In-flight Wi-Fi at Risk Following Bomb Scares



+ Add a Comment


That's the sound of my head hitting my desk.



Why do they need to connect to the internet anyways? If Wi-Fi signals are allowed, then what's to keep them from directly connecting to the device instead of going through the internet? Not much. That would probably be much easier than having to figure out how to access the internet via Wi-Fi.



Unless Delta is the only Airline that does this, In-Flight WiFi Requires you to Purchace Airtime in order to be allowed access to the internet, so unless someone knows a way to get around this, I don't see a way that WiFi could be used for that purpose.



1) It would probably cost a terrorist more time and money to set up a wifi detonation, than to just use a stop-watch, or other similar methods.

2) How will they prevent satellite phone detonation?

3) Maybe this way they can at least track the guy after the detonation.

4) I don't see stopping Wi-Fi adding to our protection in any way, the main concern should be preventing the device from getting on board, once its on board the bomber could use many ways to detonate it, so stopping wi-fi is really a joke. With the wi-fi enabled however, there may at least be clue's left by passengers and/or the terrorist's internet use about what happened. (all communication is going through one provider).



1) I don't think they are worried about costs

2) I have never used a satephone, but would the signal work down in the cargo hold?  Just thinking about how weak sat radio and gps seems

3) could be

4) yeah I would think stopping from getting there in the first place is right.  I guess they could also put in a signal jammer in the cargo holds. 

Also how do they get something that is in the cargo hold to log on to the network and sign up/pay for the service?  I guess it's some sort of script they could right, but then if the airlines add in the random captcha questions...


Keith E. Whisman

I have a friend that's a Airline Captain at Spirit Airlines and he said that Cell phones work great at altitude, you almost never lose a signal unless your over the ocean and out of line of site. I've used the phones on the airplanes, the ones that are attached to the back of the seat in front of you and it's expensive but it was neat calling from 35,000 feet. 5min cost me $28bucks and that was back in the early 1990's.


Keith E. Whisman

Everyone knows that terrorists love to browse the web and sent twitter updates while they hijack airliners. 



Ok, maybe I'm missing something here but...

Does it matter if they have one more way to detonate their bombs? I mean, what's one more method anyway? Assuming they can get the bomb on board and in place, they can use a timer, a cell phone (I'm assuming that a terrorist won't turn their cell phone off when the flight attendant asks...), even radio or sattelite signals... Do they really need WiFi??

In fact, would't a wifi detonator be a hassle? I mean, they would have to have someone on board to sign up for the wifi service, right? Which kinda defeats the purpose of a remote detonation... just promise the sucker his 72 virgins and hand him the red button already.

I'm trying to imagine what advantage a wifi detonator would really give, I mean unless they hooked up a webcam to catch the last moments on video or something... even then, it would be the most boring youtube video ever, a bunch of bored folks on a plane and then... nothing?



Those dang terrorists!  They take the fun out of everything nowadays!

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.