[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: OT: Terrorism
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Re: OT: Terrorism
- From: "Mark Hetherington \(egroups\)" <mark.egroups@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:47:50 +0100
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > > I still think totally secure flight decks is a 'reasonable'
> solution and
> > > doesn't suffer from hacking or any other kind of outside
interference.
> >
> > There is no such thing as totally secure. Any link that allowed
> control of
> > the plane from the ground is susceptible to being hacked and can
be
> > interefered with. I do not see it "solving" anything,
it merely creates
> > problems.
>
> If you read my email properly you will see that at no point do I
recommend
> any control from the ground I merely suggest securing the flight deck.
I did read it "properly" and although you didn't specifically
mention it
yourself you quoted messages discussing this so it was not an unreasonable
place for my comment. I did miss changing paragraph however. I apologise if
you felt slighted by my comment.
I discuss locked doors further in another reply so forgive me for not
addressing your points directly. I think they are all covered in my other
email.
Mark.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|