Drone Hacked over Austin

The plan to unleash drones over the USA by the government
to spy on Americans .. might get a little complicated
and all you need is a bit of hacking knowledge and a laptop

Iran apparently hacked 2 US drones recently over their airspace
if Iran can hack advanced drones like that .. why not Americans or anonymous hackers

this can be very dangerous if those drones have weapons on it
the governement will have to put the drones war/spying program on hold
i bet some officials is gonna be pissed off over all these hackers that could ruin everything !

Infowars hosted the first ever drone mob this weekend, a citizen protest event where We the People could stand up and say “no” to our government entities spending our taxpayer dollars to upgrade and weaponize drone technology and turn it against us.

While many people came out to fly drones, one man came out to demonstrate that anyone can easily hack and take control of those drones.

Austin, Texas resident George Bliss showed up to the drone mob not with a drone, but with a laptop. Using a free, open source software he downloaded off the internet, Bliss was able to demonstrate how easily anyone can disrupt the signal between drone operator and drone, effectively taking control.

With a few keyboard clicks, Bliss was able to cut a drone’s WI-FI signal in seconds and take control of it multiple times.

Link

I can hack a drone easily, with my .308

If I were in any position where there were drones in the area it would be open season.

I'm sure Texans are more than able to take these out.

Originally posted by paratus
I can hack a drone easily, with my .308

If I were in any position where there were drones in the area it would be open season.

I'm sure Texans are more than able to take these out.

if Jeremy Renner can do it in Jason Bourne .. everybody can do it

We're in a world of hurt when the first super-geek geniuses snap and go postal. They won't go to Bill Jo Bob's Gun Store. They'll go to Best Buy and Newegg. They won't hurt customers...they'll acquire capability. When I envision a future nerd going postal? I envision a predator drone....hacked just as pretty as you please.....obliterating the whole post office building, and that? Just to calibrate the targeting system and make sure the next shots are meaningful.

There are a whole lot of reasons I think we have people like Janet Napolitano that have never met a gadget she didn't just go 'ga ga' over....and a nation that is less secure than it was before 9/11 and the onrush of technology to save us.

Oh, but hacking U.S. systems is impossible, don't ya know? Your evidence must be false...because Iran couldn't possibly have hacked the mini-stealth bomber drone and sure couldn't have screwed with the far less sophisticated one here more recently. Naww... We're hack proof! Just ask CIA....in between periods of rebuilding their website from Anonymous hack jobs.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


its also the perfect false flag scenario
accuse the hackers after a drone got hacked and crashed into a government building
perfect excuse to police the internet even more
or to raid homes of people that download free music

they can use those "hacked drone" to favor an agenda
and make sure the internet is more regulated

I have a question .. What are the chances of a drone armed with say 1 or 2 hellfire missiles, being hacked and the hacker in question was able to use this missiles against the wrong targets if you get me

About 6 months ago a watched a news program about Texas A&M University students showing how to hack these drones. Iran did not figure it out, we showed them how. Same thing with sneaking Nukes into America past customs. The customs agents told exactly how it could be done without them detecting it. Hollywood is killing us.

I'd be careful if I was George Bliss, they'll probably charge him as a terrorist if the right douchebag, er cop reads this.

reply to post by Ben81


I'm not supporting government drones but it's quite irrelevant to say that drones are bad because it's easy to hack into consumer-level drone that is designed to be easily modifiable. It doesn't mean that it is easy to hack into military drones. It's the same as saying that because it's easy to hack into my grandmothers computer we should not have internet-banks. The drone-hack was published a while ago for that drone as a part of a competition and it is widely known.

That's great that a few people can do it. we all need to be able to do it. So someone needs to load up the program, directions, etc. into a zip file and make it available to everyone for download. Let's make this a true Open source project. All it would take is the sufficiently versatile program to do it, an antenna, and a sufficiently powerful transmitter. Plug it into a USB port and let's go. I can't do the original, but like a lot of people, i'm perfectly capable of implementing it.

Just search ebay for signal jammers.
It's very easy to block the signals controling a unit.
You do do not have to communicate with the unit but both was done here.

1. Iran never "hacked" a drone, well not the RQ-170 that's for sure.

2. This article is filled with just pure BS to be honest. Where is the hacking? Because they jammed the signal 5 feet away does not constitute it being hacked. How many times have North Korea attempt to jam our manned fighter before, would you constitute that as hacking our fighter jets?

3. Only way to mimic the input signals is to access the sat-com antenna which means having to not ONLY have the proper signal coding, wavelength, and protocols the "access" transmitter has to be above the antenna to be in the proper position. (That also makes "jamming" the signal extremely hard). You also can't "record" the signal and then play it back to make it dance like how you want too.

4. The drone that malfunctioned over Iran is NOT the best stealth technology we have as the "hacker" claimed.


www.youtube.com...

This video honestly looks like someone reported it for a High School project, hell I've seen college students blow this thing out of the water. These people do not know a clue what they are talking about in the video. Everything in this article is exaggerated.

reply to post by Laxpla

You know what I think of when I hear folks say the U.S. drone absolutely, positively could NOT have been hacked?

Germany was 100% positively and absolutely CERTAIN Enigma couldn't be broken too. It cost them the whole world war in the end.

reply to post by Laxpla

Because they jammed the signal 5 feet away does not constitute it being hacked.

if u can jam from 5 feet away with enough power u can jam from further away. so no not hacked, but it can be renderd useless.

reply to post by DocHolidaze

I have heard that an old pringles can works wonders at directing a signal.

reply to post by deadeyedick


coffe can work best from what ive seen, u can piggy back someones internet with one of those small lyynksys routers placed in a coffee can placed on your roof from a block or so away, imagine if you had some real equipment not purchased from walmart

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Except the RQ-170 wasn't hacked. If it was hacked, and made a soft landing like Iran claimed, why is there damage consistent with a hard landing on the leading edge of the wings? I've read several sources that say it was a mechanical problem, and the evidence is consistent with a mechanical problem. The most interesting quote I've heard about the incident is that if it hadn't been Lockheed flying it, it never would have come down in one piece.

reply to post by Zaphod58


So we're saying the drone was deliberately landed in Iran by Lockheed (for malfunction..I don't suggest wantonly) and left there to be captured without destroying it? I find that harder to believe than the hacking story but if that is what happened? I'd call that worse. At least hacked, Iran got it fair and square and as they say, all is fair in love and war. Good for them. If they got it because leadership again failed to lead and literally handed it to them by landing it intact for retrieval then I think there are some real core issues to see about addressing at all levels of our system.

The craft on public display definitely covered the bottom with the apron they were using around it, so who knows what damage came on the landing itself....but it looked a whole lot more intact than anything of it's type should ever have been possible to be taken, IMO.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


No, part of the mechanical problem it suffered was a loss of communications with the base system. Once that happened Lockheed had no say in what happened to it. From my understanding, once it loses comms, it basically orbits until they are restored. Although in this case, it most likely began losing altitude as well.

The comment about it not coming down intact if Lockheed hadn't been flying it, is because LM didn't have the self destruct hardware installed that the Air Force uses. It was on a CIA mission, operated by LM, is my understanding. From what I've read, they didn't have a follow on mission to destroy it because the CIA didn't want to go hat in hand to the Air Force, even though the RQ-170 is a joint operation, and because no one thought it would come down intact. It was expected that it would crash, and be destroyed in the crash.

If you look closely at the leading edges of the wings, you can see fairly minor damage to the leading edges of the wings, but it's consistent with a hard landing. That damage occurred when the aircraft hit the ground without the landing gear down. The damage to the wings, it's hard to tell if that occurred in the crash, or if they cut the wings off to get it into the gymnasium to display it.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


You can read this if you like to answer your questions.

www.secretprojects.co.uk...


I mean, when drones malfunction they get obliterated right?