I was contacted by this journalist and I gave my views on all the good work that it is been done in aviation security. Of course “good news” and reassurances in aviation security are not popular, therefore they are not covered and replaced by FUD.https://www.ft.com/content/2e416eca-4e3d-11e8-ac41-759eee1efb74 …
-
-
Replying to @AndreaBarisani @marcosorallo
what part of the story is FUD?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @reversemode @marcosorallo
Almost entirely omitting the good side of the story, while focusing on questionable information (the Boeing hack being fairly vague if you ask me, the GAO report extremely poor, the sideways claim a joke) is to me, by definition, playing with fear, uncertainty and doubt. (1/2)
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
This is an industry where fear, uncertainty and doubt play little role. There is an extremely rigorous process and there is no good reason to worry the general public with these kind of articles which, while more balanced than others, still reflect poorly reality. (2/2)
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @AndreaBarisani @marcosorallo
Fine for me but as I'm being quoted in that article I assume that my claims are also being considered FUD when actually are strictly reflecting *real-world* situations. As usual, anyone will eventually have access to the tech details that back those claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @reversemode @marcosorallo
My tweet wasn't necessarily pointed at your specific comment and it isn't. My only potential remark on your comment could be that I've never seen a data loading platform that "might ... inject malicious malware", and this by design. Of course I haven't audited all DL designs.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
And my general complain is that there is a worrying trend of reporting unsubstantiated claims first, and then maybe some of them are backed by technical details. As of today not a single real life aircraft hacking story has ever been corroborated with solid technical merits.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @AndreaBarisani @marcosorallo
so you are saying, for example, that the scenario I elaborated in my latest 'aircraft hacking' research didn't actually happen?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @AndreaBarisani @marcosorallo1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
You making that research != real life aircraft hacking story, I guess we are debating semantics here. Also no safety impact (as you point out). I have a lot of comments and I find the research debatable in a few aspects, but honestly I have no desire to argue about it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.