https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/270608...
I checked your source and it didn’t back up this claim.
I’m not a networking specialist but isn’t it possible to detect if something is transmitting a massive amount of data (such as video) to an undetermined destination?
seems like this type of blatant data export would be easy to detect and subsequently ban the device doing it.
I’m just a simple software developer, so the network stuff can go over my head sometimes (heh), but the claim that such a large amount of data is being transmitted in a way that couldn’t be confirmed enough to ban the product seems dubious.
If so, it's on their servers and there's no "networking" you can do to know whether they forwarded it on from there.
So not that many jumps from what I described.
Because you can doesn't mean you have to, especially when you don't actually have any knowledge on the topic at hand. (And, as people have pointed out, this is both a weird and incorrect assumption, adding nothing to the discussion other than confusion.)
What's worse is that I don't think it actually works how you've assumed. The drone has no internet connection itself, the software is instead pulling the files down over wifi, which is something the standard software supports if the drone is close enough. This is the "no need to export from your DJI device" - LightCut can presumably access the drone files directly. None of this requires uploading the videos to anywhere, and doing that wouldn't even make sense - these are large video files, people would notice their data plans being ravaged by multi-gig uploads every time they flew their drone.
As far as being condescending, I think that's less of a negative trait than offering unbacked "I don't know, but" comments which add no value to the discussion.
I did consider the value of my own comment at the time, but I think there is a big problem in tech discussion with people with no actual experience or relevant knowledge feeling that their off-the-cuff suppositions are as welcome and useful as meaningful input from people with direct experience, and highlighting this behaviour as negative and unwelcome is worth risking the inevitable backlash in response.
Holy irony man
For the transfer part it is much harder as said and easier to detect in peace time.
But then what happen in war or proxy-war time. You have to know how many senior Russians are killed by using a phone …
In the early days of the Afghan (or was it Iraq?) war, people used Strava to figure out the locations of American bases. They'd see a bunch of smart watches suddenly wake up in the morning and start exercising at the same time, a dead giveaway.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/11/europe/russian-submarine-...
Incidentally, the blunder in the 1941 in the Red Army was an issue of loyalty indeed. Navy didn't experience the same problem.
A big part of the process in undermining an opposition is promoting the worst aspects in them. Instead of killing off a moron, perhaps secretly encourage them to run for office and donate to their political campaigns, secretly buy media coverage for them, etc.
The CIA for example drills into their people this same information denial training but they appear to neglect randomness so you end up with a bunch of people with the same peculiar behavioral patterns so they’re ironically rather easy to detect if you have access to click stream data. For example, they’re told not to follow each other on social media, but they still interact so you end up with two people who freely follow lots of people who interact with each other frequently but don’t follow each other. It’s weird, I’m not saying everyone who does this is information hiding but you can extract networks of people who behave in this same weird way with each other.
In order to protect the enigma cracking secret the UK randomly allowed themselves to be bombed with a bias towards less strategic targets. That’s the kind of thing you have to do to hide information, letting yourself be bombed should denote just how serious it is.
There were devices like black berries and tmobile sidekick, and gps trackers from garmin (etc) but I think the incidents you were referring to happened much later (2018 vs 2001/2002).
Also happened across a few American bases across Syria, Yemen, Niger, Afghanistan, Djibouti and more. Some British and Russian bases were highlighted too.
There are far more obvious reasons for that. These drones are of enormous military value. By buying them, US consumers are funding an obvious foreign military hardware production. US money may well be funding production of drones which may once be used to correct artillery strikes on Los Angeles.
DJI are particular seem to work in concert with "military civilian fusion," and have hardware, and software to defeat both very serious jamming, and attempts to fry its radio with pulsed microwaves. Military jammers for 2.4g band seemingly have near 0 effect.
This statement would be correct for any product of Chinese origin - no?
Meanwhile in the US...