Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

8/22/2019
04:30 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Aviation Faces Increasing Cybersecurity Scrutiny

Some aviation experts and security researchers are trying to foster closer alliances for securing airplane networks.

{Continued from Page 1}

Boeing said there's no "quick" patch program for software in the aviation industry, and development of software for planes follows specific regulatory guidelines.

Jeffrey Troy, executive director of the Aviation-ISAC, the official threat intelligence-sharing arm of the industry, describes patching in avionics systems as a "case-by-case" situation. "Every instance of a vulnerability is a unique case," he says. "You also have to understand what the impact is and how to address it based on that impact."

He says aviation companies, when contacted by researchers, listen and then vet the findings. "They go out and conduct tests to validate whether or not the vuln that has been made known can be replicated. And if so, they do their assessments to determine what they need to do," he notes.

It's only a matter of time before Boeing and other aviation industry vendors are forced to find common ground with the researcher community, experts say. The increasingly networked aircraft fleet naturally will open avenues for security holes that need spotting and fixing.

"We've gone literally from having to physically go to planes and their avionics and upload a floppy [disk] for 20 minutes to now updating them over the air," Pen Test Partners' Munro notes. "You get reduced costs, but it [brings] security implications, too."  

And aviation firms have invested large amounts of money in developing safe and secure code, he says. "It will be some time before avionics opens up their source code" to security researchers, though, he says.

Progress, Actually
John Sheehy, IOActive's director of strategic security services, worked with Santamarta on his disclosure with Boeing. He believes some good progress has been made in relationships between researchers and the avionics industry over the past three years.

"Boeing clearly understood what Ruben was going to present [at Black Hat]," Sheehy says. "They did not take any aggressive action to stop us from doing so. I think they understand the value of this kind of research."

Related Content:

Check out The Edge, Dark Reading's new section for features, threat data, and in-depth perspectives. Today's top story: "You Gotta Reach 'Em to Teach 'Em."

 

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Previous
2 of 2
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
tdsan
50%
50%
tdsan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/31/2019 | 9:03:33 PM
Re: Boeing blames the "pilots" again?
Didn't the same thing happen in a movie where the pilot had to land the plane in a river in NY - Sully? In the movie, the panel did not disclose to Sully that it took the pilots 6-7 times during the simulation that they had failed and crashed the plane numerous times in their simulation. 

This does not surprise me, because when the birds hit the engines and the pilot experienced failure, he reacted in the best manner to protect the passengers during a stressful time. In this instance, it took them 13 months to share information with the public about their lack of security testing because they wanted to get their stories right before presenting them to the public. They wanted to find a scapegoat before they brought this to the public's attention. 

From the findings Rapid7 submitted to the airline industry, they should present information much like "Project-Zero - Google's Security Team", they offered their help and they shunned them away like small children. The way to deal with that is to take their findings public so this does not happen again. 
His firm decided not to publicly name the affected vendors since it was an underlying CAN bus issue not specific to the vendors' equipment Kiley had hacked. Even so, he doesn't know whether the vendors actually fixed the flaws he found.
"I let the vendors know what I did with the equipment, and they didn't indicate what they would do or change. They thanked us and sent us along our way," Kiley says.
Avi S
50%
50%
Avi S,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/30/2019 | 3:39:51 AM
Boeing blames the "pilots" again?
Boeing lost 2 planes and did not disclose 737 MAX alert software issue to FAA for 13 months. 
Only after China had grounded the aircraft, they've published some details of new system requirements for the problematic MCAS software that caused these crashes.

"Our extensive testing confirmed that existing defenses in the broader 787 network prevent the scenarios claimed." 🕵️🤷‍♂️
john@ylventures.com
50%
50%
[email protected],
User Rank: Author
8/23/2019 | 7:13:39 PM
Aviation Security Opportunities
Interesting problem space - tough GTM and sales cycle for independent startup, but seems like there is some opportunity for innovation, here.
allenred123
50%
50%
allenred123,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/23/2019 | 1:33:26 AM
cybersecurity
useful suggestion
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
7 Old IT Things Every New InfoSec Pro Should Know
Joan Goodchild, Staff Editor,  4/20/2021
News
Cloud-Native Businesses Struggle With Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  5/6/2021
Commentary
Defending Against Web Scraping Attacks
Rob Simon, Principal Security Consultant at TrustedSec,  5/7/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-16632
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-15
A XSS Vulnerability in /uploads/dede/action_search.php in DedeCMS V5.7 SP2 allows an authenticated user to execute remote arbitrary code via the keyword parameter.
CVE-2021-32073
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-15
DedeCMS V5.7 SP2 contains a CSRF vulnerability that allows a remote attacker to send a malicious request to to the web manager allowing remote code execution.
CVE-2021-33033
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
The Linux kernel before 5.11.14 has a use-after-free in cipso_v4_genopt in net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c because the CIPSO and CALIPSO refcounting for the DOI definitions is mishandled, aka CID-ad5d07f4a9cd. This leads to writing an arbitrary value.
CVE-2021-33034
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
In the Linux kernel before 5.12.4, net/bluetooth/hci_event.c has a use-after-free when destroying an hci_chan, aka CID-5c4c8c954409. This leads to writing an arbitrary value.
CVE-2019-25044
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
The block subsystem in the Linux kernel before 5.2 has a use-after-free that can lead to arbitrary code execution in the kernel context and privilege escalation, aka CID-c3e2219216c9. This is related to blk_mq_free_rqs and blk_cleanup_queue.