http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36385839
>The Government Accountability Office said the Pentagon was one of several departments where "legacy systems" urgently needed to be replaced.
>The report said taxpayers spent $61bn (£41bn) a year on maintaining ageing technologies
>The report said that the Department of Defence systems that co-ordinated intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear bombers and tanker support aircraft "runs on an IBM Series-1 Computer - a 1970s computing system - and uses eight-inch floppy disks".
>"However, to address obsolescence concerns, the floppy drives are scheduled to be replaced with secure digital devices by the end of 2017."
What are the repercussions of this, /g/?
That such coordination has always been garbage and thankfully we've never needed to make use of it. After the upgrade it will continue to be garbage and hopefully still not needed.
>>54747842
we really need to get windows 10 on those systems. just let the cloud take care of it
How powerful do nuclear weapon computers need to be exactly? Most of the tech is in the missiles themselves, I think. The computers basically handle the launch authorization, no?
At least they're so old nobody can accidentally catch Locky on them.
>>54747842
What's wrong with floppies? Aren't they more reliable than optical media?
At least they're immune to viruses.
>>54747887
slow as sin, but that isnt an issue since they aren't handling particularly heavy bandwidth
Everyone knows that it's 000000.
And now I'm on all of the watchlists ever.
>>54747863
That they're said to "co-ordinate" gives me the impression that these systems are more about asset management than actual weapon operations, as you surmised.
>What are the repercussions of this, /g/?
The floppy gets copied.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI
>>54747919
>yfw this music video had a bigger budget than most modern game DRM
>>54747934
Probably more effective, too.
>>54747842
What's stopping them from upgrading to newer tech
I mean shouldn't flash based memory cards be better?
>>54748165
Read the article.
the system is pretty much unhackable.
Almost nobody except for enthusiasts and the people that have to work with the system would know how to operate it.
So?
If it ain't broke don't fix it
>>54748187
I read it already, it says they use it just because it still works, but wouldn't you expect something as important as nuclear arms to be upgraded to the latest possible tech often?
>>54748225
When it comes to hacking ICBM software of the US DoD, I imagine the people tasked with "hacking" would begin by familiarizing themselves with its operation. I don't mean Ivan and his fucking bird in Siberia, but those employed by their governments to do this professionally.
>>54748225
What about Matthew Broderick?
>>54748266
WOPR was a brand new system and closer to what was common at the time.
C64's DOS machines are a lot less common today.
>>54747887
Not really.
>>54748252
Read it again.
>but wouldn't you expect something as important as nuclear arms to be upgraded to the latest possible tech often?
haha. no.
like >>54748225 said, the fact that they use such old tech that predates the internet makes it basically impossible to hack, it should be viewed as a good thing desu
>>54748241
>ends up breaking at some point
>it's now too old to find parts
>>54748266
>Global thermonuclear war
reading those words always gives me the chills - knowing the always and never approach to the weapon systems.
>>54748304
I don't think they're connected to the internet, anon.
Hell, I doubt even if they were upgraded, random usb flash drives wouldn't be allowed near it in case of a stuxnet.
>>54747842
What's wrong with this? Why would they need to upgrade it? Don't they know that newer tech is so much more fragile?
>if it ain't broke, don't fix it
>>54748330
but what if it breaks and then you cant fix it?
>>54748339
MY AMIGA NEVER BREAKS
>>54748325
This
ALL nuclear arms are have their own closed networks limited to only the control room of their facilities.
Did you guys think nuclear missiles had a nice node.js web UI in Obama's office or something
>>54747842
>implying they use those small shitty 5 1/4" disks.
>>54747887
>Aren't they more reliable than optical media?
Floppy disks are probably the most unreliable removable media format in existence.
>>54748389
Read the article.
>>54748339
Why won't you be able to fix it?
What sort of break are we talking about?
>whoops, a nuke went off in the computer room
>>54748392
depends. optical doesn't like being around mold. floppies don't like being around magnets. The 3 1/2 floppies were really shitty toward the end there, but that was a manufacturing issue.
>>54747842
>What are the repercussions of this, /g/?
Nothing? Data storage is data storage, many nuclear plants are still running on PDP-11s too.
As long as they keep their shit backed up and the drives in good working order, I'd trust that shit just fine.
>>54748400
Read the article yourself or even read the copied green text from the OP. They used reliable 8" disks.
>>54748392
That's compact cassettes.
Maybe punched tape but I never had to work with that.
>>54748339
This. Capacitors and floppy disks have a limited lifespan, God help us all if this system fails and the russkies attack.
Joking aside, nuclear weapons should require insane amounts of up to date security. This is one system where security through obscurity won't work.
>>54748424
...Yes. 8", not 5 1/4".
>>54747842
I guess its to keep the cylons out of the system.
>>54748435
Then replace the capacitors and have new disks produced, the supply chain of the U.S. nuclear arsenal isn't a clearance aisle at the local Staples.
That old shit's probably actually easier to keep running than new hardware anyway which is full of BGA and all kinds of proprietary surface mounted shit you can't easily source a replacement for. Given the market placement of the Series/1, it's probably all 7400 series logic and other discrete components, maybe one of those trademark IBM silver chips every so often, though I'm not really familiar with that series.
>implying thats a bad thing
>wanting iNuke
>wanting facebook share button on your nukes
I bet the moment they upgrade all their shit gets hacked .all comps in the silo display tranny porn and someone installs doom on the nukes.
Wonder if they used GCR or MFM encoding...
>>54747842
It's 2016, come on people!
>>54748482
>share button on your nukes
legitimately keked
>>54748252
>tfw you lose first strike capabilities against the sovs because windows forced your launch computer to update to Windows 14
>>54748435
>This is one system where security through obscurity won't work.
Not obscurity, the fact that this shit cannot be activated over a network makes this unhackable.
>>54747859
>Just tap on the map to launch the nuke
Tfw the unintuitive interface saved us from nuclear holocaust
>>54747842
>News: ISIS immobilized the US's nuclear forces
>what first thought to be a state of the art EMP bomb turned out to be a huge ass magnet.
>>54748525
Everything's connected through the sneakernet. That's how the Iranians had one of their test reactors blown up.
>>54748482
>someone installs doom on the nuke
>>54748477
On second thought, how could I be so naive?
I wonder what made them choose these systems over DEC hardware which as far as I know was 7400-based through and through, unless this was set up in the later PDP-8/11 era.
>if it's old it's bad
why do normies think this?
they have a good reason to keep using giant floppies
>>54748548
That was USB and MS Windows auto-run install virus feature.
>>54748556
>newer can be better
Why can't /g/ pseudoluddites accept that ?
>>54747934
If I ever work for rockstar, and a user tries to get around securom, that music will play on a loop forever.
>>54748574
newer can be better, but in this case you have to be damn sure it's even more reliable and secure than the old tech
which is hard to do when you're dealing with missiles made in the 70's
>>54748567
Yes. The type of media and OS were irrelevant to the point I was making.
>>54748574
Why do you always assume that because someone doesn't shit themselves every time they see something old means they automatically think it's the end all be all and best way to do everything?
New ways can bring improvements, but just because you can improve upon something doesn't mean that something is irredeemable shit, for this particular use case I can't really see a justification to upgrade the system to something new and not as "trustworthy" as long as it performs to expectations and can be easily repaired.
>>54748591
I would like to think that the "Government Accountability Office" has done some research and wouldn't spend a few millions just to endanger everyone.
>mfw I realised as I typed this that this is happening because some guy is probably brokering a deal with MS/IBM or some shit
>>54747842
>baby's first thread/click bait
>computer does what is has to do,and has dont it for years.
why are the outdated man!!! arm cores are cheap
>most advance computer at the time of installation for security have now 360'ed in to security by obscurity
why is this bad
analogue systems are more reliant and easier to maintain than digital systems
They're holding onto them in case John Titor needs one of them.
>>54748660
>analogue
britcucks >>>/out/
>>54748660
Computer technology has always been digital. However, older computer tech is more reliable in certain aspects. For example, older computers are less prone to overheating issues.
>>54748556
>normies
>>54748649
>baby's first thread/click bait
Did you fuckers even read the article ?
>report came from the Government Accountability Office
>Pentagon official states that they're indeed bound to be replaced/update
Here's a picture with words.
Here in Germany several branches of the government bought extended support for win XP instead of switching in time. Most politicians are retarded as fuck
>>54748686
>Computer technology has always been digital.
m8...
Good goyim! Upgrade your nukes to the River Trail JavaScript engine with our new Intel Active Management Technology technology!
>>54748688
It's a fundbait article. They pretend that (inter)national security is at stake if they don't get more money.
>>54748747
>US DoD has to pretend they need money
lol
>>54748369
If they ever had, I'd be glad to make the design for it... Nice blinking bomb icons that are more annoying than Warez-site-ads: "click me!"
>>54747842
Yeah better upgrade that shit so Obama can launch a nuke with an iPhone app.
>>54748688
nigger the whole nukes activation is run on shitty old computers article is old,for like 3 years or more this is clickbait/fundbait
>>54747842
You'd think those would be on 24/7, how long do CPUs even last of 24/7 being on?
>>54748869
>the notion that something is old had been around ever since that thing was considered old
alrighty
They control nuclear weapons really the last thing you want to fuck up. What do you want them to do, employ some node hipsters so they can store their configuration on Dropbox?
Everyone's not even talking about the important bits
How fast can that computer go? Can it even compute a sha1 hash? I doubt it can even do blowfish hashing with a reasonable level of iteration
That means that the nuclear launch codes in that system, are either unprotected or weakly protected. And security through obscurity never works in the long run. Meaning those codes will be created
>>54748913
Irrelevant when the facility is protected by modern security, as well as guys with really big guns.
>>54748930
We've all seen The Rock, anon. We shouldn't be taking any chances.
they have modern 1970s computers
>>54748930
This is supposed to be the final wall to stop nuclear warfare. When designing systems. You always have to think of "What If?"s. What If the base gets overthrown by the Chinese army?
>>54748978
Yes, and I'm very certain they've thought of those situations.
>>54748482
>all comps in the silo display tranny porn and someone installs doom on the nukes
>>54748913
>How fast can that computer go? Can it even compute a sha1 hash? I doubt it can even do blowfish hashing with a reasonable level of iteration
It's not like they're using a Trash-80 or some other bottom of the barrel shitbox, nor that they would need to encrypt a ton of data to get the job done should the need for some reason arise. Modern encryption methods were invented around this period by researchers that were probably using very similar hardware, at least in market placement.
>And security through obscurity never works in the long run. Meaning those codes will be created
And how exactly would they go about this on an obscure, airgapped proprietary IBM platform running undocumented software that has never actually been used and demonstrated?
Even if you somehow could generate valid launch codes, what good what it do for you, exactly? You would have to have someone (or probably a team of conspirators) on-site and even then the most they could probably do is launch maybe one or two ICBMs if that.
>>54748997
This is the government we're talking about.
>>54749035
SHA1 was published in 93. MD5 in 92. MD2 in 89
This machine is from 1970s.
> You would have someone ( or probably a team...
And I'm sure a massive organization would have the resources to occupy a base for as long as they want. Russia, China, for example
>>54749075
Governments are pretty good at what they do, despite memes. Private industry isn't the bastion of efficiency and competence, either.
>>54749113
Really. Governments are good at securing a nuclear silo for 50 years when they can't even secure Clinton's emails?
You know. Those 50 years where technology grew at supposedly double the rate every two years? Meaning modern computers would have grown by 2^25 times by then?
MD5 took 15 years to get broken. What kind of security would we have after 50 years?
>>54748978
If the base got overthrown, then that means it's game over, since many of the missile silos are hidden deep in the maiand
>>54749153
The government wasn't securing Clinton's emails, ya dingus.
>>54749175
why did you post a pic of kalousek?
>/g/ gets tasked with upgrading the nukes
>after a few weeks the job is done, everyone is happy
>suddenly ancient aliens awake and the nukes are needed as the only way to stop them from destroying human civilization!
>1
>2
>Fizz
>>54749184
It's a reaction image used to show my feelings towards silly statements.
>>54749075
>And I'm sure a massive organization would have the resources to occupy a base for as long as they want. Russia, China, for example
Let's not even get started on how absolutely stupid and improbable a ground invasion of the US would be.
Let's instead look at it from this angle;
You send a contingent to take over one or maybe even up to a dozen silos...
You somehow don't get shot out of the air,
or you somehow manage to make it on foot through kilometers upon kilometers of some of the most inhospitable terrain on Earth after a coastal invasion of the most highly populated (and defended) areas in a country where there are more guns than people,
against all odds, you have somehow managed to successfully make it through the one of the most powerful military forces on Earth, some of the most defendable land on Earth, and you capture some silos...
And instantly, you are destroyed by a counter-attack either by conventional military force, or the thousands of other silos the US still controls.
Along with your entire country.
And potentially the world.
All over enough ordinance to maybe destroy a medium-sized city in a flyover state.
What a great plan! You should become a general.
>>54748516
these images are cringe
>>54749175
That's the point dingus
>>54749161
No. Some very good ways to block everything. They'd have to rip off all the existing machinery down and stock their own. Which could take months
>>54749214
Who says that China can't just take state by state until they reach the silo?
I still rather not risk the "What If" test. You'd make a horrible sysadmin.
>>54749240
So how was it the government's fault when they didn't own those servers? It's the Clintons' fault.
So if they get rid of the systems,
Do you think I could buy them?
Always wanted a IBM Series-1.
I wonder if my Middle School still has a copy of Don't Copy That Floppy on Laser-Disc...
>>54749240
chinks being able to do shit is just a meme, dumbo
>>54749275
They'd be shredded like every other piece of upper level government equipment. Really policy is to shred everything. Keyboard, monitor, cables. The works
>>54747842
A lot of military tech is ancient. Like, we Russians still have many satellite communications stations that are mostly mechanical. You rotate them by shifting metal rods. God help you if you rotate it wrong, it will get stuck and require at least 3 privates with hammers and crowbars. Or punch tape telegraphs, stick one short piece in, glue ends together, clamp that shit down and start the transmission, haha funny fucking joke.
>>54749258
It's somebody's fault. And that somebody is working for the government.
Just to let you know. There were constant messages telling everyone to report anyone not using a .gov email
After 30000 emails, not one person reported her.
>>54749240
>Who says that China can't just take state by state until they reach the silo?
Because it doesn't work that way. The resistance they would face from military and civilian entities alike and the logistical nightmare of moving enough troops and supplies across the Pacific and then through the vast inhospitable expanses the western United states makes a ground invasion ALL while resisting the full brunt of the US and allied forces so fucking stupid and irresponsible it's not even worth considering for a "what if", especially considering that if shit hit the fan between us and China, you bet your ass they will have a fight on their hands on the home front from Japan, South Korea, and the many other even vaguely US-aligned countries that surround them and all want a piece of the action.
That doesn't even take into account the intense resistance they would face at the silos themselves, which are located in the middle of fucking nowhere and would be very well guarded by the military, maybe they could take a couple, but they would not hold them long enough, and if the US perceived a threat from that occupation, I doubt they would hesitate to unleash the full power of what they still control, nuclear or not, on taking it back.
Basically, we will have launched those missles by the time an occupying force even gets to them.
>>54747863
Look at the specs on the IBM Series/1.
16 bit processor, up to 64k of memory, about 9 MB of storage. So we're talking a high end AVR.
>>54749343
Okay fine. What about fucking Canada? I mean it doesn't matter who it is or what they're forces look like
You're ignoring the point. What do you do if an enemy captures that nuclear silo? Simply saying "lmao that's never going to happen" isn't going to do anything
>>54748477
>and have new disks produced
It doesn't work like that.
They'll be replacing the drives themselves with emulators, something like pic related.
And that's good since it's not connected to any network. You don't want someone to hack into it and remote activate the missiles.
>>54749275
Anything that touches classified information/software is going to get shredded for scrap. If you think they'll sell an IBM computer that contains nuclear launch authorization programs on government auction you're wrong unfortunately.
>>54749388
So you can't design a modern computer that can't be networked?
The maintenance cost here comes from finding authorized parts to replace hardware that's 50 years old. Even NASA had this problem -- at one point in time they had to go looking for compatible power supplies on Craigslist to replace the ones in flight hardware.
>US military system is unhackable because there is no internet
>however small amount of internet managed to get into the management room and the system was hacked and the hackers launched the nukes.
>Experts say: "This was the one thing we didn't want to happen"
>>54748252
>latest possible tech often
LaunchRecoveryProcedure.tiff.exe
>>54749372
>Okay fine. What about fucking Canada? I mean it doesn't matter who it is or what they're forces look like
Can't see it being much easier. You still have the Rockies in your way, you still have reasonably large population centers on the coast, you still have to go through the US and allied navies, you would still have to deal with shit back home, whatever you did to sour relations with the US, as internationally apathetic as it currently is when it comes to Chinese activity, certainly isn't putting you in good standing with your US-aligned neighbors.
In the time it takes you to get across the Pacific in reasonable numbers, the US and Canada can both gather up a capable defense.
>What do you do if an enemy captures that nuclear silo? Simply saying "lmao that's never going to happen" isn't going to do anything
Take it back, or neutralize it if you can't. It doesn't matter what or how new platform your control systems are running on, if they can get into it they will. Physical access is game over.
>>54749381
I never tried to imply to the contrary, but it's not like it's difficult to order some new disks from a chinese manufacturer when you're one of the most well-funded government agencies on the planet. Adapting a more modern standard is certainly a good idea though, it only needs to be secure.
>>54748252
>but wouldn't you expect something as important as nuclear arms to be upgraded to the latest possible tech often?
why? because it is in hollywood films?
the only thing they would really stand to gain from an upgrade of this system is a temporarily easier serviceability
>>54748482
>installing doom on the nukes
>not installing duke nukem
BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS
>>54748680
Fuck you Burgerfag! Queen's English, all day, 'erry day!
>>54749505
tfw you select british english when installing OS even though you live in us
who else /devlish/ here?
>>54749187
Was thinking more along the lines of
>llewd chinese cartoon desktops
>minuteManArchConfig.sh
>screenfetch nuke stats
>mpd - America - FuckYeah.opus
>degenerate command room discussions via IRC #MidnightCrew
>Cheeto dust.. Everywhere..
There's absolutely no need for a more powerful system.
If the machine is reliable, which it clearly is after all this time,then don't fix what isn't broken.
It has nothing to do with targeting, flightplans etc etc, it's a fucking fancy inventory management system.
>mfw they replace their pdp with a raspberry pi running and emulator
>>54749697
>get the call from the President to launch the nukes
>press the button to initiate launch procedure
>the 40 year old floppies finally gave up and failed
>as his skin is melting off his face, the general thinks that maybe it wasn't such a bad idea to spend a couple hundred thousand on CDs
Aren't 1970's computers impervious to outside hacking?
>>54749897
I assume 1970s computers don't even have password prompts
but if they're off the grid it doesn't matter
Install gentoo
>>54749944
>"Goddammit Jenkins, launch the nukes!"
>"Sir, I can't! Nukelaunch is still compiling!"
>>54747919
thank you for this
>>54747842
what do you replace it with some windows 10 internet connected piece of shit?
>>54748533
>computer lags
>tap wrong country
>"oops"
Time to replace that old shit with Chinese ARM CPUs and USB sticks, neckbeards.
>>54748432
>punched tape
You could adapt the optical reader to work with metal tape. Which would make this an incredibly long-lived storage solution...with abysmal capacity.
>OMG ITS SO OLD
>THAT MEANS ITS SHIT! XDDDD
>>54748556
>>54747842
If it's not broken, don't fix it.
>optimized secure software that runs perfectly on old but secure and tested hardware is a bad thing
>>54750868
It can't even run Instagram, f'am. Why would anyone want that old junk?
>>54748482
I'm pretty sure that the systems in the silos already run DOOM.
>>54750916
Normies who say shit like this trigger me so hard I swear.
>hey why do you use that old junk laptop instead of these nice Windows 10 laptops with touchscreens and apps at work?
Because I literally use my ThinkPad at work for rdp only. That's all I need it to do.
>>54749809
>what are backups
>>54749809
CDs still degrade after 20 years depending how they're stored. The most stable form of memory is probably core memory, that shit will last for 1000 years.
>>54749470
Never seen Jericho? The attack would come from inside. A US-based organization wanting a bigger slice of the pie could come up with a plan to blow the fuck out of the country and take over during the aftermath.
I'm thinking maybe evangelical extremist I saw on a documentary one day, praising Muslims because they manage to breed some efficient fanatics so they want to do their Christian version in the US to literally fight democracy, science, abortion and Harry Potter
