[HN Gopher] The Internet during world war
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Internet during world war
        
       Author : ifelsehow
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2022-12-09 19:00 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.oecd-forum.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.oecd-forum.org)
        
       | tehchromic wrote:
       | Fascinating. I think that the capacity of nuclear weapons and MAD
       | decreased the likelihood of future world wars to so low as to be
       | effectively none.
       | 
       | But this article kinda opens the possibility of world war taking
       | place entirely in the data/communications realm.
        
         | nerdix wrote:
         | I think future World Wars are definitely possible with a few
         | caveats:
         | 
         | 1. There can be nuclear combatants but the fighting is
         | primarily on the soil of non-nuclear countries.
         | 
         | 2. Because of #1, the war more like World War 1 than in World
         | War 2: some sort of peace treaty that doesn't stipulate
         | unconditional surrender. There is no regime change nor post-war
         | occupation of nuclear powers.
         | 
         | 3. There is an unprecedently high level of communication
         | between the nuclear combatants as both sides try to reassure
         | the other that they aren't going to unilaterally launch nukes
         | (there may be nuclear brinksmanship in public though as
         | propaganda tool. Backchannels will be all about nuclear
         | deescalation)
        
       | kristopolous wrote:
       | The policy suggestions are fine but the reasons are kind of
       | silly.
       | 
       | I've never been in a conflict zone but I'd assume securing food
       | and water is #1. Reliable electricity access might be a distant
       | nice to have and cell phone or wifi signal? I'm guessing that's a
       | no.
       | 
       | Decentralize, increase redundancy, eliminate single points of
       | failure, sure all good.
       | 
       | But if we're really talking about internet like communication
       | during wars then I would assume what we need to talk about is
       | off-grid power generation, packet radio infrastructure build
       | outs, hardened underground storage containers for computing
       | resources, etc. Without those you aren't going to have a phone
       | that turns on or connects to a tower.
       | 
       | Maybe this is a marketing play to sell things we should be doing
       | (like community networks) to people who otherwise wouldn't
       | listen. If that's the approach than best of luck
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | > I've never been in a conflict zone but I'd assume securing
         | food and water is #1. Reliable electricity access might be a
         | distant nice
         | 
         | This is very wrong, everything NATO/ISAF related excepting the
         | _absolutely_ smallest temporary COP and FOB in Afghanistan had
         | at minimum one basic VSAT terminal with IP link to the outside
         | world.
         | 
         | You can't have modern C4I systems without data links. Note that
         | a lot of what was implemented was not actually "The internet"
         | as we know it, though there was lots of commercial DIA, there's
         | plenty of ways to use two-way satellite capacity for entirely
         | private networks.
         | 
         | The above was a firm rule and ground truth even 15-17 years
         | ago, in the latter stages of the conflict (before the US lost
         | political will to continue in 2021, _Thanks, Trump and Pompeo
         | and Biden_...) data links for anything military related were
         | even more crucial.
        
         | shkkmo wrote:
         | You seem to be assuming "there is a world war" means
         | "everywhere is a full scale conflict zone", which it doesn't.
         | In reality, the severity of fighting will vary significantly.
         | Some areas may face challenges with food / water, other areas
         | won't. While the power grid may not be reliable in some places,
         | generators, solar power and local power generation will mean
         | that most people will have some level of access to power.
         | 
         | One of the points the article is making is that stuff like
         | "off-grid power generation, packet radio infrastructure build
         | outs, hardened underground storage containers for computing
         | resources, etc" will be important in areas with active fighing
         | / bombardment, many other areas may face entirely different
         | types of challenges.
         | 
         | Do we have a process for quickly revoking CA certs owned by
         | enemy countries? Do we have locally hosted mirrors for
         | important content / services / tools that are hosted across
         | undersea cables? The internet has been more and more integrated
         | into our work lives and it does bear some thought to make those
         | systems more resilient so the economy can maintain some level
         | of functionality in a world war.
        
         | retrac wrote:
         | It is not feasible to either fight a war or do basic things
         | like ship food without communications.
         | 
         | During World War II, to coordinate the UK and United States war
         | efforts, at the peak several thousands of teletype channels,
         | were in continuous operation across the Atlantic (something
         | like ~10 kilobytes of text per second) and priority mail
         | shipments by plane (often shrunk to microfiche to reduce
         | weight) were measured in the tonnes per week. The Allies even
         | spent around a billion dollars (inflation-adjusted) to create
         | an implausibly-complicated system [1] to allow encrypted voice
         | communication between high officials over shortwave. Allowing
         | FDR and Churchill to speak real-time, even just for a few
         | minutes a week, was considered just that important. And back
         | then, they were used to doing things with much less
         | coordination from afar.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIGSALY
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | I don't think GP was downplaying the importance of
           | communication for waging a war, I think they were saying
           | civilian internet access would not be feasible during a war.
        
           | 4gotunameagain wrote:
           | > The SIGSALY terminal was massive, consisting of 40 racks of
           | equipment. It weighed over 50 tons, and used about 30 kW of
           | power, necessitating an air-conditioned room to hold it. Too
           | big and cumbersome for general use, it was only used for the
           | highest level of voice communications.
           | 
           | And now I can whip something similar in one afternoon, and
           | run it on my phone. Nuts.
        
         | taneliv wrote:
         | It's an interesting thought experiment! What would happen if
         | electricity ceased suddenly.
         | 
         | If there was no electricity where I am at, the apartment would
         | soon start to cool down. It is right now something like -6degC
         | outside. I think it would take some days to cool down to that
         | level.
         | 
         | Electricity keeps my food refrigerated and frozen, both at home
         | and in the shop. Well, I should put the frozen food out on the
         | balcony (and cover them up so that they don't melt if the sun
         | shines during the day).
         | 
         | Kitchen oven and stove, and water kettle run on electricity.
         | There would be very little cooking going on! Not to mention
         | that electricity is needed to pump water from the ground level
         | up to the apartment. So I should to fill all available
         | containers with snow and take them inside to melt (before the
         | apartment temperature drops below freezing).
         | 
         | Seems like loss of electricity would mean loss of heat, water
         | and food in rapid order. It's difficult to imagine this loss to
         | be very localized, so my neighbours would likely be suffering
         | the same, perhaps the whole suburb. Without apartment or street
         | lights less reliable members of the community might try to take
         | advantage of the situation. Perhaps not, it's not a
         | particularly restless environment. More resourceful members
         | might come up with solutions to problems, but I can imagine the
         | situation to be quite chaotic.
         | 
         | Without communication channels I can't ask if a friend or
         | family member can support me, or if they need support. Or
         | indeed if it is safe to move, and if so, how and where. Lack of
         | street and even apartment lights might be a challenge to many
         | and make traffic overall quite a bit more dangerous.
         | 
         | I don't know how reliable electricity would need to be. But
         | some reasonable level of access to electricity is definitely
         | more important than nice to have.
        
           | jldugger wrote:
           | > If there was no electricity where I am at, the apartment
           | would soon start to cool down. It is right now something like
           | -6degC outside. I think it would take some days to cool down
           | to that level.
           | 
           | I mean, I lived this during finals week in college. During
           | the day solar heating helps some. At night, with good
           | insulation in the home it'll take some time to match outdoor
           | temps, and a winter rated sleeping bag helps at night. One of
           | my idiot roommates was using a sleeping bag as a comforter
           | and complained at how cold it was on night 1. After I pointed
           | out what the zipper was for, he reported it was toasty warm
           | on night 2. You can do the same thing without a zipper, its
           | just slightly less effective.
           | 
           | Also helps: the water heater runs on gas. So you can take a
           | warm shower. In the dark, since most bathrooms have no
           | windows, just exhaust fans. But the furnace, while it needs
           | gas to heat, required electricity to move air. I'm not sure
           | why, but water mains don't usually freeze despite the usually
           | cold winters (though indoor plumbing requires certain
           | precautions in the cold).
           | 
           | Cellphone towers usually have some batteries and backup plans
           | in these situations, which was less useful back then before
           | data plans existed, but meant you could still reach friends
           | in case their power was on.
           | 
           | Finally: emergency generators are a thing. So as long as it
           | isn't so cold that diesel freezes, emergency services will be
           | available to the community in a school or something. In cold
           | climates there are enough of these that in the lead up to the
           | ice storm that caused the mess there were PSA campaigns to
           | get them tested and vetted ahead of time -- if you just
           | energize the lines without installing a cutoff switch, it can
           | kill line workers trying to repair.
        
           | kristopolous wrote:
           | power outage is a common condition of modern institutional
           | planning exercises.
        
         | lazide wrote:
         | What you're talking about is worst case support, which while
         | important, is not typically required all the time.
         | 
         | Portable battery packs and generators, or power on sometimes,
         | but not all the time would be normal.
         | 
         | Same with internet/ISP connections.
         | 
         | Cellphone towers and WiFi would _usually_ work, unless there is
         | a big offensive going on at the time, etc.
         | 
         | That means a lot of the less severe stuff is worth talking
         | about too.
        
         | numpad0 wrote:
         | What the war in Ukraine and protests in China have showed the
         | world is, democracy in desperate times survive on Wi-Fi,
         | AirDrop'd screenshots, and dozens of single port phone chargers
         | hanging off power strips.
         | 
         | They don't even bother to use multi-port chargers, let alone DC
         | to DC converters, or cars rigged for power generation. Not to
         | mention open-source encrypted software-defined self healing
         | mesh network microwave radio protocols.
         | 
         | Maybe wartime is not the best to introduce alternative
         | infrastructure that are inherently new; maybe only what's there
         | peacetime works.
         | 
         | And if that is the case, what we would need might be such items
         | as, sideloadable resilient mesh apps for teenagers, appliance-
         | fied server for game sessions in University dorms, and parallel
         | chargers for camping.
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | Your first assumption is wrong. Food and water are necessities,
         | of course, but you can survive without either for days (outside
         | of extreme weather environments) and they're also very
         | portable. Communications are an urgent and ongoing need, for
         | military actors and civilians. Without them you are not only in
         | a bad situation, you have little idea of where to go. Military
         | communications manuals contemplate up to 5 levels of
         | communication for different contexts, from wraparound digital
         | services to smoke signals and the use of secret symbols for
         | identification/navigation.
         | 
         | You are right about communications infrastructure, which is a
         | favored target in any militarized conflict. Mesh networking
         | offers a workaround to communications breakdown, albeit at the
         | cost of bandwidth and deployment effort. LoraWAN devices are
         | quite cheap at the margin (under $10 in bulk) but hardening,
         | powering, and installing them is labor-intensive, to put it
         | mildly.
        
       | gz5 wrote:
       | Needs to be looked at from all angles including:
       | 
       | + Shared physical infra Trans-oceanic cables being the most
       | fragile. However, the risk here would not immediately be of the
       | power-food-shelter variety. Satellite-based comms will
       | potentially add resiliency. Intra-region (depending on the
       | region), there is less fragility (more independent fibers), and
       | emergency tactics such as P2P mesh networks aided by swarms of
       | drones, balloons, satellites becomes interesting.
       | 
       | + Shared software infra Because my network talks to your network,
       | and/or leverages common (or at least sometimes cascading)
       | structures like DNS, NTP, shared BGP routing tables, what risks
       | do I have? How could I mitigate them proactively? What would I do
       | in an emergency which wouldn't have worse consequences (trade-
       | offs are fine)? This category of risks can be difficult in that
       | the events might not be obvious at first (unlike most physical
       | infra events), but that could make it worse...
        
       | walrus01 wrote:
       | Sort of a related tangent to the "the internet was designed by
       | ARPA to survive nuclear war" trope that is trotted out
       | occasionally...
       | 
       | It's NOT that the Internet specifically was designed or intended
       | for this, it was a research network. The pre-existing AT&T Long
       | Lines network which carried telephone traffic around the US48
       | states also carried the DoD's AUTOVON network data links for
       | their own phone system, and data links between things like SAGE
       | direction centers.
       | 
       | Many of the cold war era hardened AT&T Long Lines bunkers,
       | underground sites, special buried mountaintop sites and such all
       | pre-date the earliest days of the ARPANET.
       | 
       | There's mountain top long lines sites out there now that couldn't
       | be duplicated for less than $50 million. Money was thrown at this
       | in quite a profligate manner - same as money was spent on various
       | early generations of ICBMs, strategic air command 24x7x365
       | standby and patrols, the DEW line, and such.
       | 
       | In the era before inter-city singlemode fiber optic cables were a
       | real operational reality these places were absolutely crucial.
       | 
       | The data links between sites in many cases rode on top of these
       | networks in the earliest days of IP.
        
       | iisan7 wrote:
       | Valid points, although risks seem to depend on the scale. A
       | worldwide conflict would have different risks than two-state
       | conflict. I don't see any reflection in the article or linked
       | materials on the lessons from Ukraine, and the potential role of
       | satellite internet in bridging localized infrastructure gaps.
        
         | throwaway4aday wrote:
         | I don't think many lessons about a potential world war could be
         | gleaned from Ukraine. A world war is going to necessarily pull
         | in all of the major powers which means that there won't be a
         | single front, navy and air force will be involved and strikes
         | deep into territory on all sides will happen via missile,
         | bombers, and drones. In short, it would be chaotic and fast
         | moving with destruction happening everywhere. The involvement
         | of satellites is terrifying since they would be a prime target
         | and would likely be one of the first major casualties.
        
           | pjscott wrote:
           | There are over 3000 satellites in the Starlink network alone.
           | How many anti-satellite missiles are there? Would taking out
           | all those satellites be worth the cost?
        
           | giraffe_lady wrote:
           | how much time have you spent fantasizing about this
        
             | s5300 wrote:
             | Eh, somebody has to, or eventually bad things will happen.
             | Impossible to know the statistics of how useful it actually
             | is, but every governments military has entire divisions
             | dedicated to simulating war.
             | 
             | I think one of said divisions are the reason we _didn't_
             | end up having a nuclear exchange, as he knew the chips
             | running the computer were pretty old  & due for
             | replacement. One day said computer says "enemy nukes
             | incoming" completely out of the blue & with no real ongoing
             | geopolitical tensions... I think his higher ups nearly made
             | the decision to order him to press the red button, but he
             | put his years of knowledge & faith in the fact the computer
             | radar whatever was malfunctioning & nukes hadn't actually
             | been launched.
             | 
             | He was right. If he hadn't fantasized about this scenario &
             | known the ins & outs of the technology involved? Well, the
             | world might've been fucked decades ago.
             | 
             | I realize what I've said isn't entirely relevant to your
             | reply, but some external perspective never hurts. Make fun
             | of all the people who do have to worry about what might
             | happen in modern war, & they may just become jaded enough
             | to say "fuck it, these people are dicks anyways" & press
             | the red button, knowing they'll all be disappearing with
             | him.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-09 23:01 UTC)