• KristellA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Mesh networks:

    • Aren’t encrypted
    • Easy to track the origin location
    • Easily jammed

    Drones:

    • Easily spotted to take down
    • Easily jammed

    Probably not, no?

  • Felis_Rex@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Despite what top comment says, what other options are there? Why wouldn’t these be the initial comms options besides jamming? I’d argue for yes up until jamming happens then you pivot. Saying no because of a roadblock and offering nothing else just reads as apathy.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      However, sustaining broad-spectrum jamming over a large area is expensive and impractical.

      If the mesh network is wide enough, redundant enough, mobile enough, then traffic can be routed around jammed areas.

      • mesa@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Its actually pretty cheap! Its just not useful for anyone. Plus there are point to point and laser communications.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Unfortunately, most mesh networks rely on civility for long range. They just don’t have the power to punch through.

        It would be relatively easy to jam large areas.

      • fullsquare@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        no, because they have separate comms using completely different bands. esp when you’re talking about military

        if you switch to different band, probably nonstandard and unlicensed, then there must be someone else to listen

      • LORDSMEGMA@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Think of a signal jammer as something blasting static. You’re only hope of getting around that is playing something even louder. Russian jammers are effective because they don’t care about leaving channels open for communication and civil comms. They just blast farts on every frequency.

      • lauha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        What works in one dimensional ear canal doesn’t work in three dimensional open space.

        While we have noise cancelling headphones, have you ever heard of noise cancelling speakers?

        • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Actually my father in-law used to design loudspeaker systems that canceled certain frequencies put out by power plants at different heights along exhaust stacks

          I assume the trick is knowing or calculating how far you are from the source your timing to block, and having speakers that are broadcasting away from the source.

    • fizzle@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Sure that’s a weakness but it seems likely these kinds of techs will be plausible solutions even if only in isolated cases.