When Nasa engineers “hacked” a camera on board their Juno spacecraft, 595 million kilometres away near Jupiter, they saved a mission at risk. But this exercise raised an uneasy question: if Nasa can tamper with a spacecraft remotely, could a hostile group do the same?

As Nithen Naidoo, CEO of the award-winning cyber-defence firm Snode, observes: “The ability to deny or disrupt space infrastructure is no longer a risk to be handled in the future. It is happening right now, and it’s accelerating.”

Naidoo’s remarks echo what’s being seen in the market. The space industry is a hotly contested environment and vulnerable to attacks motivated by profit, politics or an attacker’s urge to prove themselves. The challenge is that cyber, electronic and even physical threats overlap in ways that traditional, terrestrial defences aren’t built to handle.

Counterspace attacks

Many security experts divide counterspace threats into four main types: kinetic, non-kinetic, electronic and cyber. They often overlap, but each reveals a different weakness in space infrastructure.

1. Kinetic systems physically destroy or disable satellites

These are the most obvious and destructive. In 2007, China destroyed one of its own weather satellites with a missile, creating thousands of pieces of space debris. Each fragment became a hazard for other spacecraft.

The danger is long-lasting as strikes don’t just hit one target: They contaminate the whole orbital environment in a way that is nearly impossible to rectify.

2. Non-kinetic capabilities disable satellites without striking them directly

These systems disable satellites without hitting them directly, for example: jammers block signals, dazzlers, blind cameras and directed energy can overheat parts. The effect looks like a malfunction, making it hard to prove an attack took place.

It’s worthwhile to note that non-kinetic effects are difficult to distinguish from some types of cyberattacks because disruptions look like technical malfunctions. However, a good distinction to use is that non-kinetic tools rely on physical or energy-based interference rather than exploiting software or networks.

3. Electronic capabilities target the signals satellites depend on

Electronic attacks target the frequencies satellites depend on. A common tactic is GPS spoofing or feeding false location data. Russia has allegedly employed this tactic to disrupt the navigation systems of a plane bound for Bulgaria, which was carrying European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen. These electronic attacks are mostly focused on disrupting the electronic components of a satellite and not necessarily the underlying code or data layers, which would be the intuitive attack path in an attack classified as a cyberattack.

4. The expanding cyber vulnerabilities of space systems

Unlike missiles or lasers, cyberattacks rely primarily on code. Hackers target software, networks or ground stations that connect satellites. Researchers have logged more than 120 cyber incidents against satellites since 2022, including denial-of-service and suspected data tampering.

There is an unsettling theme with these types of attacks. “With cyber, the barrier to entry collapses,” Naidoo explains. “You don’t need billions of dollars. A laptop and determination can threaten billion-dollar assets.”

The attribution problem

On Earth, a missile strike leaves no doubt. In orbit, attacks can look like glitches or system malfunctions at first glance. This illusion makes attribution and deterrence extremely difficult.

The 2022, the AcidRain malware attack showed this clearly. On the eve of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the malware bricked thousands of satellite modems across Europe. The satellites themselves kept working, but the ground equipment was useless. To users, it looked like a sudden, devastating outage. It was only through further investigation that the motivation for a cyberattack was made clear.

Why Earth’s cyber playbooks fall short

Traditional cyber defences were designed for offices, data centres and corporate networks. Satellites are different:

They operate in remote orbits with long communication delays.
Hardware can’t be patched or replaced easily.
Compromise has global consequences, not local ones.
Costly hardware with strict SWaP (size, weight and power) constraints makes upgrades difficult.
Assured micro-patching enables safe updates without disrupting missions.

The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warns that Earth-based frameworks don’t translate neatly into orbit. The structural differences between technologies designed for Earth and those designed for space demand a new mindset and playbooks. It needs a mindset which assumes overlap across cyber, electronic and kinetic domains.

Adapting to threats that deviate from traditional threat patterns

Above all, the ability to defend against attacks on space-based assets depends on the speed and agility of response. Operators need systems that can spot unusual behaviour the moment it emerges, allowing them to respond before a disruption spreads. They also need the ability to analyse threats across cyber, electronic and kinetic domains because an incident in one area often triggers cascading effects in another. Additionally, constant simulation and rehearsal are essential. By stress testing responses against fast-moving, unpredictable scenarios, organisations can build the reflexes required to protect space infrastructure when every second counts.

Snode, for example, has developed systems that combine artificial intelligence-driven monitoring with human analysts. They leverage the CTEM (continuous threat exposure management) framework, which helps operators react more easily as threats shift from one domain to another.

As Naidoo summarises it: “Threats don’t sit in silos, they move between domains. The only winning strategy is agility.”

The stakes

Modern life already depends heavily on satellites for navigation, communications, finance and defence. As more satellites launch, the risks grow.

Nasa’s Juno “self-hack” was a triumph of ingenuity. However, it was also a warning. If systems can be reprogrammed to save a mission, they can be manipulated to end one. And when disruption strikes in orbit, the shockwaves reach Earth.

About Snode Technologies
Founded in 2016, Snode Technologies is a cybersecurity company specialising in AI and machine learning-powered technology, combined with specialist-led managed services. The company helps organisations detect, prioritise and respond to cyber threats in real time. Snode partners closely with clients across sectors to elevate their cyber maturity, reduce operational risk and strengthen decision-making through actionable intelligence. Headquartered in South Africa, Snode continues to expand its global presence while staying true to its core mission: enabling collective, proactive defence through technology and trust.