> less than a minute, that hardware implant can be fitted into a port accessible via a hatch on the exterior of the plane
Just as with computers, as the saying goes, if you have physical access to the device then all bets are off. The tricky part is getting that physical access in the first place...
Of course. Doesn’t mean we should leave the root password written down on a post-it next to the hardware. It sounds strange that such a privileged port has no authentication.
Getting security to work reliably in such scenarios can be hard. And your customer really don't want their up to hundred million in cost pieces of equipment sit there doing nothing because maintenance is unable to do something with it.
Much simpler just to instruct to physically secure the conduit around... Even better if that is already approved and demanded process.
> Just as with computers, as the saying goes, if you have physical access to the device then all bets are off
This is far less true than it used to be, though, and it seems reasonable to expect that aircraft become as secure as Macs.
But what if the device contained an explosive?
It is not that simple, atleast in the automotive industry _today_. Atleast here in EU.
Every component is analyzed from a cyber security perspective. Many components needs tampering protection - while others need not. This includes replacing components with malicious ones.
It is not logical at all and a stupid regulation. But it is not as simple as you can do what you want if you have physical access.
Well, the EU, being very much dictated by Germany, who have a large car industry, has a vested interest in making sure that if people want to have a better car they pay for a better one new rather than upgrade with an aftermarket chip.
I live in Germany. and i wish i lived in an EU that’s dictated by germany, but that is not the EU I live in.
The above statement sounded way more edgy than intended lol