Galileo Concerns: Knowledge Transfer, Security, and Possible Non-Delivery of PRS

Galileo Concerns: Knowledge Transfer, Security, and Possible
Non-Delivery of PRS

http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/galileo-concerns-knowledge-transfer-security-and-possible-non-delivery-prs-10649

October 27, 2010 By: Alan Cameron
GNSS Design & Test Newsletter, October 2010


Two main political issues surfaced during the European Navigation
Conference (ENC) last week, October 19–21, in Braunschweig, Germany. The
first swirled around Galileo’s Public Regulated Service (PRS), an
encrypted signal that will serve government, emergency, police, and
military customers. The second involved security and knowledge-transfer
concerns about the overall Galileo system, on the part of the European
Space Agency (ESA). This newsletter focuses on these two topics, while
the October 28 webinar (pre-register at www.gpsworld.com/webinar, or
download afterwards) will contain further discussion and also cover
additional ENC highlights.

Originally envisioned to carry 30 satellites (27 operational in three
planes of nine, plus three in-orbit spares), the Galileo constellation
has over time been reduced to a planned (still not orbiting) four
initial satellites plus 14 operational satellites for a total of 18,
without any spares in orbit. ESA, under direction of the European
Commission, then plans to declare an Initial Operating Capability (IOC),
or FOC-1 (Full Operating Capability, Phase One) — the terminology varies
— in the 2014–2015 timeframe.

However, such a limited constellation will not enable global delivery of
the PRS, a “Galileo-only” application, much sought by the European
Commission and member states’ governments and military, and in some
views the original and most compelling motivation for Galileo’s birth in
the first place. To wit, independence from GPS. Quite simply, more
satellites are necessary.

The same geometry-in-space and radio-frequency factors apply to some of
the high-precision services that were envisioned for intelligent
transport systems (ITS) within Europe: tools to deal with and lessen
traffic congestion and correlative environmental pollution, to enable
more and denser high-speed rail links and freight, and similarly for
marine (in-harbor and along-canal) operations.

Galileo now finds itself face to face with a potential absence of its
own raison d’être. It may be necessary to in fact collaborate with GPS
in order to achieve its former “Galileo-only” goals, or to reconfigure
the reduced constellation somehow so that it can provide continuous
service over the European continent only. This last possibility would
not satisfy the needs of European peace-keeping missions around the
world, however — another key birthing motivation.

Galileo Development after 2014. There are E3.4 billion available now,
allocated to six working packages for launching, for the ground system,
and for the satellites. However, it only covers 4 initial satellites,
and 14 operational satellites. So in 2014 we will have a constellation
of 18 satellites.

Acting on a suggestion from Fugro/Omnistar’s operations director Hans
Fisher, Jac Spaans, past chairman of the European Group of Institutes of
Navigation and past president of the International Association of
Institutes of Navigation, posed the following question to Edgar Thielman
of the European Commission.

“We are going to have Galileo-only applications like the Public
Regulated Service (PRS) for governments. This cannot work with 18
satellites, unless maybe — this has to be investigated — the 18
satellites are configured in a constellation that will give optimum
coverage of Europe. Has this been thought about yet?”

In Spaans’ opinion, Thielman gave “a very vague answer: they are in
discussions about what to do. The problem is, of course, there is no
money available after 2014 — yet. We advertised Galileo as an
independent system, but it will not be an independent system with 18
satellites. It will be a complement to GPS. The manufacturers will make
Galileo/GPS receivers, and we’ll have of course then better
availability, better accuracy with all the satellites, but the
Galileo-only applications will not be available at that time.”

Thielman Speaks. I had a lengthy conversation myself with Edgar
Thielman, Head of Unit, EU Satellite Navigation Programmes, in charge of
Applications, International Relations and Security Issues, following the
morning presentations at ENC in Braunschweig. Among several other
concerns, notably the privacy of users, he discussed the situation of
the PRS.

“PRS will be one of the first services of Galileo, as soon as it is
functional. We envision that in the 2014/2015 timeframe, with 18
satellites enabling the IOC. We know that development of receivers and
technical hardware is still to be done. Thus we put forward the
proposal, to be on safe ground, to have a common understanding for
industry and participants.

The IOC constellation will provide in the beginning the Open Signal
(OS), the Safety-of-Life (SOL), and the Public Regulated Service (PRS).
The interests are of these three services are different from one
another. The PRS follows a completely different logic. But the Member
States are interested in getting this specific service, and also the
European Commission and the European Council.”

Thielman explained that these three collective entities anticipate PRS
capabilities to deal with “crisis situations — where the Open Signal is
jammed. Government services must be able to function in very difficult
circumstances, for instance, peace-keeping missions.”

He added, “We want to open this service to other international
organizations and states, subject to agreement.” Such discussion on
cooperation with third countries, as well as discussions within the EC
and among Member States on “optimization” — that is, ways to overcome
the deficiencies of a constellation limited to 18 satellites — are ongoing.

“We have a lot of talks.”

“The starting point is to have a system that satisfies the needs of the
EU and EC with the means we have.”

It was not stated, but seems implicit to many observers, that such means
to enable the PRS may require more cooperation with and use of GPS than
Galileo proponents may have originally wished.

Technical Presentations Withdrawn. In a separate development at ENC, the
European Space Agency (ESA) abruptly withdrew six — or possibly more —
technical presentations on new Galileo developments, without immediate
explanation. Probing by GPS World after the fact elicited a reply that
“the papers were withdrawn by ESA because they contained too detailed
information that could have led to knowledge transfer.” A further
hypothetical, and emphatically unofficial possible reason was posited
later by one knowledgeable attendee, having to do with security issues.

Such concerns are not unique to Galileo — far from it — nor is
withholding of sensitive technical information unprecedented. All three
of the other GNSS, from the United States, Russia, and China, actively
restrict access to key data and capabilities. Indeed, this practice
seems to be increasing across the board.

A long black cloud is coming down.

It is perhaps more striking in the European context, however, as Galileo
developers and contractors, many of them relatively young engineers,
have long demonstrated an enthusiasm for talking about their work in all
its aspects. This may be due to a feeling that Galileo needs to prove
itself on the global stage somehow. Or it may simply be youth and an
attitude of openness and free exchange. Whatever its origins, the
process is now firmly in the control of government functionaries in
Europe, as has long been the case in the United States, Russia, and China.

Most of the presentations were due to be given during a session on
“Galileo Development and Test Results” on the conference’s first fully
technical session, Tuesday afternoon, following the plenary and opening
panels, during which the PRS concerns were aired. The withdrawal of the
papers created some consternation among conference attendees, as the
session would have been the technical highlight of the conference and
was looked forward to with much anticipation, and further because no
official explanation for the action was offered. A somewhat dated and
previously-circulated presentation was offered in place of the first
paper, and the rest of the session was simply dismissed.

The German Institute of Navigation (DGON), which hosted the ENC,
announced the cancellation of the papers at the beginning of the
session, at 4 pm local time. Under heated questioning from the audience,
the hosts revealed that they had been notified of the official
withdrawal of the papers a few days previously. DGON did not explain why
it waited until the opening of the session itself to advise conference
attendees. The following can only be speculation, but the announcement
may have been withheld to avoid embarrassment or controversy for the ESA
directors who appeared onstage and spoke during the ENC’s opening and
keynote presentations, earlier in the day.

Later on during the conference, GPS World heard speculation from a
conference participant, who did not have any official knowledge or
clearance, that one or more of the papers may have contained information
about the Galileo ground control system that, if made public, might have
created vulnerabilities to Internet hacking attacks on the system.

The papers that were withdrawn included:

Galileo Orbit and Synchronisation Processing Facility (OSPF): First
Performance and Robustness Results Obtained with the Operational Element
First User Receiver-Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) Integrity and
Interference Mitigation Tests Results with Upgraded German Galileo Test
Range (GATE)
Later, however, the GATE manager stated to GPS World that this
particular paper was not withdrawn by ESA for any official reason, but
by the GATE organization itself, because it had received the special
test receiver necessary from ESA too late to perform the tests in
question, and thus to present the results.

Galileo Ground Mission Segment Operability Chain
Experimental Verification of GNSS Integrity and Statistical Solutions
for Galileo Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) Overbounding
Galileo Constellation System Verification Processes and Methods
And, from a later session on GNSS Software and Algorithms, also
withdrawn was:

First Results of the Coherent E5 ALTBOC Processing with the Galileo TUS
Receiver
The authors of three of the cited papers are staffers from ESA itself;
the authors of the other three come from companies that are under
contract to the space agency.