Hacker told FBI he made a plane fly a little bit sideways after cracking entertainment system (and a - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Splarg!;47734774]This reminds me of a story posted on FP a year or two ago about someone hacking into a water treatment plant and messing everything up. Just...how is it that people allow these things to be connected? Hoping that it's BS as some people are saying now.[/QUOTE] Connected for conviencience, almost certainly without the supervision of a network security professional. Average people don't understand the risks of having everything connected to the internet or somewhere a random person can jack in.

He has more balls than me Maybe testing a live system which is thousands of miles in the air is not the best idea

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;47733922]Let's pay attention to the fact that there isn't any proof that he actually did this besides a confession.[/QUOTE] It is bullshit because a 737 doesn't even have EICAS. Even if it did the EICAS is just a read only display in the cockpit that can't make the oxygen masks drop

[QUOTE=jordguitar;47734703]This will not be a issue until the 737 MAX is out which is implementing more fly by wire surfaces. Boeing is saying it is just the spoilers right now but I do not expect that to hold up.[/QUOTE] It [I]shouldn't[/I] be an issue even if the entire plane was FBW. There should be no connection (either intended or not) to the flight system from the IFE. [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Splarg!;47734774]This reminds me of a story posted on FP a year or two ago about someone hacking into a water treatment plant and messing everything up. Just...how is it that people allow these things to be connected? Hoping that it's BS as some people are saying now.[/QUOTE] Its for convenience, which will doom us all eventually. Its so someone sitting in an office hundreds (or thousands) of miles away can work remotely. [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Goz3rr;47735135]It is bullshit because a 737 doesn't even have EICAS. Even if it did the EICAS is just a read only display in the cockpit that can't make the oxygen masks drop[/QUOTE] I thought the NG had EICAS? You are right though, EICAS is just an annunciation system not a control system. [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] ALSO: No idea if this person knows their shit but there's no reason to doubt them [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/364n5r/fbi_claims_security_researcher_hacked_engine/cras2rk[/url]

[QUOTE=Jsm;47735510] I thought the NG had EICAS? You are right though, EICAS is just an annunciation system not a control system. [/QUOTE] I believe it has a similar system but it's not EICAS

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;47733172]Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the cockpit doors usually electronically locked? If so, this type of thing has some serious implications regarding the possibility of terrorist plots.[/QUOTE] I'm seriously surprised no terrorist group has successfully executed an attack via hacking yet (beyond website defacements). It really is the low-hanging fruit. [QUOTE=Trumple;47733309]You're right - the person who somehow linked the two systems should be sacked. Isolating them is just common sense[/QUOTE] Unfortunately, it's not. The engineers who build airplanes were never trained to even think about computer security. The idea that someone might try to hack their system isn't even part of their thought process.

[QUOTE=Jsm;47735510]No idea if this person knows their shit but there's no reason to doubt them [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/364n5r/fbi_claims_security_researcher_hacked_engine/cras2rk[/url][/QUOTE] They're right in that IFE power is cut off automatically in a variety of instances, one being pass oxygen. It does make sense. [QUOTE=Goz3rr;47735904]I believe it has a similar system but it's not EICAS[/QUOTE] EICAS = Engine Indication & Crew Alerting System. The 737s with glass cockpits do have EICAS but I don't think they actually call it that for some reason. Airbus's version is ECAM (Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor) which is a bit more in-depth. Both are monitoring systems, not control systems. They can't do anything on their own.

[QUOTE=s0beit;47735049]He has more balls than me Maybe testing a live system which is thousands of miles in the air is not the best idea[/QUOTE] Slightly tilting an airplane that is made to endure high turbulence doesn't sound that dangerous tbh.

[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;47737352]Slightly tilting an airplane that is made to endure high turbulence doesn't sound that dangerous tbh.[/QUOTE] IF he was honestly capable of altering the plane's flight path in any way shape or form, it presents much more dangerous possibilities than a "slight tilt". What if whatever he fucked with caused a nose dive? What if it caused the engines to shut off? What if it made the pilot's controls inoperable? If he can cause a slight tilt, none of these are out of the realm of what could have happened.

If KSP told me anything its that making one engine give slighlty less thrust than the other causes so much torque on the plane that no amount of control surfaces can help you. Not that KSP physics necessarily apply to real life, but still.

[QUOTE=Nikita;47737544]If KSP told me anything its that making one engine give slighlty less thrust than the other causes so much torque on the plane that no amount of control surfaces can help you. Not that KSP physics necessarily apply to real life, but still.[/QUOTE] Not completely wrong. If one engine is performing less than the other it could cause the plane to yaw. It could also mean that less air is being moved over one wing than the other which results in a loss of efficiency for the control surfaces. Not sure how torque plays into this. I have knowledge of only a private pilot and a lot of time fucking around in a simulator.

[QUOTE=Killdozer;47733179]I wonder where he found an ethernet port, I've never seen one on any of the entertainment systems on my flights.[/QUOTE] Probably those higher-than-first class pods, which is pretty chill since he probably put it down as a business expense [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Code3Response;47737558]Not completely wrong. If one engine is performing less than the other it could cause the plane to yaw. It could also mean that less air is being moved over one wing than the other which results in a loss of efficiency for the control surfaces. Not sure how torque plays into this. I have knowledge of only a private pilot and a lot of time fucking around in a simulator.[/QUOTE] The imbalanced thust produces a moment of inertia, but a pilot could easily correct it

I still question if this even happened to be honest, surely the pilots would have noticed something and filed a report with the FAA / NTSB. Like there would be an investigation in process and it would be known.

[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47733627][URL="http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2014/06/watch-dogs-game-wallpaper.jpg"]So, I now expect those who said in a thread about how internet was getting into everything that people who knew how to manipulate and hack into systems [B]wouldn[/B]'t have a big advantage or power over the other mortals who are completey unaware of coding to see how wrong they were... Guess who's laughing now? Well, robert, of course. This proves my argument that, really, tomorrow when everything is connected hackers will be on the top when it comes to personal-to-personal power. Think about it: If you wanted or want to fuck up somebody, today, you need contacts. No matter if you're a lawyer, a sheriff or the CEO of a $$$ company, you need people. But a hacker, just your number and your IP and he can more about your life in a week than anybody else....[/URL][/QUOTE] that's getting a little silly now

[QUOTE=ultra_bright;47733177]Hackers like this are like vaccines for computer systems, finding weaknesses in the immune system before a bad virus malicious hacker does.[/QUOTE] They're more like Unit 731, testing scientific theories on the unwitting public to see what works.

What if the guy fucked up the hack and actually crashed the plane? Sounds very irresponsible.

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;47737401]IF he was honestly capable of altering the plane's flight path in any way shape or form, it presents much more dangerous possibilities than a "slight tilt". What if whatever he fucked with caused a nose dive? What if it caused the engines to shut off? What if it made the pilot's controls inoperable? If he can cause a slight tilt, none of these are out of the realm of what could have happened.[/QUOTE] As far as i can read, the guy is just a hacker trying to prove the current airplane system is unsafe and must be changed. Not a suicide terrorist.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;47738877]What if the guy fucked up the hack and actually crashed the plane? Sounds very irresponsible.[/QUOTE]He didn't though. No one died, he showed how vulnerable the system is. What's the problem?

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47739430]He didn't though. No one died, he showed how vulnerable the system is. What's the problem?[/QUOTE] So, for future reference, it's okay that a (presumably) untrained civilian started fucking with internal plane computer systems (including, but not limited to, engine controls,) while it was in flight with dozens of passengers on board? There's no problem with that? As long as you don't do anything bad, pinky swear, it's okay to fuck with the engine controls of a plane without permission while it is in motion with civilians on board?

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;47739501]So, for future reference, it's okay that a (presumably) untrained civilian started fucking with internal plane computer systems (including, but not limited to, engine controls,) while it was in flight with dozens of passengers on board? There's no problem with that? As long as you don't do anything bad, pinky swear, it's okay to fuck with the engine controls of a plane without permission while it is in motion with civilians on board?[/QUOTE] Is it okay? No. But nothing bad happened and he exposed a huge security hole someone else might've actually used for horrible things. No one died so he potentially saved lives since now someone else will not be able to exploit this.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;47739501]So, for future reference, it's okay that a (presumably) untrained civilian started fucking with internal plane computer systems (including, but not limited to, engine controls,) while it was in flight with dozens of passengers on board? There's no problem with that? As long as you don't do anything bad, pinky swear, it's okay to fuck with the engine controls of a plane without permission while it is in motion with civilians on board?[/QUOTE] Assuming anything he said was true. There is zero evidence that he accomplished anything he said he did beyond getting into the IFE box.

[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47733627]So, I now expect those who said in a thread about how internet was getting into everything that people who knew how to manipulate and hack into systems [B]wouldn[/B]'t have a big advantage or power over the other mortals who are completey unaware of coding to see how wrong they were... Guess who's laughing now? Well, robert, of course. This proves my argument that, really, tomorrow when everything is connected hackers will be on the top when it comes to personal-to-personal power. Think about it: If you wanted or want to fuck up somebody, today, you need contacts. No matter if you're a lawyer, a sheriff or the CEO of a $$$ company, you need people. But a hacker, just your number and your IP and he can more about your life in a week than anybody else....[/QUOTE] You've been watching too many 90's hacker movies. [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;47739421]As far as i can read, the guy is just a hacker trying to prove the current airplane system is unsafe and must be changed. Not a suicide terrorist.[/QUOTE] You're assuming he had complete control. Have you ever debugged a program? Let me tell you, when you start fucking with things in ways they're not meant to be fucked with, bad things can start happening real quick. Again, this is all assuming he actually managed to control the plane somehow, which he probably didn't. But if he [I]did[/I], all sorts of things could have gone wrong that he may not have been in control of.

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;47740638] You're assuming he had complete control. Have you ever debugged a program? Let me tell you, when you start fucking with things in ways they're not meant to be fucked with, bad things can start happening real quick. [/QUOTE] A memory error or an unhandled exception at 35,000ft seems [I]slightly[/I] more annoying than when testing something on your PC.

[QUOTE=Goz3rr;47735135]It is bullshit because a 737 doesn't even have EICAS. Even if it did the EICAS is just a read only display in the cockpit that can't make the oxygen masks drop[/QUOTE] On the Airbus EICAS displays checklists, so he'd be telling the pilots to drop the oxygen masks themselves.

[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47736232]I'm seriously surprised no terrorist group has successfully executed an attack via hacking yet (beyond website defacements). It really is the low-hanging fruit.[/QUOTE] Well hacking isn't like in the movie where you upload a GUI interface made in Visual Basic. The people who have those skills aren't likely to join terrorist organizations with that much education.

[QUOTE=alexaz;47742720]On the Airbus EICAS displays checklists, so he'd be telling the pilots to drop the oxygen masks themselves.[/QUOTE] Which they probably wouldn't do because no pressurization problem would exist. Most likely it would just show up as them having been dropped on the status page.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;47743202]Well hacking isn't like in the movie where you upload a GUI interface made in Visual Basic. The people who have those skills aren't likely to join terrorist organizations with that much education.[/QUOTE] There are plenty of smart people with extremist political views. Besides, as you can see in this very example, we're getting more and more insecure systems in critical areas. Plugging your laptop into an ethernet jack and logging into a control system with default credentials isn't particularly 1337 stuff.