Drone Maker D.J.I. May Be Sending Data to China, U.S. Officials Say

[Meta4]

You keep repeating the same arguments. Just because you say it a million times doesn't make it any more true than the 1st time you said it. DJI was hacking people's data and the Armys data. They got caught. The army erased all incidences of it. That's the facts.

You can speculate all you want, but your speculation amounts to nothing more than some wild guesses, unfounded answers, and what seems to be an obtuse allegiance to DJI. That should be noted as well. I have no allegiance but to my country. You talk as if DJI has done no wrong, but history has proven differently.

Facts?
You have no facts.
You haven't answered the very basic questions I put to get some understanding of how you think the espionage might work.
You won't listen to anything that goes against your preconceived notions.

I shouldn't have bothered to come back. I'm sorry I did.

But my comments stand for anyone with an open mind and wanting to think about the topic.

 

[Meta4]

JI was hacking people's data and the Armys data. They got caught. The army erased all incidences of it. That's the facts.

I'd be very interested to see anything that supports this.
I'm aware of the US Army advice to stop using DJI drones but the only explanation I can find is that it was “due to increased awareness of cyber vulnerabilities associated with DJI products.”
So please point me to something showing that there was any actual breach of security, not just concern about the potential for a security breach.

Here's a fairly good summary of what I've been able to find: The Army Grounds Its DJI Drones Over Security Concerns

 

[Former Member]

I'd be very interested to see anything that supports this.
I'm aware of the US Army advice to stop using DJI drones but the only explanation I can find is that it was “due to increased awareness of cyber vulnerabilities associated with DJI products.”
So please point me to something showing that there was any actual breach of security, not just concern about the potential for a security breach.

Here's a fairly good summary of what I've been able to find: The Army Grounds Its DJI Drones Over Security Concerns

The articles you quoted are good enough evidence for me.

 

[Meta4]

The articles you quoted are good enough evidence for me.

So please point me to something showing that there was any actual breach of security, not just concern about the potential for a security breach.
So far it seems to me that you are dealing with supposition and there is no proof or evidence for your claims.
I don't like helping to perpetuate myths and search for evidence of anything before I'll post it here.
I'm asking you to do the same.

 

[sar104]

DJI was hacking people's data and the Armys data. They got caught. The army erased all incidences of it. That's the facts.

Actually that's incorrect - there is no evidence that they were "hacking" anything. The software was behaving as advertised, syncing flight telemetry and thumbnails to the DJI servers. They hadn't initially even bothered to (or realized that they could) disable that function.

 

[Former Member]

Actually that's incorrect - there is no evidence that they were "hacking" anything. The software was behaving as advertised, syncing flight telemetry and thumbnails to the DJI servers. They hadn't initially even bothered to (or realized that they could) disable that function.

Same old conversation again. If the army had no evidence they would not have banned every DJI product from their bases. Just because you and many other drone pilots haven't found any data breaches doesn't mean they don't exist. The army's word is good enough for me. Take it or leave it.

 

[sar104]

Same old conversation again. If the army had no evidence they would not have banned every DJI product from their bases. Just because you and many other drone pilots haven't found any data breaches doesn't mean they don't exist. The army's word is good enough for me. Take it or leave it.

But you are overstating the case - even the army didn't accuse DJI of hacking. In their unclassified statements they expressed concerns about "vulnerabilities", and the WIRED article linked above actually does a pretty good job of explaining that. It's fine to accept that the army had concerns, even if you haven't read the memos in question, but you have gone further into the realm of exaggerated speculation.

 

[Meta4]

Same old conversation again. If the army had no evidence they would not have banned every DJI product from their bases. Just because you and many other drone pilots haven't found any data breaches doesn't mean they don't exist. The army's word is good enough for me. Take it or leave it.

And what word from the Army would that be?

The Army is naturally cautious.
By all accounts they acted to prevent a potential security breach and there is no evidence that any actual breach occurred.
Please enlighten me if you have anything to show differently.
For someone that talks loudly about facts, you are able to call on remarkably few yourself.

 

[Former Member]

And what word from the Army would that be?

The Army is naturally cautious.
By all accounts they acted to prevent a potential security breach and there is no evidence that any actual breach occurred.
Please enlighten me if you have anything to show differently.
For someone that talks loudly about facts, you are able to call on remarkably few yourself.

I am naturally cautious too when it comes to flying my drone and my privacy.

 

[Former Member]

And what word from the Army would that be?

The Army is naturally cautious.
By all accounts they acted to prevent a potential security breach and there is no evidence that any actual breach occurred.
Please enlighten me if you have anything to show differently.
For someone that talks loudly about facts, you are able to call on remarkably few yourself.

And for someone who goes walking around with a megaphone saying that DJ is innocent of anything that they have ever done to wrong customers and clients, you seem to simply ignore any evidence that they have. So get off your soapbox!

 

[Former Member]

But you are overstating the case - even the army didn't accuse DJI of hacking. In their unclassified statements they expressed concerns about "vulnerabilities", and the WIRED article linked above actually does a pretty good job of explaining that. It's fine to accept that the army had concerns, even if you haven't read the memos in question, but you have gone further into the realm of exaggerated speculation.

I am not overstating anything my friend. The army chose to delete and eliminate any DJI products and software on their systems. That's not overstating that's being cautious. I would rather be cautious than sorry later.

If the army is concerned about something, you had better bet your breaches that I'm going to be concerned too.

You guys seem to be walking around with hands over your eyes and ears. Ignoring all of the relevant facts.

 

[sar104]

I am not overstating anything my friend. The army chose to delete and eliminate any DJI products and software on their systems. That's not overstating that's being cautious. I would rather be cautious than sorry later.

If the army is concerned about something, you had better bet your breaches that I'm going to be concerned too.

You guys seem to be walking around with hands over your eyes and ears. Ignoring all of the relevant facts.

Your statement that I took issue with was "DJI was hacking people's data and the Armys data. They got caught." Please either provide some evidence to support that statement because, otherwise, we are not ignoring facts, you are simply inventing them.

 

[Meta4]

You guys seem to be walking around with hands over your eyes and ears. Ignoring all of the relevant facts.

Then point to some of these "facts".

I've just tried to sort out what happened in a drone crash in Germany.
To do that I had to rely on direct evidence - not guesses or myths.

I have looked into the Army issue since way back and am unaware of the things you are claiming.
I've asked several times for something, anything to back up your claims but nothing is coming through.
Like any flight incident, I need to see evidence before I accept anything.

If things were as you claim, you'd have no trouble backing it up.
Until then, it's just a lot of noise and I can't take it at all seriously because I deal in facts.

 

[bushie]

First a disclaimer. I have worked in China and have had very large Chinese companies as clients.

I am probably as worried about large American companies - Google, facebook, Twitter etc mining data to say nothing of American intelligence agencies listening to my phone calls as i am about DJI looking at data from my UAV.

 

[TheRoach]

Makes you wonder what?
If you look at what's in DJI recorded flight data, there's not much I'd worry about them seeing.
Plus .. DJI don't get to see my flight data unless I choose to share it with them.
The story in an uninformed, paranoid beatup.
The claim that DJI drones and software may be sending sensitive information about American infrastructure back to China is laughable.

Read this for a little balance.
DJI Touts Report Saying It Doesn't Spy for China

A simple IP packet sniffer shows what the article stated is true. Even after 2 years. To believe the Socialist Chinese government doesn't have strict control over their companies and their data is what's laughable. Don't forget, China is the nation with a social credit system. If they spy on their own people, you can surly bet they do it elsewhere.

 

[Meta4]

Don't forget, China is the nation with a social credit system. If they spy on their own people, you can surly bet they do it elsewhere.

Ever heard of the NSA or what they do?

 

[ZooCougar]

Bushie is 100% right.

What China is doing with DJI is just another example of crowdsourced intel collection. I really don’t understand why people find this so hard to comprehend.

That picture you took at the beach on it’s own may not be useful but when it is collated with many other pieces of data it could be.

My understanding of the DJI situation initially was that US Soldiers were using their personal drones in combat and the DoD had to put a stop to that because the data was probably making it back to China.

 

[sar104]

A simple IP packet sniffer shows what the article stated is true. Even after 2 years. To believe the Socialist Chinese government doesn't have strict control over their companies and their data is what's laughable. Don't forget, China is the nation with a social credit system. If they spy on their own people, you can surly bet they do it elsewhere.

Could you clarify - a packet sniffer confirms what which article says?

I've done monitoring tests on the DJI apps, and no one is disputing that they upload telemetry and other information to the servers when you choose to sync data. And, as I pointed out above, a limited amount of location data is being sent even without sync enabled, mostly to map servers, update servers and some advertising networks, both in China and the US.

 

[Former Member]

There seems to be 2 camps here. One camp says DJI can do no wrong, China is a country of angels, and don't believe anything the US Army has to say.

I'm in the camp that says don't trust anything China or DJI do in terms of trying to acquire your data, and they are not angels.

 

[sar104]

There seems to be 2 camps here. One camp says DJI can do no wrong, China is a country of angels, and don't believe anything the US Army has to say.

I'm in the camp that says don't trust anything China or DJI do in terms of trying to acquire your data, and they are not angels.

What's going on here Rob? If you are going to play the game of completely distorting everyone else's argument to then this discussion becomes pointless.