New Potential Terror Threat: Cyber Attacks On Aircraft
March 26, 2014 | Christine Pasciuti
Share this article
In light of the intensely difficult search efforts over the last two weeks for Malaysian Flight MH370, and lack of true debris evidence or confirmation that the ill-fated flight actually crashed into the southern Indian Ocean, countless theories have emerged offering alternative possibilities for the aircraft’s whereabouts - and more importantly - its precious human cargo.
In an effort to get answers and ultimately closure on this tragedy, new questions have arisen that point to potential security threats on future air travel. One of them is whether a cyber-attack on the Boeing 777-200’s flight management system was responsible for its veer so far off course.
Though many security experts would agree on the unlikelihood of such an attack on the Malaysian jet, others disagree, saying that only minor adjustments are needed on an existing smart phone app designed to attack pilot training software, which would easily make it work on the real thing.
Hugo Teso, a Spanish commercial pilot and cyber-security expert, demonstrated the new smart phone app he developed – called PlaneSploit – at a hacker conference in Amsterdam last April. In his presentation, he describes several onboard systems he exploited to enable him to manipulate the FMS (flight management system) which he had purchased for a few hundred dollars on e-Bay.
In his presentation abstract for the conference, Teso wrote, “The complete attack will be accomplished remotely, without needing physical access to the target aircraft at any time.” The hack exploits the plane’s autopilot by transferring control to the hacker, who then theoretically can command the plane from an Android app. Though Teso himself publically dismissed the idea that the Malaysian plane was hacked, he did warn of serious vulnerabilities in aircraft systems and is continuing his research.
One such system lacking proper security is the ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) used to send text-based messages between aircraft and ground stations. In his Android hacking demonstration, Teso used ACARS to gain access to the plane’s onboard computer system and uploaded Flight Management System data.
Once in, Teso demonstrated his ability to manipulate the steering of a Boeing jet while it was in autopilot mode, saying that he could cause a crash by setting the aircraft on a collision course with another jet. He was also able to drop down the emergency oxygen masks without warning.
Technically, Teso explained, a pilot could prevent an attack by taking the plane out of autopilot, however a number of newer systems no longer include manual controls. Though some updates can be applied to patch the vulnerabilities, many legacy systems may be almost impossible to update.
A CS Monitor article highlights two other experts who believe cyber threats to airliners are real. Individual reports were released last year at different hacking conferences by Andrei Costin, a French cyber-researcher, and Brad Haines, a Canadian cyber-security expert, indicating vulnerabilities in the same key onboard location-tracking system.
At the Black Hat hacker conference in Las Vegas in 2012, Mr. Costin warned that the FAA's new air traffic control system could be hacked because the system lacks capability for message authentication. Signals can be faked and injected into the unencrypted system, giving pilots the impression they are on a collision course with other aircraft. Additionally, ground controllers can be overwhelmed with fictitious “ghost” airplane signals.
Mr. Haines, who agrees that a MH370 hack is unlikely, still offered this statement in an interview:
“The short version is that I was trying to prove to myself that flights are safe. … I fly a lot so I started digging and found, ‘Oh, that’s not good.’ I ended up proving problems. If it was a case of just me seeing this I would wonder. But there’s a whole bunch of us finding the same things. So maybe something’s there.”
“The Malaysia situation has ended up shining a big light on the cyber-problem,” he continues. “Partly it’s because in the absence of fact, people are grasping at things. At the same time, all of us doing this research have been told, ‘Oh no, no, we’ve secured these systems.’ Well how? ‘We can’t tell you,’ they say. Well, that’s not comforting.”
Because airplanes rely on electronic signals sent by networked computers to engines, flaps, and other vital flight systems, the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) issued a “special conditions” ruling last November for all Boeing 777 series aircraft, ordering them to meet a new requirement that would prevent unauthorized wired or wireless electronic connections and the exploitation of network security vulnerabilities.
Citing the FAA ruling as evidence of at least the possibility a cyber-attack on the Malaysian airliner, Carl Herberger, a former Air Force pilot and vice president at Radware, an Israel-based cyber-security firm, said, “It’s very clear from this FAA release that cyber-security has not been part of the scope of testing for airworthiness certification up to this point. … It’s very notable, especially given what happened with this 777 out of Malaysia. I’m not inferring [MH-370] was a cyber-attack, but we have a vulnerability that can’t be ignored.”
On April 12th, The Daily Caller website published a statement by FAA spokesman Les Door, who responded to a similar hacking inquiry.
“The FAA is aware that a German information technology consultant has alleged he has detected a security issue with the Honeywell NZ-2000 Flight Management System (FMS) using only a desktop computer,” Door said.
“The FAA has determined that the hacking technique described during a recent computer security conference does not pose a flight safety concern because it does not work on certified flight hardware,” he continued.
“The described technique cannot engage or control the aircraft’s autopilot system using the FMS or prevent a pilot from overriding the autopilot,” Dorr asserted, “Therefore, a hacker cannot obtain ‘full control of an aircraft,’ as the technology consultant has claimed.”
Despite the FAA’s response to this particular incident, there are other numerous vulnerabilities that allow access to sensitive flight controls.
London’s Sunday Express newspaper quoted Sally Leivesley, a former anti-terrorism advisor to the British government. “When the plane is air-side, you can insert a set of commands and codes that may initiate, on signal, a set of processes,” she said. “What we are finding now is that it is possible with a mobile phone to initiate a signal to a preset piece of malicious software, or malware, in the computer that initiates a whole set of instructions.”
Ms. Leivesley continued, “It is possible for hackers, be they part of organized crime or with government backgrounds, to get into the main computer network of the plane through the inflight, onboard entertainment system.”
“It might well be the world’s first cyber hijack,” Leivesley told the newspaper, referring to the missing Malaysian airliner. “This is a very early version of what I would call a smart plane, a fly-by-wire aircraft controlled by electronic signals.”
Leivesley pointed to increasing evidence that someone took over the plane’s controls “in a deceptive manner” and overwhelmed the plane’s system either remotely or from a seat on the plane.
“There appears to be an element of planning from someone with a very sophisticated systems engineering understanding,” she said.
Already three years ago, a study conducted by a team of Boeing and University of Washington researchers revealed “Credible examples of potential misuse” by adversaries in future aircraft that include malware to infect an aircraft system and “exploit of onboard wireless for unauthorized access to aircraft system interfaces.” The study found that “most aviation standards do not yet cover cyber-physical threats.”
In order to combat and stay on top of this growing threat endangering global air travel, fervent research must continue, with full cooperation and exchange of information between airline manufacturers, regulators, technology experts and security and anti-terrorism organizations.
Meanwhile, the world’s skies are full of airplanes 24/7, and those of us aboard them sit perhaps a bit more disquieted, hoping and praying that the organizations we rely on to protect us, will be able to stay one step ahead of a new kind of cyber-terrorism that may very well have stepped forth out of “conspiracy theory” to reality.
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/March26/266.html#c5h0RXEYYXKLeK5t.99
March 26, 2014 | Christine Pasciuti
Share this article
In light of the intensely difficult search efforts over the last two weeks for Malaysian Flight MH370, and lack of true debris evidence or confirmation that the ill-fated flight actually crashed into the southern Indian Ocean, countless theories have emerged offering alternative possibilities for the aircraft’s whereabouts - and more importantly - its precious human cargo.
In an effort to get answers and ultimately closure on this tragedy, new questions have arisen that point to potential security threats on future air travel. One of them is whether a cyber-attack on the Boeing 777-200’s flight management system was responsible for its veer so far off course.
Though many security experts would agree on the unlikelihood of such an attack on the Malaysian jet, others disagree, saying that only minor adjustments are needed on an existing smart phone app designed to attack pilot training software, which would easily make it work on the real thing.
Hugo Teso, a Spanish commercial pilot and cyber-security expert, demonstrated the new smart phone app he developed – called PlaneSploit – at a hacker conference in Amsterdam last April. In his presentation, he describes several onboard systems he exploited to enable him to manipulate the FMS (flight management system) which he had purchased for a few hundred dollars on e-Bay.
In his presentation abstract for the conference, Teso wrote, “The complete attack will be accomplished remotely, without needing physical access to the target aircraft at any time.” The hack exploits the plane’s autopilot by transferring control to the hacker, who then theoretically can command the plane from an Android app. Though Teso himself publically dismissed the idea that the Malaysian plane was hacked, he did warn of serious vulnerabilities in aircraft systems and is continuing his research.
One such system lacking proper security is the ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) used to send text-based messages between aircraft and ground stations. In his Android hacking demonstration, Teso used ACARS to gain access to the plane’s onboard computer system and uploaded Flight Management System data.
Once in, Teso demonstrated his ability to manipulate the steering of a Boeing jet while it was in autopilot mode, saying that he could cause a crash by setting the aircraft on a collision course with another jet. He was also able to drop down the emergency oxygen masks without warning.
Technically, Teso explained, a pilot could prevent an attack by taking the plane out of autopilot, however a number of newer systems no longer include manual controls. Though some updates can be applied to patch the vulnerabilities, many legacy systems may be almost impossible to update.
A CS Monitor article highlights two other experts who believe cyber threats to airliners are real. Individual reports were released last year at different hacking conferences by Andrei Costin, a French cyber-researcher, and Brad Haines, a Canadian cyber-security expert, indicating vulnerabilities in the same key onboard location-tracking system.
At the Black Hat hacker conference in Las Vegas in 2012, Mr. Costin warned that the FAA's new air traffic control system could be hacked because the system lacks capability for message authentication. Signals can be faked and injected into the unencrypted system, giving pilots the impression they are on a collision course with other aircraft. Additionally, ground controllers can be overwhelmed with fictitious “ghost” airplane signals.
Mr. Haines, who agrees that a MH370 hack is unlikely, still offered this statement in an interview:
“The short version is that I was trying to prove to myself that flights are safe. … I fly a lot so I started digging and found, ‘Oh, that’s not good.’ I ended up proving problems. If it was a case of just me seeing this I would wonder. But there’s a whole bunch of us finding the same things. So maybe something’s there.”
“The Malaysia situation has ended up shining a big light on the cyber-problem,” he continues. “Partly it’s because in the absence of fact, people are grasping at things. At the same time, all of us doing this research have been told, ‘Oh no, no, we’ve secured these systems.’ Well how? ‘We can’t tell you,’ they say. Well, that’s not comforting.”
Because airplanes rely on electronic signals sent by networked computers to engines, flaps, and other vital flight systems, the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) issued a “special conditions” ruling last November for all Boeing 777 series aircraft, ordering them to meet a new requirement that would prevent unauthorized wired or wireless electronic connections and the exploitation of network security vulnerabilities.
Citing the FAA ruling as evidence of at least the possibility a cyber-attack on the Malaysian airliner, Carl Herberger, a former Air Force pilot and vice president at Radware, an Israel-based cyber-security firm, said, “It’s very clear from this FAA release that cyber-security has not been part of the scope of testing for airworthiness certification up to this point. … It’s very notable, especially given what happened with this 777 out of Malaysia. I’m not inferring [MH-370] was a cyber-attack, but we have a vulnerability that can’t be ignored.”
On April 12th, The Daily Caller website published a statement by FAA spokesman Les Door, who responded to a similar hacking inquiry.
“The FAA is aware that a German information technology consultant has alleged he has detected a security issue with the Honeywell NZ-2000 Flight Management System (FMS) using only a desktop computer,” Door said.
“The FAA has determined that the hacking technique described during a recent computer security conference does not pose a flight safety concern because it does not work on certified flight hardware,” he continued.
“The described technique cannot engage or control the aircraft’s autopilot system using the FMS or prevent a pilot from overriding the autopilot,” Dorr asserted, “Therefore, a hacker cannot obtain ‘full control of an aircraft,’ as the technology consultant has claimed.”
Despite the FAA’s response to this particular incident, there are other numerous vulnerabilities that allow access to sensitive flight controls.
London’s Sunday Express newspaper quoted Sally Leivesley, a former anti-terrorism advisor to the British government. “When the plane is air-side, you can insert a set of commands and codes that may initiate, on signal, a set of processes,” she said. “What we are finding now is that it is possible with a mobile phone to initiate a signal to a preset piece of malicious software, or malware, in the computer that initiates a whole set of instructions.”
Ms. Leivesley continued, “It is possible for hackers, be they part of organized crime or with government backgrounds, to get into the main computer network of the plane through the inflight, onboard entertainment system.”
“It might well be the world’s first cyber hijack,” Leivesley told the newspaper, referring to the missing Malaysian airliner. “This is a very early version of what I would call a smart plane, a fly-by-wire aircraft controlled by electronic signals.”
Leivesley pointed to increasing evidence that someone took over the plane’s controls “in a deceptive manner” and overwhelmed the plane’s system either remotely or from a seat on the plane.
“There appears to be an element of planning from someone with a very sophisticated systems engineering understanding,” she said.
Already three years ago, a study conducted by a team of Boeing and University of Washington researchers revealed “Credible examples of potential misuse” by adversaries in future aircraft that include malware to infect an aircraft system and “exploit of onboard wireless for unauthorized access to aircraft system interfaces.” The study found that “most aviation standards do not yet cover cyber-physical threats.”
In order to combat and stay on top of this growing threat endangering global air travel, fervent research must continue, with full cooperation and exchange of information between airline manufacturers, regulators, technology experts and security and anti-terrorism organizations.
Meanwhile, the world’s skies are full of airplanes 24/7, and those of us aboard them sit perhaps a bit more disquieted, hoping and praying that the organizations we rely on to protect us, will be able to stay one step ahead of a new kind of cyber-terrorism that may very well have stepped forth out of “conspiracy theory” to reality.
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/March26/266.html#c5h0RXEYYXKLeK5t.99
No comments:
Post a Comment