Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Thursday March 30 2017, @03:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the hard-to-see-license-plate dept.

Drones could someday have a sort of invisible license plate that allows local authorities to determine who the unmanned aerial system (UAS) belongs too. Pitched by Chinese drone manufacturer DJI, the concept for an electronic identification system for small drones is just one of many ideas as the Federal Aviation Administration looks into potential ways of identifying drone users.

DJI suggests drones should use the radio equipment already on board most systems to transmit a unique registration number. That number would identify the drone owner to law enforcement in the event of a complaint or flight through a restricted area. Areas with restricted drone flight, such as airports, could use radio equipment to read that number and report the ID number to the authorities. Since identifying the drone would require access to a database linking each number with a name, the invisible license plate approach would be less likely to be abused outside of law enforcement, DJI suggests.

"The best solution is usually the simplest," DJI wrote on Monday. "The focus of the primary method for remote identification should be on a way for anyone concerned about a drone flight in close proximity to report an identifier number to the authorities, who would then have the tools to investigate the complaint without infringing on operator privacy."

Source: Digital Trends

Related: FAA Drone Registry to be Publicly Searchable
FAA Doubles "Blanket Authorization" Altitude for Drones to 400 Feet


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Justin Case on Thursday March 30 2017, @04:43PM (2 children)

    by Justin Case (4239) on Thursday March 30 2017, @04:43PM (#486581) Journal

    1. Politician reads about this, thinks great idea, passes law requiring transmitting a number so we can arrest you.

    2. People deserving arrest transmit fake number.

    3. Law against transmitting anything fake.

    4. ???

    5. Mayhem

    Doesn't anybody get it? Most digital messages can be easily falsified!

    "The best solution is usually the simplest,"

    Yeah, well, this isn't it. You'll need some kind of encryption and authentication to prove the number is the correct, original, untampered number. You'll also need to prohibit (how?) the owner of the device from replacing the software. Have we been down this road before? Ever? Anyone???

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:08PM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:08PM (#486595) Journal

    1. Politician reads about this, thinks great idea, passes law requiring transmitting a number so we can arrest you.

    What else did you expect from a manufacturer and an industry trade group engaging with a violently imposed monopoly?

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @09:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @09:47PM (#486763)

      This. I expected this.