Sigh, this has been reported a million times, pre 09/11 Norad had very limited ability to track non transponding aircraft within continental North America. Think of the coverage as a donut, with the most effective sensors on the outside. NORAD was originally designed to track objects trying to enter US airspace, not objects originating from it.
And is NORAD our ONLY radar installation system in the United States? What about the traffic radar at EVERY FREAKIN' AIRPORT? Or for that matter, that weather radar that every local news channel uses? Plus, why are we depending on our allies to police OUR airspace?
As I remember, we fought WWII primarily on the soil of our allies, and/or in our own territory (or at least, territory Japan had taken from us at the start of the war). It took many years of island hopping and invasions before we reached Germany/Japan- in 1944. And even then, it didn't entirely work- both Japan and Germany had successfull, if relatively unknown, attacks on the US mainland. I live in Oregon where Japan actually attacked three times, once actually even killing people (the other two caused a forest fire and kicked up some sand around Ft. Stevens on the coast).
Well, gee, thanks for that, Captain Statistical Certainties. What does that have to do with the discussion at hand?
If you don't act like most of the world is dumber than you are, AND just assume people will see the glaringly obvious, you will be disapointed in the second most of the time. Dogbert's Law still stands- People Are Stupid, and trying to pretend that they are not is useless.
I'm sure they DID consider it, and considering the resistance the airlines showed to armoring the barn door after the horses ran out, it wasn't considered "worth it". Despite my arguments to the contrary, many peoples' assessment of risk changed.
And thus you assume that spending an extra six months on the software of a basic bluetooth-wired jetliner just to encrypt the commands WOULD be considered to be worth it? The real lesson is that the PHBs rule the world- and extra expense is usually considered less important.
People use wires for security critical applications all the time. Ever heard of a "wiretap"?
That's exactly my point. Wiretap requires physical point of presence someplace along the wire.
There's no reason in the world why the signals couldn't be encrypted over a Bluetooth link.
Except going back to exactly why the door on Flight 93 was cardboard- cost. And even if encrypted- so what? The hacker doesn't neccessarily need to understand the signal to record and mimic the signal- at a distance, over RF.
Is this a good idea? I don't know...seems like it's got some advantages and disadvantages, kinda like everything else. I would wager that the engineers doing these tests (you know, tests? What you do before you put a bunch of people in a metal tube and shoot 'em through the sky at high subsonic speed?) have given a bit of thought to the failure modes, and are designing the system accordingly.
Yes, I RTFA'd- I found it very interesting that they considered the basic case (lightning interferance, jamming) and failed to even mention the higher case (snarfing), which is why I brought it up.
Are they smarter or less smart than me? Dunno. I do know that they have a lot more information about the problem they're trying to solve than I do.
A wireless control system is a wireless control system-
What happened to the Flight 93 that left the airport with all the passengers and crew on board ?
Wow, I just noticed this (don't know why I never noticed before) but this plane has the same freakin' flight number as an airplane in The Twilight Zone that never returned- got lost in time.
I was starting to disapprove of him, but now I have remembered how evil and mean the dark Arabs are, and realize that Dear Leader is protecting us by fighting them over there rather than over here.
And that strategy has worked exactly when in history?
Yes, but the point is, plane or missile, something *did* hit the Pentagon, and the government was involved if only by accident by not shooting down planes that failed to transmit transponder codes or follow orders.
Actually, I'm quite a bit less worried about that. Most airplane shells are already designed to take a lightning strike. I use bluetooth extensively for non-security applications and have never seen signal degragation due to westher. Now admittedly, this is the first I've seen anybody attempt to use it as the control system for an airplane- and that may change things- but by and large, lightning strikes do NOT resonate at 2.4Ghz....
Cryptographic methods only solve sniffing and masquerading. What about full up jamming?
Depends what you want to do. Full up jamming on bluetooth is hard- it's spread spectrum specifically to defeat that- but is still possible. The key is what kind of terrorism you want to do- do you want to hold the plane for ransom? Hit it with a short jamming burst, then call in your demands. Crash it, killing all aboard? A bit longer of a jamming signal would be required. Crash it into a building? That takes control- and would require a snarf gun and hacking.
Except that a terrorist would need the plane to send data that far too, in order for a connection to form.
Not neccessarily- 32DB antennas on bluetooth rifles have been shown to be able to snarf cell phone connections at as much as a mile even without an amplifier. A good antenna works both ways- both picks up the (much) fainter signal of the target, and sends at a higher amplitude so as to make the target think the hacker is local.
Beyond that, they would need to know the bluetooth address.
Snarf enough packets, and you'll have a full map of the plane's PAN.
All this is assuming that the wireless won't be encrypted, which would be so obvious that not even the most idiotic engineer in the world couldn't point that out.
Just obvious enough to be overlooked- or worse yet, be thought of but use an insecure encryption algorithim. Bluetooth's default in that case isn't exactly the greatest.
Not to mention the system is based on bluetooth- you could take one of these planes out of the sky with a good bluetooth rifle and fly it into whatever you wanted...if you think the 9-11 hijackers were bold, wait until you see what happens when they can hijack a plane from a half a mile away without even boarding the plane.
Sorry, I don't distinguish between different angle measurements of left. Leftist groups, like feces, all smell in the sunlight regardless of shade.
Funny, I say the same about Randroids like you.
Sorry, neither "W" nor the Demosocialists are my "boys", and my enemies are anyone who wants to put their hands in my pocket and redistribute my hard-earned wealth to other, undeserving people because they want to buy their political favor or think it's "civilized" to do so. As far as I'm concerned that's all of the above (including idiots who want me to pay for their losing at the "hide-the-sausage" game).
Then don't expect US to support you- don't do business with us. Your so-called "hard earned wealth" wouldn't exist without a government- burn your money because you don't want to pay for having money.
Actually not, which I must say I take great satisfaction in stating. The people who work for me are people I've all worked with before who I know to be good, solid software people who are well above the average dolt pounding a keyboard. I pay them 2-sigma or 3-sigma salaries because they posess that level of skillset and I know them to be so before I even think about hiring them.
Ah, but they don't deserve those salaries according to you- their salaries are taking away from your "hard-earned wealth".
Obviously that's your opinion which, I'm sure it will shock you to find, is not necessarily shared.
People who don't share that opinion of civilization deserve to be exiled.
Personally I think that definition went out the window with the Great Wall or the Crusades.
Well, personally I don't appreciate you taking my tax dollars to support your business.
It's very convenient though for people who want to put their hands in other people's wallets albeit very, very quaint and more than a little dated.
You mean kind of like you're doing by using OUR roads that you're not willing to pay for?
The best business to have is one where you sell a product or service that can't be found (readily) anywhere else.
If it can't be found anywhere else, I can readily live without it. Kindly do not sell in my state or use my road system.
the way it is when you're really good at what you do, something you obviously have no clue about. You can charge outrageous money, and guess what? People will pay it because they can't buy what you're selling anywhere else (sometimes at any price). That's all the economics that you need to know, if you're good at something (other than whining, of course).
If it can't be found anywhere else, then I don't need it. I only spend money on what I NEED, not what I WANT like some whimp consumer. Thanks for admiting that I don't need to support your business or allow your business to operate in my country.
I'll give you a quick clue: the person who put the baby in there in the first place (and is now complaining about the consequences) is the one who qualifies as the real idiot.
I'm not complaining about the NATURAL consequences, I'm complaining about the ARTIFICIAL consequences. The insurance industry and health care in the United States is ARTIFICIAL- it was invented by human beings and can be changed by human beings.
As I said before, the Constitution does not ensure you the right to breed.
Well, that's an error in the Constitution, isn't it?
Sorry about your luck, but don't even think for a moment that your misfortune entitles you to my hard earned wealth.
There is no such thing as hard earned wealth- all wealth comes by lying to customers and employees about the true value of labor.
Kindly keep your hands off my wallet.
I don't care about your wallet- but the dollar bills inside belong to the government of the United States. The Treasury Secretary signed them- they belong to that department. Whatever they choose to do with those dollars is government business; and we live in a democracy, not a capitocracy (supposedly).
Considering your complaining about being an indentured employee, perhaps you should have considered failing Macro as well.
That's funny- so you believe that ignorance, failure, and lies should be rewarded? Bet you voted for Bush!
What constitutes business in a "modern" form depends on your perspective and context, something you obviously didn't pick up.
Well, my perspective says that without a government providing a stable money supply, roads, an internet (paid for with Department of Defense dollars!), a system of defense (now breaking down, since we can't seem to control a simple border), disease control, police, fire protection, corporate contract law mediation, copyright law, patent law, incorporation, and an educated workforce, your business couldn't exist.
If you only had as much technical (and small business) talent as you do regurgitating useless history lessons, you wouldn't be nearly so indentured.
Is that why you're so busy re-creating the mistakes of the past?
In that case, I see a growth market for companies that steal from the rich that aren't their shareholders to give to the rich that are their shareholders, since profitable is not the same as legal.
Yes, and this has been so since the 1970s- Microsoft built their entire business on that model (buying/stealing technology from the companies that developed it to resell under their brand at a huge profit).
Are you going to stay with them to the "bitter end"?
I used to- I know better now.
How about if your interests change? The job isn't as much fun as it used to be? You want to go a new direction in life...
Still going to stay with the miserable job?
I made a promise, a personal promise, in coming to work in the first place, that I wouldn't leave the team in a lurch. I am duty and honor bound to fullfill that promise before considering my own feelings.
As long as the arrangement is mutually beneficial, neither party has a reason to end it. If one of them does, why should the other get to keep it going? (Wow, sounds like my last marraige!)
Commitment means something, or should- and should be rewarded. The fact that it is not is a sign that the system is broken.
America is the only place in the world where you will find overweight poor people.
America also seems to be the only place in the world where, calorie for calorie, Lard is cheaper than Carrots. If the reverse were true, then the poor people would be thin again (because poor people can only afford to eat whatever is cheapest).
Lucky us, though, we developed higher brain functions, which allow us to overcome those urges.
And replaced them with a heartless economic system that profits off the poor and throws them out in the street to die of exposure instead of killing them directly.
But, hey, who am I to suggest that reproduction shouldn't be the end-all and be-all of one's life...
Some people live near their extended families on purpose, and teach their kids that duty to family outweighs duty to self or profit. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Just don't be surprised if you end up alone in a nursing home someday because your kids want nothing to do with you.
Having said that- yes, moving around, different companies, different positions in the same company, is the way to get raises. Disloyalty is rewarded. Loyalty is thrown out with the trash. Which was exactly my point- and the point of today's Dilbert.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh, this has been reported a million times, pre 09/11 Norad had very limited ability to track non transponding aircraft within continental North America. Think of the coverage as a donut, with the most effective sensors on the outside. NORAD was originally designed to track objects trying to enter US airspace, not objects originating from it.
And is NORAD our ONLY radar installation system in the United States? What about the traffic radar at EVERY FREAKIN' AIRPORT? Or for that matter, that weather radar that every local news channel uses? Plus, why are we depending on our allies to police OUR airspace?
I took it to be the signature line....plus as a nativist, I'm not used to chicano-inspired spanglish.../sarcasmo
Now that makes sense! Plus, by using IR-opaque materials you can effectively shield remote hacking attempts AND interferance/jamming.
Um, WWII ring any bells?
As I remember, we fought WWII primarily on the soil of our allies, and/or in our own territory (or at least, territory Japan had taken from us at the start of the war). It took many years of island hopping and invasions before we reached Germany/Japan- in 1944. And even then, it didn't entirely work- both Japan and Germany had successfull, if relatively unknown, attacks on the US mainland. I live in Oregon where Japan actually attacked three times, once actually even killing people (the other two caused a forest fire and kicked up some sand around Ft. Stevens on the coast).
#1 - this ain't 802.11b- Bluetooth is more forgiving.
#2 - It would be hard, but a good scope will allow you to target anything in sight.
Well, gee, thanks for that, Captain Statistical Certainties. What does that have to do with the discussion at hand?
If you don't act like most of the world is dumber than you are, AND just assume people will see the glaringly obvious, you will be disapointed in the second most of the time. Dogbert's Law still stands- People Are Stupid, and trying to pretend that they are not is useless.
I'm sure they DID consider it, and considering the resistance the airlines showed to armoring the barn door after the horses ran out, it wasn't considered "worth it". Despite my arguments to the contrary, many peoples' assessment of risk changed.
And thus you assume that spending an extra six months on the software of a basic bluetooth-wired jetliner just to encrypt the commands WOULD be considered to be worth it? The real lesson is that the PHBs rule the world- and extra expense is usually considered less important.
People use wires for security critical applications all the time. Ever heard of a "wiretap"?
That's exactly my point. Wiretap requires physical point of presence someplace along the wire.
There's no reason in the world why the signals couldn't be encrypted over a Bluetooth link.
Except going back to exactly why the door on Flight 93 was cardboard- cost. And even if encrypted- so what? The hacker doesn't neccessarily need to understand the signal to record and mimic the signal- at a distance, over RF.
Is this a good idea? I don't know...seems like it's got some advantages and disadvantages, kinda like everything else. I would wager that the engineers doing these tests (you know, tests? What you do before you put a bunch of people in a metal tube and shoot 'em through the sky at high subsonic speed?) have given a bit of thought to the failure modes, and are designing the system accordingly.
Yes, I RTFA'd- I found it very interesting that they considered the basic case (lightning interferance, jamming) and failed to even mention the higher case (snarfing), which is why I brought it up.
Are they smarter or less smart than me? Dunno. I do know that they have a lot more information about the problem they're trying to solve than I do.
A wireless control system is a wireless control system-
What happened to the Flight 93 that left the airport with all the passengers and crew on board ?
Wow, I just noticed this (don't know why I never noticed before) but this plane has the same freakin' flight number as an airplane in The Twilight Zone that never returned- got lost in time.
I was starting to disapprove of him, but now I have remembered how evil and mean the dark Arabs are, and realize that Dear Leader is protecting us by fighting them over there rather than over here.
And that strategy has worked exactly when in history?
Yes, but the point is, plane or missile, something *did* hit the Pentagon, and the government was involved if only by accident by not shooting down planes that failed to transmit transponder codes or follow orders.
Actually, I'm quite a bit less worried about that. Most airplane shells are already designed to take a lightning strike. I use bluetooth extensively for non-security applications and have never seen signal degragation due to westher. Now admittedly, this is the first I've seen anybody attempt to use it as the control system for an airplane- and that may change things- but by and large, lightning strikes do NOT resonate at 2.4Ghz....
I think I've figured out your issue. You assume that everybody else is dumber than you are.
Well, the fact is, at an IQ of 101, most people ARE dumber than you are (by the very definition of IQ).
I wonder if the engineers designing this system had ever considered the situation you propose.
Well, apparently engineers of the Boeing 747 never considered the situation of people with box cutters cutting down their cardboard door....
Hmmm...is it possible? Nah. They must be doodie heads.
They're using bluetooth for what should be a security critical application. No further name calling is neccessary or warrented.
bluetooth cannons
sush. That's supposed to be a secret.
Cryptographic methods only solve sniffing and masquerading. What about full up jamming?
Depends what you want to do. Full up jamming on bluetooth is hard- it's spread spectrum specifically to defeat that- but is still possible. The key is what kind of terrorism you want to do- do you want to hold the plane for ransom? Hit it with a short jamming burst, then call in your demands. Crash it, killing all aboard? A bit longer of a jamming signal would be required. Crash it into a building? That takes control- and would require a snarf gun and hacking.
Don't even need a full laptop- the standard hardware of a Windows Mobile Smartphone will do with the proper software!
Except that a terrorist would need the plane to send data that far too, in order for a connection to form.
Not neccessarily- 32DB antennas on bluetooth rifles have been shown to be able to snarf cell phone connections at as much as a mile even without an amplifier. A good antenna works both ways- both picks up the (much) fainter signal of the target, and sends at a higher amplitude so as to make the target think the hacker is local.
Beyond that, they would need to know the bluetooth address.
Snarf enough packets, and you'll have a full map of the plane's PAN.
All this is assuming that the wireless won't be encrypted, which would be so obvious that not even the most idiotic engineer in the world couldn't point that out.
Just obvious enough to be overlooked- or worse yet, be thought of but use an insecure encryption algorithim. Bluetooth's default in that case isn't exactly the greatest.
Not to mention the system is based on bluetooth- you could take one of these planes out of the sky with a good bluetooth rifle and fly it into whatever you wanted...if you think the 9-11 hijackers were bold, wait until you see what happens when they can hijack a plane from a half a mile away without even boarding the plane.
Sorry, I don't distinguish between different angle measurements of left. Leftist groups, like feces, all smell in the sunlight regardless of shade.
Funny, I say the same about Randroids like you.
Sorry, neither "W" nor the Demosocialists are my "boys", and my enemies are anyone who wants to put their hands in my pocket and redistribute my hard-earned wealth to other, undeserving people because they want to buy their political favor or think it's "civilized" to do so. As far as I'm concerned that's all of the above (including idiots who want me to pay for their losing at the "hide-the-sausage" game).
Then don't expect US to support you- don't do business with us. Your so-called "hard earned wealth" wouldn't exist without a government- burn your money because you don't want to pay for having money.
Actually not, which I must say I take great satisfaction in stating. The people who work for me are people I've all worked with before who I know to be good, solid software people who are well above the average dolt pounding a keyboard. I pay them 2-sigma or 3-sigma salaries because they posess that level of skillset and I know them to be so before I even think about hiring them.
Ah, but they don't deserve those salaries according to you- their salaries are taking away from your "hard-earned wealth".
Obviously that's your opinion which, I'm sure it will shock you to find, is not necessarily shared.
People who don't share that opinion of civilization deserve to be exiled.
Personally I think that definition went out the window with the Great Wall or the Crusades.
Well, personally I don't appreciate you taking my tax dollars to support your business.
It's very convenient though for people who want to put their hands in other people's wallets albeit very, very quaint and more than a little dated.
You mean kind of like you're doing by using OUR roads that you're not willing to pay for?
The best business to have is one where you sell a product or service that can't be found (readily) anywhere else.
If it can't be found anywhere else, I can readily live without it. Kindly do not sell in my state or use my road system.
the way it is when you're really good at what you do, something you obviously have no clue about. You can charge outrageous money, and guess what? People will pay it because they can't buy what you're selling anywhere else (sometimes at any price). That's all the economics that you need to know, if you're good at something (other than whining, of course).
If it can't be found anywhere else, then I don't need it. I only spend money on what I NEED, not what I WANT like some whimp consumer. Thanks for admiting that I don't need to support your business or allow your business to operate in my country.
I'll give you a quick clue: the person who put the baby in there in the first place (and is now complaining about the consequences) is the one who qualifies as the real idiot.
I'm not complaining about the NATURAL consequences, I'm complaining about the ARTIFICIAL consequences. The insurance industry and health care in the United States is ARTIFICIAL- it was invented by human beings and can be changed by human beings.
As I said before, the Constitution does not ensure you the right to breed.
Well, that's an error in the Constitution, isn't it?
Sorry about your luck, but don't even think for a moment that your misfortune entitles you to my hard earned wealth.
There is no such thing as hard earned wealth- all wealth comes by lying to customers and employees about the true value of labor.
Kindly keep your hands off my wallet.
I don't care about your wallet- but the dollar bills inside belong to the government of the United States. The Treasury Secretary signed them- they belong to that department. Whatever they choose to do with those dollars is government business; and we live in a democracy, not a capitocracy (supposedly).
Considering your complaining about being an indentured employee, perhaps you should have considered failing Macro as well.
That's funny- so you believe that ignorance, failure, and lies should be rewarded? Bet you voted for Bush!
What constitutes business in a "modern" form depends on your perspective and context, something you obviously didn't pick up.
Well, my perspective says that without a government providing a stable money supply, roads, an internet (paid for with Department of Defense dollars!), a system of defense (now breaking down, since we can't seem to control a simple border), disease control, police, fire protection, corporate contract law mediation, copyright law, patent law, incorporation, and an educated workforce, your business couldn't exist.
If you only had as much technical (and small business) talent as you do regurgitating useless history lessons, you wouldn't be nearly so indentured.
Is that why you're so busy re-creating the mistakes of the past?
In that case, I see a growth market for companies that steal from the rich that aren't their shareholders to give to the rich that are their shareholders, since profitable is not the same as legal.
Yes, and this has been so since the 1970s- Microsoft built their entire business on that model (buying/stealing technology from the companies that developed it to resell under their brand at a huge profit).
But it MIGHT mean that they've never been screwed by a non-union job. This will be my first union job if I can get it.
Are you going to stay with them to the "bitter end"?
I used to- I know better now.
How about if your interests change? The job isn't as much fun as it used to be? You want to go a new direction in life... Still going to stay with the miserable job?
I made a promise, a personal promise, in coming to work in the first place, that I wouldn't leave the team in a lurch. I am duty and honor bound to fullfill that promise before considering my own feelings.
As long as the arrangement is mutually beneficial, neither party has a reason to end it. If one of them does, why should the other get to keep it going? (Wow, sounds like my last marraige!)
Commitment means something, or should- and should be rewarded. The fact that it is not is a sign that the system is broken.
Either that- or the loser will become the quiet guy in the office that one day blows his top and shoots 57 people.
America is the only place in the world where you will find overweight poor people.
America also seems to be the only place in the world where, calorie for calorie, Lard is cheaper than Carrots. If the reverse were true, then the poor people would be thin again (because poor people can only afford to eat whatever is cheapest).
Lucky us, though, we developed higher brain functions, which allow us to overcome those urges.
And replaced them with a heartless economic system that profits off the poor and throws them out in the street to die of exposure instead of killing them directly.
But, hey, who am I to suggest that reproduction shouldn't be the end-all and be-all of one's life...
Which just proves my point.
Some people live near their extended families on purpose, and teach their kids that duty to family outweighs duty to self or profit. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Just don't be surprised if you end up alone in a nursing home someday because your kids want nothing to do with you.
Having said that- yes, moving around, different companies, different positions in the same company, is the way to get raises. Disloyalty is rewarded. Loyalty is thrown out with the trash. Which was exactly my point- and the point of today's Dilbert.