A U.S. Navy chief who wanted the internet so she and other enlisted officers could scroll social media, check sports scores and watch movies while deployed had an unauthorized Starlink satellite dish installed on a warship and lied to her commanding officer to keep it secret, according to investigators.
Internet access is restricted while a ship is underway to maintain bandwidth for military operations and to protect against cybersecurity threats.
The Navy quietly relieved Grisel Marrero, a command senior chief of the littoral combat ship USS Manchester, in August or September 2023, and released information on parts of the investigation this week.
First off, not an officer, a high ranking enlisted(E-8) personal was the culprit.
Second, she was a Information systems technician. She literally dealt with making sure communication was safe and secure.
I know congress has to be involved to knock her down below E-7 but they need to get on that.
So she was an NCO and the writter was clueless. Ok.
And for that kind of opsec fuckup there really shouldn’t there be discharge/prison time ?
If the military imprisoned soldiers for being dumb, there would be no military.
Exactly. You only imprison people for malicious actions. If they’re just dumb, demote and reassign elsewhere.
Guess what the letter O in NCO is, dummy.
The N also stands for Non
The term officer, alone, as it stands in the headline, is reserved for commissioned officers. No one in the military would assume that headline was referring to an NCO.
No one in the military
Okay, but is the person still an officer? I mean, it is in the name. The way I see it, as a layman, it is kind of hard to ding the author for getting this wrong when they are technically correct and a laymen would consider them an officer, and the only real complaint is that colloquially military members don’t refer to them as officers.
What am I missing or wrong about?
Don’t call me sir, I work for a living.
The difference between officers and enlisted (even enlisted “officers”) is well understood in the public domain. Just google the term “military officer”. You won’t find a reference to NCOs.
From the AI:
Here are some things to know about military officers: Pay grades Officer pay grades range from O-1 to O-10.
Army’s top-level page on “officers”: https://www.goarmy.com/careers-and-jobs/find-your-path/army-officers
From the wiki:
Broadly speaking, “officer” means a commissioned officer, a non-commissioned officer (NCO), or a warrant officer. However, absent contextual qualification, the term typically refers only to a force’s commissioned officers, the more senior members who derive their authority from a commission from the head of state.
This just takes very little research for anyone writing an article on the subject. No, I don’t expect the laymen to automatically know the difference between an NCO and a commissioned officer, but we are talking about a journalist here. I suppose if you want to lower your standards for journalism, fine.
Good that’s a severe risk she* put everyone and the ship in. It was 17 officers in total and they attempted cover up
She
There’s a much bigger story here.
Think about how hard it was to discover this access point. Even after it was reported and there was a known wi-fi network and the access point was known to be on a single ship, it took the Navy months to find it.Starlink devices are cheap and it will be nearly impossible to detect them at scale. That means that anyone can get around censors. If the user turns off wi-fi, they’ll be nearly impossible to detect. If they leave wi-fi on in an area with a lot of wi-fi networks it will also be nearly impossible to detect. A random farmer could have Starlink in their hut. A dissident (of any nation) could hide the dish behind their toilet.
As competing networks are launched, users will be able to choose from the least restricted network for any given topic.
But why was it hard? Surely they’re accessing it w/ wifi, and scanning for wi-fi networks really isn’t that hard. A military ship should have a good handle on what networks they expect, and they should be able to easily triangulate where the signal is coming from.
Also, military ships should have really strict accounting for what is brought on board. A Starlink receiver isn’t particularly small, and it should be plainly obvious to security when that comes on-board.
I think it’s awesome that Starlink is so accessible for the average joe, but that’s a completely different topic than what’s allowed on military property. This sounds like a pretty big, embarassing security fail for the US military, and more people than this individual should be reprimanded, if not fired.
It was the Chief of the ship who installed it. She was the highest ranked enlisted person on the ship. She would have the access and ability to get just about anything on board that she wanted. The fact she was able to is easy to see. The fact the she was willing to and has obtained such a high rank is pretty impressive (and stupid).
The original article goes into more detail https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2024/09/03/how-navy-chiefs-conspired-to-get-themselves-illegal-warship-wi-fi/
It sounds like there were over 15 people in on the scheme. At some point people noticed that there was some wi-fi network called “STINKY” and rumors started circulating about it. It took a while for those rumors to reach senior command. Then they changed the name to make it look like a printer, which further delayed the investigation.
It doesn’t look like they actually scanned for the access point. I suspect that’s because it would be hard on a ship. All the metal would reflect signals and give you a ton of false readings.
They only eventually found it when a technician was installing an authorized system (Starshield seems to be the version of Starlink approved for military use) and they discovered the unauthorized Starlink equipment.
The Starlink receivers have gotten fairly small. It seems like that was pretty easy to hide among all the other electronics on the ship.
So it’s collusion by the people who should be monitoring for such things? Or just collusion by people in some position of power, but who aren’t in charge of network security? I don’t know much about the positions these people held.
Anyone directly involved should certainly be considered for disciplinary action, but there should be more safeguards here.
The original article said the Navy hadn’t provided all the details.
It looks like those 15+ people included at least one person who should have been monitoring for such things and a bunch of people who wanted to follow sports.
They didn’t give the password to most of the crew and they tried to keep the commanding officers in the dark. It sounds like everyone involved faced disciplinary action.
Those chiefs and senior chiefs who used, paid for, helped hide or knew about the system were given administrative nonjudicial punishment at commodore’s mast, according to the investigation.
It looks like that’s an administrative process. https://jagdefense.com/practice-areas/non-judicial-punishmentarticle-15/ Potential penalties are listed near the bottom.
Unless they just turn the satellites off over the country’s that don’t want them to avoid conflict or jam all signals because they do be that way.
We’re likely to see a variant of Moore’s law when it comes to satellites. Launch costs will keep going down. Right now we have Starlink with a working satellite internet system and China with a nascent one. As the costs come down we’ll likely see more and more countries, companies, organizations and individuals will be able to deploy their own systems.
A government would need to negotiate with every provider to get them to block signals over their country. Jamming is always hard. You could theoretically jam all communications or communications on certain frequency bands but it’s not clear how you would selectively jam satellite internet.
Serious question: Was this actually a likely or possible security risk?
Yes, it is a likely risk. Having an unauthorized broadcast signal is a security risk because it can be used to locate and target the ship, allows for crew to communicate with the outside world without the oversight that they would normally have, and is outside the control of the ship’s command.
There are many valid reasons for the military to be limited to authorized channels for communication.
