I would like to point out one
thing about the
remote controlled planes part. If
someone can control it from the ground, someone
else can
control it from the ground. Thus, this would lead to people
hijacking a plane through
hacking the control system. Perhaps "hack-jacking". You mention the
strong encryption, but that will be
broken. It always is. It would also incur great costs in research for new encryption systems and implementing those
systems every time one is hacked. But then, only
one being
hacked would be enough for massive destruction, thus defeating the purpose.
You also mention that the
military uses this
technology already, and you may point out that
they haven't been
hacked. My response to this is that they have the power to keep technology classified. The
public sector would not have this
luxury. The technology would be widespread, as I
expect it would be implemented for every airline in the nation. Being so widespread, the
knowledge of how it works would already be subject to falling in the wrong hands, and
private citizens would most likely work on the systems. This adds to the number of people with this powerful
knowledge. It would be
extremely difficult for the airlines to implement this
technology and still keep it a secret.
A
ground control system that could
take over in the event of a hijacking would be best,
rather than relying on one the
entire time. Even then,
nuclear-launch-control
security would need to be implemented. The pilots should be on the plane. Everything else, I agree with.
Response to -Brazil- :
The only thing
encryption will protect you against is
someone intercepting
transmissions. Sure, this is helpful - it protects
passwords, prevents
spoofing, etc. But what happens when someone
hacks into the
machine controlling the plane? No
encryption there.
The only secure computer is one that's unplugged, locked in a safe, and buried 20 feet under the ground in a secret location... and I'm not even too sure about that one. -- attributed to Dennis Huges, FBI
In
short, what I was trying to say is this: There is no computer that cannot be
hacked. If the plane is controlled through a
computer, that computer can and will be hacked.
And as far as the claim that the actual
vunerability is interference... Using
frequency hopping or an altered
version of it, one can
secure the transmission from interference.
Frequency hopping is a
spread spectrum technology developed by the
military and now used in the private sector. It is a "
narrowband signal that rapidly hops within a specified range of frequencies. By concentrating all of the RF power into individual narrow band transmissions, it can overcome heavy RF noise in short links." - Breezecom's BreezeAccess II Training Manual. Because of this, frequency hopping has a low
probability of
interception and jamming/interference
immunity.
But let's not
argue over the highest point of
vunerability. We both agree that the
system would be too
vunerable, and the
plane should not be
controlled from the ground.