Live data from Hacker News

Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

nakedsecurity.sophos.com

31–40 of 81 posts

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#31

What prevents this kind of attack from being used on current commercial airliners?

You'd imagine the pilots would notice if the auto-pilot started flying erratically. I'm sure it could be used to confuse the hell out of the pilots though.

Planes have crashed for lesser reasons...

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#32

What prevents this kind of attack from being used on current commercial airliners?

You'd imagine the pilots would notice if the auto-pilot started flying erratically. I'm sure it could be used to confuse the hell out of the pilots though.

Even if the pilots didn't, ATC would (and the plane's own GPS unit's internal checks might notice as well) - and then it's simple enough to disable GPS and use VOR navigation (or radar vectors, in a pinch).

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#33
post #8

I know the title here is the same as the article, but why the heck did sophos choose "Texas college" for the something done by the University of Texas? I assumed from the title it was done by some small school somewhere in Texas, not UT.

There is only one school in texas worth knowing about.

... Rice University?

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#34

What prevents this kind of attack from being used on current commercial airliners?

You'd imagine the pilots would notice if the auto-pilot started flying erratically. I'm sure it could be used to confuse the hell out of the pilots though.

Instrument failure isn't always detected by the crew. In the case of Air France 447 in 2009, even the instruments that were working correctly weren't properly understood.

The black box transcript from AF 447 is quite an interesting read: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/...

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd imagine the pilots would notice if the auto-pilot started flying erratically. I'm sure it could be used to confuse the hell out of the pilots though.

Even if the pilots didn't, ATC would (and the plane's own GPS unit's internal checks might notice as well) - and then it's simple enough to disable GPS and use VOR navigation (or radar vectors, in a pinch).

Couldn't the same thing happen with a drone? After all they are being controlled by someone one the ground. If you notice it behaving erratically or ATC notices and contacts you about it you could correct the issue. In fact that is exactly what happened in this situation the drone's autopilot was overridden by another pilot to prevent it from crashing.

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#36
post #30

Egads, the news coverage of this is horrible fear mongering. The researchers from UT built a system to protect against GPS spoofing. In order to prove that their protection system works, they had to demonstrate that GPS spoofing is feasible. Without exception, every news item on this only mentions the spoofing part, and not the protection part. Military unmanned systems use encrypted GPS that is not vulnerable to the…

Do you have some reasonable sources about GPS jamming? From what I know, GPS should be protected against jamming through signal spreading, which means you should be only able to do it with investing unreasonable amounts of resources.

Is this good enough? http://www.jammerall.com/categories/GPS-Jammers/

Low-cost GPS jammers are $30-$50 dollars, though they are illegal to sell or to use. Jamming is a simple matter of sending out a signal more powerful than the signal received from the satellites. 100mW transmitter is more than adequate in close range.

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#38

What prevents this kind of attack from being used on current commercial airliners?

Primarily because commercial airliners do not use GPS.

Don't they? AFAIK they are used for navigation, they just can't transmit back - but that's set to be implemented in the coming years. Would love to hear more on that.

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#39
post #6

There are a few good comments[1] on the article page that point out that Military drones use an encrypted GPS channel that isn't susceptible to this specific attack. A much more sophisticated attack would have to be used to take over a military drone. [1]: http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/07/02/drone-hackedwith-...

Military systems have never relied GPS for guidance. These systems were developed during the Cold War; the Soviets had the ability to take out the GPS satellites directly.

The US military has always used inertial navigation systems, usually based on extremely precise laser interferometers. You can't spoof or jam inertial guidance short of locally altering the laws of physics. A few decades ago, GPS was used to apply corrections within the (classified) error bounds of the inertial navigation system, which could be significant; any GPS correction outside the error bound of the inertial navigation system was interpreted as GPS being compromised. As the decades have passed, inertial navigation systems have become progressively more precise to the point that GPS is adding a rapidly shrinking amount of extra precision.

In fact, the US military is starting to test a new type of ultra-precise interferometer that allows inertial navigation to exceed the precision of GPS. GPS correct INS will only continue to be used to the extent it is inexpensive and gets the job done.

Re: Drone hijacked by UT hackers with $1,000 spoofer

#40
post #16
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or against US soldiers.

You would still need a strong signal near the target, which is more difficult than setting up a drone-trap like Iran seems to have done. Is it possible to somehow sign GPS coordinates? (Perhaps sync an internal clock at each mission's start, and check a time-based signature?) If not, are there practical challenges to integrating the output of a drone's engine and calculating the path travelled, instead of naively bel…

All military navigation systems are inertial, not GPS. They only accept GPS corrections within the error bars of the inertial system. As a practical matter this means that you can only make a drone deviate from its intended course by a few meters assuming you did a perfect job of spoofing the GPS.

GPS spoofing/jamming only works for systems that use GPS navigation systems; military weapons and systems have never used GPS navigation. Inertial navigation systems are spoof-proof.

Post reply on HN