EAS Hacked at TV station Zombie Alert

[Shiny Knob]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

 

[Robert Bass]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

That's because by the time they could have created an event for the EAS system, television and radio coverage of the situation was already well underway. Also, the system is designed to be used to warn of an upcoming situation, not one that has already occured. You can't exactly use EAS to alert the public that an airplane is about to slam into a skyscraper, because that's not exactly predictable.

R

 

[Kmagrill]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

That's because by the time they could have created an event for the EAS system, television and radio coverage of the situation was already well underway. Also, the system is designed to be used to warn of an upcoming situation, not one that has already occured. You can't exactly use EAS to alert the public that an airplane is about to slam into a skyscraper, because that's not exactly predictable.

R

But you can use the EAS system to disseminate news of the event and official information about it to the public, even if the event has passed. On 9-11, no one knew how many more attacks might be underway.

Should they have activated EAS on 9-11 is still a subject of debate.

EAS is used by some stations for weather or amber alerts, so it has some potential value on the local level, but this is strictly optional. As a national communications system its value is unknown and dubious, at best.

Normally, I try to not make dogmatic statements in public, but I really think that Internet based CAP is foolishness. ANY system that relies on a central server and the public Internet to function could be hacked to send bogus alerts. Moreover, it almost certainly won't work when it's really needed. A simple DOS attack might render such a system inoperable, not to mention that the Internet is, invariably one of the first utilities to fail in any emergency. CAP should never have been a requirement nor should it ever be relied upon as a main method of emergency communications. What a waste.....

 

[Robert Bass]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

That's because by the time they could have created an event for the EAS system, television and radio coverage of the situation was already well underway. Also, the system is designed to be used to warn of an upcoming situation, not one that has already occured. You can't exactly use EAS to alert the public that an airplane is about to slam into a skyscraper, because that's not exactly predictable.

R

But you can use the EAS system to disseminate news of the event and official information about it to the public, even if the event has passed. On 9-11, no one knew how many more attacks might be underway.

But news of the event was already being covered! Are you suggesting breaking into news coverage of an event to activate EAS for the same event? Why would you do that?

R

 

[Tom Wells]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

That's because by the time they could have created an event for the EAS system, television and radio coverage of the situation was already well underway. Also, the system is designed to be used to warn of an upcoming situation, not one that has already occured. You can't exactly use EAS to alert the public that an airplane is about to slam into a skyscraper, because that's not exactly predictable.

R

But you can use the EAS system to disseminate news of the event and official information about it to the public, even if the event has passed. On 9-11, no one knew how many more attacks might be underway.

But news of the event was already being covered! Are you suggesting breaking into news coverage of an event to activate EAS for the same event? Why would you do that?

R

Easy.
It's because we have always been told that the system would be used in the event of an actual emergency.
If naturally follows that hijacked airplanes crashing into skyscrapers are either not an emergency, or not worth the nation's immediate attention.

 

[secondchoice]

I would point out that the government, whoever that is, chose not to activate the EAS during the 9-1-1 event. So exactly WHEN are they going to use it?

That's because by the time they could have created an event for the EAS system, television and radio coverage of the situation was already well underway. Also, the system is designed to be used to warn of an upcoming situation, not one that has already occured. You can't exactly use EAS to alert the public that an airplane is about to slam into a skyscraper, because that's not exactly predictable.

R

IIRC There was some time between the first WTC tower being hit and the second tower being hit and flight controllera knew they had several plane "out of their control". Also if my memory is correct, the plane which crashed in PA the passengers knew about what happen in NYC and that is why they tried to take over the flight deck.

Hind site is always 20 /20 but I wonder how many folks in the second World Trade Center to be hit or the Pentagon would not had died, had the EAS had sounded that the US was under terrorist attack and the weapon of choice was airlines into buildings and not just an aviation accident as the first reports were that morning.

 

[Kmagrill]

Hind site is always 20 /20 but I wonder how many folks in the second World Trade Center to be hit or the Pentagon would not had died, had the EAS had sounded that the US was under terrorist attack and the weapon of choice was airlines into buildings and not just an aviation accident as the first reports were that morning.

There was quite a lot of confusion until after the second plane hit. There were people in the FAA and military that strongly suspected what was happening, but others believed it was an accident at first. The president was told it was an accident at first, until the second event. Up until that moment, the government was basically paralyzed not knowing what to say or do.

So, if you were a government official who believed it might be terrorist activity, do you take a risk and activate EAS? If you're wrong, your job would've been at risk. Also, if EAS is activated for too many false alerts, people will ignore it in a real emergency, so you're probably gonna wait to be sure, if you're that official sitting on the fence.

 

[Robert Bass]

EAS useage by itself is a waste of time anyway. You've got to get the "duck fart" header codes and attention signal out of the way first, before you can even begin to relay an audio message. By the time you get through all that crap, you've wasted too much time. EAS should be used only when it is clear a dire emergency is about to occur. If you are in the middle of doing your own coverage of a pending emergency event or coverage of an emergency event that is already in progress, it's ridicullous to break into that coverage to use the EAS system. In fact, it's rather redundant.

R

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I really think that Internet based CAP is foolishness. ANY system that relies on a central server and the public Internet to function could be hacked to send bogus alerts. Moreover, it almost certainly won't work when it's really needed. A simple DOS attack might render such a system inoperable, not to mention that the Internet is, invariably one of the first utilities to fail in any emergency. CAP should never have been a requirement nor should it ever be relied upon as a main method of emergency communications. What a waste.....

A number of us tried to tell the FCC that very thing, but we were ignored. The FCC's almost comical response to the zombie-attack messages was worthy of a Three Stooges short, but they can't claim they didn't know this would happen.

The one sure way to make sure a system is hacked is to put it on the Internet. Might as well paint a bullseye on it.

 

[oldiesstation]

Dam right about that!!! Just a darn waste of money.Plus the dam cap is up and down more than my ex-wife!!

 

[kenglish]

EAS useage by itself is a waste of time anyway. You've got to get the "duck fart" header codes and attention signal out of the way first, before you can even begin to relay an audio message. By the time you get through all that crap, you've wasted too much time. EAS should be used only when it is clear a dire emergency is about to occur. If you are in the middle of doing your own coverage of a pending emergency event or coverage of an emergency event that is already in progress, it's ridicullous to break into that coverage to use the EAS system. In fact, it's rather redundant.

R

I don't think the EAS System was really meant for the listeners and viewers that are already listening and watching. It was designed to ALERT people, by turning on radio and TV receivers (or, un-muting them).
If a station does interrupt it's own coverage of an emergency, for an EAS, it's to bring others on line...."keeping the chain intact", so to speak.

 

[w9wi]

I don't think the EAS System was really meant for the listeners and viewers that are already listening and watching. It was designed to ALERT people, by turning on radio and TV receivers (or, un-muting them).

Very true. For better or worse I don't, however, know of any consumer receiver that actually does that with broadcast signals. (of course, any decent weather radio contains a decoder -- and it would be trivial to replace the weather radio "front end" with an FM -- or even AM -- broadcast receiver. The protocol is the same.)

If a station does interrupt it's own coverage of an emergency, for an EAS, it's to bring others on line...."keeping the chain intact", so to speak.

Unfortunately, when cable TV was added to the system it created a significant safety issue. TV signals delivered by cable are being interrupted during an emergency to deliver an EAS alert -- often wiping out the more detailed information the alert is asking viewers to tune to! (even worse, there have been cases of the directed channel change not getting undone at the end of the alert, making it *impossible* for viewers to tune back to the TV stations carrying the emergency info...)

 

[kenglish]

Our local Cable TV system doesn't interrupt the local stations, unless they have specifically asked them to. It leaves the news stations alone in an emergency.