SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
CoolHand
on Thursday April 16 2015, @09:29AM
from the who'd-have-thought-this-would-ever-happen dept.
from the who'd-have-thought-this-would-ever-happen dept.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) warns that the computers that control and monitor the aircraft isn't protected enough by on-board firewalls intended to protect avionics from hackers. These could be breached if flight control and entertainment systems use the same wiring and routers had they in turn, been connected to the on-board WiFi. The GAO report authors stated that the affected planes include the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, the Airbus A350 and A380. All have advanced cockpits that are wired into the same WiFi system used by passengers.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Airliners Could be Vulnerable to Hacking
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 25 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
belief, n:
Something you do not believe.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by yarp on Thursday April 16 2015, @11:18AM
It doesn't seem all that long ago that operating anything more powerful than a pacemaker would allegedly interfere with an aircraft's control circuitry leading to fiery death for all aboard. Was that being pessimistically cautious in the same way we are warned against using a mobile phone at a petrol station as it could cause a spark and ignite all the fuel or was there a real basis which has since been made safe?
Also I can't understand how you can have expensive multiply-redundant control mechanisms and yet share an important data network with non-essential services allowing untrusted devices. Actually, I can: separate data networks probably just haven't entered the regulations yet so it's cheaper not to bother.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by WizardFusion on Thursday April 16 2015, @11:40AM
The mobile phone and petrol stations was a completely american issue (as far as I remember), and the problem was that the pumps have a little catch that allows people to walk away when the petrol is still being delivered. The spark came from people with cheap clothes getting in and out of their cars and the friction causing a static spark that would ignite the fumes.
Here in the UK, we don't have those little catches, so you have to stay where you are when pumping.
(Score: 1) by yarp on Thursday April 16 2015, @12:50PM
I'd read the story of sparks being caused by clothing, but never twigged that it would have been exacerbated due to entry and exit of a vehicle while a pump was running automatically.
Still, I wonder why we still have the signs up on forecourts. It's not helped that mobile phone manufacturers also give the same warning in their user manuals (not that anybody reads them).
(Score: 2) by Snow on Thursday April 16 2015, @09:11PM
You can solve the problem of having to stand by your car by jamming our car's fuel cap under the handle of the dispenser. Ta-da! Auto Fill!
When it's really cold and windy, I'll take my chances with fire over the certainty of freezing my ass off.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday April 16 2015, @09:54PM
A funny anecdote I heard from a friend is that the stickers placed on pumps in jurisdictions that forbid the catch (NY is one) reads: "It is illegal to place gas cap in handle." So people started using tennis balls since they were not forbidden by the sticker. Doubt it is a real practice or stand up in court.