MIT 3D Printing

MIT Creates 3D Printing Technique with Alloys for Extreme Environments

| By Alex Haidar | 

MIT developers published a research paper in the peer-reviewed journal Additive Manufacturing which demonstrated the potential for metal components used in high-stress and temperature applications (such as turbine blades) to be 3D printed from a specially heat-treated nickel superalloy.

Currently, air turbine blades are fabricated from solid castings of mixed metal alloys. 3D printing of turbine blades could help produce more intricate blade geometrics to improve fuel efficiency. Products made by traditional 3D-printed processes previously have left micro-structures imprinted on products, making the molecular structure vulnerable to weakening under the extreme temperatures and forces involved in turbine usage.

This research investigated how a certain heating process could be applied to 3D printed materials in order to increase the structural rigidity of the material. One of the MIT corresponding authors charged with Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Supervision Writing, and Editing envisions that in the future, “gas turbine manufacturers will print their blades and vanes at large-scale additive manufacturing plants, then post-process them using our heat treatment.”

The process, known as Directional Recrystallization (DRX), is a post-processing heating cycle directly applied to a 3D printed material which melts inconsistencies and reconfigures the molecular structure into a stronger form. Their research paper ultimately found “significant improvements” in the structural strength of these materials treated with DRX with regards to “optimization of material composition, initial texture, and component geometry.”

The MIT study was conducted under the support of funds provided by the Office of Naval Research and in partnership with Top Grain Technologies, Inc. The “Directional Recrystallization Processing of Additively Manufactured Metal Alloys” patent is currently pending at the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Photo credit: Dominic David Peachey via TechXplore

Project NEOM

Saudi Arabia Moves Forward on NEOM Vision 2030 Project

| By Alex Haidar |

Saudi Arabia is advancing the reality of its futuristic plans for developing 3 regional centers in Neom. The Kingdom considers the project to be a “revolution in civilization” and is part of the country’s diversification away from economic reliance on fossil fuels in its Vision 2030.

Trojena NEOM Saudi Arabia
Trojena Mountain Resort, NEOM Saudi Arabia

Trojena plans to host luxurious year-round facilities with focuses on outdoor activities and entertainment. On October 4th the Olympic Council of Asia announced it chose Saudi Arabia to host the 2029 Winter Games in the planned ski resort of Trojena in the Neom mountains.

Oxagon Port City, NEOM Saudi Arabia
Oxagon Port City, NEOM Saudi Arabia

Oxagon aims to function as a reimagined, fully automated port city in the Gulf of Aqaba which will spur technological innovation. In October, with the support of the Saudi Ministry of Education, 61 teams participated in a hackathon to generate ideas for “technology in the service of people” and “renewable energy alternatives”. The three chosen winning teams and their respective projects are as follows:

  1. Blindline, Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University: Utilize AI to learn Braille
  2. 3D & IOT Integrated Construction System, Princess Nourah Bint Abdul Rahman University: Utilize drones to monitor construction progress
  3. Savetro, King Abdulaziz University: Converting petrol cars to electric vehicles
The Line, NEOM Saudi Arabia
The Line NEOM, Saudi Arabia

The Line looks to accommodate roughly 9 million residents within a footprint of only 34 square kilometers while hosting state of the art technologies and amenities.

Photo Credits: Project NEOM Vision 2030 Website

Battery Tech Advances

Li-Ion EV Battery Tech Advances

| By Alex Haidar |

As governments and car manufacturers around the world shift their focus towards incentivizing and producing electric vehicles, lithium-ion cell manufacturers are looking for new ways to increase battery efficiency and performance

In a new study published by Penn State University’s Electrochemical Engine Center and Department of Mechanical Engineering and EC Power developers, Thermally Modulated Cell Technology (TMCT) has shown to be effective in both reducing charging times and maintaining battery performance in low temperatures. Similar science has been previously used by EV manufacturers, except with oversized external heating and cooling systems. 

TMCT Battery
TMCT Battery Configuration, Photo Credit: EC Power

TMCT utilizes ultra-thin layers of resistive heaters made from Nickel embedded within Lithium-Ion battery cells to moderate temperature. In the studies, researchers used TMCT to increase battery temperatures to an optimal range prior to charging, which resulted in effectively increasing the rate at which lithium ions could travel between the internal anodes and cathodes. The implications of this technology mean that conventional electric vehicle batteries could be better suited for a lifetime of quick-charging stops without their range being severely impacted. Batteries could therefore be downsized to save limited lithium resources, a necessity as car developers from General Motors to Toyota to Mercedes have ambitious transition goals within the next 10-20 years to meet increasing EV demand and regulation. 

EC Power claims that a third-party evaluation showed its new cells developed with TMCT were able to meet US Department of Energy goals of 500 fast charging cycles of 200 miles range within 10 minutes, while also retaining >90% of their original capacity after 2,500 charging cycles (500,000 mile range). 

Photo Credits: EC Power

USGIF Conference

USGIF and BAE GEOINT at the Speed of Need Conference

The USGIF and BAE hosted the GEOINT at the Speed of Need Conference at the BAE Conference Center in Falls Church, Virginia. The event provided a forum for leading industry, defense, and government innovators and analysts to make new connections and share the latest developments in GEOINT business and technology.

BAE provided several demos, briefings, and discussions at the event, highlighting research and development projects and programs by BAE company divisions and industry partners. The USGIF also had an exhibit at the event with information on upcoming USGIF conferences and membership opportunities, including the annual GEOINT Symposium scheduled for May 21st – 24th, 2023 in St. Louis, Missouri.

The Speed of Need Conference was highlighted by a presentation from Jim McCool, Director of Data and Digital Innovation at NGA, and a panel talk moderated by USGIF Board Chair Robert Cardillo. The panel of GEOINT experts included Kari Perry of BAE; Phil Ritcheson of NGA; Shannon Clark of Palantir; and Tony Frazier of Maxar. The panel discussed how technology innovation is essential to keep pace in the ever-increasing speed and volume of geospatial intelligence analysis requirements in contemporary and future peacetime and crisis situations.

The panelists looked at how the volume of imagery and data collected by various intelligence platforms often surpasses the abilities of analysts to review the information using traditional means. To meet this challenge, the panelists emphasized how technology such as machine learning and artificial intelligence automation tools are becoming more and more essential to process and analyze massive volumes of data to produce actionable intelligence solutions.

This conference was the latest in a series of events hosted by the USGIF to promote cooperation among the GEOINT community. Learn more about the USGIF’s work and upcoming events at https://usgif.org.

The official analog document appointing Taro Kono as the Digital Minister of Japan.

Taro Kono Appointed as Digital Minister for Japan

Taro Kono has been appointed as the new Digital Minister for the Government of Japan. An outspoken proponent of modernization, Minister Kono is pushing for Japanese government and industry to move away from analog technology and processes and adopt contemporary digital tools.

For example, many Japanese offices still use the traditional hanko seal as an official signature on printed documents. During COVID lockdowns, Japanese employees and citizens were often required to go to local government and business offices to physically sign documents with their hanko. But Minister Kono is an advocate for digital signatures such as those used in websites like DocuSign and digital certificates available for Adobe PDF documents.

A graduate of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, Minister Kono has served in numerous senior Japanese government positions including Foreign Minister, Defense Minister, Minister of Administrative Affairs, Minister for Disaster Management, and several other roles.

Minister Kono recognizes there’s much work to be done to complete the transition from analog to digital in Japan as he pushes for innovation while playfully chiding himself and Japanese organizations through his own Twitter account about reliance on old technologies such as fax machines. It remains to be seen how much change Minister Kono can implement, but his focus on new technologies is expected to result in much-needed progress towards a more digital society in Japan.

Satellite Cybersecurity Operations and Defense

Introduction

The cybersecurity threat to satellites will continue to increase as state-sponsored hackers, criminal organizations, terrorists, and individual hackers and hacking groups seek to disrupt satellite networks for espionage, financial gain, political objectives, to create disorder, or acquire fame among other hackers. Establishing a strong defense against these threats requires a holistic approach that addresses the different aspects of cybersecurity throughout the satellite control system including computer network security, physical security, personnel security, and satellite production supply chain security. All of these system components create an opportunity for hackers to attack a satellite network. This report will examine how hackers have attacked satellite control networks and discuss priorities and recommendations for defending against this threat.

Current Threats

Hacking components of satellite networks has been an ongoing threat for many years. There have been several documented cases of cyberattacks targeting satellite control networks, personnel, technology, and infrastructure throughout the years.[i], [ii],[iii],[iv],[v],[vi],[vii],[viii],[ix]

  • 2003 – 2006: Cyber espionage believed to be originating from Chinese People’s Liberation Army networks targeted NASA and other government and industry networks to gain access to data on US space systems.

  • 2006: In congressional testimony, Lieutenant General Robert Kehler stated military communications over commercial SATCOM were interfered with 50 times during a 16-month period, including five attacks by hostile jamming sources targeting the satellite uplink signal in Southwest Asia using a continuous wave carrier signal.

  • 2007: The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka broadcast propaganda on Intelsat satellites.

  • 2007: Hackers gained control of the NASA Terra EOS AM-1 satellite for two minutes on June 20th.

  • 2007: Hackers gained access to the Landsat-7 satellite in October of 2007.

  • 2008: Hackers gained access to the Landsat-7 satellite in July of 2008.

  • 2008: Hackers again gained control of the NASA Terra EOS AM-1 satellite, this time for nine minutes.

  • 2008: Hackers were able to upload a Trojan horse access program onto the International Space Station through infected Johnson Space Center mission control computers.

  • 2009: 39 professors, electricians, truckers, and farmers were arrested in Brazil after using amateur equipment to highjack US Navy UHF satellite frequencies. 

  • 2012: North Korea jammed GPS signals affecting over 300 commercial aviation flights.

  • 2013: Hackers took over Montana and Michigan TV station emergency alert systems and broadcast false zombie invasion alerts by gaining access to satellite and/or internet communications.

  • 2013: Iraqi military forces used at least six GPS jamming devices to disrupt coalition satellite navigation and targeting systems.

  • 2014: Chinese hackers gained access to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, disrupting dissemination of National Weather Service satellite data for two days while network administrators secured the network against further intrusions.

  • 2014: Cybersecurity expert Ruben Santamarta demonstrated critical cybersecurity vulnerabilities in ten types of military and industry SATCOM terminals at the DEFCON hacker convention.

  • 2016: NASA documented 1,484 “cyber incidents” targeting the agency through attacks based from websites as well as stolen or lost NASA computer devices.

  • 2016: North Korea again jammed GPS signals near South Korea, disrupting navigation systems in 58 planes and 52 ships using equipment reportedly acquired from Russia.

  • 2017: Chinese security researchers from the National University of Defense Technology in Changsha, China develop an inversion attack technique to decrypt GMR-2 encrypted satellite phone communications to create the 64-bit encryption key from the 3.3GHz satellite stream.

  • 2018: A cyber espionage operation by Chinese hackers was discovered to be targeting US and Southeast Asia satellite, telecom, and defense organizations.[x]

These attacks are probably not the only intrusions to have occurred. Skilled hackers have likely gained additional unauthorized access to satellite control systems without being detected. Accordingly, it’s essential to understand the particular vulnerabilities in satellite control networks.

Satellites and their control networks are vulnerable to a variety of cyberattacks and intrusions. Mr. Martin Rutishauser, an authority on penetration testing and satellite cybersecurity, detailed ten categories of satellite vulnerabilities at the Hashdays Security and Risk Conference 2012 in Lucerne, Switzerland. These vulnerabilities range from innocuous tracking and monitoring of satellite orbits through actual physical destruction of a satellite:[xi]

  • Tracking: Orbital monitoring over web data and software
  • Listening: Unauthorized intercept of transmission using equipment, frequencies, and locations
  • Interacting: Communicating with a satellite using protocols and authentication
  • Using: Taking control of a satellite or a telemetry, tracking, and command network to control satellite functions, take orbital pictures, or transmit video or audio
  • Scanning/attacking: An anonymous proof of concept explained by Leonardo Nve Egea showing the possibility of scanning, denial-of-service, and spoofing
  • Breaking: Exploiting weaknesses in old technologies, i.e. X.25 and GRE
  • Jamming: Jamming satellite frequencies
  • Mispositioning/Control: Transponder spoofing, direct commanding, command reply, or insertion after confirmation but prior to execution
  • Grilling: Activating all solar panels when exposed to sun to overcharge the energy system
  • Collisioning: Changing the orbit of a satellite to collide with another object or deorbit the satellite

These vulnerabilities can be exploited by hackers if satellite control networks are not properly secured against cyberattacks.Although comprehensive cybersecurity is essential to protect satellite control networks, a prioritized approach should be implemented to defend against the most pressing and likely threats in conjunction with creating a comprehensive cybersecurity plan to defend against all threats.

Satellite Cybersecurity Priorities

Among the many threats targeting satellites and their control networks, non-kinetic cyberattacks including jamming communications and hacking into satellite control networks are the most significant and prolific threats.[xii] Defending against these primary threats should be the first priority in developing and implementing cyber defense strategies by using anti-jamming, encryption, and network security tools, technology, and techniques to counter these threats while working with external organizations to collectively pool knowledge and resources regarding the dynamic threat.

Anti-Jamming: US Army Major General Peter Gallagher, Director of Architecture, Operations, Networks, and Space for the Army Chief Information Officer emphasized the importance of protecting satellite communications against jamming during discussions at the MilSatcom USA Conference on June 29th, 2017. “The biggest thing that we need is protected satcom, anti-jam capability, in the future. Anticipating future threats and making sure we address them, I think that’s the most critical thing.” [xiii] Accordingly, current space systems need to be evaluated for suitability for upgrading anti-jamming capabilities and future systems must have anti-jamming capabilities included as part of their design. 

Encryption: The Chatham House satellite cybersecurity report, “Space, the Final Frontier for Cybersecurity” notes the primary need for encryption in space systems. The report asserts that although it is not a comprehensive solution to counter every potential threat, the use of secure encryption is considered to be the best defense for space systems.[xiv] The challenge, though, is how to get cybersecurity added to control systems that are already in place on the ground and into satellites in orbit. Patricia Lewis, a research director at Chatham House explained “A large part of the critical infrastructure is sitting up there and not a lot can be done about it – it’s very old technology and it has never had any cyber protection built in. So the big question there is how much can they be retrofitted and what happens going forward.”[xv]

Cybersecurity companies are solving this problem by developing software and hardware solutions that can be retrofitted into existing networks and be a core component in the design of new networks. The cybersecurity company Fornetix has invented an encryption key management system called Key Orchestration that can dynamically distribute encryption keys throughout existing networks. This dynamic encryption capability provides an exceptionally strong layer of cyber defense that can be rapidly changed to protect networks against repeated cyberattacks.

Network Security: State-supported, criminal, and non-state hackers are adept at penetrating networks and infecting systems with viruses and ransomware. Brian Teeple, the Deputy Chief Information Officer for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers (C4) and Information Infrastructure Capabilities at the Department of Defense stated “The need for [network cybersecurity] protection is important because adversaries can attack any point in a system. It comes down to ‘what is the weakest link? What are they going to go after? You have to start looking at terminals and user equipment like they’re computers. There are cyber vulnerabilities and we’ve got to get cyber protections in place.”[xvi] This weakest link was echoed by Lisa Forte, founder of Red Goat Cybersecurity, when she highlighted the vulnerability of equipment in satellite ground stations, supply chains, and staff that will be actively targeted by hackers employing increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks, social engineering, and new artificial intelligence (AI) hacking tools on a massive scale.[xvii]

It is vital for network managers to anticipate both deliberate cybersecurity attacks as well as unintentional infections from authorized users unwittingly exposing networks to viruses via infected e-mail attachments, malicious websites, and improperly sanitized removable media from office and home computers. The STUXNET virus in Iran and the agent.btz virus on US CENTCOM military computers spread through systems lacking adequate and current security.[xviii] Satellite control networks need to be isolated from connections to external networks and require layered defenses that presume cyberattacks and unintentional exposure to viruses by authorized users will occur. Moreover, steps need to be taken to ensure network system suppliers are not providing components that have cyber vulnerabilities or surreptitiously pre-installed malicious software. Hughes Network Systems, for example, is a satellite production company that vets suppliers that use components from sources that have been identified as potential threats by the US government.[xix] Intelsat also works with independent cybersecurity companies to analyze hardware and software sold by suppliers in order to ensure no cyber vulnerabilities exist in the components being sold.[xx]

Cooperative Agile Cyber Defense: No single organization can find, fix, and fight all cybersecurity threats. The threat changes too quickly and different threats appear at different locations. Accordingly, organizations need to work with cybersecurity teams outside their own organizations and exchange threat information among these external organizations. Enlisting certified cybersecurity penetration teams from outside an organization who know about satellite control systems and can conduct independent security risk assessments is an essential and continuous requirement to ensure networks maintain strong security.[xxi] In addition, Inmarsat shares cybersecurity threat information with a variety of organizations including not only business partners, government agencies, and suppliers but also industry competitors.[xxii] Similarly, industry can work with government and law enforcement agencies that have resources and information available to assist organizations to stay informed of the latest threats.[xxiii] Working with outside organizations to conduct network security testing and share the latest threat information leverages larger sources of current cybersecurity knowledge to better protect an organization’s network.

Recommendations

Based on the current space cybersecurity threat as identified by experts from industry, military, and government, Intelliwings recommends considering the following actions:

Implement an immediate security review:

  • Ensure no direct connection between satellite control network systems and the Internet. The satellite control systems should exist on a closed network isolated from the Internet.
  • Disable USB ports and removable media drives – including but not limited to DVD, CD, portable hard drives, SDHC ports, etc. – on satellite control systems with the exception of a select number of computers under strict and logged control of trained network security officers authorized to conduct air gap transfer of mission-essential virus-scanned files from external networks to satellite control systems.
  • Permanently disable wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and cellular data communications for all system devices on the satellite control network.
  • Use the most current operating systems commercially available; do not use legacy operating systems such as Windows XP with outdated security vulnerabilities. 
  • Ensure all security firewall, antivirus, software, and operating system updates are installed.

Conduct a security policy and operations review:

  • Identify organizational requirements for anti-jamming, encryption, network security, and cooperative agile cyber defense
  • Meet with encryption key management companies to identify new software solutions that can be implemented on satellite control systems, satellite systems already in orbit, and on hardware systems that can be included in future launch systems. The Key Orchestration cybersecurity technology by Fornetix enables enterprise-wide encryption key management that can be dynamically updated to secure communications among all system devices.[xxiv]
  • Implement a system-wide security control regimen such as the CIS Control Protocol developed by The Center for Internet Security.[xxv]
  • Establish relationships to exchange cybersecurity information with international cybersecurity groups, governments, and law enforcement agencies to share data on the latest cyber threat organizations, intrusion techniques, and defenses. The US Department of Homeland Security and the International Cyber Security Protection Alliance are two of many organizations that promote sharing cybersecurity information and resources.
  • Partner with internationally certified White Hat hackers and penetration testers to continuously probe networks for weaknesses.

Conclusion

Planning for security at the inception of system design is absolutely essential to maximize defenses against the ever-growing cyber threat and it also avoids potentially millions of dollars of added expenses that organizations will incur when adding cybersecurity as an afterthought.[xxvi] Although senior officials responsible for protecting satellite control systems have emphasized the primary importance of anti-jamming, encryption, network security, and cooperative agile defense in satellite systems, it’s necessary to expand from these core components of satellite cybersecurity and ensure a comprehensive and holistic approach is implemented to promote cybersecurity in all aspects of network, physical, personnel, and satellite production supply chain security. 

Cybersecurity is a core priority. This mindset needs to be shared by all team members involved in satellite operations, from initial design through end users, to ensure the safety and security of the system. The threat against the system is real, but organizations can successfully defend against this dynamic threat when given the resources and training necessary and in active and continuous cooperation with internal and external network cybersecurity experts and organizations.

The report was prepared by Intelliwings, LLC. For additional information, please contact info@intelliwings.com.  


 

The following sources are recommended for additional research and information:

Endnotes

[i] Paganini, Pierluigi. “Hacking Satellites … Look Up to the Sky”, Infosec Institute, http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/hacking-satellite-look-up-to-the-sky/, September 13, 2013. 

[ii] Bichler, Stephen F. “Mitigating Cyber Security Risks in Satellite Ground Systems”, Air Command and Staff College, Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1012754.pdf, April 2015. 

[iii] Flaherty, Mary Pat; Samenow, Jason; and Rein, Lisa. “Chinese Hack U.S. Weather Systems, Satellite Network”, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/chinese-hack-us-weather-systems-satellite-network/2014/11/12/bef1206a-68e9-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html, November 12, 2014. 

[iv] Newcomb, Alyssa. “Hacked in Space: Are Satellites the Next Cybersecurity Battleground?”, NBC News, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/hacking-in-america/hacked-space-are-satellites-next-cybersecurity-battleground-n658231, October 3, 2016.

[v] Syeed, Nafeesa. “Outer-Space Hacking a Top Concern for NASA’s Cybersecurity Chief”, Bloomberg, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-12/outer-space-hacking-a-top-concern-for-nasa-s-cybersecurity-chief, April 12, 2017.

[vi] Ibid, Bichler, page 16.

[vii] Rogin, Josh. “The Top 10 Chinese Cyber Attacks (That We Know of)”, Foreign Policy, http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/01/22/the-top-10-chinese-cyber-attacks-that-we-know-of/, January 22, 2010. 

[viii] Khandelwal, Swati. “Satellite Phone Encryption Calls Can be Cracked in Fractions of a Second”, The Hacker News, http://thehackernews.com/2017/07/satellite-phone-encryption.html, July 10, 2017. 

[ix] Evans, Steven. “North Korea ‘Jamming GPS Signals’ near South Border”, BBC News, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35940542, April 1, 2016.

[x] “Significant Cyber Incidents”, https://www.csis.org/programs/cybersecurity-and-governance/technology-policy-program/other-projects-cybersecurity, 2019.

[xi] Rutishauser, Martin. “Satellite Hacking: An Introduction”, DefCon Switzerland HashDays Security & Risk Conference 2012, Lucerne, Switzerland, https://www.indianz.ch/download/IndianZ_SatelliteHacking.pdf, October 31, 2012 – November 3, 2012. Mr. Rutishauser’s complete satellite cybersecurity presentation is also viewable on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIsG8GpB67A

[xii] Daniels, Jeff. “Space arms race as Russia, China emerge as ‘rapidly growing threats’ to US”, CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/29/space-arms-race-as-russia-china-emerge-as-rapidly-growing-threats-to-us.html, March 29, 2017.

[xiii] Swarts, Philip. “Satcom’s Top Priority Should be Better Protection, Experts Say”, Space News, http://spacenews.com/satcoms-top-priority-should-be-better-protection-experts-say/, July 5, 2017. 

[xiv] Livingstone, David and Lewis, Patricia. “Space, the Final Frontier for Cybersecurity?”, page 14, Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, International Security Department, https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/publications/research/2016-09-22-space-final-frontier-cybersecurity-livingstone-lewis.pdf, September 2016.

[xv] Burgess, Matt. “Hackers Targeting Satellites Could Cause ‘Catastrophic’ Damage”, Wired, http://www.wired.co.uk/article/satellites-vulnerable-hacking-chatham-house, September 22, 2016. 

[xvi] Ibid, Swarts.

[xvii] Holmes, Mark. “Cyber Expert Lays Out Threat to the Satellite Industry”, Satellite Today, http://interactive.satellitetoday.com/via/june-2018/cyber-expert-lays-out-threat-to-the-satellite-industry/, May 2018.

[xviii] Ibid, Bichler, page 14.

[xix] Werner, Debra. “Who’s Keeping Satellites Safe from Cyberattacks?”, SpaceNews.com, http://spacenews.com/whos-keeping-satellites-safe-from-cyberattacks/, April 19, 2017. 

[xx] Ibid, Werner.

[xxi] Ibid, Bichler, page 25.

[xxii] Werner, Debra. “Protecting Satellites from Cyber Attacks Isn’t Getting Any Easier”, SpaceNews.com, http://spacenews.com/protecting-satellites-from-cyber-attacks-isnt-getting-any-easier/, March 9, 2017. 

[xxiii] Pomerleau, Mark. “When it Comes to Cybersecurity, the Satellite Industry Stands Out”, C4ISRNET, http://www.c4isrnet.com/special-reports/satcom/2017/03/08/when-it-comes-to-cybersecurity-the-satellite-industry-stands-out/, March 8, 2017.

[xxiv] Fornetix Key Orchestration, https://www.fornetix.com

[xxv] Center for Internet Security, https://www.cisecurity.org

[xxvi] Lockheed Martin was awarded a $15 million contract on 15 March 2017 to improve the cybersecurity of US Air Force Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS) ground system components. Swarts, Philp. “Lockheed Martin wins $15 million modification for SBIRS contract”, SpaceNews.com, http://spacenews.com/lockheed-martin-wins-15-million-modification-for-sbirs-contract/, March 15, 2017.