Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Security The Military China Government Japan Network Networking United States Wireless Networking News Technology

North Korea Launches Missile and Tries To Jam GPS Signals (go.com) 127

An anonymous reader writes: Hours after North Korea fired a short-range missile into the sea in retaliation for ongoing U.S. join military drills with South Korea, they started jamming GPS navigation systems near its border with South Korea, affecting hundreds of fishing boats but not causing any immediate danger. There were no disruptions to drivers' satellite navigation system or air traffic, but warning messages were broadcast in affected areas warning ships not to rely on their GPS navigation. In a statement, the South Korean Ministry of National Defense said: "North Korea has been continuously disrupting GPS system since 7:30 pm [Thursday] and thereby interfering and hampering our military movements, which is threatening the safety of our people."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

North Korea Launches Missile and Tries To Jam GPS Signals

Comments Filter:
  • Send in the HAARP! Trump would do it!
  • by kheldan ( 1460303 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @06:49PM (#51825713) Journal
    The little dog that used to just go yap yap yap is now frothing at the mouth, too. Isn't it time to euthenize it?
    • by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @06:54PM (#51825727)

      The little dog's owner is China, and even if the owner admits their dog is out of control, it is still their dog. No-one wants to kill China's dog.

      I do like metaphors. They can stretch so many ways.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        https://www.reddit.com/r/AskRe... [reddit.com]

        The idea struck me as funny and I found this today.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        The funny part is that N. Korea has already threatened China as well with potential nuclear attack for siding with capitalist pigs.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-and-china-agree-to-oppose-north-korea-nuclear-programme-a6962901.html

      • by Anonymous Coward

        NK is making China look weak and indecisive. NK has drawn the attention of every military in the region. NK actions have caused the US to deploy even more Aegis destroyers and missile defense stations on the west coast. US allies in the region have also upgraded their missile defense capabilities. If the US ends up deploying the THADD missile defense system in SK China might see their nuclear deterrent being threatened. So the question is why China would allow any of this. NK may not have an ICBM capable

      • by llzackll ( 68018 )

        you sir, are a troll. said control, where are my jelly rolls. on the poll? fear not, ill slashdot the spot with a mott.

        • Last time I got to abuse a metaphor like that, someone compared ISIS to a criminal who attacks you in the street, and said the correct response was to beat them up - by which they meant carpet-bomb ISIS-controlled territory to kill everyone.

          I explained that this particular thug has strapped babies all over his body, knowing that few potential opponents are going to risk hitting him too hard for fear of killing some babies. Are you willing to murder babies?

          • by llzackll ( 68018 )

            you are either still a troll, or a literary genius, said the metaphorical penis who murdered entire genus. maybe i shall travel to venus, or mars while living large

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by sittingnut ( 88521 )

      but who will "euthenize" nuclear armed "the little dog" ?
      same pussy cats who got bent over and spanked by even the ak47 armed afgans and iraqis? lol

      • by peragrin ( 659227 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @07:13PM (#51825793)

        The difference is k47 armed afghans and iraqis don't have a leadership. you can't cut off the snake's head to kill it. As there isn't a head to cut. Hitler killing himself ended world war II, what would have happened if the SS instead of surrendering became a gorilla fighting force that never gave up?

        The USA Army walked over the iraqi army like it wasn't there. however once the big army battles were done, then the real trouble began. Only idiots didn't see it coming.(yes they happened to be in washington DC at that time)

        • This was actually a legitimate concern. The US army was bracing for a long drawn guerilla war in the alps as it was perceived the SS were building fortified positions to this end.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Nazi gorillas!

        • by Kjella ( 173770 )

          The difference is k47 armed afghans and iraqis don't have a leadership. you can't cut off the snake's head to kill it. As there isn't a head to cut. Hitler killing himself ended world war II, what would have happened if the SS instead of surrendering became a gorilla fighting force that never gave up?

          They'd become an army of trained monkeys? As for a few rebel SS soldiers, the US lost 407,300 men in WWII so a few thousand more (for comparison 4496 in Iraq, 2326 in Afghanistan) would barely hit the noise floor. If they were defending US territory nobody would even begin to question it, it's not like the casualties are any significant drain on the US armed forces. The only reason it is an issue is whether or not the US should be fighting/fixing fucked up countries on the other side of the globe, just like

          • by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @09:03PM (#51826063)

            Part of the problem the US faces is that whenever it is talked about how such a bad idea the recent wars it undertook over in the Middle East all that is mentioned is the few thousand American troops lost and the money it cost the US to wage the wars. One almost never hears about the costs inflected on Afghanistan and Iraq.

            Hundreds of thousands have died and many times that number have been maimed because of those actions. Millions upon millions of lives have been ruined. And yet all we hear from the US is the problems that the wars caused for them. Maybe the country would have more good will if it showed more sympathy towards the victims of its actions instead of showing support to politicians who propose carpet bombing areas of the Middle East.

            • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

              by ChrisMaple ( 607946 )
              When you maliciously poke someone in the eye with a sharp stick, you have no valid complaint if he pulls out a .44 magnum and blows your arm off.
              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by Anonymous Coward

                Which is why you have nothing to complain about with regards to what happened on 9/11.

                • by llzackll ( 68018 )

                  i had called 911 a couple times and the fucken bitch on the other end said lose my number. so what was the number for 911 again ?

                • Please, point to exactly what the US did to Saudi Arabia, or even Pakistan/Afghanistan to cause 9/11 to happen.

              • by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @11:00PM (#51826381)

                Your analogy only works if there was someone who poked you in the eye with a sharp stick. Or at least if you shot the person who poked you. In this case someone pokes you with a stick, you pull out a gun, shoot randomly into a crowd of people in the opposite direction, and then complain loudly about the ringing in your ears.

                • Neither analogy works. In this case, someone is poking random people in a crowd with a sharp knife and someone starts shooting at them. Actually that doesn't work either because the two scenarios are completely different and the analogies are trying to conflate misinterpretations.

          • gorillas and monkeys aren't even the same genus.

            • by llzackll ( 68018 )

              yeah but you are talking apeshit as if it had anything to do with semantics. and i know what ive had enough of and nobody else does

              • yeah but you are talking apeshit as if it had anything to do with semantics. and i know what ive had enough of and nobody else does

                The meaning of the words always has something to do with the semantics, which is all about meaning. ;)

                It is from the Greek semantikos, "having meaning."

        • quite apart from typos(or not?) there are other problems with your comment.

          "The difference is k47 armed afghans and iraqis don't have a leadership."
          really?
          in iraq, most of the sunni fighters and leaders are from the former army and regime. only reason they are not winning is current iran backed and almost controlled, shia regime and militias in iraq, no friends of west.
          and in afghanistan taliban(and its leadership) is more or less the same as one that was supposedly defeated.

          yes "idiots didn't see it coming

          • I would also point out, the reason for the rise of ISIS is the pullout of forces in Iraq, which was caused by the President of Iraq forcing the issue. He was warned by Bush that it was a bad idea to pull out, and negotiations were attempted, but the President of Iraq was not willing to give an inch to save his country.

        • what would have happened if the SS instead of surrendering became a gorilla fighting force that never gave up?

          That would've been a hairy situation...

        • the SS instead of surrendering became a gorilla fighting force

          When winter comes, Lisa, they'll simply freeze to death.

        • The USA Army walked over the iraqi army like it wasn't there. however once the big army battles were done, then the real trouble began. Only idiots didn't see it coming.

          Agree with what you say except this part. A bunch of friends and I share a forum, and took a poll before the second Iraq War how long we thought the U.S. would be there. Everyone, including those against the war, estimated 2-5 years. My estimate was the longest - 2 years of actual combat, 8 years of reconstruction. And I only gave that

      • No need to invade, just destroy the missiles, artillery, and armor and call it done.

        • without invasion (or as they say "boots on the ground") impossible to all "destroy the missiles, artillery, and armor ".
          contrast the ineffectiveness of usa air strikes at islamic state in syria and iraq, with effectiveness of russian air strikes in syria backed up with assad's ground forces, which recaptured aleppo and palmyra and lots of more places not so famous.
          and this is no game, where AI waits like a fool, they will invade south korea and fire missiles at both sk and japan .and probably nuclear missil

          • See, that is just nonsense magical thinking.

            You're adding in words I didn't say, trying to turn it into an absolute statement. But it wasn't. I didn't say "destroy all the [stuff]," I just said to "destroy the [stuff]." The implication is that I'm talking about the main part of it. Would there be a little left? Who cares?

            You get all hand-wavy about needing to invade, based on imagined words, where the easiest solution is just to understand that isn't what is implied by my statement. Just, start out assumi

            • since you don't admit to saying anything definite, only way to answer and assume you have a brain, is to articulate statements and then reply.
              you are free to say you did not say what is in those statements.

              [you said i assume]
              "we need to worry about are the ones that are fielded", but what about those "fielded"?
              in reply i will say what i said before;
              without invasion (or as they say "boots on the ground") impossible to "destroy" all the "fielded" "missiles, artillery, and armor ". ...

              what do you mean by "end

              • since you don't admit to saying anything definite, only way to answer and assume you have a brain, is to articulate statements and then reply.
                you are free to say you did not say what is in those statements.

                If you didn't understand what I said, the thing to do is to ask questions in good faith. Not to go all narcissistic and shit.

                However brilliant you think you are, you do need to presume that people "have a brain" if you want to have any chance of saying something intelligent next time.

                I read about half what you wrote, and the answers were right there in what I already said; there is an obvious good answer to each question, and it is even the most obvious perspective of somebody who said the things I already

      • by tsotha ( 720379 )
        Right, right. That's why they Taliban is running Afghanistan.
    • Regicide is stupid, review the Invasion of Iraq by President Bush Jr.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Last I checked, they haven't attacked anyone. Stop being retarded.

  • Leave them alone? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I wonder what is there to be gained by provoking them with militarily exercises?
    People need to clean up their own shit. Who will save us if/when we will have a global dictatorship?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Mostly it's a sign that we have South Korea's back and neither will be intimidated by North Korea's antics. If anything, North Korea is stirring things up by continuing to launch missiles, conducting nuclear tests, and making threats. I find it hard to look at this and see how either South Korea, Japan, or the US could be considered provocative in this situation. The US stirs up plenty of trouble elsewhere, but we're not doing that here. If anything, we've tried to cooperate more with China on appropriate s

      • by Anonymous Coward
        > If anything, North Korea is stirring things up by continuing to launch missiles, conducting nuclear tests, and making threats Isn't this what USA does most days. Launch Missiles and making threats to other countries if they don't agree to the stricy idealism of trade ie where the trading country has to bow down to the demands. When USA where conducting nuclear tests in previous years/decades were they not considered aggressors
    • How do you think a military that has never practised in large numbers would fair if attacked? That is why it is called a training exercise.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The US actually likes to provoke NK. If NK gets riled up, it gives the US more excuses to place more troops or missile defenses in S. Korea/Japan. These missile defenses would do nothing to help S. Korea, considering that N. Korea has tons of artillery already pointed towards Seoul which is only a few miles from the border. Instead they only use is to help contain both Russia + China. More so towards containing China.

      • Provoking NK by having announced annual military cooperation drills? You also assume that the Artillery can fire, that isn't really expected. This is 50+ year old artillery that likely doesn't have gunpowder anymore as it has to be stored very dry. NK isn't exactly rolling in the money to keep resupplying artillery that never fires with gunpowder.

    • This is what they get up to if you leave them alone, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
    • I wonder what is there to be gained by provoking them with militarily exercises?

      Eat a little too much propaganda for breakfast?

      The purpose of military training exercises is not to "provoke" somebody, that is childish and silly.

      The purpose is to practice fighting in the conditions that a war might take place in. In case it happens.

      If we wanted to "provoke" them, we would just fire artillery across the border, and watch them be provoked.

      • by Alumoi ( 1321661 ) on Saturday April 02, 2016 @04:28AM (#51826935)

        The purpose of military training exercises is not to "provoke" somebody, that is childish and silly.

        Unless you're doing it in front of their house.

        • If they're living in the DMZ, they should not be in any way alarmed to see military action just outside the DMZ. That is every day of the year.

          That is the only way it would be in front of their house.

      • The purpose is to practice fighting in the conditions that a war might take place in. In case it happens.

        We gathered valuable information about North Koreas ability to jam GPS and some experience doing operations under those conditions. So, seems like a net gain for the US to me.

      • I wonder what is there to be gained by provoking them with militarily exercises?

        Eat a little too much propaganda for breakfast?

        The purpose of military training exercises is not to "provoke" somebody, that is childish and silly.

        The purpose is to practice fighting in the conditions that a war might take place in. In case it happens.

        If we wanted to "provoke" them, we would just fire artillery across the border, and watch them be provoked.

        If you think the only reason we do exercises over there is to practice, then you're just eating a different brand of propaganda for breakfast.

        • No, that is called an opinion.

          I accused the cowherd of "propaganda" because he was using blatant propaganda that is not reasonable. A person who dislikes military exercises because they raise tensions still knows that they are done for reasons other than "provocation." If you're trying to provoke a military, you just shoot at them. It is easy to do. It is not rational to claim that military exercises have provocation as the primary goal. It is not a rational belief; it ignores why people do things, and just

          • If you re-read my post, you will see I said "If you think the only reason..."

            I never mentioned "main goal" as you say. Sometimes shooting is not the best method for provocation. Especially, if you want the rest of the world on your side. Use your noggin before making accusations of "I know you are but what am I." That's not at all what I said. Perhaps it was too subtle for you.

  • Norths Koreas Launches Missiles ands Tries To Jamsssssssssssssssssssssss GPSs Signalss.

  • by Bruce66423 ( 1678196 ) on Friday April 01, 2016 @07:12PM (#51825781)
    AFAICS North Korea is best interpreted as a toddler who is indulging in tantrums to get attention. If that's the case, we have a problem. The normal toddler can be safely ignored while it goes on and on. However such a brat is not capable of doing any real damage. Whilst we may wish to assume that the NK leadership isn't suicidal, that's a hard call given just how nutty they seem to be. However it may be the best solution - just ignore them at a real level, although letting their latest threats get into the media so they don't feel totally ignored and so raise the stakes. But it could be worse - they could believe they will be rewarded in an afterlife for being destructive...
    • No, it's best understood as a authoritarian absolute monarchy in which the king's subject need to be continually remined of how great and undefeatable he is (the latter is very very very important). This has precious little to do with anything outside NK's borders.

  • Military grade GPSes are supposedly jam-proof. They use directional antennas that can detect terrestrial-based signals and notch them out of the satellite-based signals.

    • Re:Jamming GPS? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 01, 2016 @07:44PM (#51825881)

      There's really no such thing as "jam proof" - merely resistant. Even directional antennas are not perfectly directional, and will still receive off-axis signals, just at some attenuated strength. Any sufficiently strong nearby source can overwhelm a much more distant and weaker source.

      In a "real" war, it wouldn't be jamming that is the problem anyway. The problem would be that the GPS constellation would go bye-bye from the other guy's anti-sat weapons. Not that many countries have those, but the most sophisticated adversaries do have them.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        The problem would be that the GPS constellation would go bye-bye from the other guy's anti-sat weapons.

        According to the Wikipedia article on anti-satellite weaponry [wikipedia.org], that's highly improbable:

        "GPS and communications satellites orbit at higher altitudes of 20,000 km (12,000 mi) and 36,000 km (22,000 mi) respectively, putting them out of range of solid-fueled Intercontinental ballistic missiles. Liquid-fueled space launch vehicles could reach those altitudes, but they are more time-consuming to launch and could be attacked on the ground before being able to launch in rapid succession. The constellation of 30 GP

      • by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

        any idea how much energy is required just to reach the GPS system?

        ON TOP OF WHICH, you have to go ballistic to 12,540 miles, in 6 staggered orbits 60 degrees apart, and take out a significant number of the 32 birds to the point where it is impossible to get a lock on four at once. Which means taking down 60% of them.

        Easier just to jam it. 1575MHz gear can be had over the counter.

    • I doubt it. The GPS signals are pathetically weak - it doesn't take much to overpower them.

    • It only says "trie[d]"

    • More to the point, the military part of the signal is encrypted. If the DPRK have broken that encryption, worked out the secret keys, and can spoof signals that originate from an encrypted source, then that is far bigger news than the DPRK's acquisition of hydrogen bombs.

      As pointed out, directional antennas are not perfectly directional. and the laws of physics won't allow it to be perfect. But encryption is in the domain of maths - it's either possible or impossible. Currently our mathematicians believe (

  • After all, the reality is that legally the US and S. Korea could potentially attack N. Korea at any time under the Caroline doctrine or simply because they are actually still at war and do not have to go before the UN Security Council to get their blessing.

    This is unlike Iraq, where everyone knew that the US was going to strike Iraq soon, because the US had to try to get the legal blessings of the UNSC.

  • And the rest of the world said, "So?"

  • by rfengr ( 910026 )
    NK will come to an end: either a whimper or a bang. The guaranteed part is that dear leader will be strung up with his testicles in his mouth.
  • Wait a minute! What did the sea do? If the US and South Korea hold some aircraft training is North Korea going to attack the sky in retaliation?

  • Hopefully there not testing their missile to see how it will work after they screw with, or destroy GPS.

  • I'm still waiting for the sea to rise in retaliation (any day now).

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama

Working...