HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Joke About Hacking Plane Gets Passenger Detained By FBI
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Carouselambra
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2014
- Messages
- 559
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin
Yes he was a little stupid for the tweet, but these are real issues that need to be addressed instead of harassing someone that is trying to bring awareness to an issue. Seizing his laptop without a warrant... common...
-Benjamin Franklin
Yes he was a little stupid for the tweet, but these are real issues that need to be addressed instead of harassing someone that is trying to bring awareness to an issue. Seizing his laptop without a warrant... common...
silk186
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,628
restoring faith in the system...
silk186
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,628
I think he probably intended for this to happen, draw more attention to the issue.
Commander FAT
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2000
- Messages
- 3,565
Rule #1 of talking to cops is never talk to cops.
I also think he did this on purpose, if only to get some street cred for his business. Nobody over the age of 14 would accidentally make the jokes he did.
This was not an over-reaction.“Find myself on a 737/800, lets see Box-IFE-ICE-SATCOM, ? Shall we start playing with EICAS messages? “PASS OXYGEN ON” Anyone ?”
That statement absolutely deserves to get him pulled off the plane, especially after they did a check and found that he is the type of person that could carry something like that out.
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
I agree. However, there will always come a point of doing things the right way will not yield a solution in reasonable time. This usually means the messenger gets shot..
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
Sorry, but that's just stupid.
You DON'T FUCK WITH THE PLANE'S COMPUTER SYSTEMS IN A LIVE FLIGHT WITH PASSENGERS.
What if you fuck something up?
Bottom line - he shouldn't have done it on a live flight. PERIOD. This isn't a free speech issue or a he's just trying to help issue.
This is a "oh look how awesome I am, I can hack into a plane during a flight, and now let me tweet that I can fuck with people!" Again, what happens if he makes a mistake?
Or what if we get another researcher who's emboldened by this, and happens during a flight to get hit with a bout of depression or suffers from it - you want a repeat of what happened with the pilot and our most recent air disaster?
This isn't about the guy's work - something I think we all can agree is necessary.
This is about the asshole way he went about it here, potentially putting an entire flight unnecessarily in danger.
Its stupid and bush-league, and potentially disastrous.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
Wow man.
He had this "gear", everything. It would be one thing if he just flippantly made the remark (and still criminally stupid), but the dude was "weaponized".
How do we know he didn't mess with something?
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
But he didn't do anything....he just said he might. Glad to see a rational post from a rational person capable of making rational decisions. But....your hyperbole is pretty good....problem is..it isn't hyperbole, hyperbole isn't meant to be taken seriously.
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
This was probably particularly bad timing with the German plane crash so recently in people's minds ... I suspect this is more of a publicity stunt than anything else (as others noted) but I think he could have found a less risky way to bring public focus on this issue
Z3r0k3wl
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 124
Woah woah there, we wasn't going to crash the plane or anything. All he did was sweet if he should turn the warning indicator on for pilots to put on their oxygen mask. This guy is not stupid. His intentions are clear. He's been warning the industry for years of these vulnerabilities and no one has done anything except for the FBI telling him to stop his research. Basically gagging him. Like a few have already pointed out, he's creating attention to this matter likely because he has no other means to.
He didn't hack anything and no one was in danger. Someone who was going to actually do something never would have tweeted about it. He simply put out a tweet that he knew was going to attract attention. And it worked. According to the article these issues have been known about for the past 5 years. I guarantee you he had already disclosed the vulnerabilities in a more responsible way. The problem is, companies and the government will just sweep it all under the rug because they are either too incompetent to fix the problem, or they are unwilling to admit they screwed up, or they just don't want to pay for it. Either way, responsible reporting and whistle blowing doesn't always work, and you generally have to do something very public to wake these people up. The proper way to handle security issues like this is to first disclose it privately, then give a reasonable amount of time for a fix. If there is no evidence of a fix being worked on, then you disclose it publicly and shame them into fixing it.
And it's absolutely disgusting that the airlines would have wifi and entertainment systems connected to critical flight systems. That shows either an extreme amount of negligence and incompetence, or it was some how a cost cutting move. Either way, the companies need to be fined heavily for that until they fix their shit.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
No. Just no. There are lines, and this is how you cross one of them.
The dude has admitted connecting to aircraft systems before, then tweets about his current flight. Absolutely justified in pulling him off and taking his stuff.
And at the same time, it's kind of a PSA also that there are vulnerabilities that need to be addressed.
And at the same time, it's kind of a PSA also that there are vulnerabilities that need to be addressed.
Wierdo
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,817
...while the real threat he joked about remains.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
That's fine. You don't do unauthorized pen testing on a commercial flight.
Get off my plane, you terrorist.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Which is why he was removed from the plane.
LurkerLito
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 2,704
This was a publicity stunt. If someone were going to do it for real, they wouldn't have tweeted anything till it was too late to take any action.
Honestly he got what he deserved cause it was just really stupid to do that though I guess that was the point.
Still I find it even more egregious that this issue has been known for years now and no one has fixed it yet. I dislike this whole business side stupidity where they won't actually address anything till some people actually die due to their negligence and they get sued by victim's families. Their reasoning is always cause it costs a lot to fix the problem and it might be less if they can settle out of court from the victim's families.
I don't know maybe I am oversimplifying it but off the top of my head, how about keeping the avionics and stuff that keeps the plane in the air, only on a completely separate proprietary internal wired network that can't be accessed via wifi.
Honestly he got what he deserved cause it was just really stupid to do that though I guess that was the point.
from the article said:
Still I find it even more egregious that this issue has been known for years now and no one has fixed it yet. I dislike this whole business side stupidity where they won't actually address anything till some people actually die due to their negligence and they get sued by victim's families. Their reasoning is always cause it costs a lot to fix the problem and it might be less if they can settle out of court from the victim's families.
I don't know maybe I am oversimplifying it but off the top of my head, how about keeping the avionics and stuff that keeps the plane in the air, only on a completely separate proprietary internal wired network that can't be accessed via wifi.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
You do not do unauthorized pen testing on a commercial flight.
I don't care who you are, what you are doing, and why you're doing it. There are means and methods for these types of activities, but a commercial flight in which there are live innocents on board - hell to the no.
This guy implied the spilling of innocent blood to "bring light" to an issue. I have a serious serious problem with that.
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
So here's the issue.
People here are stupid for saying "He DIDN'T DO ANYTHING!'
He claims he didn't do anything. And how do we take his word for it?
He crossed a line and invited everything he's gotten.
You don't handle something of this importance like an immature 12 year old.
People here are stupid for saying "He DIDN'T DO ANYTHING!'
He claims he didn't do anything. And how do we take his word for it?
He crossed a line and invited everything he's gotten.
You don't handle something of this importance like an immature 12 year old.
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
Ur_Mom
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
- Messages
- 20,688
It brings attention to the problem. But, doing it with a live flight with passengers? Yes, that will get you off the plane and investigated.
Now, the problem still exists and yes this will bring more attention to it.
But, the FBI was justified in what they did. The guy was a real threat to the flight. Would he have done anything? Maybe/maybe not.
Now, the problem still exists and yes this will bring more attention to it.
But, the FBI was justified in what they did. The guy was a real threat to the flight. Would he have done anything? Maybe/maybe not.
So if someone says they MIGHT kill you when you're giving a speech next Saturday at the convention or they MIGHT blow up flight 7678 from Dallas or they MIGHT shoot everyone at school, its OK because they didn't do anything?
Nope, that to me counts as a threat and capability of carrying out that threat, and it being a realistic threat based on proximity (actually on the flight).
At the very least, he should be blacklisted from all airlines IMO. At the very least, I would have done a cavity check, deep and hard no lube... just as a precaution.
Yes, sometimes there are huge overreactions, like a kid making a bomb joke but clearly in jest, but this is more like a guy from Pakistan that has ties to Al Qaeda supposedly "joking" asking whether or not he should blow himself up and get 72 virgins. Its not an obvious joke, and shouldn't be treated like one.
Seems more like warn passengers to put on the Oxygen or possibly deploy the masks and create panic and confusion in the cabin. That would be logical step one if you wanted to take over the flight.
He was trolling for attention and he got it. The only issue I see here is that his tweets were monitored close enough that they were waiting for him. He hadn't done anything prior to merit that attention. Our agencies are too big, it seems.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
Do you think it is appropriate to tell that to someone (anyone?) on that plane who is more than likely not going to know what he is referring to - and then expect them to understand his inference and discover his true intentions (bringing visibility to the issue)?
I don't think it is.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
This is totally why there should be a strict no talking rule in airports or on planes and like you'd have a sign to hold up so you can request permission from an airline company employee before you could speak or use a device that emits data.
Wierdo
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,817
This is totally why there should be a strict no talking rule in airports or on planes and like you'd have a sign to hold up so you can request permission from an airline company employee before you could speak or use a device that emits data.
Basically. Flying on planes is so cumbersome these days, buncha scared pansies needing to be coddled.
GaryJohnson
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,053
Maybe you hacked the plane. Are you going to claim you didn't do anything either? Are we just supposed to take your word for it?
Innocent until proven guilty <- that's why we take his word for it.
atp1916
[H]ard|DCoTM x1
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2004
- Messages
- 5,004
...and he was taken off the plane based on suspicion of criminal behavior - and then released after being investigated.
System worked.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
You don't simply take the word of someone that said he just screwed with a plan without checking out it first especially if he has the skill to do what he claimed.
collegeboy69us
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
- Messages
- 5,255
So where do we draw the line? Should we go after all the 10 year olds on Xbox live who talk this sort of trash in addition to all sorts of other messed up stuff "they could do" (especially to mothers)
We have lost the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Other barriers in our corrupt legal system set things up that unless you have a pile of money you pretty much have to accept whatever fate some lazy corrupt judge throws you.
There's a ton of stuff I could do online that would seriously fuck people's lives up, just because I *could* do them... does that mean I deserve to get thrown in jail and my life ruined?
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I seriously doubt that.
rivertown_rat
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2011
- Messages
- 137
OK, so sidestepping the who issue of whether the authorities did the right thing or not, I noticed that everybody assumes that this guy could actually do what he claims. Usually followed by questions of why this has not been "fixed" yet. But so far I have not seen any evidence that anybody has actually demonstrated the ability to take control of the flight control systems by hacking the entertainment WiFi. I would think it would be easy to test his claims in a controlled environment. I would also think that the airlines would be eager to see such a demonstration so that they could patch any holes found. So why hasn't this happened? Why is his claims always couched in verbiage like "theoretically possible"?
TwistedAegis
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 8,958
Yeah, keep publicity stunts away from actual plane flights with passengers other than yourself.
Is he in jail? Is his life ruined? Just because there is a grey area with a line difficult to be drawn doesn't mean you excuse everything. This guy isn't 10, he is an adult, and he also clearly has the ability to do this, as others have mentioned. He isn't in jail, he was questioned and apparently is free at the moment. Seems like, that is how it should work.
All that said, he's a massive asshat. Claiming to be mMessing with pilot's in-flight? Hell no.
First off, He was being arrested, Cops don't need a warrant to seize property when your being pulled off a plane for an active incident like this.
Second, it's only a guess that the FBI was monitoring him. For all anyone knows someone who saw his tweet called the FBI. This is exactly like that woman who accused the FBI of monitoring her computer when in fact she had just quit her job and the IT staff of her employer found suspicious search activity on it and reported it to the cops.
Third, anyone know what it takes to do serious modifications to Aircraft Systems? It's a lot more involved then a car recall. The first things that would happen is the Aircraft Manufacturers would have to do their own investigations and testing of their equipment to verify the risks, it could take them years to engineer the changes and begin to incorporate them into the aircraft. They would have to have the planes retested. These planes were sold all over the world and it would be up to each owner to decide what they are going to do. Many probably don't even offer inflight service and may not even be equipped with the in-flight entertainment part of the package. Are these security researchers certain that nothing is being done?
It's true, the aircraft manufacturers aren't going to be happy, it's costs and trouble they would rather avoid. They have to balance that against risk. You can bet that they would rather just wait and deal with it on the next plane they design.
You're right, some things are not smart to do and this is going to make the list. It's like climbing the White House Fence.