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

United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#571

Post by NoPicklez »

joxdosba wrote: post #561
brigandish wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is covered in the article: > Though some have questioned why anyone intending to blow up a plane would broadcast the word bomb, many terrorist acts have relied on the threat of a bomb as leverage during attempted hijackings or hostage situations.

That does not actually address the parents point in any way.

It kind of does, that an attacker can rely on something a small as a Bluetooth name to cause disruption based on employees following policy out of fear of being fired.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#572

Post by strictnein »

punkyblewster wrote: post #434
Balgair wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings Just greping for 'Israel' or 'Palestine' gives 13 incidents, the latest occurring in 2000. It's a quite large share of the hijackings on the list, much more so that I'd have imagined de novo . Reading through a few of them, most of the hijackers had a fair bit of mental instability (duh?). So, I could totally see them naming a bluetooth something crazy if they…

Let's get real. This was a pilot using authority granted to them for security purposes to punish somebody whose politics they disliked. The pilot should be fired effective immediately.

It's interesting that you know what the pilot was doing and why they were doing it. Anyways, there's zero chance the pilot will be fired. Pilot unions are incredibly powerful and go to bat to protect their members.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#573

Post by steve1977 »

godelski wrote: post #559
steve1977 wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have no way to leave Not only do the people have no way to leave, the owner of the place also has no practical way to make people leave, like they would for example in a restaurant. At least once the plane is in the air. And the captain has to ensure the safety not only of the flying machine but also of the cabin. So I can absolutely understand the move here and the need to forbid everything that could incite…

Anyone willing to start a fight over a tacky WiFi name should be committed. Seriously, what an insane thing to do. It's such an easy thing to not be bothered by. It sits in the background, invisible, and you're... just letting it live rent free in your head? There's so many more annoying things to flying than someone's dumb personal hotspot name. Can we just recognize how crazy of a scenario this is?

People are not rational. Or at least one cannot assume they are when it comes to safety.

People start actual fights over small groups of other people, that neither of them know personally, who are chasing after a ball on a pitch.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#574

Post by imoverclocked »

teiferer wrote: post #568
godelski wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | During this incident, a Wi-Fi hotspot named "Free Palestine, F Zionists" prompted the pilot to issue a warning to the cabin, telling the passenger responsible that they had "30 seconds" to remove the name or the FBI would meet the aircraft. This is clearly not a threat…

> Being on the plane doesn't remove your right to free speech While I agree with you that this was obviously a ridiculous overreaction, an air plane is not a public space. It's more akin to being in someones living room in that the pilot has absolute authority over whom to kick out for whatever reason. If they don't like your hair, they can have you escorted out by police if you don't comply. They won't do it normall…

This. Many people are unaware of just how much authority a captain has; Failing to follow their instructions is (basically) a felony. It's best to just not mess around on an aircraft.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#575

Post by joxdosba »

NoPicklez wrote: post #571
joxdosba wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does not actually address the parents point in any way.

It kind of does, that an attacker can rely on something a small as a Bluetooth name to cause disruption based on employees following policy out of fear of being fired.

[flagged]

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#576

Post by Paracompact »

akudha wrote: post #527
godelski wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | During this incident, a Wi-Fi hotspot named "Free Palestine, F Zionists" prompted the pilot to issue a warning to the cabin, telling the passenger responsible that they had "30 seconds" to remove the name or the FBI would meet the aircraft. This is clearly not a threat…

Does naming WiFi hotspot to reflect one’s political views achieve anything? I am not against free speech or expression of freedom, just wondering if such “protests” (assuming that is what this is) have any affect at all? Flying is already a stressful experience - between security checks, waiting for flights, unruly passengers, super cramped seats etc. Why add more stress? Either protest seriously at an appropriate ti…

Not very likely, imo, that they did it specifically for the flight. More likely they named it weeks or months ago and just now boarded an airplane.

> Does naming WiFi hotspot to reflect one’s political views achieve anything?

Does action-less speech achieve anything? Advertising, PSAs, political campaigning, etc. all indicate its value in attaining mindshare. Moreover, freedom of expression is liberating for people.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#578

Post by godelski »

umpalumpaaa wrote: post #486
godelski wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | During this incident, a Wi-Fi hotspot named "Free Palestine, F Zionists" prompted the pilot to issue a warning to the cabin, telling the passenger responsible that they had "30 seconds" to remove the name or the FBI would meet the aircraft. This is clearly not a threat…

I see what you are saying but then where do you draw the line? What if the wifi name is “fuck all pilots” - “united is doomed” or “we will all die”?

I already drew the line. Credible threat. Of your three, the last one and I'm not even sure that.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#579

Post by incompatible »

Eridrus wrote: post #189
neilv wrote: post #178

I once consulted on some aviation-related software (not the safety work prominent on my resume), and a company announcement came through, that you must never use a few specific words commonly heard in software development. The two no-no words I recall were "crash" and "bomb". Don't write them in code or documents, don't say them on the phone or videoconf, etc. Those terms have senses that people in aviation take extr…

This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. Do you think terrorists are really going to name their Bluetooth speaker "bomb"? Do you think this behaviour has any meaningful true positives? This is the kind of brainworms thinking that has people throwing our their 150ml liquids out at TSA and taking their shoes off.

I wouldn't have thought so, but until now I didn't even realise that there were Bluetooth devices with configurable names.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#580

Post by plastic041 »

I kind of get that a device named BOMB made the plane turn back.

However, I don't understand this part:

> flight attendant told passengers over the PA system that they "must turn off Bluetooth immediately," or else the aircraft would have to turn around.

If there's a BOMB, turning off Bluetooth won't make it much safer. I mean, a turned-off bomb is probably safer than a turned-on bomb, but it's still a bomb.

Pilots: "Phew, BOMB is now turned off. It's absolutely safe to continue flying. Thank you for your cooperation, passengers and terrorist(s)."

Post reply on HN