4 ms·

What are the potential uses of this? Is it more about exploring how the user terminal works, or is it about enabling new features somehow on the user terminal?

ragebol 4y ago
Given that Starlink user terminals can obviously also transmit data, maybe you can make a point to point connection between user terminals over hundreds of kilometers (given line of sight, so realistically much much less). Make a mesh network that way.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
  Is there any health implications to this?
  - kernaussage 4y ago
    Why would there be? Starlink emits non-iodizing radiation.
    - pawelpro 4y ago
      Non-ionizing.
      - askvictor 4y ago
        Probably non-iodizing too.
      - tsimionescu 4y ago
        To be fair, the radiation is also non-iodizing!
        Eleison23 4y ago
        So it does not need to carry the FDA's fake warning label?
        mensetmanusman 4y ago
        Radioactive decay emits neurons with enough energy to strip electrons from molecules that it shoots through. This is how it can tear apart DNA, which would chemically react after impact/ion generation (stripped electrons), and cause cancer.
        tsimionescu 4y ago
        I'm pretty sure no radioactive decay has ever been observed emitting a neuron (a brain cell), though you probably mean "neutron", which would be correct. I was only making a joke - "iodizing" radiation would be radiation that causes something to react with iodine, which no known form of radiation would. The GP meant "ionizing" radiation, which is what you are describing as well. Now that you mention it, I suppose it's possible for ionizing radiation to cause something to react with iodine, making it "iodizing" radiation as well. Either way, radio waves are non-ionizing radiation. To the extent that they can create problems in the human body, they will do it by causing heating (like microwaves), not by stripping off electrons to create ions (and certainly not by forcing other molecules to react with iodine).
    - gambiting 4y ago
      I mean, yes, but that doesn't automatically make it safe. You know cellphone mast antennas? They also emit non-ionizing radiation yet you do NOT want to stand near one when it's working - radio burns are no joke. I don't know if starlink has enough power to cause damage - but regardless, there's a good chance this wouldn't be legal as the device isn't certified to broadcast this way and would fall afoul of regulations.
      - b112 4y ago
        radio burns are no joke. No kidding! I'll never call in to my town's talkshow again. That DJ sucks.
      - kortilla 4y ago
        Nah, unless this mod somehow boosted beyond what it transmits to the sats, it’s safe. It would require a scary sticker otherwise.
      - JoachimS 4y ago
        We are talking kW output effect vs mW for a Starkink UT.
        gambiting 4y ago
        Of course, my point is just that saying "it's non-ionizing radiation" isn't a magical rule that makes it safe. You can absolutely have dangerous or even lethal levels of non ionizing radiation too. (I think I should have used a simpler example - your microwave uses non-ionizing radiation too, yet would most definitely burn you if you put your hand inside it).
        JoachimS 4y ago
        The microwave is also generating many hundreds of Watts, up to kW of radio waves, a bit like the mobile base station. In slightly different frequencies. It is still several orders of magnitude less than what Starlink emits from the antenna.
        4y ago
    - hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
      I don’t think malice was intended but your response seems shaming. Try instead thinking why others might not know something you consider to be obvious.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    Well, yes, in that you would be arrested.
- dezgeg 4y ago
  Are the Rx/tx protocols really that symmetrical that an UT can receive and decode transmission from another UT? Since for cellular networks that is definitely not the case.
  - ragebol 4y ago
    I'd assume that is not symmetrical. But if you can run your own software, does that matter?
    - MertsA 4y ago
      If the Phy on one terminal isn't capable of receiving anything the Phy on the other terminal can transmit then all the software in the world won't help there. If the frequency bands for Tx and Rx don't overlap then you're out of luck.
    - dezgeg 4y ago
      Depends on how much of the stack is implemented in software and how much in fixed-function silicon.
sneak 4y ago
You can replace the OS that it runs with one of your own (that's not signed by Starlink keys). You could, for example, modify the root filesystem to allow you to ssh into it, or query it with SNMP, or perhaps report a different GPS location to its APIs (instead of the one it's actually at). I'd personally like my Starlink to use its real GPS for calculating which satellites it needs to talk to, but only report a truncated (or no) location to HQ, so that SpaceX doesn't have my meter-resolution location every time I'm online. I imagine there are some Ukranian soldiers who feel the same way.
- FL410 4y ago
  > I'd personally like my Starlink to use its real GPS for calculating which satellites it needs to talk to, but only report a truncated (or no) location to HQ, so that SpaceX doesn't have my meter-resolution location every time I'm online. That’s actually what it does by default. Unless specifically activated for debugging reasons, the terminal does not send its lat/lon, so the most they know is what cell you are in (~10km-ish resolution)
  - sneak 4y ago
    I’m curious about how one would go about confirming this information. Did you learn this from a dump of the dish’s filesystem? My email is in my profile if you want to share details privately.
- pifm_guy 4y ago
  > I imagine there are some Ukranian soldiers who feel the same way. I imagine there are russian soldiers who even more think the same way... Putting the GPS location to be a few miles over in enemy territory would be a good way to make the dish work when it's geofenced.
ComodoHacker 4y ago
Russian intel would be very grateful for the possibility to hack into terminals used by Ukrainian troops.
- Gasp0de 4y ago
  By having physical access to the terminal? What would be the use case for that?
  - ComodoHacker 4y ago
    Traffic interception.
    - Gasp0de 4y ago
      So they steal the user terminals, give them back to the Ukrainian soldiers, then intercept their (probably TLS encrypted) traffic, and then send that information back to themselves?
  - irae 4y ago
    wild guess: spies compromise terminals before it is given to troops, take tactical advantage of live GPS and maybe MITM them later?

ragebol 4y ago

Given that Starlink user terminals can obviously also transmit data, maybe you can make a point to point connection between user terminals over hundreds of kilometers (given line of sight, so realistically much much less). Make a mesh network that way.

hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
Is there any health implications to this?
- kernaussage 4y ago
  Why would there be? Starlink emits non-iodizing radiation.
  - pawelpro 4y ago
    Non-ionizing.
    - askvictor 4y ago
      Probably non-iodizing too.
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      To be fair, the radiation is also non-iodizing!
      - Eleison23 4y ago
        So it does not need to carry the FDA's fake warning label?
      - mensetmanusman 4y ago
        Radioactive decay emits neurons with enough energy to strip electrons from molecules that it shoots through. This is how it can tear apart DNA, which would chemically react after impact/ion generation (stripped electrons), and cause cancer.
        tsimionescu 4y ago
        I'm pretty sure no radioactive decay has ever been observed emitting a neuron (a brain cell), though you probably mean "neutron", which would be correct. I was only making a joke - "iodizing" radiation would be radiation that causes something to react with iodine, which no known form of radiation would. The GP meant "ionizing" radiation, which is what you are describing as well. Now that you mention it, I suppose it's possible for ionizing radiation to cause something to react with iodine, making it "iodizing" radiation as well. Either way, radio waves are non-ionizing radiation. To the extent that they can create problems in the human body, they will do it by causing heating (like microwaves), not by stripping off electrons to create ions (and certainly not by forcing other molecules to react with iodine).
  - gambiting 4y ago
    I mean, yes, but that doesn't automatically make it safe. You know cellphone mast antennas? They also emit non-ionizing radiation yet you do NOT want to stand near one when it's working - radio burns are no joke. I don't know if starlink has enough power to cause damage - but regardless, there's a good chance this wouldn't be legal as the device isn't certified to broadcast this way and would fall afoul of regulations.
    - b112 4y ago
      radio burns are no joke. No kidding! I'll never call in to my town's talkshow again. That DJ sucks.
    - kortilla 4y ago
      Nah, unless this mod somehow boosted beyond what it transmits to the sats, it’s safe. It would require a scary sticker otherwise.
    - JoachimS 4y ago
      We are talking kW output effect vs mW for a Starkink UT.
      - gambiting 4y ago
        Of course, my point is just that saying "it's non-ionizing radiation" isn't a magical rule that makes it safe. You can absolutely have dangerous or even lethal levels of non ionizing radiation too. (I think I should have used a simpler example - your microwave uses non-ionizing radiation too, yet would most definitely burn you if you put your hand inside it).
        JoachimS 4y ago
        The microwave is also generating many hundreds of Watts, up to kW of radio waves, a bit like the mobile base station. In slightly different frequencies. It is still several orders of magnitude less than what Starlink emits from the antenna.
      - 4y ago
  - hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
    I don’t think malice was intended but your response seems shaming. Try instead thinking why others might not know something you consider to be obvious.
- wumpus 4y ago
  Well, yes, in that you would be arrested.
dezgeg 4y ago
Are the Rx/tx protocols really that symmetrical that an UT can receive and decode transmission from another UT? Since for cellular networks that is definitely not the case.
- ragebol 4y ago
  I'd assume that is not symmetrical. But if you can run your own software, does that matter?
  - MertsA 4y ago
    If the Phy on one terminal isn't capable of receiving anything the Phy on the other terminal can transmit then all the software in the world won't help there. If the frequency bands for Tx and Rx don't overlap then you're out of luck.
  - dezgeg 4y ago
    Depends on how much of the stack is implemented in software and how much in fixed-function silicon.

sneak 4y ago

You can replace the OS that it runs with one of your own (that's not signed by Starlink keys). You could, for example, modify the root filesystem to allow you to ssh into it, or query it with SNMP, or perhaps report a different GPS location to its APIs (instead of the one it's actually at). I'd personally like my Starlink to use its real GPS for calculating which satellites it needs to talk to, but only report a truncated (or no) location to HQ, so that SpaceX doesn't have my meter-resolution location every time I'm online. I imagine there are some Ukranian soldiers who feel the same way.

FL410 4y ago
> I'd personally like my Starlink to use its real GPS for calculating which satellites it needs to talk to, but only report a truncated (or no) location to HQ, so that SpaceX doesn't have my meter-resolution location every time I'm online. That’s actually what it does by default. Unless specifically activated for debugging reasons, the terminal does not send its lat/lon, so the most they know is what cell you are in (~10km-ish resolution)
- sneak 4y ago
  I’m curious about how one would go about confirming this information. Did you learn this from a dump of the dish’s filesystem? My email is in my profile if you want to share details privately.
pifm_guy 4y ago
> I imagine there are some Ukranian soldiers who feel the same way. I imagine there are russian soldiers who even more think the same way... Putting the GPS location to be a few miles over in enemy territory would be a good way to make the dish work when it's geofenced.

ComodoHacker 4y ago

Russian intel would be very grateful for the possibility to hack into terminals used by Ukrainian troops.

Gasp0de 4y ago
By having physical access to the terminal? What would be the use case for that?
- ComodoHacker 4y ago
  Traffic interception.
  - Gasp0de 4y ago
    So they steal the user terminals, give them back to the Ukrainian soldiers, then intercept their (probably TLS encrypted) traffic, and then send that information back to themselves?
- irae 4y ago
  wild guess: spies compromise terminals before it is given to troops, take tactical advantage of live GPS and maybe MITM them later?