Next time the "hacker alarm" goes off - a full scientific report should be published that could answer a couple of questions and put the sensationalism aside:
1. Is it possible to "hack" flight control systems and autopilots etc systems from the ground over one of the available datalinks?
If the answer is "yes":
What datalink?
What equipment do I need?
Do I need to "hack" some other facility first (such as a maintenance facility and then hack the aircraft from there)?
2. If we assume that I am able to "hack" the aircraft, the next series of questions come up:
Which systems can I enter?
What can I do with them?
What happens to my "hacking" if the pilot pull the circuit breakers (for example if I start to change different settings on the autoflight system such as changing heading on the A/P, reducing speed on the A/THR etc)?
3. If the "ground-to-air hacking" isn't possible and the argument start to revolve around "hacking" from the cabin comes the next set of questions:
Through which system do I gain access?
Do I need to do something in the avionics bay (such go through the maintenance terminals/connections)?
What equipment do I need to bring onboard to do the "hacking"?
What happens to my "hacking" if the pilot pull the circuit breakers?
If anyone can provide a link to a proper scientific report that can provide answers to those questions and also deal with the most important one - namely the possible consequence (i.e. if "hacking" can make an aircraft uncontrollable) I think the thread could become more useful.
If I am sitting in the cabin "hacking away" like there's no tomorrow and the pilot decide to power down the cabin bus - would I still be able to do my thing when the IFE and WiFi etc goes down?
A "hack" that is unable to survive "pull circuit breaker 2-A" isn't a particular threat, is it?
Same thing if I would "hack" the A/THR and the pilot disconnect it when I decide to throttle back to idle... Annoying perhaps but it's a matter of disconnecting it and then set the thrust manually and later give it another go (engaging it again).
It is first when the hacker can take full control of the aircraft AND the hack are able to survive circuit breaker resets and power downs of different buses that we can talk about a serious threat.
Same thing with "managed to hack A/P 1" - OK, A/P 1 disconnected, A/P 2 and 3 connected. Problem solved.
Hacks that require different modifications of the aircraft (i.e. software replacements and the installation of extra equipment) isn't exactly like the sensationalism of "Someone claimed that he were able to reduce thrust on the engines by hacking the aircraft through the IFE system".
There should be practical demonstrations and proper scientific reports about "hacking the aircraft" if it is to be treated as a serious threat. "It is theoretically possible to hack..." doesn't feel to convincing, does it?