2 ms·
Yeah! Hijacking is a failure of type systems due to dynamic dispatch. Plane control should have been restricted to only statically defined pilot values. Yeah!
by MichaelGG 12y ago
Yeah! Hijacking is a failure of type systems due to dynamic dispatch. Plane control should have been restricted to only statically defined pilot values.
Yeah! Hijacking is a failure of type systems due to command injection. Properly typed planes world fail to allow passenger actions to be interpreted as pilot actions.
To prevent these threats, the TSA should confiscate bad analogy guns or at least validate strict isomorphism.
(And as far as the article goes, it's not even correct. Your "data" includes closures/function pointers/whatever and if that data gets corrupted you could get the program to call into the wrong function.)
- Rangi42 12y agoAnalogies are a good spur for creativity, even if they have to be sanity-checked afterward. Someone who didn't already know that cockpits are sealed might consider it by relating hijacking to buffer overflows. Your own analogies both suggest that some way of binding "pilotability" to the actual pilot would be useful -- maybe a retinal scan or DNA check before activating the controls.
- superuser2 12y agoThe only thing worse than an aircraft controlled by a hijacker is an aircraft piloted by no one at all because the security system locked out the legitimate pilots. I'd give this a resounding NOPE.