Amazon Patents System To Defend Drones Against Hackers, Jammers and Arrows (geekwire.com) 122
As Amazon prepares its drone-based delivery service Prime Air for the United States, the company has been looking for ways to keep its drones safe while they're flying to and from their destinations. According to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the company has patented a plan that lays out countermeasures for potential threats ranging from computer hacking to lightning flashes to bows and arrows. GeekWire reports: The "compromise system" that Amazon's engineers propose relies on an array of sensors to orient the drone based on the sun's position in the sky, if need be. That's in case the drone gets confused by, say, lightning or a muzzle flash. The system also provides for a mesh network, in which drones would check with each other and other data sources -- including satellite signals -- to verify the readings they're following. If there's a discrepancy in the data, the drone would tally up the verdicts from all of the sources available, then go with the majority opinion. The onboard compromise system would be designed to keep the drone on track even if someone tried jamming its communication system. And if the drone became completely disoriented, it would be programmed to land safely and broadcast its location to its handlers. Now, about those arrows: Amazon lays out a scenario in which an attacker shoots an arrow at a drone in the air. "The malicious person may be attempting to cause the UAV to fall to ground, so that that malicious person may steal or destroy the UAV," the application reads. This is what Amazon suggests would happen: "The compromise module detects the presence of the arrow and generates the UAV compromise data indicating that a threat exists that may compromise the UAV. The fail-safe module terminates the navigation to the first computing device, and the fail-safe module directs the UAV towards the ground. In some implementations, the fail-safe module may be configured to direct the UAV to take evasive maneuvers, navigate to a safe landing or parking zone for inspect, and so forth."
Maybe it could help in Ukraine (Score:1)
"Millions of dollars' worth of U.S.-supplied drones that Kiev had hoped would help in its war against Russian-backed separatists have proven ineffective against jamming and hacking, Ukrainian officials say."
Re: (Score:3)
yeah they take disposable drones designed to fight people who don't have indoor plumbing and who film their propaganda on vhs camcorders, and they try to use that against Russian hackers. That's like hiring convenience store robbers to steal gold from fort knox.
Re: (Score:1)
Trump will ship better drones to Russia now to fight 'evil' Ukraine.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-23/trump-aide-partnered-with-firm-run-by-man-with-alleged-kgb-ties
"Subu Kota, who pleaded guilty in 1996 to selling the material to an FBI agent posing as a Russian spy, is one of two board directors at the company, Boston-based Brainwave Science. During years of federal court proceedings, prosecutors presented evidence they said showed that between 1985 and 1990 Kota met repeatedly with a KGB
Re: Maybe it could help in Ukraine (Score:1)
This is the same article that accuses him of spreading Internet conspiracies for daring to say *gasp* "Fear of Muslims is rational."
Re: (Score:2)
For example, more US aircraft were lost in WWII due to crash landing, especially on carriers, than to an enemy fire.
If one buys any fixed-wing RPAS and starts flying it without a prior experience, he/she will crash it before long. That is what happening most probably.
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost as good as forgetting that other nations - like Tsarist Russia - did it too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I think Goldmember is the funniest of the three, though International Man of Mystery (the original) is my favorite.
The Spy Who Shagged Me had none of the campy charm of the original and was mostly a cruder rehash.
The third was very meta, and you may or may not appreciate that. I for one found the mock intro with tons of cameos (from Tom Cruise to Danny DeVito), the scene with Nathan Lane, everything with Nigel Powers, etc. absolutely hilarious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Charm, originality, satire, etc.
The first movie was intentionally campy and self aware, and it had a genuine charm to it (along with great music and musical cameos). The second movie lost all of that and doubled down on the crude humor. I enjoy the crude humor, but it can't carry the whole film unless you're 12 years old. I felt the third movie was the funniest, largely in part due to Nigel Powers and the relationship between Austin, Dr. Evil, and Nigel. It got some of the charm back as well.
Re: They won't evade my arrows (Score:2)
It was amusing.
For those with IQ's beneath a certain threshold, I bet it was almost as funny as Talladega Nights.
Re: (Score:2)
The Ballad of Ricky Bobby is hilarious. If you can't see past the surface to find the satire, the problem lies with you. It's not as good as Austin Powers, however.
Re: (Score:2)
If somebody is shooting stuff at the drone, they've got a pretty good chance of taking it down if they keep at it. At which point, what's more valuable, the $50 package, or the $5,000 drone?
This isn't really a problem for the customer, Amazon knows they didn't get their package, and can take the appropriate action (refund, dispatch another drone, dispatch a same-day-delivery driver, dispatch a regular delivery, etc.) But from their perspective, it's probably better to let the thief have the package and be a
Re: (Score:2)
That's the whole point, though. If the drone lands and the thieves take the package, the drone can be recovered. If the drone just lets them keep shooting at it, the drone will crash and be damaged (potentially beyond repair), and the thieves still get the package.
It's better to lose the $50 package than have the $5000 drone be destroyed.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you'd end up with the police doing the same to you. Just on matter of principle.
Jail? (Score:2)
Does the system involve increasing penalties for people that screw with your delivery drones?
Drones attack Drones (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Don't worry - there's an infinite supply of drone from the 3 scripted puppets on the show.
For those wondering: TGT is awful and forced. Yes, TG was scripted to hell, but TGT is scripted and pathetic.
In the immortal words of the internet... (Score:4, Insightful)
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED.
Re: (Score:3)
A hacker can circumvent. We have learned this lesson time and time again.
No, we are presented with this lesson time and time again...
It would seem many are incapable of actually learning it.
Re: (Score:2)
So my drone override transmitter that is already jamming GPS just needs to impersonate more than at least half the drones in range?
Along with all the local wifi hotspots, ssids, repeaters, device MAC addresses, etc. (including their spatial relationships to each other) that Google Maps just went ahead and logged. If I had to set this whole "out of sight flight" thing up that is one database that would get a lot of updates. People have put radio beacons everywhere, it would be a shame not to at least check in and say hello 60 times a day...
Re: (Score:2)
So my drone override transmitter that is already jamming GPS just needs to impersonate more than at least half the drones in range?
Along with all the local wifi hotspots, ssids, repeaters, device MAC addresses, etc. (including their spatial relationships to each other) that Google Maps just went ahead and logged. If I had to set this whole "out of sight flight" thing up that is one database that would get a lot of updates. People have put radio beacons everywhere, it would be a shame not to at least check in and say hello 60 times a day...
Also, he's confusing "jamming" with "impersonating." His "drone override transmitter" (whatever the fuck that is) can do one, or the other...but not both. And he should note that he'd need to be doing this across a LOT of spectrum...and eventually the FCC is going to find his ass as a result because as soon as GPS stops working, the drone shifts to other methods of navigating until it gets out of range of the jammer.
Re: (Score:2)
Those people have some very serious drones, and no one wants a delivery from one of them...
And, seeing they are part of Cyber Command, they most likely have a pretty good bead on, well, everything.
Re: (Score:3)
You might want to read up on how aircraft navigated before GPS (and still do, to some extent). In addition to ATC beacons, RDF (radio direction finding) off of commercial AM broadcasting stations was and is a thing. Triangulating from two isn't that hard for a human, it's a trivial task for a computer. Good luck overriding the signals from a few multi-kilowatt commercial broadcast towers.
Hacking, jamming arrows? (Score:2)
They are trying to defend against Hawkeye.
Thiefs with arrows (Score:2)
and the fail-safe module directs the UAV towards the ground
And right into the thief's hands... nice plan.
Wouldn't that make the thing easier to steal?
Re: (Score:2)
At what ranges do arrows travel at bullet speeds?
Re: (Score:2)
Except the arrow value is feet per second and the 22 is in meters per second, but shh. I suppose with (in)sufficient gunpowder you could make a slow enough bullet, range might suffer (drastically).
Patentee needs to be shot in the head. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is not a novel invention.
This is trivially obvious from hitting the problem 'I am deploying lots of drones'.
All of the above solutions are obvious and un-novel and in no way not obvious from prior art.
Re:Patentee needs to be shot in the head. (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously you meant "In the Clouds".
Re: (Score:3)
Did you read the patent? It only seems to describe what actions the drone would take, not how those actions would be carried out. Any idiot could say "the drone will detect a threat and move out of the way." The hand waving behind this patent is similar to a software patent - no meat behind *how* it is done. Here is a great line from the patent: "The imager 210(2) may detect objects, which may allow the UAV 102 to identify the objects." Maybe if they designed some very sensitive "imager" with a wide FOV that weighs nothing and uses very little power along with a processor to handle all of the data, then they would have an invention.
I think I'm going to file a patent on a device that creates power through nuclear fusion. I'll just copy/paste the Wikipedia article on the topic since that level of detail is apparently enough for the idiots at the Patent office. Then, when someone finally figures out how to do it I'll be rich!
Actually, it did describe how they would be carried out, in detail. I mean, it doesn't explain how a camera works, but at some point you have to assume that a person reading a patent application has some understanding of, well, you know...consumer-grade electronics.
It describes what it would use as points of reference, and in what way. It even goes into details as to the frequency bandwidth needed for some of those uses. It explains the circumstances under which certain sets of activities would take plac
Re: (Score:2)
What the other poster said.
It all flows naturally from 'I have a lot of flying drones, and don't want to lose them'.
You want you drones to react sensibly to loss of any input. This is not a novel idea remotely - fault tolerant systems have been around forever.
This means alternate means of control and navigation and orientation.
Mesh networking, for example, is a truly obvious idea, if you have lost communication with your base and there is another nearby drone.
As is switching to other localisation systems, a
Re: (Score:2)
This is not a novel invention. This is trivially obvious from hitting the problem 'I am deploying lots of drones'. All of the above solutions are obvious and un-novel and in no way not obvious from prior art.
Prove it, then. If it's not novel, you should be able to find someone doing it before November 2014. Otherwise, by definition, it's novel.
And if it's not obvious, then you should be able to find all of the elements of the claim in one or more pieces of prior art from before November 2014. I'll help. Here's Claim 1:
1. A method of operating an uncrewed autonomous vehicle (“UAV”) comprising:
establishing, at the UAV via a communication interface, communication with a mesh network comprising a plurality of other UAVs;
generating first location data of the UAV using a first navigation system onboard the UAV, wherein the first location data indicates a first location of the UAV;
receiving external data from one or more of the plurality of other UAVs in the mesh network;
generating second location data using a second navigation system, wherein the second location data indicates a second location of the UAV;
determining that the first location data differs from the second location data by a threshold value;
determining operation of the UAV is compromised based at least in part on the external data;
transitioning to a fail-safe mode wherein the UAV is configured to disregard one or more of commands, the first location data, or the second location data; and
transmitting alert data indicative of: the compromise of the UAV; and last available location data of the UAV.
Now, establishing mesh networks and receiving data over mesh networks has been done since at least 2007, according to Wiki.
Here's a post from April 2014 on redundancy in airplane autopilot locat [stackexchange.com]
Muzzle flash? (Score:2)
I'd think a muzzle flash would be trivially disorienting compared to the subsequent impact by a high speed projectile...
Re: (Score:2)
It didn't specify muzzle blast from the ground. Maybe they plan on arming these things and have noticed shooting causes flight controller confusion.
Hah! (Score:3)
Katniss Everdeen can shoot fighter jets out of the sky with arrows. What makes you think you puny drones will be able to do any better?
It's safety measures are to land? Nice. (Score:2)
So it's safety measures are to land, which means then thieves no longer need to check doors for packages, they can just threaten the UAV's with arrows. Granted some idiots shooting arrows in the sky isn't a comforting thought...
"and so forth." (Score:3)
I need an attorney, to patent a simple invention which will "improve life, the universe and everything" using innovation, science, technology, "and so forth." It will be fundamental to any possible future patent. I'll be rich!
Jam the Distress Call? (Score:2)
And if the drone became completely disoriented, it would be programmed to land safely and broadcast its location to its handlers.
Get (or observe) a few drone deliveries and do some SIGINT collection with an RTL-SDR to ID the freq range and strength of the drone's transmissions.
Once you do have a method to force a landing (which doesn't seem easy, BTW), broadcast with a cheap-ish SDR (probably a HackRF or the new LimeSDR) and a power amplifier to jam the drone's distress call.
Steal the drone and its cargo. Disable the drone's comms and sell on the black market.
What sort of stuff are they delivering with drones anyway? Gaming lapto
Going to form my own anti-hero identify (Score:3)
I'm going to dress in green tights and a feather cap, get out my bow and arrow and call myself "Robbin' Goods".
To those on Slashdot aroused by the thought, you I will deem my Band of Fairy Men. You can stay inside and, uh, "support" me from afar k thanks.
Re: Really? (Score:1)
Shocked (Score:3)
I'm shocked, shocked , to find that Amazon is filing frivolous patents.
Where'd You Get That Bird? Innernet. (Score:2, Interesting)
If I start seeing drones filling the sky near my property, I'll take up falconry and train them to take the things the fuck out.
Fuck your shit.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd give you an internet tough guy point but I'm all out after the holidays.
Patenting the inevitable. (Score:2)
Gotta love technical patents like this. A literal blueprint for hackers. I predict this will be utterly worthless about 17 seconds after it's implemented.
Gee, if we only had real punishments for those found guilty of attacking drones instead of wasting millions trying to patent the inevitable.
Actual deterrents against criminal behavior. What a novel fucking idea...
Diversity radio and a sun tracker (Score:2)
Diversity receivers aren't hard to come by, you can buy them off-the-shelf. You can get just a diversity hub into which all your receivers plug, and they can be of disparate types.
Sun trackers are harder. The easiest way to do it is probably with a camera with a filter on, by burning CPU cycles. But you could do it with just a whole bunch of light intensity sensors at different angles. But but, that's what a camera is, and maybe they have cycles to burn.
Sensor overload (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon doesn't need to push for any laws. Drones are considered aircraft. Attacking them in flight or otherwise interfering with operations is a big-time federal felony no-no. Combine that with doing it in an attempt to steal the payload and/or the aircraft, and there's plenty for both local LEOs and the feds to go after you on.
IANAL, but from what I read there is a lot of gray area and uncertainty over how drones are treated with respect to laws covering interfering with or attacking a/c. I agree the existing laws should be use din such situations but it appears they have not been to date.
Rocket Propelled Entaglement Nets! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I built a proof of concept and took down my drone that was flying at 150' in my yard. It was fun.
I'm pretty that a delivery drone can not out manuver a rocket propelled net dispersion system.
I don't know...it doesn't have to move much to accomplish it. How wide was your net, and did you hit a moving drone or one that was stationary above you? What was your angle to the drone...because if it's passing by a hundred feet or so to either side of you, it only needs to shift course away from your position a tiny bit to cause a miss. The drone doesn't need to suddenly be 30 feet from where it was at the moment you fire your net...I'm guessing it's got a solid 1-2 seconds...at least...to alter cours
Re: (Score:1)
The very nature of how the drone stays aloft requires that it pull air down through itself.
Any means of dropping segments (say, 12 to 24 inches) of monofilament fishing line into the intakes could cause the propellers to bind.
Re: (Score:2)
Causing a rapid decrease in air density directly under the drone should cause it to drop precipitously for a few seconds. The "how" is left as an exercise to the reader.
Hey smug hackers (Score:2)
They are already on the ground and you only need to threaten them with a weapon, not actually use it.
Drones seem to be the big thing in weponry now (Score:2)
Might be ok if someone open sourced it so it wouldn't lead to a power imbalance but killing people with drones is pretty problematic so even then it's not a good thing.
Think a bit Slashdot, nerds aren't for evil.
Unless they work for Microsoft.
Or the pay is really good.
Or it's just too cool.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe thinking about this is a bad thing.
Might be ok if someone open sourced it so it wouldn't lead to a power imbalance but killing people with drones is pretty problematic so even then it's not a good thing.
Think a bit Slashdot, nerds aren't for evil.
Unless they work for Microsoft.
Or the pay is really good.
Or it's just too cool.
So...did you even READ any of this? This is a patent application by Amazon, for their delivery drones. They aren't killing people, they're delivering consumer products. The threats that Amazon is counteracting are actually already accounted for in military drones; it's called SAASM, with regard to jamming/spoofing, and also called "flying really high" with regard to the whole bow and arrow threat. Nobody is looking at this as a way of killing people, and if you're worried about the possibility that dron
Hm. Bad writing? (Score:3)
When I first read the OP, it didn't make sense. A drone being "confused" by a muzzle flash? What kind of idiot thinks that's how a drone navigates...or that a muzzle flash would be more confusing than light reflecting off a window or a pond? So I dug in...and the actual patent application is what you should really read because it's very cool. The article about the patent application itself is very poorly-written; either the author didn't really read the patent app or didn't understand it.
The underlying problem is this: people will screw with drones that are delivering valuable items. They will shoot at them with objects ranging from thrown stones to bullets from firearms. They will use signal jammers, spoofing of navigational or control systems and maybe even malware that compromises a device that's used to provide guidance. They've put together a pretty clever approach to each of these problems.
For kinetic threats, a system that would detect the attack would trigger one of a few possible reactions. One reaction is the emission of foam to cushion the drone from the direction of the threat. This would temporarily degrade its flight performance, but only on an as-needed basis. Another would be avoidance, if possible.
For (using the USAF definition) cyber threats, they get really clever. GPS is a nightmare against a moderately-capable attacker; spoofing and jamming are pretty much impossible to defend against. The current gold standard is a device called a SAASM...but there's a catch. It's only available to military users of GPS, and no commercial equivalent exists. It depends upon cryptographic keys to use the privileged GPS functions, so even if you could build your own you could not make use of it. And this is the other interesting/tricky threat.
So, you're humming along and minding your own business using GPS to navigate when...aha! Someone jams you. Or they spoof GPS and try to get you to crash into the ground so that they can take your goodies. You will notice one of these happening when you suddenly lose GPS signal...and the other when your speed and course suddenly vary wildly without you having done anything to cause such.
Amazon has put together a really smart mutli-layered approach to this kind of threat. I won't dig into the details, but some of the goodies include mesh networking, using a variety of alternate methods as points of reference (including even the signal jammer itself, if jamming is going on) and a broad range of different frequencies so that all-encompassing jamming or spoofing becomes a serious, serious pain in the ass for the attacker to accomplish.
Re: (Score:2)
They've put together a pretty clever approach to each of these problems.
For kinetic threats, a system that would detect the attack would trigger one of a few possible reactions. One reaction is the emission of foam to cushion the drone from the direction of the threat. This would temporarily degrade its flight performance, but only on an as-needed basis. Another would be avoidance, if possible.
The obvious threat will be capture ie a projectile net to catch the drone and its payload, or if you see one landing at your neighbours, you pop next door and take their stuff and/or smash the drone for shits and giggles.
Other risks are injuries to unsuspecting pets/children, or accidents (the crash rate will be above zero),
How will these be handled?
Enter the arms race.... (Score:3)
Just wait till UPS finishes its cutting edge stealth fighter/delivery drones (CODENAME: STOLEN) then we will see who rules the skies. There's also the Fed-Ex experimental air-to-air "Logistical Orbital Spearhead Targeter", (LOST) . USPS is gonna have to back to the drawing board though, looks like the surface-to-air "Malicious Operator Radio Equipped Ballista System" (MOREBS) is going to need a redesign.
So far though, its the underdog, 7/11, who rules the skies with their own system, the "Neighborhood Orbiting Grip and Ship" (NOGAS) The hot Coffee payload and secondary microwaved burrito launcher seem deterrent enough....... for now.
Typical bad software patent (Score:2)
"If someone shoots an arrow at the drone, try to avoid it. Or maybe land. Or maybe run away." It's nothing but a vague statement of the problem and some goals you might want to aim for. If they actually gave a detailed algorithm for evading arrows, that might be patentable. But this is just nonsense. They're saying, "We should have exclusive ownership of the concept of trying to avoid arrows because we were the first to file a patent application pointing out it could be a problem."