Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ultimate Hacking?
#21
I don't understand why finding a vulnerability on a plane should cause embarrassement to the authorities?
If he was even half-serious he would contact the right persons in the air industry confidentialy through appropriate chanels and not brag on twitter or telling FBI agents who knows nothing about it.

If he has no close relation with the air industry, doesn't have any mandate or official contract, if he doesn't have friend or aquaintance or an entry in the airplane or airline business, if he doesn't have a minimum of credential then why does he pretend to conduct a research on flight safety?
The bare minimum to do this is to have an authorized access to an aircraft, first on the ground, then on a test flight. Apparently his only way to get close to a plane was to buy a plane ticket.

He can't be charged with air piracy because he didn't do that. If what he said is true, he just disturbed the flight during a second or two. He didn't take passengers hostage, didn't do terrorist act, didn't try to bring the plane to another location etc.
But what he did or claimed that he did was enough dangerous to deny him flying.
Anyone who would tell FBI agents that he played with the engine of a plane with 250 persons on board would face the same troubles. I don't see anything abnormal here.

Y Wrote:How exactly does being "totally insane" render a "wizard apprentice"?? Perhaps something like savant syndrome?
What I mean is that a sane and intelligent person would never send a pirated command to a plane engine in mid-flight.

If he is frustrated that nobody takes him seriousely, starts a depression, psychological disorders, and decides to show the world what he is capable of doing?
Won't be the first time that supposedly sane person crashes a plane full of passengers intentionaly.
Reply
#22
(05-22-2015, 05:43 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: I don't understand why finding a vulnerability on a plane should cause embarrassement to the authorities?

You obviously don't understand the current status of U.S. politics. If there is anything wrong, it HAS to be some one else's fault. In this case it is being considered Chris Robert's fault. U.S. aviation is an especially vulnerable area (definitely on the PR front, possibly on the security front).


(05-22-2015, 05:43 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: If he was even half-serious he would contact the right persons in the air industry confidentialy through appropriate chanels and not brag on twitter or telling FBI agents who knows nothing about it.

He claims to have been in a dialog about this for the last 6 years as his firm has been researching this. I'm not sure, as I have not seen the legendary indictment ... but it probably involves conversations proceeding the flight where he made his famous tweet. There is definitely a Barnie Fife aspect here as he's apparently been bleating about this for years and the final straw came as he was flying to and from a conference to report his concerns and findings.

(05-22-2015, 05:43 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: If he has no close relation with the air industry, doesn't have any mandate or official contract, if he doesn't have friend or aquaintance or an entry in the airplane or airline business, if he doesn't have a minimum of credential then why does he pretend to conduct a research on flight safety?
The bare minimum to do this is to have an authorized access to an aircraft, first on the ground, then on a test flight. Apparently his only way to get close to a plane was to buy a plane ticket.

He claims to have bought the subsystems involved to perform an investigation and simulation over the last six years to have established that the vulnerability existed. If he worked for the air industry, either he would have been squelched or this would have never occurred ... until somebody else found a vulnerably. Do you think any knuckle head with a packet sniffer can board an aircraft and create a threat serious enough to cause the feds to INSINUATE A FEDERAL INDICTMENT supporting an air piracy charge?? That's what all these articles are saying. What do you say?

(05-22-2015, 05:43 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: He can't be charged with air piracy because he didn't do that. If what he said is true, he just disturbed the flight during a second or two. He didn't take passengers hostage, didn't do terrorist act, didn't try to bring the plane to another location etc.
But what he did or claimed that he did was enough dangerous to deny him flying.
Anyone who would tell FBI agents that he played with the engine of a plane with 250 persons on board would face the same troubles. I don't see anything abnormal here.

If he didn't do that what is he being charged with. Take a moment, do a search and look at all all the articles titles. They indicate that he took control of an aircraft ... not that he threatened to take control or lied about taking control. I don't think he did any of the above. I think he tweeted that it was possible ... called attention to it. And for that there is a as-yet-quasi indictment of his actions.

Y Wrote:How exactly does being "totally insane" render a "wizard apprentice"?? Perhaps something like savant syndrome?

(05-22-2015, 05:43 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: What I mean is that a sane and intelligent person would never send a pirated command to a plane engine in mid-flight.

If he is frustrated that nobody takes him seriousely, starts a depression, psychological disorders, and decides to show the world what he is capable of doing?
Won't be the first time that supposedly sane person crashes a plane full of passengers intentionaly.

Yes I totally agree. I don't see him as insane. I see a series of articles that he claimed to have done something insane ... without links to the pertinent 'legendary' court documents. I think he offered what was possible, was frustrated about being dismissed, and then offered a frustrated snarky tweet about what might be possible for public consumptions ... and apparently that got noticed. He was frustrated, but I really doubt he accessed or alter the control settings even if he could ... because that would be nuts. But this has morphed into a story about what he actually did ... which would be a terrorist act ... for which he should be in custody ... except he isn't. In summary, something really stinks here. In further summary, you can't simultaneously argue that what he's accused of doing is impossible and then argue that he actually did it.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#23
Mr Y Wrote:If there is anything wrong, it HAS to be some one else's fault.
And why is finding a rare vulnerability something wrong? What about the aircraft makers anouncing proudly and together that they have fixed a treath before it could be exploited by Islamists?
What about making Roberts a hero who is there like a superman to protect the passengers?
Why should they be embarrassed to report an increase in flight safety?

But OK, I'll leave this absurdity on the acount of US politics which are hard to understand for me, as you said...

And we should see if he will be realy punished for what he did or didn't.
Reply
#24
(05-23-2015, 05:55 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Why should they be embarrassed to report an increase in flight safety?

Because it would first require admitting weakness and vulnerability. And that is a non-starter. When was the last time you heard of a government or aircraft manufacture for that matter admit such a thing? Have you not noticed that torturing whistle blowers has become our new national sport?? Drawing attention to weakness and vulnerability is considered treason ... even if you are trying to help. The guy may be a total crack pot ... or not. But there are far too many examples of how a "helpful snitch" is treated to believe that there isn't at least some possibility that this guy is being deliberately thrown under the bus. If so, it's the highest form of idiocy. The up side, is that if there are vulnerabilities, they will probably be looked into and dealt with ... to avoid future embarrassment. That said, it's a very sad thing when avoiding 'embarrassment' becomes the primary motivator of ensuring public safety.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)