23 about Google map is one of those stories that should have been have been kept under the carpet by the Ukrainien (If true)

I'm strangely reminded of an article that came out a few years before consumer ADS-B receivers became widely available, about how they would inevitably turn out to be a terrorist's dream and a security nightmare ...

Normal Pprune service will now be resumed.

Indeed. Especially showing the use of consumer drones to spot for mortar and artillery.

I am also very surprised about the open admission that Russian senior commanders are being located and targeted through their use of insecure comms, including civilian mobile phones. Surely you would want to keep that secret so you can continue to hit them ? It reminds me of the (apocryphal?) story from the Falklands that the press reporting of many unexploded bombs, caused the Argentinians to review their fusing technique and fix the problem.

Both seem so odd to me, that I wonder if it's mostly false but designed to create fear and confusion among the invaders. eg extreme reluctance by a commander to make a call renders him useless?

I think some of you forget how experienced and well trained you are as combat pilots. Just apply some common sense when providing insights.

Overheard somewhere in the Kremlin:

"Hey Yuri, forget radar and spy satellite, have just seen post by Cessna150Captain on PPRuNe! Can watch aircraft on degenerate Western FR24! Problem they not take Rubles for subscription! Keep looking at free service and write down all you see!"

FR24
 

As an interesting aside, when the war started FR24 showed NATO EWACS on patrol. Since last week they don't show up. Either they are not flying, (they are) or transponders turned off or FR24 have blocked them? ( still on other tracking sites therefore FR24 must have blocked them)

Even Google (earth) will blot out details of airbases etc if asked.

One of the reasons the Ukrainians are doing so well is their use of ALL sources - social media, satellites, drones etc - to build a detailed picture.

This is the new world - the idea you can hide anything big for very long is long gone

it's 15 years since I was told by an ex USMC SO lecturing at at a US college "we tell people that anything they commit to any electronic media is no longer secret - it's just a matter of time before it's public"

"I am also very surprised about the open admission that Russian senior commanders are being located and targeted through their use of insecure comms, including civilian mobile phones"

Well considering the one of the first documented uses of hitting someone using their mobile phone was the Russians hitting a Taleban leader in Afghanistan 30 years ago (and THAT took some planning in those far off days) I don't think it's much of a top secret tactic

Opsec is for inside information. Like NDAs. Beyond that there seems to be no way to turn back tweets and videos in todays mobile phone world. Information gets professionally monitored, harvested and manipulated anyway. Take the Kabul retreat where live pictures on TV (multiple) were days ahead of the official situation reports. In fact you could monitor the helicopters of the fleeing president live on air. Whatever is outside will be seen and spread globally.

I'm not trying to troll anyone but was reflecting on this, and there's actually a very recent example of the degree to which highly sensitive information now makes its way into the public domain very quickly, despite the understandable best wishes of those in uniform.
And for anyone worried about BEADWINDOW - this has been widely reported across social media and on mainstream websites including the NYT, so will be no news to anyone hostile monitoring this site.
About four days ago a new and previously unknown type of decoy deployed by Iskander missiles was shown visually, both whole and disassembled, and discussed in the clear in some detail.
A decade or two ago, I would suggest that doing so would have absolutely been verboten.
For example, during the Cold War, a distinctive small antennae at the back of some types of Soviet SAMs was a very closely guarded NSA secret, because the Americans knew how to jam the signals it emitted (again, it's now in several James Bamford books - no sensitive information there).
But today...?
The wreckage is photographed on an iPhone and uploaded in a second.
A coarse, word only text search in Google can aggregate a huge amount of information... much as I love PPrune and enjoy chatting with those of you who have worn a uniform - 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.
The Falklands War was cited as an example earlier - it' easy to forget that at that point if I'd asked about something called the National Reconnaissance Office I probably would have been told there was no such thing.
The volume of information on Twitter alone now is astonishing, from both sides in this war.
I'd scornfully dismissed it as a sewer of uniformed noise - while Mrs T (one of those dreadful TV News producer people) enthused about it.
Wanting to follow the war in great detail, because I'm so concerned about the geopolitics of it all, I dived in.
My God...

"The Falklands War was cited as an example earlier "

and of course that was 40 years ago - no mobile phones, little internet, no commercial satellite images available in almost real time.

Tho given the lack of people and the cost of using a phone in the FI it's probably one of the few places you COULD fight a semi-secret war these days