3 ms·
It is an interesting vulnerablity. But the one advantage of ILS against such attacks is that each site is separate and to try this at scale would require lots
by supernova87a 7y ago
It is an interesting vulnerablity.
But the one advantage of ILS against such attacks is that each site is separate and to try this at scale would require lots of co-conspirators. It's not similar to a GPS or other system-wide exploit. Also, I guess you would need a highly directional antenna setup to be able to track a plane and overwhelm the legitimate ILS signal (i.e. why is that weird van parked here).
Attempt this at even one airport and you'd have law enforcement / FAA on you very quickly with a penalty of getting sent to federal ass-pounding prison for tampering with life-critical navigation systems.
- t0mas88 7y agoThis. And also, the article claims: > Commercial flights typically fly CAT II or CAT III approaches. That's not true at all. We fly by far the most CAT I approaches, or visual with the navigation instruments only as a backup. To be allowed do a CAT II or CAT III approach, the ground environment needs to be managed differently by air traffic control. They will monitor and keep completely empty a big area around the ILS transmitters and the runway. Specifically to avoid any interference with the signals. Not even official airport cars are allowed in while doing CAT II or III operations. So anyone that would want to transmit something nefarious would be standing in an empty grass and asphalt area that is actively monitored by ATC.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]