Re: Re: FAA computers hacked

May 9, 2009

They likely were not willing to build a new physical network. As I

understand it the new systems are networked to allow smoother

handoffs. The reason for more computer control is because ATC is

coming under increased strain. However, " mission support " to me seems

to suggest stuff like personnel databases, not the actual control

network.

It would be wise to snap out of the silly idea of getting Windows off

the shelf and putting it in charge of something critical. A secure

distribution of Unix or Linux should be used, like NSA's SecureBSD.

On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 16:58, strictnon_conformist

<no_reply > wrote:

>

>><snip>

>

>> Maybe the FAA should have looked at each airport tower and system having

>> an independent intranet with no outside connections. That would increase

>> local efficiency without compromising security. Powerplants should just go

>> back to analog monitoring systems with actual people controlling the

>> machines

>> to adjust power. Sure this might mean a few second delay in reaction time,

>> but what would be far superior to having a hacker get in and completely

>> destroy the system and equipment.

>>

>

> Hackers may very readily scramble the software from a distance, and cause

> bad commands to be followed by those using them, but (at least for FAA

> computers) you won't be able to destroy hardware that way. If the power

With many systems it takes a long time to find the critical hole in

the network, not " readily " .

Recommended Posts