MESSAGE IN A BOTTLE – TERROR BY TAGG
with the search for Malaysian plane still lingering on,
it´s time to remind at potential interferences that occurr within aviation – not necessarily t h e explanation for what has happened, but solid information in order to ask the right questions, just as the people from NTSB would do as well.
While visiting the aviation fair at Hamburg the booth for RFID [radio frequency identification] explained how to use the technology for scanning purposes. It is designed for scanning which items have been sold during duty free offer from the tray.
technology usually works on a broader scale. Thus, with Chaos Computer Club ccc having demonstrated how insecure the RFID tags in passports are, it is time to ask:
Passengers on board use their notebooks, for not scanning the bottles in the tray, but as well passports of all passengers, where they bought their T-shirts, where they´ve been, etc.
Or even going further with pinging at every single circuit, component of a plane that can be adressed. Originally a technology meant for making aviation faster and safer, it can be used right the opposite.
„Der Geist ist aus der Flasche“ – the spirit joins the ghost out of the bottle – a djin – (Arabic for ghost) can´t be pressed back into where it all started.
The next case of “avia conversia” emerges.
„SCAN DIN AVIA“
Especially with RFID technology being ubiquitious on the taxi runway – tagged to every single suitcase, approaching
approaching planes, ready for take off and those taxiing on the ground. With passenger still having to switch off their mobile phones (for good reasons), their suitcases are already on their way – technologically capable of being addressed and of pinging other RFID components.
Sounds wild? No, one of the developing companies such as IBM even made the problem visible in their advertisement:
for instance in SPIEGEL magazine 51/2010 showing an engine of an airplane and electromagnetic waves made visible as colored triangles, stating in words in the ad:
„Hier werden Daten sichtbar gemacht, die bei der Gepäckabfertigung am
Flughafen Amsterdam Schiphol entstehen.“
Ad´s headline slogan was:
„Was bedeuten 3 Millionen Zeilen Programmcode für einen Koffer?“
Therefor my questions for publication are:
Were did the smart baggage tracing system trace the baggage of crew and
passengers of the missed Malaysian flight?
In case this was not done, why?
In case it failed: why?
To which extent do and/or did your system of baggage tracing increase
electromagnetic incompatibility at Shiphol airport which has been reported
by emv-emc experts on the Düsseldorf conference?
Does the IBM ad express a sublte criticsm towards ignorant managers who
have refused extensive emc-emv testing of the baggage tracing system in
the operating ground befor actually offering and/or even selling it? As
„Koffer“ standing for those who are just looking at selling figures
without having any knowledge and/or the basic information which is
necessary when it comes to technology and aviation especially?
If so, could you provide further details of experts insisting on extensive
emv-emc testing beforhand – as it is prerequisite in a military
environment (Stanags required), and therefor touches civil aviation even
within every taxi on ground event. More so if it comes to trespassing a
disputed area as it is to observed in the south East Asean region.
Pitching for publication! Television. Print. Online.