61–70 of 277 posts
From the article: "He was surprised to discover a fully unprotected server on Boeing's network, seemingly full of code designed to run on the company's giant 737 and 787 passenger jets, left publicly accessible and open to anyone who found it. So he downloaded everything he could see." Is that even legal? Will he ever be allowed to cross the US border after admitting this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The moving map could easily be fed from a separated consumer grade GPS. Same for all other metrics that the median passenger would care about (height, speed over ground), except for the ever-impressive outside temperature.
Outside temperature is pretty impressive indeed. The map also shows projected flight plan and ETA, which would not come purely from GPS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside temperature is pretty impressive indeed. The map also shows projected flight plan and ETA, which would not come purely from GPS.
Most/all international flights I've been on are really terrible at providing an accurate flight plan or ETA to the passengers via the entertainment system. I would not be surprised if it is already a manual update done when convenient by a member of the flight crew.
It seems insane that all this code isn't just open source by default. No one's going to be able to rip off airlines by stealing it, you still need to have a company that, you know, sells planes. Keeping it closed seems like a full admission that "there are probably a bunch of bugs in here and we don't want people to see them"
Maybe open-source software is today's standard, but I imagine it wasn't back when those airliners were first designed. Now, imagine they did open-source their code: I imagine those codebases are humongous and it would take months if not years for security issues to be found by the community. How do you make sure that a bad actor doesn't find a flaw before the community does and uses it? So open-sourcing sounds totall…
If I owned a 787, would I be likely to have the rights to lend it to security researchers to test the exploits, or would it be prohibited through a contract that Boeing requires customers to agree to? Is there a reason that an individual would own a 787 for personal use— eg - is it a plane that people change the interior layout for use as a private jet, or are these planes all tied up in commercial use? If I owned on…
Drake owns a 767 [1], and the founders of Google own one [2]. A couple members of the Saudi Arabian royal family are reported to own 777s [3]. It's not inconceivable that an individual could own a 787, though I can't find any reference to one yet. I think, though, that the sort of person who owns one doesn't tend to want to tinker with it. You just hire someone to fly it, and know that it's always available. The diff…
Oh, tons of people! There's a whole industry around hacking cars, most of those people aren't the kind of researchers that do con talks though.
> But Boeing counters that it has both "additional protection mechanisms" in the CIS/MS that would prevent its bugs from being exploited from the ODN, and another hardware device between the semi-sensitive IDN—where the CIS/MS is located—and the highly sensitive CDN. That second barrier, the company argues, allows only data to pass from one part of the network to the other, rather than the executable commands that wo…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72#Final_report