<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title><![CDATA[[SecurityRatty] tag: faa]]></title>
    <link>http://securityratty.com/tag/faa</link>
    <description></description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
    <generator>iRatty Engine</generator>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[National Security Perspectives A Post-Election Insider View]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/caa8257ee971993e58e1b834379f8c71</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/caa8257ee971993e58e1b834379f8c71</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently I participated in an event entitled National Security Perspectives held at the famous Congressional Country Club in Maryland . The featured panelists had impressive credentials from the NSA ,...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently I participated in an event entitled National Security Perspectives held at the famous <a href="http://www.ccclub.org/" target="_blank">Congressional Country Club in Maryland</a>. The featured panelists had impressive credentials from the <a href="http://www.nsa.gov/" target="_blank">NSA</a>, <a href="http://www.dhs.gov/" target="_blank">DHS</a> and the <a href="https://www.cia.gov/" target="_blank">CIA</a>. The topics of discussion ranged from Current Geopolitical Threats and Evolving Technology Demands to predictions about the New Administrations Intelligence, Defense and Homeland Security focus.</p>
<p>The panelists were:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency" target="_blank">William P. Crowell</a> – former Deputy Director of the National Security Agency<br />
<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/m_jackson-bio.html" target="_blank">Michael P. Jackson</a> – Deputy Secretary, Department of Homeland Security<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Rodriguez_(intelligence)" target="_blank">Jose A. Rodriguez, Jr</a>. – former Director CIA, National Clandestine Service &amp; CIA, DCI Counterterrorist Center</p>
<p>Overall, it was a very nicely arranged event on a brisk fall evening with about 100 CXO attendees; mostly large but some small government contractors and a few product companies like ScienceLogic that conduct business with military, intelligence and the public sector.</p>
<p>No surprise, given the financial crisis the economy is suffering from that the panelists said we also have a <a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/11/defictits-actua.html" target="_blank">crisis coming on the Federal budget front</a>. This will put enormous pressure on the way Administration thinks, and how and where to spend the $$.</p>
<p>Obama’s tone regarding the issues he will be confronting in the world during the election was encouraging. Make the world more non-partisan and take on the threats that we have in front of us head-on!</p>
<p>The panel was very upfront about current threats. William Crowell said,</p>
<blockquote><p>“It is highly imprudent to believe that there will not be another 9-11. We have to fund and support the work to stop other attacks. We can only mitigate risk but we can’t eliminate risk. We have to try to absorb the sense of urgency and wake up every day looking at the intelligence screens as if 9-11 happened within the last couple of months.”</p></blockquote>
<p>He added,</p>
<blockquote><p>“They (the intelligence community) need the innovation, sense of commitment and urgency that comes from the private sector – a sense of mutual commitment to that mission.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Predicted Priorities for investment for DHS:</p>
<ol>
<li>Cyber attack as the top issue</li>
<li>Nuclear threats including dirty bomb</li>
<li>Chemical and biological attacks</li>
<li>Explosive attacks against critical infrastructure with maximum # of lives and or financial disruption / loss.</li>
<li>Large scale natural disasters – hurricane + earthquakes</li>
<li>Border penetration - identity management and border management issues</li>
</ol>
<p>An <a href="http://www.barackobama.com/index.php" target="_blank">Obama administration</a> will spend dollars around these threat vectors. They will want to spend $$ to help state and local governments. Grants to state and local governments should significantly increase with the Obama administration, so think about how you will increase your focus on the state and local government spending initiatives.</p>
<p><a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/11/pressure-on-oba.html" target="_blank">Secure border investments</a> – the panelists believe that the new administration will feel compelled to invest here. Michael P. Jackson bluntly said, “You have to make investments in border tools to get meaningful immigration reform.”</p>
<p>Panelists agreed that the 1<sup>st</sup> year will be an intense period of scrutiny about fundamental directions. We can’t afford it all at DHS; it is dramatically under budgeted. At TSA/DOT and then at DHS, we spent about $4 Billion on technology investments since 9-11; those investments are now reaching the end of the original service life.</p>
<p>One gripe from the panel that I found humorous: “We don’t have a group of people who think like entrepreneurs.” It is insane how long things last when you buy things in the government. As an example, we are still replacing vacuum tubes in some of the very old FAA gear… this is well beyond what any reasonable person would think these initial investments should/would last.</p>
<p>Final Thoughts:<br />
I actually think that the Obama Administration will be quite favorable to COTS software products, SaaS offerings, and creative financing initiatives from the private sector. The government just won’t have the capital budget to do everything it wants to accomplish. I would say if you look at how intelligently and aggressively <a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/11/obama_and_techn.html" target="_blank">Obama used technology</a> to assist his campaign, the odds are good that this new breed of IT talent (which is already really comfortable with SaaS products, blogs, wiki’s, hosted/outsourced Cloud solutions… this team really understands the latest technology trends) will quickly work to bring these new IT paradigms to the Federal marketplace. Clearly the private sector can help the Government achieve more with lower capital budgets – beginning to provide services rather than transaction-based selling. Another clear idea is to think about leasing as a better way to work with the government which going forward will have increased budgets restrictions.</p>
<p>They will likely be in confrontation with members of Congress that won’t change fast enough, however the future of our nation’s ability to fight terror lies in becoming more efficient and effective. It requires the government be flexible enough to figure out what <a href="http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/hiner/?p=880" target="_blank">jobs and IT functions to outsource</a> in a nimble and smart way. My prediction: this is great news for Service Providers. Overall the next 4 years should be great for our business as well as the Managed Service Provider/SaaS industry!</p>
<p><em><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secure border investments">secure border investments</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/investments">investments</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/government contractors">government contractors</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/government">government</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/threats">threats</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/government achieve">government achieve</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/initial investments shouldwould">initial investments shouldwould</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/obama administration">obama administration</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/current threats">current threats</category>
      <source url="http://blog.sciencelogic.com/national-security-perspectives-a-post-election-insider-view/11/2008">National Security Perspectives A Post-Election Insider View</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[In-Flight VoIP Ban: Against FCC Rules? Highly Desirable?]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/04edfe3e5a28bd63c48bc3f4ded28db4</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/04edfe3e5a28bd63c48bc3f4ded28db4</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Think-tank wonders whether banning in-flight VoIP constitutes a violation of FCC rules about blocking services: The Progress and Freedom Foundation's Barbara Espin uses the ban on in-flight VoIP by...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/plane.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://blog.pff.org/archives/2008/09/does_disclosure.html"><strong>Think-tank wonders whether banning in-flight VoIP constitutes a violation of FCC rules about blocking services:</strong></a> The Progress and Freedom Foundation's Barbara Espin uses the ban on in-flight VoIP by American Airlines (facilitated by provider Aircell) to make a broader argument about what she calls the FCC's "ad hoc approach to broadband network management issues." It's clever. American discloses that calling isn't allowed, and VoIP isn't even technically within the FAA or FCC's purview, as far as I can determine. The FAA could choose to regulate it as a safety issue. PFF generally tilts anti-regulation, and has as what it calls its "supporters" a broad area of multiple system cable operators and telecom firms, including Comcast, which was singled out and fined by the FCC for its undisclosed network disruption of P2P connections.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/business/14essay.html?_r=2&ei=5070&emc=eta1&oref=slogin&oref=slogin"><strong>Espin references Joe Sharkey's excellent column on in-flight calling in Sunday's New York Times:</strong></a> Sharkey, a veteran travel writer, who survived a mid-air collision over the Brazilian Amazon a few years ago, looks at varying attitudes about calls made during flights. He quotes Aircell's Jack Blumenstein saying what I've telling folks for months: Aircell has a lot of techniques to block VoIP calls already, and "as we identify new ways that people are trying to do voice calls on the airplane, we just kind of zero in and knock those off." Many geeks have assumed Aircell is a bunch of unsavvy folks who wouldn't be able to figure out how to disrupt their clever workarounds for making VoIP. (I keep noting that introducing jitter for suspicious data connections wouldn't disrupt legitimate applications, but would destroy VoIP call quality.)</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:50:22 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/voip">voip</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight voip constitutes">in-flight voip constitutes</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight">in-flight</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight voip">in-flight voip</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/block voip calls">block voip calls</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fcc rules">fcc rules</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fcc">fcc</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/voice calls">voice calls</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/calls">calls</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008444.html">In-Flight VoIP Ban: Against FCC Rules? Highly Desirable?</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Leading Travel Writer Reams Out In-Flight Internet]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/f64004c5f420a4aa7be1520dea970d4b</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/f64004c5f420a4aa7be1520dea970d4b</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Joe Brancatelli pokes beneath the surface of claims that in-flight Internet is imminent: I've covered some of the same ground, but veteran travel writer Brancatelli connected the dots by checking with...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/plane.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/19/AR2008081901066.html"><strong>Joe Brancatelli pokes beneath the surface of claims that in-flight Internet is imminent:</strong></a> I've covered some of the same ground, but veteran travel writer Brancatelli connected the dots by checking with the FAA to find the status of applications for aircraft certification by Aircell and others. </p>

<p>He's not very positive about it, because his research shows a mismatch between claims and work. He writes that an unnamed American airline executive is frustrated by the delay in launching the 3-to-6 month pilot on their trans-continental fleet; that Aircell hasn't submitted paperwork for Virgin's Airbus models for certification; and that the FAA just received a request to certify Delta's MD-80 craft, which makes a launch with 75 planes this year on that airline less likely.</p>

<p>Competitor Row 44 doesn't fare better in his analysis, as they promised spring and summer 2008 tests that still haven't happened, with Southwest and Alaska Airlines.</p>

<p>I'm a little more positive about the future of in-flight broadband. There's no particular conspiracy. It's hard to make it work. Development and testing is tricky due to FAA limits, and getting in-flight handoffs to work for seamless service at 35,000 feet is far more difficult than, say, cellular handoffs in a moving car at 100 feet above sea level. My suspicion is that tuning the service to be entirely reliable at launch is what's taking so long.</p>

<p>Brancatelli blames the high price of Connexion on its failure, but I don't think the $27 fee for long-haul flights deterred users. Lufthansa, which deployed all its long-haul fleet, apparently had very good usage. Most other airlines had few craft equipped, which didn't allow business travelers, able to expense several hours of work for a $27 fee, the reliability of having on-board Internet when they needed it. Connexion also had many reports of spotty service in certain areas. </p>

<p>Connexion's failure came from deploying technology that was old when it was deployed, which weighed too much, and which was too expensive to install. Connexion's revenue and expenses were forecast based on having several hundred aircraft with Connexion service--recall that it was supposed to be a domestic U.S. service, too. In the end they had about 100, I believe. </p>

<p>Brancatelli is also modest when he says Boeing "lost" $300m. That's part of what they wrote down. My sources say they spent more than a billion in R&D, transponder leases, ground station operation, airline incentives, and payoffs at the end.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service">service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/seamless service">seamless service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/spotty service">spotty service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/connexion service">connexion service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/connexion">connexion</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airline incentives">airline incentives</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airline">airline</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight internet">in-flight internet</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/ground">ground</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008422.html">Leading Travel Writer Reams Out In-Flight Internet</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Congress Moves to Formalize Ban on In-Flight Calling]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/bc92887baba81744e02f64b8838c9677</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/bc92887baba81744e02f64b8838c9677</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[A bill is heading to the US House of Representatives to create a legal ban on in-flight calls: The current ban is regulatory, with the FCC disallowing calls using 850 MHz equipment and the FAA not...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/plane.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wireless/53980/flight-cell-call-ban-advances-congress"><strong>A bill is heading to the US House of Representatives to create a legal ban on in-flight calls:</strong></a> The current ban is regulatory, with the FCC disallowing calls using 850 MHz equipment and the FAA not certifying airworthiness for mobile calls (and not having been asked to do such by the industry, as far as I know). But that's not enough for Congress, and perhaps rightly so.</p>

<p>The HANG UP Act (Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace, cute) will make the regulatory actions statutory. Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio has been pushing such a move to prevent airlines from moving forward on such services despite the overwhelming distaste by American travelers. In Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, there appears to be less concern, and we'll see how it works out when calling starts to become widely available on RyanAir and other airlines by year's end.</p>

<p>AirCell's near-term launch with American Airlines of its GoGo Internet service will use various measures, including crew involvement, to prevent in-flight VoIP.</p>

<p>To enable in-flight calling, OnAir and others place a low-power picocell in an aircraft which handles all the frequencies that could be used by mobile phones. The phones associate with the picocell, keeping their power output low. The picocell could be used to prevent calls entirely, too. </p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/calls">calls</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/mobile calls">mobile calls</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent calls">prevent calls</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent airlines">prevent airlines</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airlines">airlines</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/regulatory">regulatory</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/picocell">picocell</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/low-power picocell">low-power picocell</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/regulatory actions statutory">regulatory actions statutory</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008407.html">Congress Moves to Formalize Ban on In-Flight Calling</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Security Briefing: June 2nd]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/4f93a50b729d045f9fcc5233913af494</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/4f93a50b729d045f9fcc5233913af494</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Im baaaaaack! As many of you noticed, Myrcurial was a trooper last week manning the battlements here at Liquidmatrix as I handled a personal project. And now, I can share the good news. My wife and I...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><img src='http://www.liquidmatrix.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/newspapera.jpg' alt='newspapera.jpg' /></center></p>
<p>I&#8217;m baaaaaack! As many of you noticed, Myrcurial was a trooper last week manning the battlements here at Liquidmatrix as I handled a personal project. And now, I can share the good news. My wife and I had our first child last week! Both mother and baby are doing great!</p>
<p>Thanks to all of our new subscribers that joined us yesterday. Welcome! </p>
<p>Click here to <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/Liquidmatrix">subscribe to Liquidmatrix Security Digest!</a></p>
<p>And now, the news&#8230;</p>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/146517/phishers_target_new_victims_on_linkedin.html">Phishers Target New Victims on LinkedIn</a> | PC World</li>
<li><a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/05/31/banks-google-mailing-pins">Banks and Google mailing PIN codes on pieces of paper</a> | the Inquirer</li>
<li><a href="http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2217975/sourcefire-takes-bite-barracuda">Sourcefire rejects Barracuda bid</a> | vnunet</li>
<li><a href="http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/05/mediadefender-d.html?cid=117123750">MediaDefender Defends Revision3 SYN Attack</a> | Wired</li>
<li><a href="http://blocksandfiles.com/article/5367">US FAA database corrupted by hard drive failure</a> | Blocks and Files</li>
<li><a href="http://www.csoonline.com/article/373414/Bruce_Schneier_Q_A_The_Endless_Broadening_of_Security">Bruce Schneier Q&#038;A: The Endless Broadening of Security</a> | CSO Online</li>
<li><a href="http://www.gazette.com/articles/card_36883___article.html/plastic_security.html">Card issuers passing on fraud costs to retailer</a> | Colorado Springs Gazette</li>
<li><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&#038;articleId=9091538&#038;intsrc=hm_list">H-1B opponents challenge Bush administration in court</a> | Computerworld</li>
</ol>
<p> Tags: <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/News" rel="tag">News</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Daily+Links" rel="tag"> Daily Links</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Security+Blog" rel="tag"> Security Blog</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Information+Security" rel="tag"> Information Security</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Security+News" rel="tag"> Security News</a></p>

<p><a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/Liquidmatrix?a=J9aANe"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/Liquidmatrix?i=J9aANe" border="0"></img></a></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?a=YCmncI"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?i=YCmncI" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?a=4x7Gzi"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?i=4x7Gzi" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?a=F62A2i"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?i=F62A2i" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?a=dR2DWi"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?i=dR2DWi" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?a=ZWnG9i"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/Liquidmatrix?i=ZWnG9i" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Liquidmatrix/~4/302897529" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 06:49:57 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security">security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/information security">information security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security news">security news</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/liquidmatrix security">liquidmatrix security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/news">news</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/hard drive failure">hard drive failure</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/colorado springs gazette">colorado springs gazette</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/liquidmatrix">liquidmatrix</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security blog">security blog</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Liquidmatrix/~3/302897529/">Security Briefing: June 2nd</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Wee-Fi: Aircell Inches Closer; St. Paul's Cable Speed Boosted]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/04ddc8dff8d60777f824b9e6cabe07c2</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/04ddc8dff8d60777f824b9e6cabe07c2</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Aircell gets FAA approval for in-flight launch: Aircell has completed another hoop, with approval from the FAA to manufacture, install, and operate its hardware on planes; the first models approved...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/weefi.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://aircell.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&amp;item=78"><strong>Aircell gets FAA approval for in-flight launch:</strong></a> Aircell has completed another hoop, with approval from the FAA to manufacture, install, and operate its hardware on planes; the first models approved are for the American launch, the Boeing 767-200. Virgin, Aircell's other launch partner, is using Airbus A319 and A320 aircraft. The press release notes that the launch routes for American will serve Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Miami. American is equipping 15 planes at launch with Aircell's Gogo Inflight Internet service.</p>

<p><a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/comcast-to-bring-speedier-internet-to-st-paul/index.html"><strong>Is it a coincidence that St. Paul is getting Comcast's fastest service?</strong></a> St. Paul, just over the river from Wi-Fi-loving Minneapolis, will get news tomorrow from its cable provider that DOCSIS 3.0 technology will be rolled out. This latest flavor of cable standard will allow 50 Mbps down and 5 Mbps up in Comcast's initial rollout. Service will run $150 for 50/5 Mbps; 6 Mbps and 8 Mbps downstream service are currently $43 and $53 per month. The faster service will hit 20 percent of Comcast's customers nationally by 2009 and fully rollout by 2010.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:25:44 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/mbps downstream service">mbps downstream service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/mbps">mbps</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/american launch">american launch</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/american">american</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/launch">launch</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/aircell">aircell</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service">service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight launch">in-flight launch</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/launch partner">launch partner</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008254.html">Wee-Fi: Aircell Inches Closer; St. Paul's Cable Speed Boosted</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[FAA Badges Missing]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/1db452f491e9608b9fbd5c6dd8d4fcea</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/1db452f491e9608b9fbd5c6dd8d4fcea</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[I don't know how big a deal this really is, but it is amusing nonetheless: According to the investigation, 122 Federal Aviation Administration safety inspector badges have been stolen or lost in the...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don't know how big a deal <a href="http://www.nbc5i.com/travelgetaways/15508460/detail.html?rss=dfw&psp=news">this</a> really is, but it is amusing nonetheless:</p>

<blockquote>According to the investigation, 122 Federal Aviation Administration safety inspector badges have been stolen or lost in the past five years. The credentials are one of the few forms of identification that give complete and unfettered access to airport facilities, including the cockpits of planes in flight.

<p>"The FAA badge is probably of all the badges just as dangerous if not more so than any other," aviation expert Denny Kelly said.</p>

<p>Kelly, a former commercial pilot and a private investigator, said the badge can give a person free access to nearly every secure area of an airport.</p>

<p>"The FAA badge allows you not only on one airline, plus getting through security, it allows you to get on any airline, any airplane, anyplace," he said.</blockquote></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=ZAyikOF"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=ZAyikOF" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=hHdOpSF"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=hHdOpSF" border="0"></img></a>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:14:43 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/faa badge">faa badge</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/badge">badge</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/person free access">person free access</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/access">access</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airport">airport</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airport facilities">airport facilities</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/badges">badges</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airline">airline</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/commercial pilot">commercial pilot</category>
      <source url="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/03/faa_badges_miss.html">FAA Badges Missing</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Hacking the Boeing 787]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/7ca828ab0ae2ad8e333d11c067a82c52</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/7ca828ab0ae2ad8e333d11c067a82c52</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[The news articles are pretty sensational: The computer network in the Dreamliner's passenger compartment, designed to give passengers in-flight internet access, is connected to the plane's control,...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/dreamliner_security">news articles</a> are pretty sensational:</p>

<blockquote>The computer network in the Dreamliner's passenger compartment, designed to give passengers in-flight internet access, is connected to the plane's control, navigation and communication systems, an FAA report reveals.</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/01/06/boeing-787-vulnerable-hacking">And</a>:</p>

<blockquote>According to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner aeroplane may have a serious security vulnerability in its on-board computer networks that could allow passengers to access the plane's control systems.</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/dreamliner-hacking-scare/2008/01/07/1199554534790.html">More</a> <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/07/boeing_dreamliner_hacker_concerns/">press</a>.</p>

<p>If this is true, this is a very serious security vulnerability.  And it's not just terrorists trying to control the airplane, but the more common software flaw that causes some unforeseen interaction with something else and cascades into a bigger problem.  However, the <a href="http://frwebgate6.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=486816490816+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve">FAA</a> <a href="http://cryptome.org/faa010208.htm">document</a> in the <i>Federal Register</i> is not as clear as all that.  It does say:</p>

<blockquote>The proposed architecture of the 787 is different from that of existing production (and retrofitted) airplanes. It allows new kinds of passenger connectivity to previously isolated data networks connected to systems that perform functions required for the safe operation of the airplane. Because of this new passenger connectivity, the proposed data network design and integration may result in security vulnerabilities from intentional or unintentional corruption of data and systems critical to the safety and maintenance of the airplane. The existing regulations and guidance material did not anticipate this type of system architecture or electronic access to aircraft systems that provide flight critical functions. Furthermore, 14 CFR regulations and current system safety assessment policy and techniques do not address potential security vulnerabilities that could be caused by unauthorized access to aircraft data buses and servers. Therefore, special conditions are imposed to ensure that security, integrity, and availability of the aircraft systems and data networks are not compromised by certain wired or wireless electronic connections between airplane data buses and networks.</blockquote>

<p>But, honestly, this isn't nearly enough information to work with.  Normally, the aviation industry is really good about this sort of thing, and it doesn't make sense that they'd do something as risky as this.  I'd like more definitive information. </p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=UBKEE3D"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=UBKEE3D" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=3q4ncnD"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=3q4ncnD" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=FeSWAHD"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=FeSWAHD" border="0"></img></a>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/data">data</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/airplane data buses">airplane data buses</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/on-board computer networks">on-board computer networks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/networks">networks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/systems">systems</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/control systems">control systems</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/communication systems">communication systems</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/control">control</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/aircraft data buses">aircraft data buses</category>
      <source url="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/01/hacking_the_boe.html">Hacking the Boeing 787</source>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
