6 ms·

ADS-B information is broadcast unencrypted in real time from every civilian aircraft all the time. Anyone can receive this information with easily available equ

ADS-B information is broadcast unencrypted in real time from every civilian aircraft all the time. Anyone can receive this information with easily available equipment and tell everyone about it on a website. I don’t think it’s technically possible to censor this information. If you’re worried about someone shooting you down or whatever then you’re going to have to find a different way to counter this. Maybe fit countermeasures or buy another two planes and keep people guessing which one you are on. But it seems overly paranoid TBH.

wizeman 4y ago
> ADS-B information is broadcast unencrypted in real time from every civilian aircraft all the time. ADS-B information is available publicly, but what's not always available publicly is which aircraft (or rather, which aircraft identifier) belongs to whom. Specifically, if an aircraft is subscribed to this program, then it receives a new temporary identifier every month, unconnected to the owner: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/privacy https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/privacy And Elon's jet is subscribed to this program, as confirmed by Elon himself: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603803508087537665 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603803508087537665 So I think the problem is not tracking some airplane, the problem is connecting an airplane identifier to its owner by other means and then publicly broadcasting that information (i.e. make it easily accessible), when its owner has requested the government for privacy protection under a government program which was specifically designed to provide that exact type of privacy protection.
- philistine 4y ago
  You're completely sidestepping the issue that the man is amongst the richest in the world, so the whereabouts of his private plane could be argued to be of public interest. Keep this in mind as well; his plane's whereabouts are being derived from obscured data and published. Not his own personal whereabouts. We don't know what car he takes and where he goes once he lands. What is he scared of? A scud missile? For example, we know his plane is in Quatar. With the news he is trying to sell shares of Twitter at his purchased price, we now can investigate whether he is talking to Quataris about selling shares. Being amongst the richest and owning a social network puts you in the public eye.
  - wizeman 4y ago
    > You're completely sidestepping the issue that the man is amongst the richest in the world, so the whereabouts of his private plane could be argued to be of public interest. I'm guessing most participants in that privacy program are filthy rich and yet the program was still created. You can argue that the whereabouts are in the public interest, but the real-time whereabouts are much harder to justify. > Keep this in mind as well; his plane's whereabouts are being derived from obscured data and published. Not his own personal whereabouts. We don't know what car he takes and where he goes once he lands. You'd do if you went to the airport before he lands. > What is he scared of? A scud missile? I'm guessing he's scared of someone hurting or kidnapping him or his family. You would be too if you were in his position, believe me. No amount of hired security can completely mitigate the risk of your exact coordinates being broadcast in real-time, every single day. It's amazing to me how much lack of empathy people have against other people, just because they're rich or famous. Or maybe it's just ignorance about the risks these people face every single day. > For example, we know his plane is in Quatar. With the news he is trying to sell shares of Twitter at his purchased price, we now can investigate whether he is talking to Quataris about selling shares. Being amongst the richest and owning a social network puts you in the public eye. You don't need his location in real-time for that.
    - philistine 4y ago
      Billionaires do not have riskier lives: https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647c189616f0 https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647... They have the money to skew public opinion, and the money to protect themselves. Security through obscurity is no security at all.
      - wizeman 4y ago
        > Billionaires do not have riskier lives: https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647 https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647... That is the result of a myriad of security measures that they and their families take every day, including not publicly broadcasting where they are in real-time or exactly where they are going to be at a specific time, among many, many others. And even when they have to do that occasionally (e.g. when the public knows that they are going to attend a public event), they have to take additional security precautions, to protect themselves against someone hurting them, kidnapping them or robbing them (or their families). Even presidents/prime ministers of entire countries, who are not as rich or famous as Elon Musk, occasionally (or always) require extreme security precautions, like having bullet-proof vehicles, police escorts, streets being closed, dogs sniffing around for explosives wherever they go, and much, much more. And Elon Musk doesn't even have access to all these measures, because many of them are not available to private individuals in many countries. But even if you could, you wouldn't want to take these increased security precautions all the time, it's just not realistic or desirable to have a police escort and/or the secret service following every rich person and closing streets everywhere they go. > Security through obscurity is no security at all. You say that like if that analogy holds for physical security... Or do you think that physical security only truly exists if everyone knows exactly where you are all the time and they still can't hurt you? With regards to physical security, that's not a thing. There are only a certain number of obstacles, and the more obstacles, the better protected you are. But there is no silver bullet, especially if you want to have a life and not live in some bunker somewhere. Not all computer analogies hold in the real world. Cryptography doesn't give you physical protection.
- _djo_ 4y ago
  Musk is lying. This is what an aircraft in the PIA programme looks like. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a0fe01 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a0fe01 Note the 'PIA' flag and lack of additional information that would normally be pulled from the registry. In fact if you searched the registry for A0FE01 you would not find the actual aircraft but a placeholder. Musk uses three jets, N628TS, N272BG, and N502SX. None are in the PIA programme, all are easily visible on ADSB Exchange and most importantly have their ICAO hex codes listed publicly on the FAA registry, along with ownership information. So please, let's stop repeating this false claim. N628TS: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=628TS https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul... N272BG: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a2ae0a https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a2ae0a https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=272BG https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul... N502SX: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a64304 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a64304 https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=502SX https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul...
  - leereeves 4y ago
    As was pointed out in responses to your independent post about this[1], aircraft enrolled in PIA still have public permanent codes, which they must use when outside the US, as Musk is now (at the World Cup in Qatar). Linking to the adsbexchange page for that permanent code doesn't prove that no anonymous temporary PIA codes exist. You should be more careful before accusing someone of lying. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34037780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34037780
    - _djo_ 4y ago
      You're right about international flights and I should have specified that, but you can view the aircraft's recent US-only flights and see that it also used its permanent ICAO code.
      - leereeves 4y ago

wizeman 4y ago

> ADS-B information is broadcast unencrypted in real time from every civilian aircraft all the time. ADS-B information is available publicly, but what's not always available publicly is which aircraft (or rather, which aircraft identifier) belongs to whom. Specifically, if an aircraft is subscribed to this program, then it receives a new temporary identifier every month, unconnected to the owner: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/privacy https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/privacy And Elon's jet is subscribed to this program, as confirmed by Elon himself: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603803508087537665 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603803508087537665 So I think the problem is not tracking some airplane, the problem is connecting an airplane identifier to its owner by other means and then publicly broadcasting that information (i.e. make it easily accessible), when its owner has requested the government for privacy protection under a government program which was specifically designed to provide that exact type of privacy protection.

philistine 4y ago
You're completely sidestepping the issue that the man is amongst the richest in the world, so the whereabouts of his private plane could be argued to be of public interest. Keep this in mind as well; his plane's whereabouts are being derived from obscured data and published. Not his own personal whereabouts. We don't know what car he takes and where he goes once he lands. What is he scared of? A scud missile? For example, we know his plane is in Quatar. With the news he is trying to sell shares of Twitter at his purchased price, we now can investigate whether he is talking to Quataris about selling shares. Being amongst the richest and owning a social network puts you in the public eye.
- wizeman 4y ago
  > You're completely sidestepping the issue that the man is amongst the richest in the world, so the whereabouts of his private plane could be argued to be of public interest. I'm guessing most participants in that privacy program are filthy rich and yet the program was still created. You can argue that the whereabouts are in the public interest, but the real-time whereabouts are much harder to justify. > Keep this in mind as well; his plane's whereabouts are being derived from obscured data and published. Not his own personal whereabouts. We don't know what car he takes and where he goes once he lands. You'd do if you went to the airport before he lands. > What is he scared of? A scud missile? I'm guessing he's scared of someone hurting or kidnapping him or his family. You would be too if you were in his position, believe me. No amount of hired security can completely mitigate the risk of your exact coordinates being broadcast in real-time, every single day. It's amazing to me how much lack of empathy people have against other people, just because they're rich or famous. Or maybe it's just ignorance about the risks these people face every single day. > For example, we know his plane is in Quatar. With the news he is trying to sell shares of Twitter at his purchased price, we now can investigate whether he is talking to Quataris about selling shares. Being amongst the richest and owning a social network puts you in the public eye. You don't need his location in real-time for that.
  - philistine 4y ago
    Billionaires do not have riskier lives: https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647c189616f0 https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647... They have the money to skew public opinion, and the money to protect themselves. Security through obscurity is no security at all.
    - wizeman 4y ago
      > Billionaires do not have riskier lives: https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647 https://www.forbes.com/2005/04/05/cx_vg_0405feat.html?sh=647... That is the result of a myriad of security measures that they and their families take every day, including not publicly broadcasting where they are in real-time or exactly where they are going to be at a specific time, among many, many others. And even when they have to do that occasionally (e.g. when the public knows that they are going to attend a public event), they have to take additional security precautions, to protect themselves against someone hurting them, kidnapping them or robbing them (or their families). Even presidents/prime ministers of entire countries, who are not as rich or famous as Elon Musk, occasionally (or always) require extreme security precautions, like having bullet-proof vehicles, police escorts, streets being closed, dogs sniffing around for explosives wherever they go, and much, much more. And Elon Musk doesn't even have access to all these measures, because many of them are not available to private individuals in many countries. But even if you could, you wouldn't want to take these increased security precautions all the time, it's just not realistic or desirable to have a police escort and/or the secret service following every rich person and closing streets everywhere they go. > Security through obscurity is no security at all. You say that like if that analogy holds for physical security... Or do you think that physical security only truly exists if everyone knows exactly where you are all the time and they still can't hurt you? With regards to physical security, that's not a thing. There are only a certain number of obstacles, and the more obstacles, the better protected you are. But there is no silver bullet, especially if you want to have a life and not live in some bunker somewhere. Not all computer analogies hold in the real world. Cryptography doesn't give you physical protection.
_djo_ 4y ago
Musk is lying. This is what an aircraft in the PIA programme looks like. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a0fe01 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a0fe01 Note the 'PIA' flag and lack of additional information that would normally be pulled from the registry. In fact if you searched the registry for A0FE01 you would not find the actual aircraft but a placeholder. Musk uses three jets, N628TS, N272BG, and N502SX. None are in the PIA programme, all are easily visible on ADSB Exchange and most importantly have their ICAO hex codes listed publicly on the FAA registry, along with ownership information. So please, let's stop repeating this false claim. N628TS: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=628TS https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul... N272BG: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a2ae0a https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a2ae0a https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=272BG https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul... N502SX: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a64304 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a64304 https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResult?NNumberTxt=502SX https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/NNumberResul...
- leereeves 4y ago
  As was pointed out in responses to your independent post about this[1], aircraft enrolled in PIA still have public permanent codes, which they must use when outside the US, as Musk is now (at the World Cup in Qatar). Linking to the adsbexchange page for that permanent code doesn't prove that no anonymous temporary PIA codes exist. You should be more careful before accusing someone of lying. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34037780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34037780
  - _djo_ 4y ago
    You're right about international flights and I should have specified that, but you can view the aircraft's recent US-only flights and see that it also used its permanent ICAO code.
    - leereeves 4y ago