Software Vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787

Re:Software Vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787 by sebazzz on Friday August 16, 2019 @12:12PM (#20716636)

> That second barrier, the company argues, allows only data to pass from one part of the network to the other, rather than the executable commands that would be necessary to affect the plane's critical systems.

Assuming planes don't use something like CAN-bus but regular TCP protocol, this can't really be true right? Perhaps they talk about which services are allowed to connect (listen for incoming connections).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Software Vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787 by p_l on Friday August 16, 2019 @01:00PM (#20717113)

AFDX protocol stack is unidirectional with no ACKs or anything like that, which makes use of physical data diodes trivial.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Software Vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787 by Hunisgung on Friday August 16, 2019 @04:06PM (#20719184)

That is false. Apart from the hard-coded and restrictive network configuration, AFDX is basically UDP/IP. There are many uses of bidirectional application protocols (like TFTP).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Software Vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787 by p_l on Sunday August 18, 2019 @01:56PM (#20731725)

unidirectional nature of the communication protocols means that AFDX-compatible application can be easily firewalled for cases such as reporting data to maintenance network, as I understood from Boeing's response.

Electronic Flight Bag being part of maintenance network is not something good, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]