4 ms·

What? That's still not an excuse to attempt it on a live passenger plane in the air. You're potentially endangering not only your life but the lives of hundreds

What? That's still not an excuse to attempt it on a live passenger plane in the air. You're potentially endangering not only your life but the lives of hundreds of strangers. In an empty plane you're piloting alone, or a simulation, sure, but there's clearly a non-zero chance that the navigation hijacking could disrupt the plane enough to force an emergency landing or even cause it to crash. Even if you think you know what you're doing, there could be lots of unintended side effects from forcing the plane to make certain maneuvers.

userbinator 12y ago
It says that he had been telling people about these security holes for years and without effect, so he probably felt that actually doing it on a real plane would. If his statements are true, then it would be far better him doing it and potentially endangering people, causing manufacturers to fix their planes very quickly, than a terrorist doing it and actually causing some serious damage.
efnx 12y ago
The article states that he had tried telling the manufacturers for years about these vulnerabilities. That means every time one of these planes flies all passengers are at risk. If he has to pull a stunt like this to raise awareness in order for the vulnerabilities to be fixed, who is putting more people at risk? This is an ethics question and it's a hard one. There are no direct analogies. This is pretty much par for the course with security researchers and big corporations. It usually takes some big negative publicity and a public scare for a manufacturer to do a recall, which makes sense because recalls are expensive.
- Nadya 11y ago
  There are two tracks on a railroad. An unguarded lever allows someone to switch which rail the track leads to. A fellow has told the train company to secure the lever so that only their qualified individuals can pull it. They've ignored this fellow for years. The fellow see two trains are approaching on the separate tracks. They decide to pull the lever - temporarily placing the lives of everyone on each train at risk of a collision. Before the trains are in danger of switching tracks, they pull the lever again. A bunch of people were scared, but no real harm was done. One day, a malicious person could be the one that pulls the lever and kills hundreds of people. The company has been putting lives at risk for years - but only after receiving bad press regarding the insecure lever have they decided to invest in its security. The end.

userbinator 12y ago

It says that he had been telling people about these security holes for years and without effect, so he probably felt that actually doing it on a real plane would. If his statements are true, then it would be far better him doing it and potentially endangering people, causing manufacturers to fix their planes very quickly, than a terrorist doing it and actually causing some serious damage.

efnx 12y ago

The article states that he had tried telling the manufacturers for years about these vulnerabilities. That means every time one of these planes flies all passengers are at risk. If he has to pull a stunt like this to raise awareness in order for the vulnerabilities to be fixed, who is putting more people at risk? This is an ethics question and it's a hard one. There are no direct analogies. This is pretty much par for the course with security researchers and big corporations. It usually takes some big negative publicity and a public scare for a manufacturer to do a recall, which makes sense because recalls are expensive.

Nadya 11y ago
There are two tracks on a railroad. An unguarded lever allows someone to switch which rail the track leads to. A fellow has told the train company to secure the lever so that only their qualified individuals can pull it. They've ignored this fellow for years. The fellow see two trains are approaching on the separate tracks. They decide to pull the lever - temporarily placing the lives of everyone on each train at risk of a collision. Before the trains are in danger of switching tracks, they pull the lever again. A bunch of people were scared, but no real harm was done. One day, a malicious person could be the one that pulls the lever and kills hundreds of people. The company has been putting lives at risk for years - but only after receiving bad press regarding the insecure lever have they decided to invest in its security. The end.