NATO has announced a new project aimed at enhancing the resilience of global internet infrastructure by rerouting data through space in the event of disruptions to undersea cables.
The $2.5 million project, partially funded by NATO’s Science for Peace and Security (SPS) programme, was launched on 31 July 2024.
The project seeks to address the vulnerability of critical internet infrastructure, particularly the reliance on undersea cables, which are susceptible to attacks or accidental damage.
The initiative will develop a hybrid network that combines submarine cables with satellite communications to ensure the continuous flow of data, even if these cables are compromised.
According to Dr Eyup Turmus, SPS Advisor and Programme Manager at NATO, “Through this SPS-supported project, NATO is bringing together Allies, prominent institutions including Cornell, John Hopkins Bifröst, and Swedish Defence Universities and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology as well as telecommunications companies to address the urgent need for a more resilient internet infrastructure worldwide.”
The project is expected to produce a working prototype within two years, with a demonstration planned at the Blekinge Institute of Technology, part of the NATO Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA) Maritime Research Centre in Sweden.
The consortium leading the project, known as the Hybrid Space/Submarine Architecture Ensuring Infosec of Telecommunications (HEIST), aims to integrate existing technologies, tackle legal and jurisdictional challenges, and promote international collaboration between NATO Allies and partners, including the United States, Iceland, Sweden, and Switzerland.
This initiative reflects NATO’s ongoing efforts to safeguard critical infrastructure and ensure the stability of global communications in an increasingly complex and contested digital environment.
Bandwidth?
The undersea cables have a lot higher bandwidth and lower latency than satellite comms…..
Unless we are talking LEO?
I also misread the article to say $2.5Bn it is $2.5m so it just about funds a small university research group for a year……
If the space component was a mixture of LEO stuff and geostationary with the LEO orbits and the geostationary position optimised to connect defined (unmoving) fixed points on the planet, e.g. two ends of a transatlantic cable that got damaged, you could do some bandwidth and latency optimisation via traffic analysis by intelligently routing traffic at send (uplink) time, e.g. send all email via the geostationary link so that valuable lower latency LEO bandwidth isn’t wasted on someone emailing their overly long and elaborate PowerPoint presentation to a colleague.
Also, if you know your LEO constellation is only going to need to connect a finite number of defined ground sites you could probably optimise such a constellation substantially in terms of size vs one aiming for near global coverage and with fewer satellites you might be able to afford to make them more capable in terms of bandwidth.
As you say though, $2.5m isn’t going to launch any sort of LEO or geostationary capability so maybe this is more about researching stuff e.g. traffic routing etc. You could simulate ideas like mine quite easily to see how they would work in practice and what new on-orbit infrastructure might be required to get various levels of network performance under typical loads.
I would assume on a war footing all non essential traffic would be blocked.
Hmmm…All hail Elon Musk? 🤔😳
Nothing new I very often built networks with satillite backup. There is one issue with sat com, time delay. A straight up down link has about a 0.25 of a second delay, if you then have to hop between satelittes that can increase up to a full second delay in each direction. Thats not to bad for data but live speach or video and it becomes a bit of a bug bear. The other issue with sat com is sun fade.
Good idea.
In my previous life I worked for a few years at NCIS the NATO Comms and IT organisation….Strange job for a hydraulics, heavy electrics and stuff that goes whoosh and bang Engineer… But hey, variety is the spice of life and Naples was a great 3 years!
NATO secret IT network comms between all NATO bases go over commercial internet/ data connections. Not an issue because it’s all IPSec encrypted before it leaves the NATO servers and it cannot be intercepted or hacked.
If we lost a civilian data backbone (it did happen) then the network reroutes automatically to another data network provider and does a seamless mesh.
I assume this project will add satcom connections into the mesh improving resilience.
Am I right in thinking that GW1 was slightly “delayed”, whilst they reposition more satellites over the area, so they could ensure fast and full coverage of the expected battlefield or it that me just getting old.
Just bring back Morse and Semaphore .🤔
Was Semaphore inspector Morse’s sidekick?
I think he was, yes. I did hear that he was originally going to be French but the producers could only find white flags.
There, that should trigger a few !!!!😄
I’ll get my coat. .
The theme tune to Inspector Morse is the word ‘Morse’ in Morse.
You would need a very strong pair of binoculars to read a message this way between for example Lands End and New York! (Morse could work this way between Dover and Calais on a clear day).
Seems to me that if undersea cables are being cut it’s also probable that NATO & Russia/China would be knocking out each others sattelites, making near space virtually uninhabitable for sattelites due to the sheer amount of debris generated. So we could end up with localised net services.
It is terrible how we behave given that so far, Earth is the only known inhabited planet in the entire Universe and all we seem to want to do is destroy it along with each other and near space.
Way things are going we won’t need a war to have restricted interest 😀
Interesting to see Switzerland in that list?
Off point..I’ve just read Labour intend to cut Defence R&D by 20 per cent. I wonder whether there’s any point in waiting for the Strategic Dfence Cuts Review??
Yeah but it was the Torygraph. However I said cuts we’re coming Labour will now go team Europe on RnD of course lumping the blame on the previous government. So predictable .
Defence reviews are rigged by both parties, for instance you can say you want a security agreement with Europe and not give that as parameter for the review body. Boris had his global Britain as another example. I actually don’t mind they’re rigged but it bugs me political class lie about it.
Cuts have to come because of the pay award, which was needed but should have been done via a budget increase.
I thought it had been substantially raised recently? So may be just reduced to as before?
I know you agree with me but what we need more than anything is stablity. We’re not going to get it if decisions are made even before the Strategic Defence Cuts Review takes place.
Agree. We do need stability.
It never happens. SDSRs every 5 years turn things round time and again.
The Army, above all, has suffered from this trying to organise itself.
👍
I wonder if Starlink is part of the mix. That would be amusing.
Could be the DT but what if the story is true. Defence farce review cometh. We know the Tories were crap but it can only get worse and now there is even less meat to cut off the carcass.🐂
Objectively cooperation on RnD with Europe would save money but it would also mean loss of sovereign capability. The defence review will focus on Europe and UK jobs. The latter is to satisfy the unions but the unions focus is largely blue collar abd won’t care if UK factories are making a UK designed bit of kit or stuff designed in Europe. Of course critics will say we cooperate now but this would be a whole new level and would mean successful things like AUKUS or the export success of T26 will never happen again.
Keep in mind also Labour will likely reduce RnD tax breaks across the board also.
Ironically one of my reasons for voting remain. Was the funding for science and RnD and the fear domestic investment would be cut, the EU provided ring fenced money in the for of grantsback to us, but I always saw defence RnD as needing to have sovereign control over. Sadly it could become sacrificial lamb in the drive to eventually rejoin.
Loss of sovereign capability is potentially forever. If Labour go there normal route of pretend European programming there are going to destroy that capability, not that I suppose that matters to Reeves one way or the other.
I think sovereignty has been a major problem for the political class for sometime.
Always…
R&D Tax Credits have already been cut back, partly it would seem due to the amount of fraud that was going on.
Yep but wouldn’t it have been better to tackle the fraud rather than penalise genuine RnD with carpet reductions. That’s what any one sensible would have done. So objectively fraud just looks like an excuse to increase the tax burden.
Or Oneweb, which the last Conservative government bought into and is now looking very promising with its constellation of Leo satellites.