Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

  1. #1
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    White House: Dateline 26 January 2015.

    US Secret Service discovers a "drone" on the White House Lawn.

    No damage done. No information on the type of "drone" (chances are it was a small, portable quad copter of some sort). Did it have cameras? COULD it have been armed with explosives?

    The answer to these questions is "Yes" and "yes".

    But likely it wasn't armed with explosives, was a copter someone was using to get a good close look at the WH and lost control of the device, didn't want to reclaim it for fear (a good reason too) of being arrested.

    COULD it be terrorists scoping out the white house though? (Not that *I* care if they get the President, after all the Left wishes a lot of hate and hell on Bush and Cheney....but I won't do it, I just won't feel upset if terrorists DO get him at this point, it will serve him right).

    But - the chances are GOOD it could be prelude to attack.



    Washington (CNN)The U.S. Secret Service is investigating a "device," described as a small drone, found on the grounds of the White House, a White House official said Monday, and Press Secretary Josh Earnest said early indications are that the device does not pose an ongoing threat.

    The Secret Service is sweeping the White House grounds on Monday morning looking for anything else that might be on the ground.
    President Barack Obama and the first lady are both away, traveling in India with Earnest.
    No, you can't fly drones over the White House
    Flying drones is illegal in the District of Columbia. Additional details were not immediately available.










    How close can a drone fly to your plane? 01:49
    PLAY VIDEO

    The Secret Service patrolling the grounds of the White House has been in the national spotlight for the past year ever since a man managed to hop the fence and get inside the White House itself through an unlocked door. The incident led to the resignation of the Secret Service's director and reassignment of other top level officials.
    An independent report commissioned by the Department of Homeland Security said in its executive summary said the department was stretched "beyond its limits" late last year.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  2. #2
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    What we know about the quadcopter drone found at the White House

    The U.S. Secret Service identified the crashed drone as a 2-foot quadcopter, which means it was a harmless consumer drone. This is what we know about a quadcopter's capabilities.

    BY Alejandro Alba
    NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
    Monday, January 26, 2015, 12:12 PM


    Susan Walsh/AP Secret Service found a 2-foot quadcopter at the White House grounds during the middle of the night Monday.

    It was reported by the U.S Secret Service that a small drone crashed at the White House complex early Monday while the President and the First Lady were in India.


    The drone was only identified as a 2-foot quadcopter and harmless. No details on the brand have been released yet. Although the Secret Service is still trying to investigate the drone crash, this is what we know about quadcopter drones:


    Type:
    The drone was identified as a 2-foot quadcopter, which usually don't impose any threats. Quadcopters are some of the simplest drones out in the consumer market. The drone can be controlled at a distance by either remote control or using a smartphone app. The drone is lifted and propelled by four rotors and can move in any direction. Quadcopters also range in size and weight. Most consumer drones weigh under 55 pounds.


    Capabilities:
    Consumer quadcopters are mostly used for taking pictures. They serve as toys or for taking aerial shots of landmarks and houses. They can also be used for spying —although they are not that discreet. Aside from cameras, the equipment these lighter weight drones are capable of carrying is limited.


    Sean Gallup/Getty Images A quadcopter drone can be equipped with a camera. Most quadcopters are recreational drones that are used as toys or to capture aerial shots of houses and properties.

    Price:

    Quadcopters usually range in price. It can cost anywhere between $15 and $3,399. It all depends on size, hardware and the material used. The price will also vary depending on whether or not it is equipped with a camera. People can also build their own quadcopters with self-built drones usually ranging between $300 and $1,500.


    Regulations:

    Flying a drone over the White House or congressional buildings is prohibited by the Federal Aviation Administration. Most areas in Washington are flight restricted zones. If someone knowingly flies their consumer drone over the White House they can face a fine or be imprisoned for up to a year.


    The FAA is currently trying to develop regulations for commercial drones. Consumer drones are strictly prohibited from flying in certain zones and at certain altitudes. Currently, the FAA allows hobbyists to fly their consumer drones below 400 feet and out of the way of manned aircraft.


    It is still unclear what the motive was behind the drone flying above the White House at 3 a.m. or if there are any suspects, but the drone was harmless, according to White House officials. If the drone had a camera then it's possible that the user was trying to get some aerial shots of the mansion.


    aalba@nydailynews.com
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  3. #3
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    It is still unclear what the motive was behind the drone flying above the White House at 3 a.m. or if there are any suspects, but the drone was harmless, according to White House officials. If the drone had a camera then it's possible that the user was trying to get some aerial shots of the mansion.


    Ok... 3 AM. The phone rang and no one was there. Not even the USSS.
    I guess at 3AM they were just out joyriding their copter over the White House in an innocent manner and not trying to see how close they could get with one carrying a bomb.

    The President is routinely on the South Lawn, HMX-1 is out there routinely (the helicopter) and man, I know it's innocent to fly a small helicopter over the WH at 3 am and all, but what if I did that from behind some trees to the SE of the WH and flew it in over the top of the press corps, Prez or choppers just as they were taking off.... with a hand full of C4 on it.

    How much weight can a quadcopter lift?




    This question is a bit like asking "how fast is a car?" Quadcopters can be designed with larger motors for heavy lifting, or designed to be as lightweight as possible and therefore have very little payload capacity. They come in all types of shape and size, ranging from palm-sized micro-quads to much larger craft.

    But for the puprpose of providing some kind of coherent and useful answer, I'd say that most quadcopters that you see will fall in the 10 inch propeller region, and a quadcopter of that kind of size can probably lift in the region of 0.5 to 1.5kg of payload in addition to its own weight.

    We have quadcopters with 10 inch props that can lift a brick (2.6kg), but it's not designed to lift that kind of payload and will probably overheat and drastically shorten battery longevity if you do it for too long. This quadcopter is using motors that are quite a bit larger than necessary on a craft its size.

    If you go up to larger props, larger motors, (higher prop pitch,) you can lift more, though I think in terms of scale, you'd be beginning to think about hex and oct rotors.















    2.6kg for those who don't know is 5.73202 lbs ( 1kg = 2.2 lb).

    Ok...

    Now, let's assume for a moment someone designs a small weapon... say a small bomb of 1/2lb of C4 and some BBs or pellets and mounts it on such a rig:

    People apply C-4's explosive power toward all kinds of destruction. One common application is military demolition -- soldiers pack it into cracks and crevices to blow up heavy walls. It has also been widely used as an anti-personnel weapon, in battle and in terrorist attacks. In Vietnam, for example, soldiers used a number of C-4-based bombs and grenades. One notable weapon, the claymore mine, consisted of a C-4 block with several embedded ball bearings. When the C-4 was detonated, the ball bearings became deadly flying shrapnel (this sort of weapon was also featured in the movie Swordfish).


    Unfortunately, C-4 will keep making headlines for years to come. Because of its stability and sheer destructive power, C-4 has attracted the attention of terrorists and guerilla fighters all over the world. A small amount of C-4 can do a lot of damage, and it's fairly easy to smuggle the explosive past light security forces. The U.S. military is the primary manufacturer of C-4, and it tightly guards its supply, but there are a number of other sources for similar explosive material (including Iran, which has a history of conflict with the United States). As long as it is readily accessible, C-4 will continue to be a primary weapon in the terrorist arsenal.

    Iran... hmmm.... Russia has access... hmmm... Terrorists therefore, have access... hmmm

    To further think this through, as if I were a bad guy (I'm not, my job is stopping bad guys) C4 is about 1.2 times as powerful as TNT, the standard against which other explosives are measured.

    It takes about 10lbs of the stuff to flatten a building (small building).

    A 1/2 pound is MORE than sufficient to send shrapnel against an unarmored target (like a man) from a distance. Even IF US Secrets Service sees it coming (doubtful) and can shoot it down with their handguns (Pretty doubtful hitting a quickly moving, flying object coming DOWN from above before anyone really notices it) and EVEN IF they shoot it down over the head of the intended target (it's going to FALL DOWN ON THEM ANYWAY) you've just lost the intended target if the pilot can get his detonate signal off. Or it's set to explode on contact, an altitude (8 feet?) and is full of bomb and bullets....

    SERIOUSLY?????????????????????????????

    People aren't in a fucking uproar over this and 2 PSI is pissing them off? This country is fucked up.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  4. #4
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    Out comes the claims now.

    Man tells police drone crash at White House was accidental




    Man tells police drone crash at White House was accidental




    A man has come forward to say he was responsible for the drone that crashed early Monday on the White House grounds.


    A U.S. official says the man made contact with the Secret Service after reports of the crash spread in the media. The man told the Secret Service that he was using the drone recreationally and didn't mean to fly it over the White House.


    The official says the operator of the drone is a Washington resident and that he's cooperating with investigators. Secret Service agents are now interviewing other people to corroborate the man's story. The official says investigators don't currently have any reason to doubt the man's story.
    The official wasn't authorized to discuss the ongoing investigation publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity.


    A small drone flying low to the ground crashed onto the White House grounds before dawn Monday, triggering a major emergency response and raising fresh questions about security at the presidential mansion.


    Although President Barack Obama was not at home, the security breach prompted a lockdown of the entire complex until officials could examine the drone. The White House later said the drone did not pose a threat.


    The Secret Service launched an immediate investigation into the origins of the drone, which crashed on the southeast side of the White House grounds just after 3 a.m.
    The device was described as a 2-foot-long quadcopter -- an unmanned aircraft that is lifted by four propellers. Many small quadcopters are essentially sophisticated toys that can also be useful for commercial operations like aerial photography and inspections. Often weighing only a few pounds, they sell for as little as a few hundred dollars or less and were popular Christmas gifts last year.


    The Secret Service said the drone discovered Monday was of the commercially available variety.
    The president and first lady Michelle Obama are traveling in India and were not present for the incident, but their daughters, Sasha and Malia, may have been at home. White House officials declined to comment on the daughters' whereabouts Monday, but ahead of the president's trip aides had said the daughters would remain in Washington so as not to miss school.


    "The early indications are that it does not pose any sort of ongoing threat to anybody at the White House," said presidential spokesman Josh Earnest.


    Still, the incident was likely to reinvigorate a long-running public debate about the use of commercial drones in U.S. skies -- as well as White House security. At the urging of the drone industry, the Obama administration is on the verge of proposing rules for drone operations that would replace an existing ban on most commercial flights.


    Although remote-controlled airplanes and related toys have been available for decades, the recent proliferation of inexpensive drones has prompted growing fears about potential collisions with traditional aircraft. Technological advances have also made it easier to equip drones with advanced capabilities such as cameras, raising privacy issues as well as concerns that such devices could carry weapons.


    White House aides could not recall any similar incidents occurring at the complex.


    Police, fire and other emergency vehicles swarmed the White House just after the crash, with several clustered near the southeast entrance to the grounds. The White House was dark and the entire perimeter was on lockdown until around 5 a.m., when those who work there were allowed inside.
    After daylight, more than a dozen Secret Service officers fanned out in a search across the White House lawn as snow began to fall. They peered down in the grass and used flashlights to look through the large bushes that line the driveway on the south side of the mansion.


    It was not immediately clear that the Secret Service could have done anything to prevent the incident. Yet the episode joins a string of recent security breaches at the White House that have fueled questions about the agency's effectiveness and ability to protect the president.


    Four high-ranking executives were reassigned this month, and former Director Julia Pierson was forced to resign last year after a Texas man armed with a knife was able to get over a White House fence and run into the Executive Mansion before being subdued.


    An independent panel that investigated the agency's leadership and practices after that September incident, and the disclosure of a previously unreported security breach, recommended hiring a new director from outside.


    That report was the second critical review of the agency responsible for protecting the president. In November, the Homeland Security Department, which oversees the Secret Service, released an internal investigation about the fence-scaling incident that found poor training and staffing and a series of missteps led to the breach.


    Homeland Security investigators found, among other things, that uniformed agents patrolling the White House grounds the night of Sept. 19 mistakenly assumed that thick bushes near the mansion's front door would stop the intruder.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  5. #5
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    A simple method would be to string lots of monofilament fishing line all over the grounds (it works for out side eating places in Florida to stop the gulls).

    Or a net.

    Which will kill birds and piss off the PETA people.

    lol
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  6. #6
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    By the way, I wanted to point something out. I mentioned the use of C4. It's pretty well controlled, but not impossible to get.

    A similar device could be produced using simple black powder, though perhaps not as dangerous (more black powder per power units of explosion).

    TNT is the standard, and TNT used nitroglycerin (basically packaged in a sawdust base, though more modern materials are used). I'm not sure an ANFO type device would be as viable because it would necessarily be heavier.

    Drone crash at White House reveals security risks






    The drone crash early Monday on the White House grounds illustrated the security challenges in protecting against small, unmanned aircraft, as the Federal Aviation Administration develops rules for drones.


    The FAA prohibits unauthorized aircraft over the White House, congressional buildings and the National Mall. But small drones, which could carry a camera or other small cargo, are widely available and could be launched without federal permission.


    Monday's incident involved a quadcopter, which has four small rotors to lift and steer the aircraft, which is about 2 feet in diameter. The Secret Service is investigating.

    Spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters that the device didn't pose any threat to anyone at the White House. President Obama and Mrs. Obama are traveling in India.



    USA TODAY
    Secret Service questioned man whose drone crashed near White House





    John Magaw, a former director of the Secret Service, said security officials from the service, U.S. Park Police, D.C. Metropolitan Police and the Defense Department have discussed for months how to thwart drones because they could be launched close to the White House or another target.


    "It is a huge problem that all security is going to have to deal with," Magaw said.


    Options include expanding patrols to where a drone could be launched around the White House, growing more foliage to block a remote pilot's view of the target or using technology to scan for the trajectory of drones in the sky, Magaw said.


    Another strategy would be to jam radio frequencies between remote pilots and drones, Magaw said.


    "You can put jammers up all around, but you've got to make sure you've got all the frequencies covered," Magaw said. "That's one of the things that they're going to do very quickly."


    Jeff Price, an aviation security expert and associate professor at Metropolitan State University in Denver, said electronic jamming might be the best strategy because of the difficulties shooting down a small aircraft — and the risks from stray bullets or missiles that miss.

    "I'm thinking electronic countermeasures may be the way to go," Price said.


    Among nearly 200 drone sightings that the FAA released from February to November 2014, the incidents included:


    • A July 7 report that U.S. Park Service police questioned a person after a quadcopter drone was flown near the Lincoln Memorial.
    • A July 8 report that the pilot of a Piper P28A flying at 2,200 feet in the air saw a small, white drone plane pass 400 to 500 below him southbound toward Reagan National Airport.
    • An Aug. 29 report that U.S. Capitol Police questioned a person operating a drone within the U.S. Capitol grounds.
    • An Oct. 6 report that a white drone with red-and-blue lights flew 150 feet above FedEx Field, where Maryland's Prince George's County police questioned the pilots.

    USA TODAY

    10 other White House security breaches



    The Secret Service said that at 3:08 a.m. Monday one of its officers "heard and observed a 'quadcopter' device, approximately two feet in diameter, flying at a very low altitude and ultimately crashing on the southeast side of the complex."


    The incident occurred as FAA is developing comprehensive rules ordered by Congress in 2012 for drones to share the skies with passenger planes by September.
    So far, commercial drones are largely prohibited, although the FAA has granted 16 permits out of 295 applications for purposes such as movie-making and smokestack inspections.


    The agency's latest proposal for small commercial drones weighing up to 55 pounds, such as a real-estate agent might use to film a property, is scheduled to be released by Friday.


    Mark Dombroff, who leads McKenna Long & Aldridge's unmanned aircraft systems practice, said the incident reinforced the need for FAA to release its proposal so that better enforcement could follow.


    Rules might not have prevented the crash, but Dombroff said rules could include elements such as requiring every drone be registered to its owner, so they are easier to trace.


    "People should not be flying these things in restricted airspace, certainly not over the White House front lawn," said Mark Dombroff said. "But if the White House ever needed a reason to get moving, it landed on the front lawn at 3 a.m. this morning."


    Interest in flying drones is intense. While the FAA has hundreds of applications for special approval for commercial drones, Dombroff said thousands more are likely once the proposal is released because the rule could take 18 to 24 months to be completed.


    "I think that once there is a regulatory structure out there, things like this are less likely to occur," Dombroff said. "I think if anything, this demonstrated the vulnerability, whether it's the White House or any location, to this type of device."


    The FAA restated its rules for hobbyists in June, which include avoiding manned aircraft, flying within sight of the remote pilot, staying below 400 feet in the air and notifying air-traffic control towers if flying within five miles of an airport.


    "We want people who fly model aircraft for recreation to enjoy their hobby – but to enjoy it safely," Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said at the time. "At DOT, we often say that safety is a shared responsibility, so to help, we are providing additional information today to make sure model aircraft operators know exactly what's expected of them."
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  7. #7
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    As usual, this was a non-issue (except perhaps for the guy who accidently crashed it there... at 3AM. Did I mention he was "recreating at 3AM"?) Anyway... what if it wasn't?


    What IF it were a test to see?

    What if ... the bad guys say, "Oh, hey some dumb ass did our testing for us. All we have to do is be near by waiting for the President to make a trip out and drop a drone on his head!"

    What if....
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  8. #8
    Senior Member Toad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Minot, ND
    Posts
    1,409
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    I would envision a 8" barrel, single shell, firing pin remotely controlled. Would destabilize the drone, but you got your shot off. That could be a nightmare scenerio for security of any kind.

  9. #9
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    Yeah, one shot though.

    A bomb loaded with pellets has a better chance of fucking up lunch.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  10. #10
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    Government employee...

    lol

    Is this the "insider threat"? LOL


    Ryan Lusher/Getty Images



    WHOOPS

    01.27.15
    The Lil’ Drone That Landed at the White House

    A government employee crashed a tiny drone on the White House’s South Lawn. It was likely a Christmas present gone awry, not a cause for concern about U.S. safety.


    The drone that crashed on the lawn of the White House reveals less about unmanned aircraft systems than it does about the people using them.


    The government employee operating the drone was evidently taking it on a 3 a.m. joy ride when it crashed on the impeccably manicured South Lawn. During questioning Monday he told the Secret Service it was an accident—which, given the circumstances, make sense.


    Small unmanned aircraft, like the one in question, were big business this Christmas. This landed the device on many a gift guide and, presumably, under more than a couple trees. Missing from these gifts, or the purchase of the drones in general, is a safe, regulatory market that tells users not only where they can fly the aircraft, but how.


    So while the tiny drone may not have posed any real danger to American safety, a continued lack of organization surrounding this newly popular commodity just might.

    ***


    Congress first addressed the growing need to regulate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in 2012, directing the FAA to come up with a plan for the “safe integration” of drones into the national airspace by September 30, 2015. But the regulatory framework for integrating UAS into the national air space (NAS) will only fix one part of the problem: drones flown above 400 feet.


    Those flown under 400 feet, such as the White House drone, or the one that crashed carrying six pounds of meth near the Mexican border, fall outside the FAA’s jurisdiction. This air belongs to whoever is directly below it, like a homeowner or a state municipality, unless the state or district overrides.


    In a section titled Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft, the administration seeks to defend itself against arguments that unmanned aircraft fall under legal grey area. “There are no shades of gray in FAA regulations. Anyone who wants to fly an aircraft—manned or unmanned—in U.S. airspace needs some level of FAA approval,” the report reads. This defense only holds up for UAS flown about 400 feet, meaning that unmanned aircraft below that level don’t necessarily need FAA approval to fly, or really any approval at all.

    “It was just a hobbyist that made a mistake.”

    But while the idea that the FAA isn’t regulating them at this height may be a bit worrying, it isn’t necessarily the problem. UAS are extremely small and lightweight, two necessities in order for them to sail through the ail so easily. Their presence in the sky alone isn’t dangerous, but a pilot who doesn’t know how to operate it could be.


    Matthew Schroyer, founder of DroneJournalism.org and an instructional technologist, says the White House drone is a good time to look at what’s wrong with our current UAS policies—but insists one can do so rationally. “I think it’s important to downplay the sensationalism of saying ‘What if a terrorist did this instead?” he tells me. “It was just a hobbyist that made a mistake.”


    Still, he admits that the legal framework surrounding UAS is “messy,” which he attributes to a “breakdown in communication” both on the FAA side and the manufacturers’.


    “This is a lesson we can learn about what’s the right way to allow consumers to have access to this stuff. There are important questions we need to ask: ‘Was this person aware? What’s the manufacturers responsibility to educate the operator about the hazards of flight? I think more responsibility needs to be taken up on the side of manufacturers and the FAA to be more accurate in communicating these concerns to the public.”


    But while Schroyer says some media outlets are taking the narrative too far (like CNN, which created an entire 3-D graphic of the drone in question), it raises interesting questions about drones as commodities. “I think there’s lessons we can learn about the right way to allow consumers to have access to this stuff.”


    If the FAA isn’t getting their act together, Congress isn’t aware of it.


    The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing on January 21 titled Drone Research and Development. Talking over the hum of a drone flying around the committee room, 3D Robotics senior VP Colin Gunn argued that regulations are already in place. "We had to get permission to fly a drone in the committee room as well," said Chairman Lamar Smith. "So the rules are still pretty strict."


    While the FAA is set to announce the new regulations in September 2015, some have expressed concern that the decision be expedited. Regardless, Americans are in no more danger today than they were yesterday. Recreational drones, while in a messy legal and regulatory framework, aren’t technologically advanced enough to be capable of mass violence.


    It’s this that Schroyer fears will be the negative outcome of the news story—convincing Americans that a small drone like that one can turn into terrorist weapons over night.

    “I think it’s really important to step back and realize all the things that someone would have to go through to weaponize a radio controlled drone that weighs less than 5 kg,” he says. “The actual payload capacity of that is 2.6 pounds. That’s about the weight of a squirrel.”

    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  11. #11
    Super Moderator and PHILanthropist Extraordinaire Phil Fiord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    3,496
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re: Remote Controlled Terrorism - Drones/planes

    Speaking of remote control...

    Recall a man being pursuied in Los Angeles, and had it crash into a tree? We all opined on wireless cars and how they may be hackable. Guess what:

    http://arstechnica.com/security/2015...en-to-hacking/

    Wireless device in two million cars wide open to hacking

    SnapShot from Progressive Insurance, contains few anti-hacking defenses.

    by Dan Goodin - Jan 20 2015, 4:27pm EST
    73

    An electronic dongle used to connect to the onboard diagnostic systems of more than two million cars and trucks contains few defenses against hacking, an omission that makes them vulnerable to wireless attacks that take control of a vehicle, according to published reports.
    US-based Progressive Insurance said it has used the SnapShot device in more than two million vehicles since 2008. The dongle tracks users' driving to help determine if they qualify for lower rates. According to security researcher Corey Thuen, it performs no validation or signing of firmware updates, has no secure boot mechanism, no cellular communications authentication, and uses no secure communications protocols. SnapShot connects to the OBDII port of Thuen's 2013 Toyota Tundra pickup truck, according to Forbes. From there, it runs on the CANbus networks that control braking, park assist and steering, and other sensitive functions.
    "Anything on the bus can talk to anything [else] on the bus," Thuen was quoted as saying in an article from Dark Reading. "You could do a cellular man-in-the-middle attack" assuming the attacker had the ability to spoof a cellular tower that transmits data to and from the device. The critique was presented last week at the S4x15 Conference in Miami. It's only the latest research to highlight the minimal protections included with many widely used car computer systems. Researchers at Argus Cyber Security analyzed the Zubie connected car service and similarly found it lacking many anti-hacking defenses. Progressive officials told Forbes they were confident SnapShot was secure, but welcomed any data Thuen may have so that they could evaluate it and make any necessary improvements.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Drones
    By American Patriot in forum Amateur Radio
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: October 1st, 2014, 14:23
  2. Japan will shoot down foreign drones
    By American Patriot in forum Southeast Asia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 22nd, 2013, 19:53
  3. Iran develops new drones
    By Luke in forum The Middle East
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 5th, 2012, 21:03
  4. Orange goo near remote Alaska village ID'd as eggs
    By American Patriot in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 9th, 2011, 22:25

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •