Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 128 posts

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#101

Post by Karunamon »

hobs wrote: post #75
pyre wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> little to no control over it's members There is some amount of control when you are accepting and possibly celebratory in response to behaviour that should be discouraged. For example, if you never sexually harass someone yourself, but you are silent while other do so, you are ceding a control that you have over the situation. If more people that were respected in the community called out these behaviours when they…

At the same time, you can always claim that "the community isnt doing enough" because "enough" and "the community" as so ill defined that you can always castigate "the community". It is a complete waste of time.

Somewhat OT, but this is something I wish people could understand about groups like Occupy and GamerGate. The criticisms of both are often measured in such a way that the targets of the criticism can never do "enough".

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#103

Post by pasbesoin »

jamesbrownuhh wrote: post #10
csirac2 wrote: post #2

We live in shitty knee-jerk reactionary times, but did anyone else see his tweet at the time? At best, it seemed in poor taste. At worst, the outcome seems depressingly predictable. I don't know what I'm trying to contribute here, except that whilst I have no problem with EFF working on this, their article here seems overly shrill and over-reactionary at how shrill and over-reactionary the airline was in their respon…

This isn't exactly a new phenomenon - even before 9/11, a careless joke at baggage check-in ("Did you pack your own luggage today, Sir?" - "No, my wife probably put a bomb in there.") would often result in the joke not being recognised or treated as such. Said jokester gets taken to one side, scrutinised by the boys in blue, and eventually told that they "will not be flying today, sir." In the age of Twitter, such hi…

Humour is a part of human nature. Denying this at the outset of your policy and procedure, seems a pretty poor start to vetting humans.

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#104

Post by nitrogen »

ghshephard wrote: post #84
nitrogen wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did he expect was going to happen? I hate how often this line is used to defend bullies and blame victims. It's an attitude that ensures the overly aggressive can browbeat their way to getting whatever they want.

Bullies proactively seek to hurt others for their own amusement. For better or worse the Secret Service (in the case of the president) and the FBI (in the case of airplane safety), are reactively responding to potential threats. So if you don't want them to react, don't threaten the president, don't make threats about messing around with aircraft EICAS systems. Remember, the FBI isn't responsible for designing safe a…

Bullies proactively seek to hurt others for their own amusement.

This is definition is too narrow, in my opinion. Workplace bullying, for example, isn't just for amusement, or even to hurt others deliberately.

I would define a bully as anyone or any group that uses coercion to get their way, rather than persuasion. Alternatively I would say a bully wantonly throws their weight around.

As such, using the power of the FBI to seize equipment as the first response to an unproven alert is bullying.

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#105

Post by DanBC »

keevie wrote: post #92
ghshephard wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also has the peripheral advantage of ensuring that you never carry a package for someone else, and that you are leery about carrying luggage/bags packed by someone else.

Really? I would have no problem bringing a wrapped gift from a friend or colleague, the contents of which I do not know on a plane. And lying about packing my bags myself. In fact, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with that...it's a constant and (imo) fair assumption of mine that my friends are not trying to kill me.

The list of things you are nkt allowed to take over a border is very much greater than "things that will kill someone or destroy a plane".

Carrying eg an apple into the US is probably not going to be fun if they find it.

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#106

Post by tptacek »

freehunter wrote: post #99
tptacek wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every response to this I've seen from "the infosec community" (my connection to that community tends sharply towards vulnerability researchers, since that's my background) has been critical of this guy. I can't think of anyone I've seen cheerleading him. I've even seen rare glimmers of people criticizing EFF for trying to make a cause celebre of him. But you're taking things too far by casting aspersions on all of "s…

I've seen a lot of people cheering for him. I've seen the man in person at various cons, and I think he's brilliant. The problem is, what are we supposed to do? Responsible disclosure: companies don't give a shit and will hide it. Full disclosure: you get sued and thrown in jail. Stunt hacking disclosure: people get scared even though it's easy to do. People demand something be done about it. The person who did the d…

How about this: don't publish a message to the world on Twitter saying that you are tinkering with what you believe to be flight control systems on an actual aircraft in transit?

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#107

Post by rdtsc »

tripzilch wrote: post #96

Reminds me of this 2012 story about two British tourists being barred from their flights for tweeting they were going to "destroy America" (slang for "having a blast"): http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-16810312 I wonder how they connect the tweets to the persons? Do they actually actively search Twitter for keywords, and when they hit they dig into it until they have found a name, which they check against their pas…

I would guess they go off passenger list first, then expand from there. Find Facebook, twitter, other social accounts. Then scour for keywords. "So I saw you threatened to 'Bomb that test' when you were in college in 2001, Mrs/Mr tripzilch, please step over here and follow this officer to the enhanced interrogation area".

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#108

Post by threatofrain »

rhino369 wrote: post #78
Confusion wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People make harmless jokes that are applicable to your life at a daily basis, you're just not party to them. Thinking a joke is dangerous just because you observe it is a base rate fallacy.

People in general are very afraid of flying despite the fact it is reasonably safe. Making a joke about fucking with an airplane is in poor taste considering many people are on edge. It'd be like making a rape joke when you pass a woman on a dark street.

It's just a bad joke. People also have an obligation to control their own hearts instead of waiting for someone else to tell them how they should feel.

It's not my job to make anyone feel safe. That is merely the bias of my personal style. Pure coincidence. The fact is, talking about religion with derision could incite violence, pain, and fear. Am I someone who gets off on pain? No. But I'm not going to go out of my way to protect someone's heart either. It's their job to rule their own heart. It's not their psychiatrist's job or their pastor's job. On a side note, I would add that many religions go out to deliberately propagate fear ("Jesus is the sacrifice to save us from hell"). Nobody cares. I have a friend who is really pained by the thought that he can't convert his close friends, and worse of all, his parents! What agony he must go through now that somebody decided to exercise their free speech and tell him about the eternal torture of hell. It was his job to rule his own heart.

Similarly, it is not the job of students to avoid discussion of rape on campus because the mere mention of rape could cause a reliving of trauma. It is instead out of personal will for a healthier future that we deliberately choose superior speech over unrefined speech.

It is okay for society to shame those they think are tactless. It's not okay to bring logistical or material pain to someone's life because they made one feel terror, or angst, or outrage. Discussion of hell could bring more pain into someone's life than most other subjects one can summon up without a priori knowledge.

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#109

Post by freehunter »

tptacek wrote: post #106
freehunter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of people cheering for him. I've seen the man in person at various cons, and I think he's brilliant. The problem is, what are we supposed to do? Responsible disclosure: companies don't give a shit and will hide it. Full disclosure: you get sued and thrown in jail. Stunt hacking disclosure: people get scared even though it's easy to do. People demand something be done about it. The person who did the d…

How about this: don't publish a message to the world on Twitter saying that you are tinkering with what you believe to be flight control systems on an actual aircraft in transit ?

The problem is, he's done it before. And reported it to the airlines. And they've done nothing about it.

I've heard him talk for years. Same thing every year. So seeing what I saw on Twitter was no surprise. He's not publishing an exploit on Twitter, he's making a joke to the followers he has that all know what he's done. He's making the joke that this year, again, the flight control systems are still vulnerable to literally anyone with a laptop and an ethernet cable.

It's not that he's saying he's tinkering with what he believes to be flight control systems on an actual flight in transit. Of course he wouldn't do that... again. He's already done it once, years ago. Why was there no outrage then?

Re: United Airlines Stops Researcher Who Tweeted about Airplane Network Security

#110

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

simoncion wrote: post #38
ghshephard wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would your response be to the person who "joked" that they were pissed off with United Airlines, and would like to remind them that his house was on the approach path to SFO, and the next time United lost his luggage, he would be more than happy to repay them by taking a few potshots at their 747s with his trusty .22? Sometimes the way we keep airplanes full of passengers from falling out of the sky, is by looki…

Me? I would laugh at him. Everyday FOD [0] will do far more damage than an impact with a .22. [0] Foreign Object Damage. In this case, at-speed impacts with grit, ice, and whatever.

Way to miss the point.
Post reply on HN