DEFCON 20: Hacker + Airplanes = No Good Can Come Of This
Christiaan0083 HN recommenders · recommended in 3 months, 2015-2026
226K views · 13 years ago · talk · evergreen
A DEF CON 20 talk by RenderMan on the security weaknesses of ADS-B, the unencrypted, unauthenticated aircraft tracking broadcast. It shows how easily the data can be spoofed and what that means for security designed in too late.
Cited whenever aviation or vehicle communication security comes up, as the standard demonstration that ADS-B is naively designed and trivially spoofable.
52:51DEF CON 22 - Zoz - Don't Fuck It Up!
DEFCONConference
546K views • 11 years ago
40:47DEFCON 19: Steal Everything, Kill Everyone, Cause Total Financial Ruin! (w speaker)
Christiaan008
1.7M views • 14 years ago
18:40DEF CON 17 - Deviant Ollam - Packing and the Friendly Skies
DEFCONConference
88K views • 12 years ago
46:22DEF CON 23 - Charlie Miller & Chris Valasek - Remote Exploitation of an Unaltered Passenger Vehicle
DEFCONConference
171K views • 11 years ago
52:43DEFCON 19: Introduction to Tamper Evident Devices
Christiaan008
352K views • 15 years ago
42:36Defcon 21 - The Secret Life of SIM Cards
HackersOnBoard
708K views • 12 years ago
52:33Defcon 18 - Practical Cellphone Spying - Chris Paget - Part.mov
killab66661
217K views • 15 years ago
45:14DEFCON 19: Bit-squatting: DNS Hijacking Without Exploitation (w speaker)
Christiaan008
24K views • 14 years ago
42:50DEF CON 18 - Moxie Marlinspike - Changing Threats To Privacy: From TIA to Google
DEFCONConference
7K views • 13 years ago
45:14DEF CON 19 - Artem Dinaburg - Bit-squatting: DNS Hijacking Without Exploitation
DEFCONConference
4K views • 13 years ago
38:49DEF CON 23 - Chris Domas - Repsych: Psychological Warfare in Reverse Engineering
DEFCONConference
173K views • 10 years ago
48:52DEFCON 20: Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains: The National Security Agency and the Constitution
Christiaan008
10K views • 13 years ago
49:49DEF CON 23 - Marc Rogers and Kevin Mahaffey - How to Hack a Tesla Model S
DEFCONConference
84K views • 10 years ago
47:34DEF CON 23 - Robinson and Mitchell - Knocking my neighbors kids cruddy drone offline
DEFCONConference
695K views • 10 years ago
46:22DEF CON 19 - Moxie Marlinspike - SSL And The Future Of Authenticity
DEFCONConference
11K views • 13 years ago
50:59DEF CON 22 - Adrian Crenshaw- Dropping Docs on Darknets: How People Got Caught
DEFCONConference
219K views • 11 years ago
46:04DEF CON 26 - Christopher Domas - GOD MODE UNLOCKED Hardware Backdoors in redacted x86
DEFCONConference
86K views • 8 years ago
25:11Black Hat 2013 - OPSEC Failures of Spies
HackersOnBoard
229K views • 12 years ago
24:32Defcon 20 - Dan Tentler - Drinking from the caffeine firehose we know as shodan
vissago
182K views • 14 years ago
43:40DEF CON 29 - Richard Henderson - Old MacDonald Had a Barcode, E I E I CAR
DEFCONConference
18K views • 5 years ago
11 comments from Hacker News
There was this proof of concept in 2012: ▶ this video (IIUC they did not actually transmit data, just fed it directly into an ADS-B receiver, but transmitting would've been trivial at this point)
There was a talk at DEFCON about this in 2012 [1]. The main issue is a radar system gets its information from ground-based measurements, while a GPS system gets its information from air-based measurements that are later transmitted to the ground station. This means that those reports can be spoofed, or lied about, or absent entirely. ▶ this video
You may find this interesting ▶ this video in particular about the bleed of ATSB data from virtual world into real world. It's a semi-hypothetical Defcon presentation on insecure wireless communications directly with the aircraft.
Ok. Lets play. link Take it from 300MHz-3.8GHz to 70MHz-6GHz link Buy some antennas for the freq's you want to RX/TX. Sniff or investigate the protocol. Cause wrecks and brake-checks and other bad things with cars. I guarantee this will be as bad as ADS-B : ▶ this video
That's already been demonstrated at defcon. Here's Brad Haines tricking open source flight tracking software into displaying YOURMOM, a connecting flight with the San Francisco International air control tower. Demonstrated in safe conditions in a faraday cage, of course. ▶ this video
This reminds me of the complete lack of security in ADS-B transmissions from aircraft. See an interesting DefCon talk from a few years ago: ▶ this video
I get smatterings of your comments of the similar old idea of "Can you imagine a mechanical horse carriage where all 4 hooves moved in unison?! Balderdash, I must say. There's no way 4 legs could ever move that fast and that synchronized! It'll never happen. Now, Jeeves, go ready my carriage. We're going to meet a weird entrepreneur by the name of Henry Ford." You're right. With old "state of the art", and yes I do say old, having 100+ planes in a square mile would be very trying. But we're talking of no encryption, no authentication, no anti-jamming, no anything really. And that's from a 2012 presentation at Defcon: ▶ this video
DEFCON 20: Hacker + Airplanes = No Good Can Come Of This ▶ this video Good watch if you wanna see how naively designed the whole thing is.
Except ADS-B is a shit show. Watch this video [1] and tell me if you really want to still trust it over radar. [1] ▶ this video
In the airplane case, it's possible today: ▶ this video And link TL;DR you simulate a bunch of other planes in close proximity and the auto-pilot freaks out and tries to avoid them. As the second talk explains, the pilots would definitely notice and switch autopilot off. This is why IMO it's very important to not take ultimate control away from humans in cars. I would personally never buy one of the Google (or any other) self-driving models with no controls. It already freaks me out that many cars are drive-by-wire (for the accelerator), and now even steer-by-wire: link #noThankYouPlease
But when the day comes that SDR's which can transmit from 0-10GHz are in every device you buy, all the FCC will be able to do is rubber stamp these devices as 0-10GHz SDR's, which are actually very capable of severe interference: ▶ this video The reason they want to regulate the software is because regulating the hardware is soon not going to be sufficient. Hopefully one day we can use extreme versions of beam forming (e.g. the pCell) to replace the need for RF regulations and switch to space based multiplexing as opposed to frequency based multiplexing.