8 ms·

That is amazing: > ALIS does not have redundant infrastructure: ALIS’s current design results in all F-35 data produced across the U.S. fleet to be routed to a

That is amazing: > ALIS does not have redundant infrastructure: ALIS’s current design results in all F-35 data produced across the U.S. fleet to be routed to a Central Point of Entry and then to ALIS’s main operating unit with no backup system or redundancy. If either of these fail, it could take the entire F -35 fleet offline. That sounds like a movie plot [Independence Day] (or Battlestar Galactica)! So, the enemy jams comms or shoots down satellites, and a F-35 squadron deployed to a base on the other side of the world can't do maintenance? An aircraft carrier is attacked and its antennas are destroyed, and they can't do maintenance? The enemy breaks into or takes offline the Central Point of Entry over the Internet (oh, but it's airgapped, of course...), and the entire F-35 fleet around the world can't do maintenance? (Or can't do it at the level required to maintain combat readiness.) Am I misunderstanding something here?

jjn2009 11y ago
Nope that sounds like the ramifications of having a single point of failure.
TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
Yes, yes, and I don't think so. Where was the oversight? It's beyond incompetent. If I was paranoid I'd wonder if procurement and architecture had been taken over by hostile agents. Short of putting a remotely controlled logic bomb and/or actual explosive device on every plane, it's hard to imagine how the F-35 could possibly have been made more vulnerable and less fit for purpose.
engi_nerd 11y ago
> So, the enemy jams comms or shoots down satellites, and a F-35 squadron deployed to a base on the other side of the world can't do maintenance? This makes it sound as if ALIS does maintenance. ALIS does not do the maintenance. Human beings still do the maintenance.
- btbuildem 11y ago
  From the article it seems like they need to drive around with ALIS CD-ROMs to do maintenance..
  - engi_nerd 11y ago
    That's not supposed to happen, but...
- alphapapa 11y ago
  > This makes it sound as if ALIS does maintenance. ALIS does not do the maintenance. Human beings still do the maintenance. Well, obviously, ALIS is not a robot with mechanical arms that do the physical work (although with its name, it wouldn't be surprising if some people expected "Alice" to do just that; and the personification is creepily reminiscent of 2001: A Space Odyssey). But from what I've read in these articles and part of that GAO report, it sounds like ALIS is part of the designed maintenance protocols. For example, Action Requests are entered into ALIS and uploaded to the contractor (!) who triages them (!) and collates data across multiple sites (noted in the GAO report are problems such as a software update preventing contractors from receiving ARs while the on-site personnel are waiting for an answer--eventually they call and ask, hey, what about those ARs? and the contractors respond, what ARs? because they didn't know they were failing). And technical manuals are accessible through ALIS instead of having to refer to paper manuals. Of course, these are all so vague and general that it's hard for laymen to figure out what it would mean in practice. The terms used in the GAO report for expected functionality are so non-specific that it seems nearly useless to even use them. Having said all that, the GAO report does mention (buried in the middle of a paragraph, not prominently like a major vulnerability should be) that ALIS can be used in an offline capacity: > DOD officials told us that they recognize this issue and, for short-term losses of connection, ALIS users are able to work offline. (page 17) But that doesn't sound very reassuring to me. In wartime, all sorts of bad things happen, and lost connectivity and communications should be at the top of the list of expectations. If maintenance is severely degraded and aircraft can't fly sorties at the needed rate, well, in a war....
- CWuestefeld 11y ago
  AIUI, every component of the plane has a unique identity and status. It sounded to me like this involves digital signatures and all that. So presumably, manual maintenance without the proper bookkeeping would be viewed as tampering/sabotage, and the plane would refuse to operate.
  - gherkin0 11y ago
    > manual maintenance without the proper bookkeeping would be viewed as tampering/sabotage, and the plane would refuse to operate. If that's true, it sounds like a solution is search of a requirement. IIRC, but I don't think the US military has had problems with tampering and sabotage of military jets.
    - brokenmachine 11y ago
      Sounds more like DRM than prevention of sabotage. Like in printer ink heads... "Attention! Counterfeit hydraulics system installed. F-35 disabled until genuine system purchased". This would stop people buying cheap F-35 spare parts from China on ebay and trying to save a couple of million dollars.
  - engi_nerd 11y ago
    Interesting speculation, but General Bogdan's assertion that you can operate an individual F-35 for "up to 30 days" without ALIS indicates otherwise.
    - CWuestefeld 11y ago
      I don't think that contradicts my understanding. If no maintenance was necessary in the 30 day period, then there wouldn't be anything to detect.
      - engi_nerd 11y ago
        A droll reply would be, "It's a fighter, maintenance is always necessary." But to give a real answer: If a jet sits for 30 days without any maintenance, then it's supposed to be preserved. This means all fuel is offloaded, all lubricants drained and then refilled and then drained again (leaving a film of clean lubricant over important parts), etc. Otherwise, you have to perform an engine run to keep the aircraft nominally flyable. Really, if you aren't flying, you are either doing maintenance to prepare to fly, fixing something, performing scheduled inspections, or performing modifications. So if the aircraft is operational, there is no such thing as a 30 day period without maintenance. Without ALIS, you just do all of this via the old paper processes for a while.
clem 11y ago
Have they considered designing super weapons for the Galactic Empire?
- alphapapa 11y ago
  The sad/funny/weird thing is that some people would say that's what this is. Almost makes one wonder...
happyslobro 11y ago
> airgapped How the heck to do you airgap a "Central Point of Entry", lol.
- alphapapa 11y ago
  That's a good question. I meant airgapped from the Internet, of course, but the "..." was meant to imply that it's the kind of thing that is easier said than done, and easily, accidentally done wrong.

jjn2009 11y ago

Nope that sounds like the ramifications of having a single point of failure.

TheOtherHobbes 11y ago

Yes, yes, and I don't think so. Where was the oversight? It's beyond incompetent. If I was paranoid I'd wonder if procurement and architecture had been taken over by hostile agents. Short of putting a remotely controlled logic bomb and/or actual explosive device on every plane, it's hard to imagine how the F-35 could possibly have been made more vulnerable and less fit for purpose.

engi_nerd 11y ago

> So, the enemy jams comms or shoots down satellites, and a F-35 squadron deployed to a base on the other side of the world can't do maintenance? This makes it sound as if ALIS does maintenance. ALIS does not do the maintenance. Human beings still do the maintenance.

btbuildem 11y ago
From the article it seems like they need to drive around with ALIS CD-ROMs to do maintenance..
- engi_nerd 11y ago
  That's not supposed to happen, but...
alphapapa 11y ago
> This makes it sound as if ALIS does maintenance. ALIS does not do the maintenance. Human beings still do the maintenance. Well, obviously, ALIS is not a robot with mechanical arms that do the physical work (although with its name, it wouldn't be surprising if some people expected "Alice" to do just that; and the personification is creepily reminiscent of 2001: A Space Odyssey). But from what I've read in these articles and part of that GAO report, it sounds like ALIS is part of the designed maintenance protocols. For example, Action Requests are entered into ALIS and uploaded to the contractor (!) who triages them (!) and collates data across multiple sites (noted in the GAO report are problems such as a software update preventing contractors from receiving ARs while the on-site personnel are waiting for an answer--eventually they call and ask, hey, what about those ARs? and the contractors respond, what ARs? because they didn't know they were failing). And technical manuals are accessible through ALIS instead of having to refer to paper manuals. Of course, these are all so vague and general that it's hard for laymen to figure out what it would mean in practice. The terms used in the GAO report for expected functionality are so non-specific that it seems nearly useless to even use them. Having said all that, the GAO report does mention (buried in the middle of a paragraph, not prominently like a major vulnerability should be) that ALIS can be used in an offline capacity: > DOD officials told us that they recognize this issue and, for short-term losses of connection, ALIS users are able to work offline. (page 17) But that doesn't sound very reassuring to me. In wartime, all sorts of bad things happen, and lost connectivity and communications should be at the top of the list of expectations. If maintenance is severely degraded and aircraft can't fly sorties at the needed rate, well, in a war....
CWuestefeld 11y ago
AIUI, every component of the plane has a unique identity and status. It sounded to me like this involves digital signatures and all that. So presumably, manual maintenance without the proper bookkeeping would be viewed as tampering/sabotage, and the plane would refuse to operate.
- gherkin0 11y ago
  > manual maintenance without the proper bookkeeping would be viewed as tampering/sabotage, and the plane would refuse to operate. If that's true, it sounds like a solution is search of a requirement. IIRC, but I don't think the US military has had problems with tampering and sabotage of military jets.
  - brokenmachine 11y ago
    Sounds more like DRM than prevention of sabotage. Like in printer ink heads... "Attention! Counterfeit hydraulics system installed. F-35 disabled until genuine system purchased". This would stop people buying cheap F-35 spare parts from China on ebay and trying to save a couple of million dollars.
- engi_nerd 11y ago
  Interesting speculation, but General Bogdan's assertion that you can operate an individual F-35 for "up to 30 days" without ALIS indicates otherwise.
  - CWuestefeld 11y ago
    I don't think that contradicts my understanding. If no maintenance was necessary in the 30 day period, then there wouldn't be anything to detect.
    - engi_nerd 11y ago
      A droll reply would be, "It's a fighter, maintenance is always necessary." But to give a real answer: If a jet sits for 30 days without any maintenance, then it's supposed to be preserved. This means all fuel is offloaded, all lubricants drained and then refilled and then drained again (leaving a film of clean lubricant over important parts), etc. Otherwise, you have to perform an engine run to keep the aircraft nominally flyable. Really, if you aren't flying, you are either doing maintenance to prepare to fly, fixing something, performing scheduled inspections, or performing modifications. So if the aircraft is operational, there is no such thing as a 30 day period without maintenance. Without ALIS, you just do all of this via the old paper processes for a while.

clem 11y ago

Have they considered designing super weapons for the Galactic Empire?

alphapapa 11y ago
The sad/funny/weird thing is that some people would say that's what this is. Almost makes one wonder...

happyslobro 11y ago

> airgapped How the heck to do you airgap a "Central Point of Entry", lol.

alphapapa 11y ago
That's a good question. I meant airgapped from the Internet, of course, but the "..." was meant to imply that it's the kind of thing that is easier said than done, and easily, accidentally done wrong.