91–100 of 277 posts
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"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There should actually be three distinct "air-gaped" networks (or at least classifications of network). Secure: The network that connects and controls the airplane. Absolutely only essential things allowed on, and if possible isolated using mathematically proven secure vlan/isolation techniques. "Employee": pilots, crew, etc. This is more just a distinct network for corporate operations security. "Customer": Still try…
Most Boeing planes (though not the 787 discussed here) don't use fly-by-wire, so you could argue that the most essential control plane is perfectly isolated by virtue of not having any sort of network at all, just hydraulics into the cabin.
> 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…
Call me when you bypass them, I have a job for you.
Who thought that having any communication path from the passenger entertainment system to flight control was a good idea?
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72#Final_report
Interesting that they never found the root cause. I assume they fixed it by detecting symptoms since the cause is unknown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Connecting entertainment systems to flight control sounds very wrong. Connecting entertainment systems to flight management would be common; it should be one-way communication (entertainment can only read FMS data, not send any), for the purpose of driving the moving map displays for passengers.
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.
...an FAA spokesperson wrote in a statement to WIRED that it's "satisfied with the manufacturer’s assessment of the issue." Can't help but read this as: "We don't have a clue and depend on the manufacturer to tell us everything is 5 by 5."
The FAA was satisfied with Boeing's design for the 737MAX. Sorry, but I now have zero trust in the FAA.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2019/03/18/did-tru...
I feel like this is the kind of thing that would've been completely ignored by everybody except for a handful of concerned hackers had it not been for the recent media outrage against Boeing (and in my opinion absolutely deserved). I guess the question is how bad is it (from the article it's hard to tell exactly, but it sure doesn't sound great)? And another question is how many of our systems that we rely on, from b…
>I have no idea how that company will ever earn back my trust Millions of ongoing safe flights? I dunno. I feel like they're getting savaged (which they deserve... to a point... but we will cross that point I am pretty sure, if we haven't already...) The thousands (tens of thousands?) of safe flights per day don't make the news. Boeing has been a pioneer in the safest form of transportation in existence. Mentour Pilo…
[x] and I don't mean that to doubt you but I hope you understand I can't be absolute on this without verification
I feel like this is the kind of thing that would've been completely ignored by everybody except for a handful of concerned hackers had it not been for the recent media outrage against Boeing (and in my opinion absolutely deserved). I guess the question is how bad is it (from the article it's hard to tell exactly, but it sure doesn't sound great)? And another question is how many of our systems that we rely on, from b…
>I have no idea how that company will ever earn back my trust Millions of ongoing safe flights? I dunno. I feel like they're getting savaged (which they deserve... to a point... but we will cross that point I am pretty sure, if we haven't already...) The thousands (tens of thousands?) of safe flights per day don't make the news. Boeing has been a pioneer in the safest form of transportation in existence. Mentour Pilo…