Hacker News Reader

Comment by magduf | Hacker News Reader

No, but perhaps it is coming from the same organization that thought MCAS was a great idea. After all, such an organization obviously has severe deficiencies with basic systems engineering; what other deficiencies might it have?

View on HN

That’s a cheap shot and a risible one at that. The hierarchy of decision-makers who designed and implemented MCAS and the hierarchy of decision-makers who handle the information security at Boeing is (as I’m sure you’re well aware) so far removed and unrelated to each-other as to be essentially distinct. Conway’s Law doesn’t really apply here.

Exactly. A rogue bunch of MCAS engineers hacking Airbus is not based on any kind of reality.

The article clearly states China was believed to be responsible.

...what does Chinese gain from these attacks then? International infamy?

Valuable aviation intel to use for their young, but growing, airline industry.

Makes me wonder if it'd be simpler to gain this stuff the old-fashioned spy way: bribe or blackmail someone working in one of those supplier companies.

If Pierre in Toulouse is desperate to hide his affair with the Chinese girl he met a week ago in the bar...

Oh, that certainly happens as well. It's just harder to pull off, because physical security at these companies (even physical computer security) is well ahead of network security.

Or the other way: just buy it outright. Either buy from the supplier companies, or buy existing stuff used and reverse-engineer it.

This isn't denial of service attack, this is unauthorized access to steal technical data.

I wouldn't call it cyberattack then; rather it should be cyberespionage

Stealing blueprints and other technical data so they can make their own knockoffs of western aircraft, as they have with the J-20 (F-22 knockoff) and J-31 (F-35 knockoff).

Both of you provide some sources or anything more than “I could imagine X...because Boeing has been in the news lately.”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com