Typical U.S. approach, wait until something bad happens, then address the problem. (Yes I am an American, just one that's fed up with the idiots in the U.S. government).
@Xudd I'm more mad at the engineers. I'm not sure that its nearly as much the fault of the US gov't as it is the fault of the company (Boeing?) who deployed the system. It is a common research strategy to remove links that may cause failure, but any deployed system should be secure, both in terms of information and control.
I do robotics research at a major University. I developed a unsecure robot behind a firewall a few months ago. There was a lightweight TCP server (with root access... oops!) for handling sockets for remote control, that I forgot to protect. It took 30 minutes to have the server owned when I dropped the firewall.
@someguy7234 This is why engineers should leave the software to computer scientists. It's for the same reason computer scientists leave the engineering to the engineers; it's not that one can't do the others job (they very likely could), it's that they've been trained to remember to do certain things that non-CS people may overlook or never even think of. Note I said computer scientists, not programmers. That's another problem nowadays, but I digress.
@someguy7234 You assume that they also have control of the satellite and what system it employs, hell perhaps the maker of the drone has no access to the damn software at all, boeing is a commercial company and not secure so they probably have to face some walls because of that.
@someguy7234 Actually it's General Atomics that makes the Predators.....i know this because I work for General Atomics (not in the division that makes the Predators, though)
@TheAngryIntern - Grrrreat. I want a guy named "TheAngryIntern" working for a company that makes a remote-controlled stealth plane to bomb people. Anyone else this that this, too, is a bad idea?
@Xenoterranos Whatever man. CS, CE, EE is no matter here. The network is 10 years old. I assume the Predators are no older than that as well. Encryption schemes existed 10 years ago I'm fairly certain ;) If the govt didn't pay for or specify encryption, then you aren't spending the time, money and resources to implement it. Period.
"I'm moving to a small studio and for some reason the cable connection is in an awkward place and I need a way to transmit HD quality video and audio no more than 20 feet away. What is the best wireless HDMI transmitter / receiver for this situation? Thanks!"
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Typical U.S. approach, wait until something bad happens, then address the problem. (Yes I am an American, just one that's fed up with the idiots in the U.S. government).
@Xudd Kinda reminds me of Die Hard 4...
@Xudd
I'm more mad at the engineers. I'm not sure that its nearly as much the fault of the US gov't as it is the fault of the company (Boeing?) who deployed the system. It is a common research strategy to remove links that may cause failure, but any deployed system should be secure, both in terms of information and control.
I do robotics research at a major University. I developed a unsecure robot behind a firewall a few months ago. There was a lightweight TCP server (with root access... oops!) for handling sockets for remote control, that I forgot to protect. It took 30 minutes to have the server owned when I dropped the firewall.
@someguy7234
This is why engineers should leave the software to computer scientists. It's for the same reason computer scientists leave the engineering to the engineers; it's not that one can't do the others job (they very likely could), it's that they've been trained to remember to do certain things that non-CS people may overlook or never even think of. Note I said computer scientists, not programmers. That's another problem nowadays, but I digress.
@someguy7234
You assume that they also have control of the satellite and what system it employs, hell perhaps the maker of the drone has no access to the damn software at all, boeing is a commercial company and not secure so they probably have to face some walls because of that.
@r3loaded Kinda reminds me of airport security...
@Xenoterranos You really think that Boeing doesn't employ CSs in their weapon's divisions?
@someguy7234 Actually it's General Atomics that makes the Predators.....i know this because I work for General Atomics (not in the division that makes the Predators, though)
@TheAngryIntern - Grrrreat. I want a guy named "TheAngryIntern" working for a company that makes a remote-controlled stealth plane to bomb people. Anyone else this that this, too, is a bad idea?
BTW, ;)
@TheAngryIntern You should get on firewalling and encrypting that crap. Send your supervisors a link to SSH.
@Xenoterranos
Whatever man. CS, CE, EE is no matter here. The network is 10 years old. I assume the Predators are no older than that as well. Encryption schemes existed 10 years ago I'm fairly certain ;) If the govt didn't pay for or specify encryption, then you aren't spending the time, money and resources to implement it. Period.