Fire at Starlink site in Bulgaria after suspected sabotage in Poland

(dpa-international.com)

122 points | by ilamont 1 hour ago

8 comments

  • nickff 39 minutes ago
    >"Bulgarian Interior Minister Ivan Demerdzhiev told parliament that additional security measures had been introduced at similar facilities, even though responsibility for their protection rested with their owners."

    It seems absurd that the government is blaming SpaceX for not securing its property against trespass and vandalism/arson, especially when it seems likely that the violations are by foreign-state-sponsored actors. If this sort of issue is not the responsibility of local police and federal agencies, I am not sure what is. I understand that railways in some countries have their own police, but it is my understanding that SpaceX has not been granted such powers in any country.

    • Geof25 16 minutes ago
      It is not absurd at all. You can't arrest somebody for a sabotage without letting him to execute the deed. Because if he won't execute there's nothing to arrest him for...

      So to prevent a sabotage is to have several layers of security (i.e multiple fences) so you will force the saboteur to commit minor crimes like trespassing first and also slow the saboteur significantly so you can arrest him for these minor crimes.

      • chinathrow 3 minutes ago
        Drones do not care about fences.
      • ceejayoz 12 minutes ago
        > You can't arrest somebody for a sabotage without letting him to execute the deed.

        Sure you can. We convict people of conspiracy all the time.

        https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/overt_act

        • Geof25 5 minutes ago
          Arresting all the people who happen to walk past a strategic object will fill up your prisons very quickly.
          • ceejayoz 4 minutes ago
            Yes, that would be very dumb. Who suggested that?
    • arccy 34 minutes ago
      most of what police do is after the fact. you're responsible for securing your own property, security guards are a thing everywhere.
      • nickff 20 minutes ago
        >"you're responsible for securing your own property, security guards are a thing everywhere."

        Maybe Bulgaria differs from most countries, but security guards seem to be mostly theatre. Private actors are generally very limited in what they can do to secure property, and they're usually required to basically call the police and hope the police show up in time to do something, which is often unlikely in either the countryside or industrial areas.

        • fasterik 18 minutes ago
          I think the point would be that it's the private company's responsibility to provide a minimum level of security, even if their job is just for deterrence, documentation, and notifying police in a timely manner. Even if it's only "theatre" it still serves a purpose.
        • EA-3167 2 minutes ago
          It really depends on the site being secured and who's acting as a guard. Try to storm a major US airbase and you'll learn very quickly that not all guards are created equal. Do the same as your local strip mall and yeah... that guy is only there to break up fights between kids and call the cops.
      • PorciiVorbesc 21 minutes ago
        >most of what police do is after the fact.

        This. Police are just the clean-up crew who come 20 minutes after, and fill in the paperwork proving that something bad did indeed happen to you, that you can then use for your lawsuit or insurance claim, nothing more.

        Unless you're a politician or the billionaire owner of an island, they're not gonna do much more to actually prevent or solve your problem.

      • buckle8017 21 minutes ago
        security guards vs FSB.

        uh huh

    • PorciiVorbesc 38 minutes ago
      >If this sort of issue is not the responsibility of local police and federal agencies, I am not sure what is.

      It's the Balkans mate. You pay next to no taxes, you also get next to no services back from the government. Police, education, healthcare, etc. that exist, is just a skeleton crew in minimum load bearing role, not to actually solve your problem when you need it.

      • miroljub 13 minutes ago
        Why would Balkan tax payers pay to secure foreign corporation? Especially if that corporation is involved in a war they don't care which makes it a legitimate military target.
        • PorciiVorbesc 6 minutes ago
          >Why would Balkan tax payers pay to secure foreign corporation?

          Because foreign corporations operating in the Balkans pay taxes in the balkans, own property/real estate on Balkan soil and employ workers in the balkans.

      • phoronixrly 29 minutes ago
        As a Balkanian I vouch for this. Even what little you pay as taxes gets embezzled and you are always on your own.
    • walrus01 35 minutes ago
      Starlink sites are mostly at dwdm regen hut sites, which as a general industry baseline have a remarkably low level of security.
    • numpad0 25 minutes ago
      > If this sort of issue is not the responsibility of local police and federal agencies,

      ... it means those properties are own sovereign nations, or at least autonomous zones! woo hoo, time to declare independence of People's Republic of Mars.

    • gostsamo 28 minutes ago
      Local here. The new prime minister is a spineless russian rag and everyone around him is from the former communist party. You won't find in them anything approaching self-respect or actual will desire to defend against any russian provocation.
      • jacquesm 7 minutes ago
        Well, then he's on Elon's side I guess...
  • MisterMunchkin 2 minutes ago
    I am getting a bit concerned that Russia is actually planning an attack on Eastern Europe.

    It’s just like red storm rising, their refineries have been blown up and their diesel will only last 6 months. They need to move now or they’ll have to accept peace and economic prosperity.

  • toomuchtodo 1 hour ago
    I find it somewhat interesting Russia is likely sabotaging these stations while Musk is limiting StarLink capabilities to Ukraine in fighting Russia. Very Spy vs Spy. Pick a lane!
    • tcdent 32 minutes ago
      You're talking about Starshield, which is operated by the US Government via services contracted, not personally regulated by Musk himself.

      Starlink, the commercial product, was always off limits for military operations (the type that require connectivity at 100+ MPH).

      So, no, this is not one person dictating the usage.

      Starlink’s Acceptable Use Policy explicitly prohibits:

      - Remotely controlling or piloting any aerial drone or unmanned vehicle (unless otherwise contractually permitted by SpaceX).

      - Engaging in any military activity other than approved morale/welfare/recreation programs for service members.

      • culi 16 minutes ago
        Starshield uses all of Starlink's satellites and a few special ones specific to Starshield. There's been plenty of cases in Ukraine of suicide drones being configured to starlink accounts instead of military ones. In fact, that's exactly how Russia took advantage of starlink for the first 2 years.

        While there might be a legal distinction between the two systems, technically speaking, it's mostly a matter of configuration.

      • roosterIllusi0n 27 minutes ago
        It's only one set of satellites. Stop pretending that its different.
      • toomuchtodo 30 minutes ago
        Can you say with assurance, hopefully with evidence, which entity has degraded service as described?

        > Starlink’s Acceptable Use Policy explicitly prohibits

        Starlink's AUP is whatever Musk decides it is when he decides. He is petty, and there are robust examples of his pettiness as it relates to X and Starlink (I'm unaware if he's weaponized Tesla vehicle access in this regard, but welcome citations, if they exist).

        "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law."

        https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/04/29/musk-more-petty...

        (if you do not rely on Musk controlled systems, he cannot weaponize them against you; choose your risk exposure accordingly)

        • scottyah 25 minutes ago
          Yes- if they were using it for drone attacks and the service stopped/slowed, that was not Starlink, because it never would have happened in the first place.
    • jkestner 35 minutes ago
      You're telling me appeasement doesn't work?
    • numpad0 22 minutes ago
      Or that one wasn't Musk but Starlink sat2sat turns out to be mostly smoke and mirrors, and the satellites simply could not provide services without the ground station in the immediate vicinity of terminals.
    • heaney-555 26 minutes ago
      >Musk is limiting StarLink capabilities to Ukraine

      Incorrect. The US government limited Starshield, the military version of Starlink which it controls. SpaceX has no say.

      • paimapi 20 minutes ago
        It must be nice to think there is such a clear and high wall between private corporate actors and the US government in 2026. I want to live in that delusion, too. Unfortunately, I retain a minimum amount of skepticism.

        From the Starshield Wiki page:

        >While SpaceX president and COO Gwynne Shotwell has indicated that there is little information she is allowed to disclose about Starshield, she has noted "very good collaboration" between the intelligence community and SpaceX on the program.

        >The retired four-star general Terrence O'Shaughnessy, who previously ran U.S. Northern Command, is the vice president for SpaceX's Special Programs Group who is thought to be involved with Starshield.[1] The Wall Street Journal reported that Starshield's online job postings required people with top-secret clearances, as well as experience working with the Defense Department and intelligence community — such as representing Starshield to Pentagon combatant commands

        >Col. Eric Felt, director of space architecture at the office of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for space acquisition and integration, said that there are plans to acquire at least 100 Starshield-branded satellites for this purpose by 2029. He said that while the military is an active user of SpaceX's commercial Starlink service, they also want to take advantage of the company's dedicated Starshield product line.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starshield

        • chews 16 minutes ago
          ya bro was saved from the Yandex bombout, but bots be botting.
    • PorciiVorbesc 41 minutes ago
      > while Musk is limiting StarLink capabilities to Ukraine in fighting Russia

      Can you share a link? AFAIK Musk blocked Starlink for Russians, not Ukrainians.

    • chews 18 minutes ago
      He get's his bags from the DoD either way... in-fact the chaos undoubtedly is actually more profitable, make hay while the sun is up... we live in a busted reality of broligarchs that are actually DoD welfare queens. They are literally on both sides of the trade so profit is inevitable. When america elect's a clown, we get a whole 3 ring circus.
    • bflesch 48 minutes ago
      It might just be feel-good propaganda to reduce the PR fallout for starlink/musk.

      "See guys please don't cancel your Starlink orders russia also thinks we are the enemy!"

      • tencentshill 40 minutes ago
        Scarily enough, money isn't his main motivation. He willingly destroyed tesla sales for politics.
        • jonas21 1 minute ago
          Did he though? Tesla sales have been flat for the past few years -- not growing any more, but not "destroyed" either. And the stock price (which is what actually correlates with Musk's money) has nearly doubled since the 2024 campaign season.
        • bflesch 36 minutes ago
          It's not only about musk but about continued US influence over European defense. If every European defense company moves away from the Starlink platform the US loses a lot of leverage. If they create "plausible deniabiliy" feel-good propaganda like this one, then they can convince some decision makes to keep building defense projects upon the Starlink platform.
        • scottyah 34 minutes ago
          Haha you really just can't win as a builder. Half the people despise him for doing anything for money, and the other half hate him because he cares for politics over money.
          • origini 28 minutes ago
            I don't think he really cares about politics.

            He was proper left wing before, switched over to right wing.

            There were plenty of stories and timelines were he as really lucky regarding his money and his investments.

            Im pretty sure he did all of this to lobby for himself.

            Why would he try to change or fix USA Politics for the better of humanity if he stated that earth is over and we need mars.

            DOGE? His way of fighting burocracy and environmental rules. Giving money to Trump? Subsidies, advertising, reduction of environmental rules etc.

            • chews 12 minutes ago
              He was left wing cause that sweet tax credit for alternate energy... does anyone remember A123 and the amount the Obama administration put into it. Literally, Solar City and Tesla were to hit the sweet sweeet rebates. You can see the effects by companies like Ford canceling the F150 lighting cause the consumer breaks are gone, he was pillaging California and other Federal rebates to build his businesses, then does SpaceX to suck funds from the DoD to launch NRO sattelites. His affiliations go where the money gun blows.
          • toomuchtodo 21 minutes ago
            [flagged]
    • salviati 53 minutes ago
      Some are disabled by Musk, some are disabled by sabotage. No contraddiction.
  • AmericanOP 39 minutes ago
    [flagged]
  • postsantum 47 minutes ago
    [flagged]
    • PorciiVorbesc 42 minutes ago
      There's only 3 other comments ATM besides yours. You are the bot here.
    • platinumrad 42 minutes ago
      I thought they "went away" after the Yandex data centers were hit.
  • culi 21 minutes ago
    I didn't realize that in addition to the 11,127 satellites in our orbit it also takes over 1,500 ground antenna in the US alone to run this network? It seems likely that there is much more ground infrastructure than space infrastructure to make Starlink work
    • MisterMunchkin 5 minutes ago
      How else do you expect the satellites to connect to AWS or Google? It obviously has to come down at some point otherwise your packets wouldn’t be able to go anywhere…
    • api 19 minutes ago
      The satellites are glorified repeaters.

      There was some talk about having the satellites form a laser mesh but I don't think they've gone live with anything like that, so it almost always just comes back down at the nearest site.

      • detritus 2 minutes ago
        Wait. They're not doing the orbital mesh?!

        I thought that was fundamental to the whole network?

        Not another Elon bullshit?

      • Polizeiposaune 15 minutes ago
        Most of the satellites now have three 200GBps inter-satellite links. The starlink V3 that will be launched on the big rocket reportedly have six ISLs.
  • PorciiVorbesc 39 minutes ago
    >Two men aged 20 and 21, both holding German passports

    They way Germany has been handing out passports like candy in last years, they very well could be Russians or foreigners with sympathetic ties to Russia willing to commit crimes for them in exchange for some pocket money.

    So the term is correct.

    • origini 34 minutes ago
      [flagged]
      • PorciiVorbesc 31 minutes ago
        Sorry, I don't engage with trolls whos start comments with bad faith unsubstantiated accusations. To the Yandex datacenters with you.

        For the rest who care, just Google "Germany naturalizations per year" and see the trend. You can't possibly tell me they vetted everyone who qualified for the ultra low bar to get a german passport, to check that they're also not a Putin sympathizer or a traitor/terrorist.

        • origini 26 minutes ago
          Im a german, i told you already in my comment the argument i made.

          Stop gasligthting and bring up a proper argument with a source.

          The german state, similiar to canada, has a very basic clear rule how to get a passport. Hasn't changed in ages.

          And for plenty of germans history this was on purpose. Turkey worker were invited 50? years ago.

          • PorciiVorbesc 24 minutes ago
            >Im a german

            You mean youre a "German passport holder" to be accurate.

            • origini 18 minutes ago
              No im a german. A real german born and raised in germany as german.

              Do i have a german passport holder? Yes that too.

              • PorciiVorbesc 10 minutes ago
                >No im a german. A real german

                Isn't the trope of the self identified "real german" an AFD far-right white-supremacists talking point? You yourself fell into your own purity test trap.

          • gib444 15 minutes ago
            Hasn't changed in ages??

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nationality_law#Reform_...

            2024. Reduced the residency requirement from 8 years to 5. Made big changes around dual citizenship too.

            • origini 2 minutes ago
              I looked it up inmore detail, it was 'easy' enough before i would argue because 8 years were required since 2000 and for me therefore normal.

              For a bit it was 3 but that already had high requirements.

              Now its 5. If someone already has a stable job in germany, does 8 or 5 years really matter that much?

              But might be my viewpoint perhaps? I thin people who work in germany for a long time should be able to get german citicenship. Would be unfair like in USA to want cheap labor and not give back?

        • morsch 9 minutes ago
          Germany's naturalization rate is not out of the ordinary for the EU, either per capita or per number of foreign residents. Italy, Belgium, Spain and others "hand out more passports" relative to their own population than Germany; Poland, Ireland, the Netherlands and others "hand out more passports" relative to the amount of refugees that live in their countries. Germany is very much middle of the road. So, you know, whatever.

          https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/7870049/24010214/KS-...

          No doubt it's easier to smuggle foreign agents into liberal democracies with a humanist approach to asylum. And no doubt it's easier to smuggle foreign agents into countries with aging populations that are desperate for cheap labor. I don't think stricter naturalization policies are going to stop or even deter foreign state actors though, that's ridiculous.

  • pelagicAustral 26 minutes ago
    Right after Starlink partially cut the pipe to Ukraine... Right at the time an Ukranian is facing a court of justice for the Nord Stream pipeline...
    • Geof25 22 minutes ago
      So you think that Ukraine is able to pull out such operation on foreign soil in matter of hours?
      • pelagicAustral 14 minutes ago
        Assuming they have a semi-competent military complex, then they should be able to put together plans ahead of time, measures and counter-measures, just like any other institution. What's so shocking about that idea?

        Seems pretty feasible at this point that they might be trying to drag NATO into all-out war.

    • exe34 24 minutes ago
      [flagged]