Slashdot Mirror


US Says Plane Finder App Threatens Security

ProgramErgoSum writes "The Plane Finder AR application, developed by a British firm for the Apple iPhone and Google's Android, allows users to point their phone at the sky and see the position, height and speed of nearby aircraft. It also shows the airline, flight number, departure point, destination and even the likely course-the features which could be used to target an aircraft with a surface-to-air missile, or to direct another plane on to a collision course, the 'Daily Mail' reported. The program, sold for just 1.79 pounds in the online Apple store, has now been labelled an 'aid to terrorists' by security experts and the US Department of Homeland Security is also examining how to protect airliners. The new application works by intercepting the so-called Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcasts (ADS-B) transmitted by most passenger aircraft to a new satellite tracking system that supplements or, in some countries, replaces radar."

15 of 524 comments (clear)

  1. fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Be afraid! Everything is a threat!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    and we can't take away all your freedoms unless you are afraid...

    1. Re:fear by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Knowledge is Power. Power can be used by the Terrorists. Ban Wikipedia.

    2. Re:fear by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not just ban airplanes? If there are no planes in the sky, they can't be shot down!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  2. Already done? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this any different from a website like flightstats.com, and I'm sure there are plenty of other sites like that too. It isn't difficult to figure out where the planes are. The app probably only makes it marginally easier to view this data on a phone. Sounds like much ado about nothing

    1. Re:Already done? by Cylix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I fail to understand how anyone can complain when they failed to institute basic encryption policies to protect such data.

      It would make no sense to block the application because it's obvious the work can be easily reproduced.

      If this was ever a concern they should have at least implemented some basic protections.

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    2. Re:Already done? by Korrente · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can rent an ADS-B equipped plane from my local FBO for $130. I've been able to do this since about 2006. This way, I can track the 737's flying into BNA, and also have the option of flying into any other object within 300 miles. No iPhone needed (it's probably cheaper than an iPhone, too). Yes it's much ado about nothing, but how would we survive without something to ado about?

    3. Re:Already done? by BitterOak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I infer from Pinkfroot's "Share Data" page that their apps just get the ADS-B data over the Intertubes from people who have ADS-B receivers and make the data available.

      And if I'd Read The Entire Fine Article, I wouldn't have had to infer; The Fine Article says exactly that:

      The firm behind the app, Pinkfroot, uses a network of aircraft enthusiasts in Britain and abroad, who are equipped with ADS-B receivers costing around 200 pounds to intercept the information from aircraft and send it to a central database.

      Wouldn't it make more sense, then, to ban the receivers rather than the apps? It sounds like all the app is doing is aggregating data that's already available. A resourceful terrorist could write his own software to do that.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    4. Re:Already done? by the_womble · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Concerns about terrorism are never secondary.. The 3,000+ people killed by terrorists the the US in the last decade are a far greater concern than the best part of 200,000 other murders over the same period. fewer than 40 people killed by terrorists in the UK in the last decade are a greater concern than than close to 3,000 killed by other murderers over the same period, or something on the order of 30,000 from each of road accidents and suicide.

      It follows that a risk of a terrorist attack is of greater concern then the risk of accidents, even if the latter is a greater threat in terms of the number of people killed.

      Do you expect a rational policy?

  3. Yes, let's all focus on the iPhone apps... by kbensema · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... instead of, say, the surface-to-air missiles

    1. Re:Yes, let's all focus on the iPhone apps... by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also note that the iPhone app works because THE AIRPLANE IS BROADCASTING THIS INFORMATION CONSTANTLY. If this information is a security threat, why did they create an air traffic control system where this information is public? If you can't be arsed to encrypt your own broadcasts, is it really shocking when someone actually reads them?

  4. Here comes the stupid... by chaboud · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I get this argument from idiot alarmists all the time:

    "We can't allow for the last link of dissemination of information to the public at large to exist, but it's okay for the information to be available. We just need to make it *less* available."

    This sort of argument appears to stem from one or many of a few beliefs:

    1) Terrorists are too stupid to get this sort of information from less casual sources.
    2) Of all of the speedbumps to becoming a terrorist, figuring out where the flights are was the thing that was holding people back.
    3) They had no idea that we had this information available (this is a variant of 1),
    4) It's okay to leave information we consider dangerous out in the open, as long as you can't get it without knowing the right URL (or, in this case, the right frequencies). This isn't quite what crypto nerds mean when they say "security through obscurity isn't security at all," but it's pretty relatable.

    And to think, US Cyber command is under the impression that they don't need geeks. If this is what passes for an understanding of safety and security in our government, we're just doomed.

  5. Re:OMG by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DHS might be able to stop corporations, but they can't stop me from publishing the source code:

    PA LAW: "The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject." ----- MD LAW: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution thereof, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people thereof..... the liberty of the press ought to be inviolably preserved; that every citizen of the State ought to be allowed to speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that privilege."

    And so on across all 50 Member States. Nobody at the US level has the right to block publishing or sharing source code of programs I or thers create

    Aside -

    I found this bit of the Bill of Rights interesting: "Monopolies are odious, contrary to the spirit of a free government and the principles of commerce, and ought not to be suffered." And yet the BGE and Comcast monopolies exist. Perhaps the Maryland government should buy-out the wires and lease the lines to any company that wished to use them (BGE, PPL, comcast, cox, appletv, etc). i.e. Consumer choice is a right.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  6. Re:It's bad by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd have thought that the _problem_ is that the aircraft is broadcasting its position, not that somebody wrote an app to listen to the signal.

    If some Android developer can figure out how to do it, so can anybody else.

    But...go ahead, ban the app if it makes you feel better.

    --
    No sig today...
  7. Re:It's bad by robot256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aren't the aircraft broadcasting their positions so other planes can avoid them? I don't think we want every single plane operating in stealth mode, just look how well that works with submarines. If there is "increased risk" of being targeted by missiles, then so be it, you're way more likely to run into another plane than get targeted by a missile. And if you're in enemy airspace you should already have that shit turned off.

  8. Re:It's bad by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was worried when I realised that the local bus company had posted information telling us the routes and times of the bus services in the city. If it weren't for the drivers doing their best to randomise their arrival times, terrorists would use this information for nefarious purposes!

    I saw a kind of foreign looking guy the other day. Close call that.

    --
    -- Using the preview button since 2005