The communications link for most satellites is vulnerable to attack by hackers who could disable or disrupt satellite service.
Keywords: Satellite Jamming.
Can you improve on this argument text? Help develop this argument by editing and adding more information or click on one of the edit links below to add a counter, supporting, or related argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a supporting argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a counterargument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a related argument.
The growing interdependence between U.S. civilian and military space systems further increases the likelihood that cyber-attacks might be launched against American commercial satellites, if for no other reason than military action directed against U.S. space capabilities will have to target the nation's broader space infrastructure to be successful. In addition, to potential foreign adversaries seeking to avoid a direct military confrontation with the U.S. forces, whether a traditional uniformed military or "non-traditional" adversary (such as a terrorist organization), the commercial sector represents the "soft underbelly" of American space power, which can be attacked through cyberspace in such a way as to make determining the origin of the attack very difficult. ( More ... ) Petras, Christopher M. "The Use of Force in Response to Cyber-Attack on Commercial Space Systems." Journal of Air Law and Commerce. Vol. 67, No. 4 (Fall 2002): 1213-1268. [ 1 reference ]
According to the Satellite Users Interference Reduction Group, there were only 305 satellite radio frequency interference incidents reported in 2006, a significant decline from the 1,282 reported incidents in 2005. Of these events 17 percent were caused by equipment malfunction and 19 percent by human error; less than one percent of the interference occurrences were caused by terrestrial services. Only 14 percent occurred during cross- polarization - when satellite dishes are being aligned to receive signals from the satellite - and adjacent satellites were responsible for only four percent of the incidents, suggesting the ongoing ability of the international community to manage use of the radio frequency spectrum. Almost 40 percent of all cases were classified as unknown; however, most of these are attributed to operator errors that were quickly corrected. Graham, Thomas and William Marshall. Space Security 2007. Waterlo, Ontario: Project Ploughshares, August 2007. [ 20 quotes ] [ page 37 ]
Nonetheless, it is unintentional interference and collisions that most worry satellite operators in GEO rather than the still relatively rare instances of open conflict over slot allocation or deliberate jamming. All satellites in GEO must make routine maneuvers to maintain their orbital paths so as to ensure continued connection with ground-based receivers. However, if satellites pass too closely, their signals will clash, causing interference. And of course, the insertion of satellites into orbit and on-orbit maneuvering raises the possibility of inadvertent collisions. With the plethora of new players in the satellite game, some less-experienced operators—particularly in Asia—lack familiarity with the informal rules employed by the long-established operators, and thus often fail to abide by those best practices such as notification of launch, maneuvers, and potential close approaches. Hitchens, Theresa. "Debris, Traffic Management and Weaponization." Brown Journal of World Affairs. Vol. 14, No. 1 (Fall / Winter 2007): 173-186. [ 5 quotes ] [ page 177 ]