[HN Gopher] Cache of documents declassified by the NRO for its 6... ___________________________________________________________________ Cache of documents declassified by the NRO for its 60th anniversary Author : starwind Score : 62 points Date : 2021-11-16 18:50 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.nro.gov) (TXT) w3m dump (www.nro.gov) | posnet wrote: | The NRO have the best mission patches. | | NROL-39 seems to be the crowd-pleaser. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NRO_launches | edm0nd wrote: | You can find a bunch of eBay if you search for 'NRO launch | patch'. | jamesfe wrote: | What you really want is NROL-11 which inadvertently revealed | the classified location of the payload: | https://gizmodo.com/decoding-hidden-messages-in-those-geeky-... | programd wrote: | Randomly skimming the documents, this is my favorite line so far | from a document discussing funding and competition for a new | recon satellite system [1] | | "Mr. Duckett commented that the Governmant had been carful not to | pry too deeply into this area because there were a number of | "gentleman's agreements" between contractors" | | Sounds very pragmatic of them. | | [1] | https://www.nro.gov/Portals/65/documents/foia/declass/MAJOR%... | CamperBob2 wrote: | Also worth noting that the Deputy SecDef present, David | Packard, was _the_ Dave Packard. | 0des wrote: | title should be "its" not "it's" | dang wrote: | It's fixed now. Thanks! | starwind wrote: | Thanks! That always confuses me | starwind wrote: | Letter explaining some of the information available here: | https://www.nro.gov/Portals/65/documents/news/press/2021/202... | | "The SIGINT satellite story" looks interesting: | https://www.nro.gov/Portals/65/documents/foia/declass/HISTOR... | onychomys wrote: | It seems so weird that they're still redacting things from the | late 1960s. All of the technology they're talking about in those | memos has been far surpassed by even commercial enterprises, so | who even cares anymore? | largbae wrote: | Maybe they promised some ally that they didn't have this tech | back then and don't want to reveal the lie. | madars wrote: | I don't think we know that all tech has been eclipsed | commercially. Recall that in 2012 NRO donated two unused, spare | satellites to NASA that were superior to the Hubble telescope | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_National_Reconnaissance_O... | and when President Trump tweeted out a, presumably NRO-sourced, | picture it was at ~10cm resolution or better | https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/09/01/t... | . | | More to the point, there are sensors that are not commercially | interesting but could be interesting for NRO's mission. | Rebelgecko wrote: | One of the donated telescopes is being used as the basis for | the Roman (nee WFIRST) telescope, launching some time around | 2027. It'll also be interesting to see if using the donated | hardware ends up actually saving any money. | dylan604 wrote: | > saving any money. | | NASA does not understand these words in this order you have | put them. By "saving" you mean tripling them, twice? | Rebelgecko wrote: | Yeah, it seems like there were 2 schools of thought. | | One saying "let's just build cheap and compact optics | that meet our minimum requirements" | | Another saying "we have this badass hardware available, | let's use it even though it goes well beyond our original | design in terms of capabilities and also | size/weight/complexity" | numpad0 wrote: | Maybe some direct successor to the technology is active or | maybe there is something still have not been discovered by | civilian competition? | yepthatsreality wrote: | To erase intent, blame, liability, and responsibility. | starwind wrote: | There's basically no consequences for overclassification, but | the penalty for underclassification could be a job loss (or in | the extremely unlikely case, jail) | ffhhj wrote: | Just imagine what a time traveler could do with that | information. | whartung wrote: | 60th Anniversary? So many anniversaries. | | Anniversary of its founding (1960) [1]. Anniversary of the first | public mention (1971). Anniversary of first official | acknowledgment (1973). Anniversary of its existence being | declassified (1992). | | NRO -- abbreviation for "We'd tell you, but then we'd have to | kill you." | | [1] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Reconnaissance_Office... | uejfiweun wrote: | The NRO is very spooky. Word on the street is that their tech is | decades ahead of what is publicly available. I personally wonder | what kind of crazy capabilities they have all the time. | | This is going to sound stupid, but I think the NRO may have | photonic supercomputers that are being used in combination with | satellites to scrape the activity of every computer on the | planet. They have had programs such as TEMPEST for years which | aim to understand what a computer is doing through analysis of | it's EM emissions. Imagine a satellite network tuned to these | frequencies, pointed at the ground at all times, collecting and | analyzing what all computers are doing all the time using | unfathomable processing power - I think such a thing may be | feasible. | | Another cool spook program is SENTIENT which is also under the | NRO. It is an automated intelligence analysis system which | monitors the globe autonomously. Check out the movie "Eagle Eye" | for IMO a pretty accurate depiction of what this system may look | like in practice. | dylan604 wrote: | Wasn't Eagle Eye based on ECHELON? | woodruffw wrote: | The NRO struggles to put _normal_ reconnaissance satellites in | the sky[1]. Special satellites with enough juice to Van Eck | your screen from LEO (or HEO) feels like a stretch. All things | being equal, it 's probably easier for the USG (or any | government) to just MITM you or exploit the crappy router in | your closet. | | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Imagery_Architecture | uejfiweun wrote: | I personally am always skeptical whenever I see a "cancelled" | program like this. It is a near certainty that some | officially cancelled programs continued development in the | classified world, such as the SR-72 or the UCAV. | | Admittedly I know nothing, and it's probable that I'm just | blowing air out my ass. But I would LOVE to believe that the | USG has got some crazy tech up their sleeve. Because | hopefully one day they will declassify it and allow for | commercial development, just like they did with computers and | the internet. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-11-16 23:00 UTC)