Word is out that there might be a way to hack into the 787 and do terrible things. Anyone think this is a real threat? Should we be concerned?
-
Written by David SF eastbay on June 1, 2012. Reply
Anyone can say something to get they 15 minutes of fame in the media, proving it true is another matter. This will just get people checking things out and fixing any issues they find.
I would think the ‘bad guys’ would want to hack into the Pentagon computer or major bank computers and cause problems for the millions and not just 200 people on an airplane and anything they hit.
-
Written by Bobber on June 1, 2012. Reply
Yeah. Those pesky Limey newspapers, and those good-for-nothing Cambridge University boffins – what the f*&@ would they know?!
More concerned as to whether these chips are in the drone aircraft that are currently used to spread freedom around the world. It also sounds very ‘Microsoft’ in nature (even though these are Intel chips) – you know, release a piece of crap software, wait for people to tell you where all the crap bits are.
-
Written by SEAN on June 1, 2012. Reply
I would think the ‘bad guys’ would want to hack into the Pentagon computer or major bank computers and cause problems for the millions and not just 200 people on an airplane and anything they hit.
I see your point, but a 787 crash COULD have a devistating effect on not just Boeing, but all airlines as well as the broader econemy.
-
-
-
Written by BNA Flyer on June 1, 2012. Reply
I think this is the key passage
“Connecting to the chips would be comparatively easy over the internet if the chip is wired to an internet-enabled controller, he said. Normally a special cryptographic key would be needed, but the back door does not need an encrypted channel.”
Are these planes (drones and commercial aircraft) really connected to the Internet? I highly doubt it since most of these things talk with the ground via dedicated satellite connections. It’s not like they’re dialing up AOL every time.
-
Written by Miles Barnett on June 1, 2012. Reply
In order to hack into this chip, you have to have access to it. Is the control system on a 787 connected to the internet? I doubt it.
-
-
Written by Jason H on June 1, 2012. Reply
As with most media reports they are using a “localizing” tactic to generate interest. People don’t really care as much about the military getting hacked because they figure the military can take care of itself (previous incidents to the contrary of course). By throwing the 787 into the mix they are trying to make the issue a bigger one to the larger community. It can often be used in less than ethical manners of course.
What I find interesting is the selection of the airframe for this. Airbus uses similar chips in their A380, but I guess since British taxpayers foot some of the bill for that bird they would rather point out the flaw in a bird that the American taxpayers have funded.
-
-
Written by Jason H on June 1, 2012. Reply
I realize you are just being a troll, but at the same time I happen to be equally European and “American” so you can stop trying to make my comment sound partisan.
-
-
-
-
-
Written by MeanMeosh on June 1, 2012. Reply
Methinks it’s much ado about nothing. After all, if military computers can be compromised by this back door – why hasn’t it been done yet? Surely a computer genius somewhere would have tried and succeeded by now.
-
Written by Daryl-Atlanta on June 1, 2012. Reply
Sure sounds like a storyline for a “Movie of the Week” or somewhere on cable.
-
Written by Dan on June 1, 2012. Reply
Sure, this is just what the flying public needs. They don’t understand what keeps the airplanes up in the air and the have no idea how the internet or hacking works. So, along comes some mainstream media reporter trying to sell their story and this speculation as to what might be possible an I might actually get a whole seat row.to myself on my next flight :-)
-
-
Written by Cook on June 1, 2012. Reply
I don’t have the training or experience to evaluate this claim. However, if you (and the Guardian) conclude that it is true, discussing it in such public forums demonstrates extremely poor judgment. Even in cultures that enjoy an ‘open’ press, some subjects are probably best left unpublished.
-
Written by Nick Barnard on June 2, 2012. Reply
What you’re advocating is Security through obscurity, which security professionals consider a poor and unsound technique.
Instead we should publish lots of details and let folks pick over them to find the issues in any given system.
-
-
Written by Rational Keith on June 1, 2012. Reply
Says who?
On what actual basis?
Have you researched the subject on web sites that have industry standards?
Such airplanes have many security and security features, including separation and firewalls, albeit they have to be done properly.
Talk is cheap – produce facts? -
Written by Jeremy Anderson on June 1, 2012. Reply
2008 called and wants its fear mongering back…
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/dreamliner_securityThis article is really just fear mongering. The vulnerability may exist, but it probably is not able to be executed on a flying aircraft. Now if James Bond were to walk up to the plane on the tarmac, or parachute on top of it while in flight, all bets are off….
-
-
-
Written by Patrick on June 4, 2012. Reply
While the chip does have some functionality that could allow a certain amount of reprogramming, that functionality is disabled by default and protected by a custom passcode set by each customer. Further, physical access to the chip is necessary. –It’s not possible to do this via the internet.
Should Boeing consider this a potential risk and explore just how possible it is that the functionality could be abused? Sure. But should people panic and start claiming that terrorists can reprogram a Boeing aircraft over the internet? Definitely not.
-
Comment Pages:
Leave a Comment
Subscribe for Free
Happening Now
Cranky Also Writes
Writing Intuit's "In the Trenches" column on running Cranky Concierge
Archives
Air Blogs/Forums
- Airline Reporter
- Airline Route
- APEX Editor's Blog
- Aviation Queen
- Bangalore Aviation
- Delta Airlines Blog
- EAS Flights
- Eye on L.A. Aviation
- Frugal Travel Guy
- Inside Traveller
- JetBlue BlueTales
- Jetwhine
- JohnnyJet.com
- LateDeparture.com
- LGB Spotting/News
- Middle Seat Terminal
- One Mile at a Time
- Online Travel Review
- PlaneBuzz
- Southwest Airlines Blog
- Swelblog
- Things in the Sky
- Things with Wings
- Thirty Thousand Feet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Find the Best Selection of Las Vegas Show Tickets & Orlando Show Tickets
Hot Topics
787 A380 Accidents/Incidents Across the Aisle Interviews Admin Advertising Airbus Air Canada Air France Air New Zealand Airplane Porn Airport Experience AirTran Alaska Airlines Alitalia Allegiant Alliances Aloha American Ask Cranky Baggage BNET Boeing British Airways Continental Cranky Concierge Cranky Jackass Customer Service DCA - Washington/National Delays/Cancellations Delta Distribution Emirates Environment ExpressJet Fares Frequent Flier Programs Frontier Fuel Go! Government Regulation Guest Posts Hawaiian Horizon Inflight Entertainment JetBlue JFK - New York/JFK Labor Relations LAX - Los Angeles LGA - New York/La Guardia LGB - Long Beach LHR - London/Heathrow Lufthansa Meals Mergers/Finance Mesa Airlines Midwest Airlines Miscellaneous Northwest Oneworld Operations Overbooking Qantas Republic Ryanair Safety/Security Schedule Changes Seats SFO - San Francisco SkyTeam Southwest Spirit Star Alliance Technology Trip Reports United US Airways Virgin America Virgin Atlantic Weather Westjet Who/What the F***
About | Directory | Shop | Awards | In the News | Ethics | Cranky Concierge
Powered by WordPress | SRS Solutions | © 2006-2013 Brett Snyder All Rights Reserved | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Comments
Leave a comment Trackback