81–90 of 162 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was sent to ADSBexchange's API, not over RF. No laws were broken.
Yep, as evidenced by the "Source:Other" tag on ADSBExchange. Signals actually sent over the air would show ADS-B, TIS-B, etc, as the data source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like it wasn't actually spoofed radio signals, but spoofed data collection uploaded to adsbexchange. Still seems unlikely to make the FAA happy, but not as bad. I assume air traffic controllers aren't relying on adsbexchange?
Maybe not "rely" on, but some definitely use public ADS-B aggregator sites.
As other commenters noted, this is almost certainly not RF spoofing, just sending bad data to an aggregator (ADS-B Exchange) over the internet. This instance of spoofing is notable for being the first that I know of that wasn't primitive vector art or text, but a raster image! In that area of Florida multiple receivers would have picked up actual ADS-B broadcasts. ADS-B aggregators do have various anti-spoofing measu…
Notably, the history of this aircraft shows MLAT as the source for all tracking. This spoof is the first ads-b “track” for this plane. But there’s so much wrong with the data: 50k ft at 80knots (ground speed!) in a 747.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like it wasn't actually spoofed radio signals, but spoofed data collection uploaded to adsbexchange. Still seems unlikely to make the FAA happy, but not as bad. I assume air traffic controllers aren't relying on adsbexchange?
Maybe not "rely" on, but some definitely use public ADS-B aggregator sites.
Isn't this actually illegal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe not "rely" on, but some definitely use public ADS-B aggregator sites.
I highly doubt any ATC on duty is looking at a public ADS-B aggregator as a real time source of information for his or her job.
See https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html... for non-radar ATC procedures.
As other commenters noted, this is almost certainly not RF spoofing, just sending bad data to an aggregator (ADS-B Exchange) over the internet. This instance of spoofing is notable for being the first that I know of that wasn't primitive vector art or text, but a raster image! In that area of Florida multiple receivers would have picked up actual ADS-B broadcasts. ADS-B aggregators do have various anti-spoofing measu…
Notably, the history of this aircraft shows MLAT as the source for all tracking. This spoof is the first ads-b “track” for this plane. But there’s so much wrong with the data: 50k ft at 80knots (ground speed!) in a 747.
As other commenters noted, this is almost certainly not RF spoofing, just sending bad data to an aggregator (ADS-B Exchange) over the internet. This instance of spoofing is notable for being the first that I know of that wasn't primitive vector art or text, but a raster image! In that area of Florida multiple receivers would have picked up actual ADS-B broadcasts. ADS-B aggregators do have various anti-spoofing measu…
(TIS-B is a system that broadcasts ADS-B-like signals for aircraft that are being tracked by radar but either don't have ADS-B Out or otherwise might not be picked up by other aircraft with ADS-B In, e.g. maybe they're at a low altitude.)
There have been a couple other incidents with the TIS-B system. E.g. this apparent test near Dallas in 2022 that generated dozens of false targets in an interesting pattern: https://x.com/lemonodor/status/1481712428932997122 There was a similar incident around LAX several months later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I highly doubt any ATC on duty is looking at a public ADS-B aggregator as a real time source of information for his or her job.
There are non-radar towers that don't have scopes. They may have a traffic display, or maybe not. They might choose to use a public ADS-B aggregator site because it gives them situational awareness, but they don't use it to provide radar services to aircraft. That's my understanding from listening to a lot podcast episodes with air traffic controllers, anyway. I think it's an unofficial, non-FAA approved kind of thin…
I do not understand what the upside is, aside from saving a tiny amount of effort and cost -- they could get the same data with more reliability by just running their own ADS-B receiver, without having a dependency on a third-party.