FAA: No, You Can’t Hijack a Plane with an App

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Well it didn’t take too long for the FAA to respond to the claim by a Spanish researcher to have the ability to hijack the operation of a commercial aircraft. Not no way, not no how. :D

"Today's certified avionics systems are designed and built with high levels of redundancy and security," a company spokesman said. "The research by Hugo Teso involves testing with virtual aircraft in a lab environment, which is not analogous to certified aircraft and systems operating in regulated airspace."
Click to expand...
 
What about the app for pilots which opens the secret booze compartment on the jet? :p
 
ShamisOMally said:
In before in a week the FAA gets proven wrong....
Click to expand...

+1

Frankly, considering the way the FAA works I doubt there's more than window dressing difference between the lab test and the actual hardware. The money quote is this one:

"... which is not analogous to certified aircraft and systems operating in regulated airspace."

CERTIFIED AIRCRAFT and SYSTEMS OPERATING IN REGULATED AIRSPACE both have nothing at all to do with whether the software is vulnerable to what this test did. It does, however, sound like the person who responded to the media has no damn clue how this technology works in aircraft.
 
I'm inclined to believe the FAA here. There's the real simple issue that the WiFi system in the plane isn't connected to the flight control systems. Yes, this guy could access that stuff on his simulation unit, however that's not how a real plane works. On real planes, the WiFi is installed later, by and is actually owned by another contractor. It doesn't touch the flight systems not only for security but because it was never there in the first place.
 
Being a pilot, I found the original claim ridiculous. Sure it worked with a Virtual plane and Virtual pilot, but in the real world?

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, and say that he can 'capture' the electronics of the aircraft.

Just as soon as the plane makes an unexpected speed, heading, or altitude change, the REAL aircrew, as opposed to the clueless virtual aircrew, will notice it and take action to correct it.

That action? TURN OFF THE AUTO PILOT, and hand fly the plane.

Even if the electronic instrumentation is compromised, any competent pilot can fly and land even the largest passenger jets with just the analogue compass, altimeter, and airspeed indicator.
 
It's a misquote. The FAA said it's not possible then the company that made the aviation system at issue issued the quoted statement to corroborate the FAA's position.
 
RAF_OldBuzzard said:
...TURN OFF THE AUTO PILOT...
Click to expand...

Ordinarily, I would completely and absolutely agree.

But, given that engineers love to take simple two-wire switches and transform them into computer modules with 150 wires, my question then becomes:

What happens when the autopilot just doesn't turn off?
 
prndll said:
Ordinarily, I would completely and absolutely agree.

But, given that engineers love to take simple two-wire switches and transform them into computer modules with 150 wires, my question then becomes:

What happens when the autopilot just doesn't turn off?
Click to expand...

Simple, you flip the circuit breakers to the auto pilot system.
 
RAF_OldBuzzard said:
Simple, you flip the circuit breakers to the auto pilot system.
Click to expand...

...assuming that these breakers doesn't provide power for some other (more vital) system.

Things often get wired in crazy ways. At this point, I put nothing past engineers.
 
I knew this story was BS when I read it. The phone doesn't have the right radios in it to even communicate to any of the flight management systems.

There is an air traffic control system called GATM (Global Air Traffic Management) that is used in much of the world. It simply gives instructions from an airport to the airplane in the form of text messages, so they can adjust for weather, airspace closures, airfield closures, etc. Unfortunately, the system is completely open - no encryption, no authentication. If one gets stolen or used nefariously by a country, they could give instructions to aircraft to change flight path, go different places, etc. The pilots would still have control, but they have no way of knowing that incoming messages aren't valid. You couldn't crash a plane remotely, but you sure could screw up air traffic if you knew what you were doing.
 
prndll said:
...assuming that these breakers doesn't provide power for some other (more vital) system.

Things often get wired in crazy ways. At this point, I put nothing past engineers.
Click to expand...

Assuming you are making shit up because you have on clue (hint, I did circuit breaker panels for a few big iron aircraft). Seriously, thinking engineers do crazy shit on aircraft just shows how little you know about engineering or the method that goes into aircraft design.

The FMEA for a typical aircraft is typically a few 100,000 pages. Trust me, we looked at this shit. There are no single point failures on level A systems. Furthermore, most critical system are more than okay down to 2 failures deep.

As another FYI..auto pilot is a Level C or less system usually. You can disable it in about 5 different ways actually. Furthermore, it is not a series control system that intercepts the main inputs, but rather it is a parallel set of instructions. The main flight system can CHOOSE to ignore them at anytime. So keep digging your hole of ignorance.
 
@Fenris Ulf

This isn't my field so in the absence of any other information, I have to assume your correct. This does bring up the idea of crashing two planes into eachother. I do know that 'near-misses' happen from time to time.

If the idea is to 'hijack', then changing flight path would certainly qualify.
 
@Trepidati0n

As I said, this isn't my field. I'm not claiming to know much (or anything) about this. But, I have seen enough to seriously question the ways in which things are put together.
 
bluetooth.jpg
 
Yeah, never yet seen any aircraft Wifi system that was ever able to access the autopilot. Most avionics doesn't even communicate over network protocols and the ones that do are redundant cables that have nothing to do with any on-board network for passengers. We've installed networks on aircraft and never once entertained the concept of putting any cockpit avionics on it ... not that we could have. The whole premise of cabin installations for passengers is that you don't mess with the cockpit, period. Saves you a whole lot of work and a whole lot of certification if you just keep the back end separate. Nobody in their right mind would combine the two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top