Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could ADS-B 'be used in a Bad Way' ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Could ADS-B 'be used in a Bad Way' ?

    Interesting Read (in a way) Somewhat of a 'Chicken Little Scenario' IMHO..but his perspective I guess ! Everyone is entitled to their own opinion as they say ! But..interesting none the less !
    http://www.airsport-corp.com/adsb2.htm
    VE6CPP
    F-CYQL1

  • #2
    I think we will see a lot more of these sort of wild theories in the future due to the attention that MH370 has brought to ADS-B.
    AMS Daily Fight Information: http://schiphol.dutchplanespotters.nl/

    Comment


    • #3
      "My purpose in writing these scenarios is to illustrate the problems that I perceive. I am not delivering a threat, rather I am delivering the message that ADS-B is a threat."

      Unfortunately the problem with this argument is that almost everything man has ever invented can be deemed 'dangerous' or a 'threat.' Life is full of danger. (I was an electrician before retiring- crickey that stuff needs to be banned).

      Perhaps we should all go back to the dark or stone age? No, wait, they had flint and were able to produce fire- bloody dangerous stuff that.

      I've never seen such a rubbish argument in my life. We should all curl into the fetal position and crawl back into bed- we're doomed? What utter rot! Let's all give up on new technology and raise the white flag of surrender? Garbage!

      That's just my humble viewpoint. Now, back to bed and tuck my head under the pillow and hide.

      Regards,
      Gregg
      Last edited by fungus; 2014-03-23, 13:52.
      YSSY2/T-YSSY4 [SBS-1 Basestation w/- SSE-1090 SJ Mk2 Antenna (Thanks Delcomp) ] [Uniden UBCD996T w/- 16 element Wideband Discone VHF/UHF Antenna, and tuned 108MHz-137MHz Airband Antenna] [Trialing a home-brew 1090MHz collinear antenna]

      Comment


      • #4
        Dick Smith had suggested that ADS-B could be spoofed a few years ago.
        http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/DS_...B_spoofing.php
        F-YSWG1 and T-YSWG2

        Comment


        • #5
          That original page is quite old. The give away are the references to Litton equipment. Litton was bought out by Northrop Grumman about 15 years ago. I used to work for Litton many years ago.

          ADS-B has already been cracked. The details were given at Blackhat 2012 and subsequently. When I first looked at the ADS-B spec. I was reminded of the internet circa 1985 - wide open. In my view the ADS-B spec. is very seriously flawed.

          However MH370 was certainly not a ADS-B hack!

          Comment


          • #6
            Almost anything can be used in a bad way, look at how many people are killed by cars each year!!! You can misuse the police radio comms if you are so inclined (just ask the ambulance chasing "lawyers"), the Internet is misused millions of times a day around the world, perhaps it should be banned??
            I find it hard to think of any human inventions that cannot be misused, so why single out ADS-B?
            FR24 F-EGLF1, Blitzortung station 878, OGN Aldersht2, PilotAware PWAldersht, PlanePlotter M7.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by F-EGLF1 View Post
              Almost anything can be used in a bad way, look at how many people are killed by cars each year!!! You can misuse the police radio comms if you are so inclined (just ask the ambulance chasing "lawyers"), the Internet is misused millions of times a day around the world, perhaps it should be banned??
              I find it hard to think of any human inventions that cannot be misused, so why single out ADS-B?
              Because ADS-B is a poor design. Its shoddy engineering. Its "unsafe at any speed".

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Exadios View Post
                Because ADS-B is a poor design. Its shoddy engineering. Its "unsafe at any speed".
                So you get it encrypted, then we cant see it, FR24 is finished ... and the bad boys will have bought the latest positronic realtime decryption module and will view the data freely. (remember - decryption modules will be available because pilots in other aircraft need access to the data for collision avoidance)

                Just like guns being banned in the UK - they're banned, the police have them, so do many many criminals.
                Last edited by peterhr; 2014-03-23, 16:47.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by peterhr View Post
                  So you get it encrypted, then we cant see it, FR24 is finished ... and the bad boys will have bought the latest positronic realtime decryption module and will view the data freely. (remember - decryption modules will be available because pilots in other aircraft need access to the data for collision avoidance)

                  Just like guns being banned in the UK - they're banned, the police have them, so do many many criminals.
                  I haven't mentioned encryption. And I not sure how much you understand the subject.

                  I'm not particularly concerned about any of the 'passive attacks' since any real harm in this case is done by an agency outside of ADS-B.

                  However active attacks are a real problem so the spec. should have required signed packets.

                  What the spec. has to do with UK gun laws I cannot imagine. Possibly a connection that is only apparent to you?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by peterhr View Post
                    So you get it encrypted, then we cant see it, FR24 is finished ...
                    Not necessarily. Think something like SSL encryption and certifcate authorities.
                    Although your bank probably has a https site, it's website still is visible to everyone, yet everyone knows it's (probably) the real site.
                    I know there are exceptions, and problems as well, but it's a lot safer than no encryption at all, and still readable to all, including FR24.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by jhmb View Post
                      Not necessarily. Think something like SSL encryption and certifcate authorities.
                      Although your bank probably has a https site, it's website still is visible to everyone, yet everyone knows it's (probably) the real site.
                      I know there are exceptions, and problems as well, but it's a lot safer than no encryption at all, and still readable to all, including FR24.
                      The point in encryption here would be so the data is only visible to those who have need to see it.

                      It's a minefield of the data is exceedingly useful to ATC and to on board systems for collision avoidance. You also need to have affordable equipment - so aircraft operators can fit it.

                      If you have any system that is affordable and able manage collision avoidance, then it could be programmed to do the opposite ... encryption just adds complexity.

                      On guns - no matter what the rules are - the bad boys will find a way around them.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by peterhr View Post
                        The point in encryption here would be so the data is only visible to those who have need to see it.
                        No, the point would be that what you get is what was intended, e.g. the info can be trusted. So only trusted parties should be able to produce the info, while everybody is able to read it.
                        Last edited by jhmb; 2014-03-23, 18:05.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by fungus View Post
                          "My purpose in writing these scenarios is to illustrate the problems that I perceive. I am not delivering a threat, rather I am delivering the message that ADS-B is a threat."

                          Unfortunately the problem with this argument is that almost everything man has ever invented can be deemed 'dangerous' or a 'threat.' Life is full of danger. (I was an electrician before retiring- crickey that stuff needs to be banned).

                          Perhaps we should all go back to the dark or stone age? No, wait, they had flint and were able to produce fire- bloody dangerous stuff that.

                          I've never seen such a rubbish argument in my life. We should all curl into the fetal position and crawl back into bed- we're doomed? What utter rot! Let's all give up on new technology and raise the white flag of surrender? Garbage!

                          That's just my humble viewpoint. Now, back to bed and tuck my head under the pillow and hide.

                          Regards,
                          Gregg
                          Well said. I don't think this topic serves the best interests of a community whose ongoing primary interest (after MH370 is no longer newsworthy) is plane spotting for fun and it should be terminated. Those who want to speculate are able to do so elsewhere on any number of fringe blogs.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by jhmb View Post
                            No, the point would be that what you get is what was intended, e.g. the info can be trusted. So only trusted parties should be able to produce the info, while everybody is able to read it.
                            This is the point.

                            The stated aim of the ADS-B deployment is to provide primary ATC coverage - at least in those areas that have no radar / Mode S coverage. And with this increased coverage comes with the promise increased traffic density and so on.

                            But none of these gains can be realized if the system cannot be trusted. The protocol has no security at all. Attacks against ADS-B could hardly be characterized as attacks since that characterization would imply some level of difficulty.

                            Rather than being an affordable system ADS-B it risks becoming a very expensive one in that the money has been spent with no real hope of achieving the goals set.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by airnrail View Post
                              Well said. I don't think this topic serves the best interests of a community whose ongoing primary interest (after MH370 is no longer newsworthy) is plane spotting for fun and it should be terminated. Those who want to speculate are able to do so elsewhere on any number of fringe blogs.
                              Agreed.

                              -----

                              (a few mor characters to get above the minimum post size)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X