And they really thought this wasn't going to happen????????? people break into different organizations data systems everyday just to see if they can do it; this is why the Government highers hackers.
Maybe. But everything the government does changes from the original intent over time. First of all it puts more burden on taxpayers. Second, the bad things that can happen with this outweigh the positives.
Well, since Clinton turned off the encryption several years back and basically put GPS out to the public, I would think they at least need to go back to some type encryption for these vehicles, to where they could only be operated by the user. I kinda think that was the intent here but like I said earlier, we are dealing with the government so whether anything will be learned is a guess.
If drones are allowed here it will just be a matter of time before the bad happens. That's as dumb as flying for 30 years after D B Cooper with unsealed cockpits.
Another aspect of this article, is I have not read anywhere, that the Drone in Iran was ever claimed to be a US Drone. How do the authors of this story allude to the fact the the DHS, enacted this test 'because' they feel Iran took over control of that Drone? That statement in the article tells me it was ours!. I have never read anywhere that the US Military claimed that Drone.
Well, it was a controlled situation so if the government learned anything and puts it to use, maybe we'll be better for it, BUT, we are talking about the government here.LOL
I know that, but it started the trend of high jacking planes here. Other countries had already been sealing cockpits by then. No matter what happens in back, land where you want. From that point on useless to try high jacking.
Creepy considering last night I watched a show of NCIS Los Angles where somebody did the same thing but they dramatized it with the drone having a hell fire missile and so on...
I wonder if these guys are related to the Drone developer in Texas Univeristy, that was thought to be the source of the Saratoga,CA Drone photos 2007, though superimposed, showing a Drone with the back ground in the Hills above Saratoga, the related photos in Capitola,CA over the PG&E power pole and then found to actually, be in Campbell,CA. As far as I know, the case is still open and being investigated. The Drone photos used in 2007 were thought to be real models, though not large, but obviously digitally alerterd, this makes me wonder especially with a texas connection.
What concerns me more than the students taking control of the drone is that they can "spoof" a GPS signal. What does that mean for regular pilots? What if you're doing a GPS approach and someone is sending out false GPS data?
Perhaps a revolving system like automobiles use with their embedded key-less openers. something with multilevel codes that only react to the mother units codes that are random. Who ever has the solution will be filthy rich.
Obviously we need a better firewall. The GPS signals that the drones use should also transmit a code to authenticate the signal-one that cannot be reproduced, and one that is changed hourly.
Well, it is a widely known fact that GPS is not a fool-proof navigation system. Being a system that relies on low power (below the thermal noise level) radio signal, it is a system that is prone to spoofing and jamming. It is easy (albeit illegal) to procure a GPS jammer and the use of devices of this kind by civilian users trying to hide their whereabouts has resulted in aviation related problem in several airports (especially with their GBAS/LAAS), EWR being one of them. The issues that come as a package with GPS signal has prevented the use of GPS in high-integrity applications such as CATIIIb landings.
The study conducted at UT Austin is very commendable because it allows researchers to understand better spoofing mechanism. Actually there is a lot of research on how to detect spoofing, from satellite discrimination to signal structure correlation.
And for one thing, bad GPS affects not only UAV but also any manned aircraft. Coupled with IMC, poor situational awareness, depending solely on GPS can result in a very serious accident.
There are signals embedded in the GPS signal that cannot be reproduced. They are known as the P(Y) signal and the M-code. But they are available only to military users. There are works available that show how to do GPS signal authentication; It is still at a very early stage of development but we could expect this to be the norm in the future.
Well, I didn't see that show but I can see where the possibilities are endless if it fell into the wrong hands. Tis good this be found out as the FAA is still considering the permitting process. I don't think folks totally understand all the ramnifications of things they may do these days. The devil is in the details.
They probably already know how, but just don't have the equipment yet. DHS put them up to the task, and they were able to do it. I think the real error lies in using unencrypted GPS for guidance.
I'm not GPS maven, but my understanding is that the position is calculated from the relative delay in receiving timestamped signals. I'd like to know if there is ANYTHING to encrypt. I suppose one could encrypt the timestamp and have the engines use a known public key to decrypt that. Of course, that would break each and every GPS in place. SA used a dithering algorithm which only the military could reverse but this would not protect from someone spoofing.
RSA keys change the 6-digit number they display every 60 seconds, and are used to help authenticate user logins on secure servers. It shouldn't be too hard to add some sort of security code to the signal. Either that, or DoD can reencrypt the signal like it was before Clinton ordered the encryption turned off.
