

Malware blamed for fatal Spanair plane crash - all
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38790670/ns/technology_and_science-security/?gt1=43001

======
paulgb
To clarify, the malware was running on the system that the mechanics use to
log incidents. The plane had had three recent incidents that would have
grounded the plane had they been known, but they weren't. The reason they
weren't was a combination of the mechanic's neglect and possibly that the
system was crippled by malware.

Here is a better article (Spanish to English translation):
[http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&h...](http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/ordenador/Spanair/anotaba/fallos/aviones/tenia/virus/elpepiesp/20100820elpepinac_11/Tes&sl=es&tl=en&act=url)

~~~
ams6110
Good clarification --- a quick read of the MSNBC piece leads you to believe
that an on-board system was infected.

~~~
paulgb
That's how I read it at first too. I think it's partly the result of a
gramatical ambiguity:

"(a central computer system used to monitor technical problems) in the
aircraft was infected with malware"

vs.

"a central computer system used to monitor (technical problems in the
aircraft) was infected with malware"

~~~
DeusExMachina
Interesting, I read it with the second meaning and not the first.

I'm italian and in my language sentences are less structured, allowing you to
move parts around "almost freely". So for me it's natural to bond
"complements" to the nearest "object" in the sentence (sorry, I don't know the
right words for this).

Is it different in English?

~~~
StavrosK
It's ambiguous, so the behaviour is undefined. The author should change the
sentence to make it conform to the standards.

------
yread
Airliners.net has an interesting discussion about it by industry professionals
[http://www.airliners.net/aviation-
forums/general_aviation/re...](http://www.airliners.net/aviation-
forums/general_aviation/read.main/4904992/)

(and nutheads who like planes...)

------
cjg
I suppose that the author of this malware was prepared to accept imposing
financial costs on their victims. After all, it's only money, right?

I wonder how they feel now that people have died as a result of their law-
breaking.

~~~
konad
s/author of this malware/person that decided to run critical safety equipment
on a network connected OS known to be vulnerable to many many viruses from
many many vectors/

s/law-breaking/incompetence/

Spanair crash - Windows Malware implicated

BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill - Windows BSOD implicated

Incompetence and penny pinching

~~~
keithwarren
Airplane crashes and things like deepwater horizon are caused by a series of
cascading failures and in some way insinuating that it is just malware (or
Windows) is goofy. Obviously someone has an agenda.

~~~
konad
The series of steps that allows something with such a large attack surface as
a Windows network to operate as last resort air traffic safety shutdown
system.

It's IT Dept. incompetence. I'd go so far as to call it negligence, maybe even
culpable.

