Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Back to Squawk list
  • 41

A flight was delayed after someone named their Wi-Fi hotspot 'Samsung Galaxy Note 7'

While the Virgin Airlines plane was mid-flight, cabin crew noticed that one of the available Wi-Fi networks was called "Samsung Galaxy Note7_1097." ( Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

joel wiley 3
There have been worse:

Mobile Detonation Device

Mobile Detonation Device Al-Quida Free Terror Nettwork


I wonder if whoever posted their bail saw the humor
Do not forget - there is no Freedom of Speech in France.....
MH370 2
Lonie Scott 2
Never shout hello to anyone named "Jack" in a busy airport...
Lonie Scott 2
In the US all frequencies are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission. As someone stated earlier there is no free or unregulated air space. Each country has its type of Communications authority. And each country is regulated by the International Telecommunications Union. So knowing that can you say that D.C. To Daylight is highly regulated and profitable...
RECOR10 -1
But, what we do with our SSID's on that spectrum is NOT regulated in any way (must accept interference blah blah blah....). Same reason many police depts and what not are changing to encrypted and FCC governed frequencies that (unlicensed)civilians are not allowed to used. Heck, Ham Radio guys need a permit in most states.
Lonie Scott 1
I apologize for the double tap, but the reason why agencies are encrypting their signals is to keep people committing crimes unaware of the agencies activities to capture them. As an added caveat IF said person has the means to decrypt said signals, the perpetrators can be charged at the federal level and if convicted at the state and federal level, it's going to be a long sentence.
RECOR10 -1
Way OT - but, as for the decrypting of "secure" traffic. Simple (with help from eBay and China). From there, it is what you do with the decrypted traffic...that is the pain with radio - you never know who is getting it, what they are doing with it and can not detect the recipient if they are not also transmitting....but, another forum maybe :-)
Lonie Scott 0
It's not that simple. With the big push to go digital, such as P25, APCO25, NexGEN, to name a few, the transmission are becoming extremely difficult to decode. Now for example the public service entity in my location decided on P25 phase 1 with 128 bit encryption with gps time sequencing. It would take several dozen years to decrypt the audio stream that was made last week if it had been recorded. There is also the fact they also have more than a dozen AES encryption keys to rotate through. Now if you have a receiver playing live audio, you have just broken state and federal laws.
RECOR10 -1
We have "played" many times with devices that can handle the cypher in just about "real time". "Detecting" the AES version is childs play, grabbing the TKIP...Snort and any iOS device or Android (laptop running Redhat). Channel, any WLC will give you that...and, the devices are an the open market on many foreign websites. Get yourself a Pringles can and some internet and a Yagi is less than $5 and you get a snack...

From there, the fact that a "lost" radio in the hands of a less than honest cop ruins any security any way (unless they want to re-key every handset)

I would never never ever sneak a into China either.....hard to get SmartNet coverage from there however ;-)
Bernie20910 2
Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. A lost radio does not impinge on security once it is reported lost, as that radio can be killed remotely and taken out of the network.
LOL - again, depends on technology and so many other factors. A police Dept in N. Illinois "lost" a digital radio - and it was over $200k for new ones - ALL new programing and man power (then pesky FOIA stuff on top)
Lonie Scott 1
Actually it is regulated but by a technical standard. I believe you are referring to Regulations Title 47, Part 15 (47CFR15).

Of course there are many more regulations that be its nature excludes part 15. Think on this, what would happen if an incidental radiator happened to interfere with the aviation frequencies. If it is bad enough the FAA will ground aircrafts in the immediate area, re-route those in the air to avoid interference and involve the FCC. The owner of said incidental radiator would be in a severe fecal shower.

So there I must be some type of regulation in place to keep the afore-mentioned scenario from happening.

There is more but going into detail would probably be considered trolling.

Also "ham radio guys" as per Title 47 Part 97 are required to be licensed. Knowledge of regulations, operating proceedures, basic electrical and electronics, safety, are only a small portion of the requirements placed not by the FCC but rather the ITU because radio signals do one thing... ignores boarders. We don't have a permit limiting us to a few states but rather a license of international recognition. I have a unique call sign issued to me as does every licensed Amateur Radio operator worldwide.
Bernie20910 0
You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Please name a single state where a ham radio operator requires a state issued permit.
Oh, that is a FEDERAL licenses and small minded people on the internet like to slice and dice minutia (and often spend their lives on the internet trying to prove others wrong - or sit on a ham radio all day trying to contact Alfa Sentari)
Joe Kolodziej 1
Cannot read article. Prevented because I use an Ad blocker.
sparkie624 1
Some idiot having FUN. But not so funny! Shy are people so stupid!
kurt schmidt 1
...yeah RECOR 10..that breaks it down. Besides, none of this is likely to impair flight operations, communications, cockpit instrumentation or compromise data integrity of flight recorders in any way.
Jaz Wray 1
I was a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 owner, received my Note 7 replacement, then was sad to have it permanently recalled. It is important to clarify that the phone owner did not necessarily "name" their WiFi to include the word Samsung Galaxy Note 7 as noted in the article. When moving from my first Note7 to my second Note7, then to my Samsung Galaxy Edge 7, the phones were connected by the Samsung sync method using the adapters included in the box to transfer the phone data from the old to the replacement phone. My current WiFi hotspot name is still Samsung Galaxy Note 7_3155. I did not choose that name. It was automatically transferred from the previous phone with my other settings like background photos and default email. So, don't be surprised when this continues to happen. Samsung needs to push a firmware update that changes the WiFi name on all Samsung replacement phones to remove the reference to Note 7.
Why are you a terrorist? I will send the Secret Service and TSA to your home promptly....
leon davis 1
they all got wiped wont work anyway
Ivan Blakely 1
Silliness all round there.
If the article is accurate, seems to me the delay in getting a response from the passengers was because the crew asked the wrong question (who has a GN7?). The device wasn't a GN7 so nobody twigged it was their phone. They should have asked "who set their hotspot name ..."
Why you would have the hot spot active is another good question - do you get wireless data coverage at cruise altitude in US?
Then, if the plane didn't divert, how did this incident slow the inbound aircraft for the next flight?
Bored kid I bet...not a kid, but that is something I would do - if it is a open network another persons phone probably just connected to the available open network (or tablet or what ever)
James Hanley 0
That is so petty!
Steve Long -6
No different in my book than "joking" about a bomb. They should hold him financially responsible for the consequent canceled flight, at the very least.
btweston 7
Good thing your book isn't THE book. This is an overreaction.
jcsjcs 2
Whoever canceled the next flight should be held responsible for any losses. I see absolutely no reason why the flight should have been canceled.

Sorry sport - that is the way it goes. I am an IT "Expert" for a living...and we are "playing" with NON-FCC regulated badwidth here (802.x). The computer name that I am on is "ERROR" (and shows as much on ARP and MAC tables). SSID name is simply meaningless. I still spoof SSID's (in my neighborhood I have an SSID called "Steal the Neighbors WiFi". At any given time there will be at least five devices on that SSID passing my gateway (not that I care). I have even seen neighbor feud over SSID's ("My neighbor is a nigger" was one of the more famous trouble SSID's broadcast - the neighbor then was broadcasting "Shoot the crackers whore wife") times.

Just because you dont like something, and someone reacts to something improperly...does not make it criminal. Besides, who was looking? From there, if they had a WLC it would not have been hard to triangulate the SSID for that matter.
Bernie20910 1
In the US, FCC does indeed regulate wi-fi frequencies, as it does any other radio frequency you care to name. Just because you don't need an individual licence grant to use it does not make it unregulated.
RECOR10 -1
Um, no - those are "open" areas of the spectrum. If my 2.4GHz cordless phone messes with your Enterprise WiFi - too darn bad. If my 2.4GHz on channel 6 disrupts your business network...ooops...too darn bad...and on and on and on (5GHz as well). The entire spectrum is of course regulated, what happens on them is not (content may be, but that is not the topic). An SSID is simply not something that someone can regulate - MAYBE if your SSID was "Shoot Obmama" but, that is where the 1st Ammd. comes into play. Simply, if I am your neighbor and pick the same channel on the same segment of the have no recourse (in most states). Thus, SSID spoofing is the brave new ground...dont like it? Get Admission control and SSL Certs (with a MAC authentication pool and still cope with channel latency).
David Stark 2
Maybe you should stick to your area of expertise, which is obviously not law.

Threats against the president, whether serious or not, are crimes and are not protected by the First Amendment. In fact, none of the threatening spoof IDs you mentioned are lawful or protected.
RECOR10 -1
Short of a direct threat...your SSID has every right of free speech as you have. So, if I fire up an SSID on my Android that is "Fire!!!" and I am in a theater shall I worry? I have seen more than one Tee Shirt that says "Shoot Obama", is that okay on a shirt but not as an SSID? Oh, I miss the days in the old 'hood (outside Chicago) where the neighbors would fight via SSID....I may have to fire up something novel for the neighbors....
David Stark 1
Have fun. Until you have to explain it to the Secret Service. Just because nobody has been caught yet does not mean it's lawful.
LOL - yeah, called me worried...if I had a "Shoot Obama" shirt I would fit in perfectly with the rest of the folks in Central Florida (The Villages)...they are as common as "Hillary for Prison" bumper stickers and intolerance of ignorance ;-P
Michael Kruger 1
You say not regulated. You mean, not regulated TODAY. Regulations come from people not being able to self-regulate, or as you say, "too darn bad."
Bernie20910 -1
Part 15 operation is still regulated. There is no "open" unregulated portion of the RF spectrum.


¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos, y más!