Using Large Language Models to Protect Satellites from Attack
War has broken out in the Pacific, and our adversaries are using everything in their arsenal to disrupt our satellite communications and surveillance— to strike us blind. They’re trying to jam the signals between our satellites and ground stations. They’re trying to hijack the satellites, by sending commands that seem to be coming from our ground stations, but are actually coming from their own. They’re aiming missiles and lasers at the satellites, and even using their own satellites to take ours out of commission.
Ideally, our satellites would be able to think for themselves, so they could detect and defend against such attacks almost instantly, without waiting for operators at ground stations to analyze the threats and then determine possible courses of action. Having such a “brain” on board each satellite would be particularly valuable in the coming years, when there may be mesh networks of thousands of small DoD satellites— far too many for ground stations to fully monitor.
Defense organizations may soon have the ability to equip their satellites with this level of intelligence. Large language models, a form of generative AI, can develop a contextual understanding of a situation and—mimicking the human brain— make sophisticated inferences and suggest a complex set of actions.
ONBOARD INTELLIGENCE
For example, based on an awareness that war has broken out, or may be about to, a large language model might infer that certain seemingly innocent radio signals actually indicate a probable attack. The model might then execute the defensive measures it has determined have the highest probability of success, taking into consideration not just the adversary’s capabilities, but also how other satellites in the network are currently faring against similar attacks.
And it would do all this without needing to rely on ground stations to detect and analyze the signals, recognize the threat, and then work out how best to respond. It is important to note that any actions suggested by large language models would be constrained by humans through guardrails, based on mission context.
Attacks on satellites—whether by cyber, missile, laser or an enemy satellite—can happen so quickly that instructions from ground stations may not arrive in time. A satellite with a large language model doesn’t have to wait for instructions from a cybersecurity expert on the ground, for example. The large language model on the satellite is the cybersecurity expert.
In a sense, a large language model would be like having a team of human operators on each satellite, performing a number of specialized actions at once—such as analyzing data on an attack, formulating a response, and communicating with other satellites in the network.
And a large language model’s response to an attack can be highly sophisticated. For example, if an adversary fires a ground-based missile at a satellite, the model on the satellite might quickly figure out how to outmaneuver it.
Or, a model might recognize that an enemy satellite is moving into a position that suggests it is about to attack. The model could then deter- mine the best defensive measures— even anticipating how the enemy satellite might respond to those actions, and plotting out moves to outwit it,
like a chess game.
SOPHISTICATED COLLABORATION
With mesh networks, satellites connect with each other through an “internet in space,” and can communicate even if signals from the ground are disrupted. It’s similar to the way Uber works. Each Uber driver serves as a node in a network, providing information to help create a common operating picture. And what one satellite sees, they all see.
If a satellite in the network were attacked, its large language model could not only determine the best defense, it could pass that information along to all of the other satellites. For example, say an adversary jams the ground signals going to a group of satellites. Large language models on those satellites might detect the attack and quickly switch communications to different frequencies, with each model choosing the frequency it predicts will work best.
If a satellite finds a successful frequency, it can communicate that to the others in the immediate group under attack—as well as to the thou- sands of other satellites in the network. If one of the other satellites picks a bad frequency, and is cut off from the ground, it can communicate that to the group as well. The large language models in a mesh network combine what they’ve learned to figure out what works and what doesn’t, as teams of human operators would. With each attack, the network of large language models get smarter about defense.
Just as important, the large language models in the mesh network would work together for the greater good— that is, taking defensive actions not just to protect themselves, but to make sure the satellite constellation as a whole is doing what it needs to do. This might even mean that some satellites would sacrifice themselves— moving into the path of incoming missiles, for example—to protect the larger network.
AWARENESS OF CONTEXT
One of the strengths of large language models, compared to conventional AI, is that they have a much greater ability to understand context. Say, for example, a model learns that the network is under attack from an adversary, and then gets commands from the ground that don’t reflect the conflict, such as an order to observe a region far from the war zone. The model might then take steps to determine whether it is being hacked—it could, for example, query other satellites about whether they are getting the same commands. It might also alert operators at the ground station of the possibility of an insider threat.
Having hundreds or thousands of large language models in a network would help make sure any single model stays accurate and on task. If a model went rogue, so to speak, or was compromised by an adversary, the other models in the network would likely recognize that it was deviating from the group—and possibly quarantine it. They might designate another satellite to take over its role, and perhaps recommend that ground control shut it down.
It would be no more difficult or expensive to equip satellites with large language models than with conventional forms of AI. Large language models are offering new opportunities for defense organizations in a variety of applications—including in protecting satellite communications and surveil- lance from crippling attacks.
LT. GEN TREY OBERING ([email protected]) is a Senior Executive Advisor at Booz Allen, specializing in space and missile defense. He is the former Director of the Missile Defense Agency.
COLLIN PARAN ([email protected]) is an AI architect at Booz Allen who builds large language models for a variety of applications for the Space Force, Navy, Army and Air Force.
Booz Allen subject-matter experts Evan Montgomery-Recht, Timothy Snipes and Karis Courey contributed to this article.
Check out more sponsored articles.
Smart Shipyards Are Essential to Navy SIOP Transformation: A Digital Backbone Is Critical to Force Generation and On-Time Deployment of Ships
The national security imperative for modernization of U.S. Naval shipyards has been well recognized for years. The Navy’s Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) Office was created in 2018 recognizing that America’s shipyards were designed in the 1800s and, while there has been some modernization since then, the Navy’s four organic shipyards – Norfolk, Portsmouth, Puget Sound, and Pearl Harbor – require critical upgrades given their vital roles in maintaining and updating nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, submarines, and other ships to ensure their warfighting readiness for the future
The Navy currently has committed $21 billion to SIOP, and while the planned physical infrastructure upgrades are essential (for example, the latest ballistic submarines cannot fit into existing drydocks), many national security experts are concerned that not enough effort and resources are being dedicated to an equally crucial component of a successful modernization program: digital transformation for the 21st century.
One year ago, retired Admiral James Foggo – former commander of US Naval Forces Europe and Africa and commander NATO Allied Joint Force Command Naples – correctly outlined the criticality that any shipyard optimization include a “digital backbone.” Admiral Foggo asserted the reality that the United States will not build as many ships as China for the foreseeable future, and emphasized the need for a more modern and more efficient digital infrastructure to rebuild and maintain our warfighting readiness advantage. The three main challenges to shipyard modernization, according to Foggo, are inefficient workflows, talent & training gaps, and oceans of data. All three can be overcome through a modern digital approach that incorporates additional investment and the establishment of trust from operators on the available new technologies that have been in use in the commercial industry for years.
Foggo’s proposal, accordingly, incorporated four main tenets: a dedication of an additional three percent to the overall SIOP budget to digital transformation objectives, a ground-up approach that involves the engineers, project managers and artisans from the outset and throughout the projects, demonstrating value using existing datasets, and of course, do no harm to the complex environments of a naval shipyard.
Affirmation for Digital Transformation from Leading Shipbuilding Scientists
Admiral Foggo is not alone. In November 2023, Dr. Jong Gye Shin spoke at the American Society of Naval Engineers’ Technology, Systems & Ships / Combat Systems Symposium about the successes South Korea and other nations have achieved in modernizing commercial shipyards. Jong is a three-time winner of the Elmer L. Hann Award (often called the Nobel Prize of Shipbuilding) and was named in 2023 as the chairman of South Korea’s Committee for Expertise of Shipbuilding Specifics. At the symposium, Jong noted both the complexity and differences between various shipyards to make the case for “smart” shipyards, incorporating AI and other modern technologies to manage the volume and complexity of data and eventually even possibly leading to fully automated shipyards.
Jong punctuated the success of this approach by noting that Korean commercial shipyards produce over 200 ships (50,000 tons) per year, while American shipyards produce as few as 10 (10,000 tons). And while those are commercial facilities, Jong also noted the vastly higher number of shipyards and of production capacity the Chinese Navy possess versus the United States. Transformation and innovation are enabled through three lines of effort: top-down, bottom-up, and scalability.
A Three-Pronged Approach To Modernize U.S. Navy Shipyards
The challenges facing the U.S. Navy to realize the visions of Admiral Foggo and Dr. Jong are significant, but not insurmountable. If the resources Admiral Foggo outlined – a small percentage addition to the overall SIOP budget – are allocated, the Navy’s SIOP program can achieve quick, lasting, and scalable results enabled by modern digital equipment.
Achieving this goal begins with an approach along three lines of effort. First, a “top-down” approach is essential for establishing and executing the vision, strategy, and governance for this modernization and includes the necessary program management, organizational change, and governance structures. Equally vital is a fact-based assessment of digital opportunities and a framework for an overall strategic blueprint. Furthermore, this top-down approach demonstrates leadership buy-in to all stakeholders and personnel, which is consistent with Admiral Foggo’s emphasis on the crucial establishment of maintenance and trust. This approach, used regularly in large commercial enterprises, achieves real cultural change, an absolute imperative to achieving real transformation in our public shipyards.
This trust is enhanced by the second line of effort: a “bottom- up” orchestration of pilot programs, prototypes, and learning opportunities running in parallel and simultaneously with the top-down strategy. The bottom-up aspect of the transformation requires establishment, adoption, and execution of Agile and DevSecOps methodologies, proven and trusted software and technology development organizational structures. Agile and DevSecOps place the emphasis on collaboration and constant communication through every step of development, from ideation to creation to execution. The approach also enables the development of minimum viable products (MVPs), which can be released and evaluated incrementally, as opposed to older waterfall methodologies which do not allow for the opportunity to implement, let alone evaluate, segments of work until final release.
This leads to the third line of effort, scalability. This is a projected approach, based on the evaluation of previous releases and MVPs. But Scaled Agile methodologies, by design, incorporate scalability into their project roadmaps. Employing the first two prongs followed by the third not only creates a technological transformation that can be constantly evaluated, but also enables scaling in the quickest manner possible.
Shipyard Digital Transformation: The Essential Path For The Navy
In view of the current capacity of the naval shipyards, the continued and expanding readiness challenges facing the Navy, and the significant investments being made through the SIOP program, it is critical that the Navy include and prioritize the digital transformation of our organic shipyards commensurate with the needed physical infrastructure upgrades. The combined top-down, bottom-up, and scalability approaches to this digital transformation will help the Navy to develop the smart shipyards required to achieve the objectives of SIOP. It is clear that the technology-based optimization of the United States Navy’s shipyards is an achievable objective, for the near and long-term future.
Check out more sponsored articles.
It's a Complex and Dangerous World Out There. DOCA Has Been Providing Clarity Since 1952
The U.S. Civil-Military Divide
Ironically, as our military, intelligence, and foreign services have been engaged in the longest period of sustained conflict in the nation’s history, less than one percent of American adults have served their country on active duty. As our military shrinks, the connections between military personnel and the civilian population naturally grow more strained. This creates a destabilizing divide in our society’s ability to project power precisely when unity of effort is essential for global peace and prosperity. There is increased potential for the United States to experience, in the words of former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, “a void of relationships and understanding of the armed forces”.
The idea of a civil-military divide is not new to American society. In some respects, military values of unity, subordination, and sacrifice run contrary to the cherished American values of individualism, acceptance, and free expression. This increasing gap, however, has potentially catastrophic implications for our capability to act decisively anytime and anywhere our interests require it. If the public fails to understand the importance and relevance of overseas missions, they may increase pressure on Congress to reduce funding for these operations. Furthermore, the ability to recruit qualified citizens to serve is severely hampered when civilians do not perceive the values of a strong and engaged military.
Why DOCA?
The Defense Orientation Conference Association (DOCA) was founded in 1952 by civilians who had participated in JCOC, a Secretary of Defense initiated and taxpayer funded program. JCOC was designed to address the then new, but growing, civil-military divide by creating a conduit to inform the private sector of the missions and operations of the Department of Defense and the challenges it faces in carrying out its goals. JCOC participants gained first-hand knowledge of the military organizations and defense strategies of our country and were given a frank appraisal of the tasks and problems faced. Early JCOC alumni decided to organize a public effort to continue the important work the SECDEF had begun and thus DOCA was born.
Over the past 70 years, DOCA has evolved from a mostly inside the beltway alumni club into a national, non-political, non-partisan, 501(c)(3) non-profit member association of civilian community leaders with the following objectives:
- To enrich member understanding in matters of national security and international relations under the jurisdiction and supervision of the Departments of Defense, State, Homeland Security, and the Intelligence Community
- To enable members to increase general awareness and understanding in our society by conveying information learned to others in their business and social communities
DOCA organizes four to six field orientation conferences annually. They are held in DoD facilities across America and abroad under DOS auspices where the United States has formal bases or established defense missions. DOCA members thereby gain an integrated view of the military establishment and national foreign policy, the problems
confronting the United States in pursuing its policies, and the economic, political, and military means required to carry them out. DOCA has members from all walks of life and would love to add your voice to ours, the only requirement to join is that approved members must be U.S. citizens with a desire to learn and share.
DOCA Gives Back
- While DOCA has the primary mission to explore, to learn, and to share, we also strongly believe in giving back.
- DOCA provides active support to the National Defense University International Fellows and Counter Terrorism Fellows programs.
Through the DOCA Defense Fund, our members make significant donations to the MWR organizations directly supporting those who serve and their families on every conference trip organized.
FIND OUT MORE AT DOCA.ORG.