cjbprime

73 ms·

931.
by cjbprime 7y ago
> Is there actually any kind of believable “pilot error” that can cause a passenger 737-800 to catch fire in the air and crash? Yes, here's one (on an A300) where pilot error while operating the rudder sheared off the vertical stab
932.
by cjbprime 7y ago
It's worth not trying to understand what happened in the first few hours, you'll rarely be correct. The video could have been an old one that someone uploaded as misinformation. The video can show you that the plane looks like it
933.
by cjbprime 7y ago
In theory, so does the US.
934.
by cjbprime 7y ago
It sounds like you missed that the exploit wasn't in the MCU. That's not the system the wifi chip's connected to.
935.
by cjbprime 7y ago
This doesn't look positive: > However, few plants have commenced construction since 2015, and it is now unlikely that this target will be met.
936.
by cjbprime 7y ago
> only available to those who you've distributed the modified program to That's not true. GPLv2 text: > Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party , for a charge no more tha
937.
by cjbprime 7y ago
It appears that: Tesla bought this all-in-one ARM board from Parrot, and Parrot gave them a 2.6.36 kernel with thousands of custom patches in, and Tesla's not in much of a position to port it to a newer kernel, and then Parrot presumab
938.
by cjbprime 7y ago
> why the fuck and how can Android phone and other embedded device makers get away with not publishing anything? In general, the answer is that Linus Torvalds especially, and kernel developers in general, are very uninterested in filing
939.
by cjbprime 7y ago
This is fine, but not an answer to the actual question of whether Tesla is still shipping 2.6.36 on a Model S's Parrot system today. Parrot-the-company could have given an updated kernel in the year or so since the vulnerability was r
940.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Oh, I didn't get that impression. Keen's previous Black Hat paper made it sound like Tesla is dual-maintaining 2.6.36 and 4.x kernels, because they're unable/unwilling to upgrade from 2.6.36 on the Parrot board but are
941.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Oh! You misunderstood my question: I meant to ask whether Tesla's latest software update continues to ship a 2.6.36 kernel on Parrot, or a newer kernel instead, as they do for their other modules. (Tesla uses the name Parrot to refer t
942.
by cjbprime 7y ago
What do you mean by "still exist"? Obviously a vuln was found in one that was inside a Model S, reported to Tesla and fixed.
943.
by cjbprime 7y ago
And the information center runs Ubuntu, not CentOS. If Parrot's still running 2.6.36, that's a really really bad sign for its security. You would have to predict more remote vulns on the way.
944.
by cjbprime 7y ago
I wonder if there's a way to find out which kernel version Parrot runs today.
945.
by cjbprime 7y ago
(Note that this article is only talking about the dashboard entertainment machine, which probably isn't the one the wifi chip's connected to. Perhaps that one got slower updates.)
946.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Right, but it's surprising that Tesla would be one of those vendors since they have an ongoing obligation to the security of their devices. It looks like their open source disclosure of the kernel source is a 4.4 kernel, so something w
947.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Definitely a common combination. The OLPC XO-1.5 was using this hardware 10+ years ago. It sounds like NX protections defeat the attack, and it looks like they went in soon after this kernel, around 2.6.38.
948.
by cjbprime 7y ago
> As Linux Kernel 2.6.36 does not support NX Does the Model S really run 2.6.36, first released ten years ago? I'm sure they're using a stable branch and keeping up with security patches in general [1], but that's still sh
949.
by cjbprime 7y ago
I think the point of the sample image is to display many possible sculpts, not to say that this image is a good keyboard to use. i.e. pick your favorite sculpt and use it on an entire keyboard or an entire row. Maybe I'm wrong though!
950.
by cjbprime 7y ago
I think the parent commenter is pointing out that the descending aircraft could (and arguably should) have refused the descent clearance on noticing that it would lower them into FL290 traffic that they could see via ADS-B display in the co
951.
by cjbprime 7y ago
But the point of systemic thinking is to see when you've hit an area that's vulnerable to human and training factors and try to do the best you can to reasonably remove the risk. There are surely hazards that have caused less los
952.
by cjbprime 7y ago
I don't think it's reasonable to say that wake turbulence has never caused an issue for an airliner, when many hundreds of people died because pilots misapplied rudder in direct response to wake turbulence. The correct systemic re
953.
by cjbprime 7y ago
I think IFR clearance is already displayed as texts in the cockpit? https://www.aviationtoday.com/2014/12/01/tcpdlc-transitionin...
954.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Yes.
955.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Wake turbulence was the cause of the second deadliest air crash in US history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587 And involved in this one, though the situation is harder to assess: https:&#x2F
956.
by cjbprime 7y ago
No, the misapplication of basic statistics is yours in concluding that one data point in a small sample size must be significant. The opposite is true.
957.
by cjbprime 7y ago
(It would probably require training on what to do when the system becomes inoperable, at least.)
958.
by cjbprime 7y ago
Good point. The airlines would certainly be less happy, but it's unclear that they'd be unhappy enough to make the plane unprofitable. I guess the question is whether it would make them all buy the A320neo instead.
959.
by cjbprime 7y ago
> Pilots are trained for how to recover from these conditions and regain trim authority. I agree with all of your corrections except this one. I've read that this yo-yo or rollercoaster maneuver was described in old 737 manuals de
960.
by cjbprime 7y ago
A normal person wouldn't, but you're probably overstating the reluctance an actual pilot would have. Being reluctant to push the nose down when in a bad situation would cause pilots of any aircraft to fail their first hour of stal

More ›