Hello and welcome to my talk here at the Aerospace Village at DEF CON Safe Mode. MITM, the mystery in the middle. My name is Matthew Gaffney and I'll be taking you through an introductory level talk about the aircraft information systems domain, also known as the AISD. We'll be covering through these topics throughout the 15 minutes or so talk today, covering most of it on EFBs, if I'm honest. So why the mystery? So the reason I said I called it the mystery in the middle was due to the lack of public information I could find about the AISD when I started my journey into aviation cyber security several years ago. I could find lots out about how to meet Yonix systems, IFE and all about their weaknesses, but very little about the AISD. So that's the reason the main reason for the talk today is to try and improve knowledge and awareness of this part of the aircraft and generate the healthy discussion about security within. So logically the AISD sits in between the aircraft control domain and the passenger information and entertainment systems domain, both known as the ACD and the PISD. And essentially what makes an aircraft what's known as E-enabled. An E-enabled means that it will integrate, the aircraft will integrate with the airline IT systems to provide significant cost savings to the business. What it does is it allows remote maintenance and uploading of software updates, which is a key time saver, especially when you consider that previously. If you wanted to update the firmware on a module, you'd have to remove it, send it away. In the meantime, put in a replacement, then get the old unit back with the new firmware and swap it over. So being able to upload new software remotely without having to remove modules or LRUs, as they're known, is a considerable cost and time saving for an airline. It also allows the airline to download logs, both operational logs and security. So for airlines, the AISD is the most important part to get right for the business, at least that's my theory. An airline cannot have much influence on how the ACD is constructed. That may be a small amount of customization, but not very much at all. It's heavily regulated, it's heavily dependent on certifications, which are long, expensive and time consuming. So the AISD is where the airline, the operator, really has to get it right. But there's lots of challenges in doing that. There's, across all aviation, not just enabled aircraft, there's a lot of older technology that gets reused. And it's not really a surprise, because if it works and it meets the requirements, why change it? Certifying new modules is expensive and time consuming as well. So the older modules that are still fit for purpose will be reused a lot, because it's cheaper to modify them or to use the older ones. What this also means, though, is that when threats change over time, these older modules can be attacked in new ways, nobody thought about when they would can see. We're seeing this with avionics hardware today, but we are not really thinking about this when it comes to the AISD, and maybe we should. When I say we have new risks to manage, what I mean is engineering now needs to consider cyber and infosec risks. Infosec teams now need to understand and consider engineering. Traditionally, these are two areas of the business that have been completely isolated. And it has allowed engineering to operate in its own little bubble, which has led to engineering not following infosec policies 100%. And you see examples of bad practice such as post-it notes with passwords, or even passwords being written as a procedure documentation, because it's easier to operate that way when you're an engineer than it is to use a password manager or to remember the password off by heart. At the same time, IT and infosec are implementing systems for engineers to use without fully understanding the constraints of engineering. They don't always have really good 3G connection on-board an aircraft. They don't always have time to be able to learn new systems in depth. What they do have is very pressured time constraints in order to get aircraft back on the line, because all the time spent being fixed is money. But when IT comes along and comes along and implements a new IT system, say for example, they don't have a single sign on, all of a sudden that engineer instead of 20 passwords to remember, they now have 21. And then we ask the question, why are they writing down passwords? So understanding the constraints and the difficulty of engineering can go a long way to improving the security posture of an airline, and operators really need to get these departments working together in harmony. When dealing with engineering and E operations, you cannot bring the corporate informational cybersecurity mentality and templates to the party. They just won't work. You're dealing with an area of the business which historically has not been great with cyber. So you have to go slow. One thing that's on your side though, as an intersect person, is that aircraft engineers love processes and procedures. Oh boy, do they love it. Before you can even touch an aircraft on the ground, you must have a job card which outlines the steps engineers must take for each task. So if you can bring influence to these procedures to improve security, that's half the battle of one. And then finally, I should probably explain that last comment on the slide. This is my humble opinion and I know many would disagree, but I feel that when looking at aviation security, hackers should not focus entirely on adionics. Although the ACD in the adionics have a number of well documented and technical weaknesses, it does have a very effective physical security model. You can only access the adionics bay from outside the aircraft. So when the aircraft is in flight, not even the pilots can get to it. So only the engineers on the ground can do that. And if you've ever tried to get access outside the legitimate reasons, you know how difficult it would be to get outside the illegitimate reasons. Also, there's usually only one network interface between the ACD and the AISD and I'm talking about aircraft that are fully compliant with ANK821 here. But this separation is normally implemented with protections such as a firewall or even a data diode. And sometimes we also base that network communication on proprietary protocols, not on TCPIP. So if you can get into the ACD, yes, you can inflict a lot of damage, but gaining that access, either through physical or technological means would be extremely difficult. And if you could go to that level, if you could get physical access to an aircraft, why go hacking? You know, you can do something much more nefarious with a much greater guarantee of success, if that's what you wanted to do. So for me, instead, the aircraft information systems domain has multiple touchpoints ranging from the airline network, Wi-Fi, even the internet and the cabin. And these attack scenarios are much more traditional and realistic for a hacker. Okay, it's not sexy. We can't control the the aircraft control services from the AISD. You can have other effects on the aircraft, effects which may impact operations. And if you know what you are doing, you could modify some of the data presented for pilots. So manufacturer challenges. So I explained the challenge about technical debt. And the reason for that is that airworthiness time scales are huge and they encourage or they almost force manufacturers to really think about what they're going to reuse and what they have to rebuild from scratch, because those brand new modules are really expensive to get certified. Challenges from the operator are very different and in many ways are quite significant. The key one is they have zero visibility of the manufacturer's risk assessment. So when the manufacturer is designing and building an aircraft, they perform extensive and detailed risk assessments to mitigate system vulnerabilities. They will mitigate many of these issues themselves, but they will also transfer some to the operators. And this is communicated in a number of ways, such as security handbooks or hand solves depending on which manufacturer you're dealing with. But no operator will get to see details of the original vulnerability or the risk assessment. So despite the quality of this manufacturer guidance and these recommendations which come down, there's no real mechanism for the operator to assess the effectiveness of implemented controls. And this can, and from what I've seen, probably does lead to gaps in the cybersecurity protections of E&A World Aircraft at the operator level. When you think about it, airlines are heavily reliant on legacy IT systems. For example, many use at the core of their business a TPS system, which handles all of the real-time transactions. It's not a traditional operating system. It is based on technology that was released in 1979. To program it, it's done in hexadecimal. It's just not what we would, people in my generation would consider a traditional operating system. But it handles transaction messages one to one at an extremely high volume and extremely high speed. And what that does is make sure that the same seat isn't booked twice by separate transactions milliseconds apart. So, and there's nothing out there on the market that can really replicate that right now. Also, airlines over time have grown and have added new systems on top of the old systems. And until quite recently, this may have been done without consideration of all the risks. In fact, some of them would have been done before cybersecurity was really a thing. So, some may not have followed good practice such as network segregation. Airlines also operate 24-7. And that means that outages are very costly. When an airline IT system goes down, aircraft stop, they just cannot take off because they haven't got the information they need for the pre-flight. So, any introduction of a new system that could have an impact on operations is risk managed to the end of the degree. And there's a lot of risk avoidance going on when these new systems are put in place. Either that or you just throw resources at it to make sure that if something does go wrong when you introduce a new system, that the impacts are mitigated as much as possible. What it does mean is that over time, airlines can become quite flat in their networks. And what that means is if the perimeter is at a breach, it's very easy for an attacker to then pivot inside the networks. So, where regulators fit in. So, speaking from a European perspective, there's some really positive steps going on right now in the critical national infrastructure sphere of which aviation forms a part of. And maturity in cyber security, aviation cybersecurity is growing slowly and gathering momentum, or at least it was before COVID. So, last time I was really involved. From what I've seen, the UKCA is growing the cyber oversight function in a very positive way. And rather than just setting out a framework and directing airlines to comply, they are working closely with operators instead, guiding them and helping them through their assure process, which is really good to see. So, going back to this gap in the risk assessment, could the regulator help bridge that gap? The issue is sharing the risk assessments with operators as they are highly sensitive. Maybe some trusted government bodies could be given more details on the risks and help guide operators on the effectiveness of their controls without passing on that sensitive detail. If we can't trust the government, what about the aviation ISAM? Although they are a member organization, most of the large operators and manufacturers are members. Could this be another suitable mechanism to do the same thing? Whatever happens, I feel something does need to be done. Otherwise, pardon the pun, airlines could be flying. So, here is a rather simplified overview of a enabled aircraft. This diagram is based on compliance to the ARRIC E21 protocol. And as you can see, we've got the three main domains, the aircraft control domain, the aircraft information system domain, and the passenger information and entertainment systems domain. The AISD, as well as being a main communications hub, or hosting a main communications hub, will host the electronic flight bag if it's a class II. If it's a class II, the EFB will sit in the ADOX, more on that later. Some aircraft have their flight standard panel or FAP connected in the AISD. And there's also occasional printers, maintenance terminals, which can be USB or Ethernet port, depending on what kind of device you're using. If you're using just a straight up USB as a tool, or if you're using a portable data loader. And those maintenance ports are used as a backup for the Ipset tunnels that sit between the aircraft and the glans. So, these Ipset tunnels are really well secured, and the security is excellent. So, they are managed from mostly on board, but the ground systems are involved in the keying of the aircraft. And there's, we'll talk a bit more about PKI later on. What we do have is the EFBs, if they are connected to the AISD, they will often route traffic to the internet through the Ipset tunnel, through the DMZ and out into the internet, which is usually for software updates. And it's usually a very restricted set of websites where the EFBs can go. That is usually done on the ground as well, because if you imagine, if this is happening during the flight phase, you have the latency of the SAP connection down to the ground systems through the DMZ and out to the internet. So, the response time on that in flights would be pretty long, but on the ground it's manageable. One thing to note as well is sometimes in enabled aircraft, instead of having a SAP come in the IISD, there is an option whereby the manufacturer offers the operator the ability to use the passenger SAP connection. Remember, this SAP connection, the passenger domain, does not go through this Ipset tunnel here. It goes off through the service provider's network. And one option that some manufacturers are offering to operators is that the information systems domain here can connect to the ground systems, but through the same SAP com here. And that is quite advantageous in terms of cost. The more you use SAP com, the cheaper it is. So, if you have two connections, that's going to cost you quite a bit of money. If you have one, yes, you're going to be paying for more data, but because prices come down with volume, you'll actually be paying less overall. What I have seen though is quite promising that when this is implemented, the connection from the IISD into the SAP com is through a separate VLAN. So, essentially, that's a mini network segregation on its own there. And that data is not accessible from the IFE or the Canon Wi-Fi. So, moving on to my favorite subject, electronic flight bags. So, these have been a revolution for pilots. As the name suggests, they replaced the large and cumbersome and often heavy bags, which were used by pilots to carry paper-based manuals. These bags would often weigh more than 25 kilos. And as well as being difficult to maneuver, they also contributed to physical injuries of pilots as well. Moving those bags around the cabin, around the cabin, around the cockpit, sometimes led to shoulder injuries because of their weight. Depending on the type of EFB, they can perform a variety of functions, including a documentation reference library. They type B can perform what's known as performance calculations. These give V1, VR, V2 speeds, all that kind of stuff. These are important for pilots to know. On-route navigation if you have a GNSS feed into the EFB. And if you have the relevant connections, access to no-tams, weather information, and the ability to do fuel calculations as well. Some operators also include spoke applications that sit on the EFB. And these might be used to complement airline operation systems, so long as they reach the relevant approvals. But they will also help achieve the overall goal of EFBs, which is not just a reduction of paper inside the cockpit, but also faster access to information, which helps lower turnaround times and reduce workload in the cockpit. And non-pilots may not understand the importance of that last part. Many incidents of pilot error cite cockpit workload as either the main or as a contributing factor. So this makes EFBs not just an effective tool in reducing costs, but they also help meet flying safety. Hardware categories have different names, depending on which regulator you sit under and how long you've been in the business. They're often used together, so I've included both here with some general characteristics. So a Class 1 or portable EFBs, they're often small devices and double-uppers corporate devices at the same time. Think of a small EFB, a small iPad, and with no connectivity to the aircraft. They're then considered like a pad, a personal electronic device, and as such they must be stored for takeoff, taxi and landing. Class 2, these can be pilots or plane attached to the EFB. These connect to AISD with usually a one-way feed of data from the avionics. They can be integrated with the cockpit displays and their build is the responsibility of the operator. Quite often they are small laptops with operating systems such as windows and then the manufacturer will provide the software which runs on top of that and connects to systems on board the AISD. It's worth mentioning that Class 2 EFBs have very different threat profiles, depending on whether they are plane or pilot attached. So our plane attached EFBs are considered part of the minimum equivalent list or NEL and tracked as an aircraft part. They're always under the control of the airline with coordinated and tracked movements between locations. Pilot attached EFBs are not. They enter and exit the cockpit when the pilot enters or leaves the aircraft. They are very likely to connect to all sorts of networks and hotels, cafes and airports so that the pilot can update software, navigation databases, no-tams, re-corporate emails or even surf the internet. So you can see how the plane attached EFB has a very different threat matrix to that of a pilot attached one who may be anywhere in the world using insecure Wi-Fi. And then finally, I've included Class 3 for completeness because Class 3 don't really form part of the AISD but they are in EFB. So they are integrated into the aircraft control domain and they have no connectivity outside of that. The build is the responsibility of the manufacturer but it is maintained by the operator and what I mean by that is that the hardware is fixed, the hardware cannot be changed. There may be software updates of the time but these are provided to the operator who then have the responsibility of maintaining the right version. Class 3 EFBs are certified as part of the EFBs. So the operator has next and no ability to make changes unless they wish to go through the trouble and expense of re-certifying. And even though EFBs, Class 3 EFBs, so from the AISD, the ones I've seen are logically separated from the core avionics. And you have to interface through many different modules before you can bridge a gap between the control surfaces and the EFB. So attacking a Class 3 EFB to affect an aircraft in flight is still not that straightforward. Software categories. So Type A, really simple, they're just used for the storage and display of documents. And like I said, these are typically Class 1 classes, PEDs, and they get put away during the critical phases of flight. Type B applications, this is where it starts getting more fun. So like I said, they can perform performance calculations and they may access the internet on the ground and in flight and they may be able to receive one-way data from the avionics. They are also the most common EFB software type IFC. It's worth mentioning that Class 1 and Class 2 EFBs are built by the operator. And as such, they are not the responsibility of the manufacturer. Even though they may provide some of the software that runs on the device, it is up to the operator to ensure that they are working securely. For EFBs running Type B software, this is where things can get a bit blurred. According to regulations, any vulnerabilities in the software that could affect the operation of EFB software regardless of who coded it is the responsibility of the operator to mitigate. At the same time, details on EFB vulnerabilities do not seem to be passed onto the operator, just a series of recommendations for EFB security. Now, these recommendations are really good, but as we'll come on to later, I don't feel they go far enough. Type C applications can affect the control of the aircraft in flight. So this is the really juicy part. Essentially, they can send data to the avionics. However, at the moment of going to press with this presentation, there are no current approvals that exist for Type C applications that I am aware of. I have seen future offerings from some manufacturers about having a bidirectional connection between EFB and the flight management system, which sits in the avionics. However, I have not enough detail there to give you the information about it. As I touched on the previous slide, regulators provide operators with cybersecurity recommendations. Recommendations are also given by the manufacturers, but I feel that even when you combine these two sources, this advice does not go far enough. By that I mean that there is a lack of detail in what to consider and measures to take. When it comes to regulatory documentation, security appears to be the poor cousin, with the majority in the document dedicated to physical characteristics and user interface design. The wording is also quite willowy and lacking in detail. It is certainly an area where I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Also, because implementing EFB security is the responsibility of the operator, some manufacturers appear to use this as a green light for poor implementations of technology, which on their own would be considered zero security by design. Instead, the security is designed to be assured by the inherent assumption that the operator's networks will never be compromised or that malware will never find its way onto an EFB, kind of like passing the security hot potato. At the same time, operators are not directly informed of any vulnerabilities, instead given a set of recommendations to implement. Unless the operator discovers any weaknesses, they would be unaware of the risks involved, and if they were aware of the risks, I'm more than certain that they would have targeted controls to them based on what they knew. Overall, though, the recommendations given by some manufacturers are pretty good, although I feel there could be more detail in certain areas. I would like to share the document names and references with you. However, I am heavily constrained by NDA, as well as manufacturer efforts to protect IP, so I'm not allowed to give you these names, even though doing so would be for the benefit of any operator's watch. And I cannot move on without briefly talking about Class 3 or integrated EFBs, and even though they don't form part of the AISB, there are some use cases here which highlight a really important issue when it comes to technical debt. So, like I said before, the hardware is fixed and the software updates come from the manufacturer. So, to an operator, it may seem a very attractive prospect in terms of time and cost to get an EFB rate. However, this category of EFB is not without this issue. And an example is an aircraft which I love, which is the Dreamliner, having flown it many, many times, albeit not that long ago. I only started flying it about three years ago. I absolutely adore this aircraft. It was great to fly on as a passenger. But many Dreamliners have, especially the ones that first were brought to market, have Windows XP operating system integrated in the EFB, which sits in the endionics. And this is a fact which gets a low-surprise look from infosec and IT questions, but hang on. Remember, the 787 was designed in 2002-2003. Back then, XP was king and would be for many years to come. The type of approval and first flight for this aircraft was in 2009. Vista was available, but come on, Vista, who would have changed? So, when that aircraft was first went to market, it was delivered with EFP-EP4, developed using Windows XP. EP5 is available now, which uses Windows 10. However, not only do the upgrades come with a huge cost in terms of the unit, but also a huge cost in terms of downtime and recertification of the endionics, because it's a hardware change, as well as a software change. So, this kind of explains the issue of technical debt using more modern examples. Of course, we all think that an EFP onboard a brand new modern state-of-the-art aircraft should be the most recent stable version of an operating system. But even in the timelines that we're talking about here, which are very small, we're seeing out-of-date operating systems being used in critical systems because of these timelines. And this issue is not limited to one manufacturer. I just brought up Boeing because of the knowledge I have of the EP4, EP5 versions and the operating systems. And it's not even limited to EFPs. It is all across the aircraft. I just wanted to discuss the technology trap. To those who may not fully understand why we see old tech in these brand new modern state-of-the-art aircraft. But it is interesting to think that the first Boeing 787s still have 20 years of life left in the war more. And when they come to end of life, will they still be running EP4 with XP? I think some will. And we'll see if Ken is still, but for Ken from PENTA's partners is still climbing around aircraft in breakers yards in 2040. Then he may come across Windows XP inside the Adionix, which will be a really, really cool thing to see him play with. But if you haven't seen their videos, they have some great walk-through talk-throughs on 747s, which I'll go through the scrapyard today. And they also have older videos on their blog about dismantling old IFE systems a couple of years ago, which have a 386 hardware inside them. And these are aircraft that were only dismantled a few years ago. So remember I said that you know what aircraft are flying data centers with half of it on the ground? Well, this is your half ground system. And they're used for keying and rekeying the PKI on the aircraft. They're used, like I said, for the key thing is the uploading of LSAPs and FLS. Upgrade software modules on board the aircraft, a major, major time saver. But they also use the configuration changes, downloading of logs, and as a conduit for EFB connections. And this is done with some software provided by the manufacturer in a client-server relationship. The idea is that the operator would implement a Windows server, which runs the server software, and then the client will be installed on the engineers of that time. The PKI onboard the enabled aircraft is typically used to protect the VPN connection between the aircraft and the ground system. It is also used to digitally sign the software that gets uploaded. So integrity checks can be done before it is installed in the aircraft. And this is one area that manufacturers seem to have gotten right with the latest enabled aircraft, at least the two main manufacturers in a way. While I do not have a PhD in cryptography or anything higher than a BSC in any subject, for that matter, the PKI implementations I have seen are simply excellent. And that shows the manufacturers are learning from previous issues. And that's great to see. As well as EFBs, I think that ground systems require special consideration when it comes to security control implementation. The enabled aircraft being sold on the market today are truly excellent. Whether you're a pilot or a passenger, they are fantastic creations and a true credit to the teams involved in their development and manufacture. However, the same cannot be said of some of the supporting software. Some of the software distributed with modern aircraft is quite old, and they were likely coded at a time when there was very little consideration given to secure DevOps or even cybersecurity at all. It seems that the approach back then was so long as it works, it's fine. And that has led to some very insecure software being used with modern-day aircraft. However, I'm seeing positive movement in this area. There are new versions of EFB and ground systems software being developed today, which should be available in a few years' time. And that is going through what appears to be a sensible and secure approach to software development. So time will tell what comes out from that, but again, it's another positive move. As with EFB software, how many operators have looked at the ground system software from an attacker's perspective? Have they looked for weaknesses? Have they found any and then combined this with their threat model and overlaid on the existing network architecture? Remember, like I said, a lot of airline networks have any, if at all, any segregation. So if the corporate network was compromised, could someone pivot into the ground systems and put your aircraft at risk? Also, conversely, could this software, at any weaknesses you identify, introduce new attack vectors or vulnerabilities in your systems which could then be used to pivot into the corporate network? These are things that operators really need to consider and look at. Now, I have seen some manufacturers and third parties offer ground systems, a ground system service hosted in the cloud. And now, while I understand moving to the cloud is not the sort of side of wallet for any organization, although some seem to think it is, from my experience, these cloud solutions are normally put together very well from a security perspective. They also permit creative design in methods to mitigate weaknesses in the software. So, for example, if you had issues with the client software that would sit on the engineer's laptop and you didn't want that interaction with the server going across the network, then what you could look at is putting both the server and the client in separate lockdown enclaves inside a cloud solution, then implement a VDI to host the client interface through a secure HTML5 web front end. And that gives you lots of opportunities to customize the security according to your threats and risks and all sorts of other opportunities as well. So, these are certainly ideas that we're looking at because the software that's available today doesn't seem to be that good, but some of the cloud offerings are flight to the panels. So, these are interesting from a side of perspective. So, anyone that deals with industrial control systems will know that these are essentially what's known as a HMI, a human machine. And these are used for lighting, air control, announcements, door status, lighting, emergency buttons, and they might also have the spread features that the airline will implement. They can also be used for maintenance and for uploading FLS, LSAPs, and for downloading logs if the maintenance port isn't available. So, why do FLAPs have a security focus? Well, like any HMI, especially those ICS implementations, they're typically an easy target, especially those within the USB port. I did some research on FLAPs, and while some are directly connected to both the AISD and the PISD in the United Arabian Aircraft, there are none which have a connection to the AISD or EDONIX anymore. Not that I can see it well. That said, I did raise concern about the possibility of a passenger inserting a USB stick loaded with malware into the FLAP USB port. And what that would mean. So, the team I was in started asking the manufacturer some very probing questions. And to their credit, the manufacturer provided a highly detailed and impressive response. And it was actually done in person due to the sensitivity of the content. But what they showed us were that the technical controls to protect the ACB from the FLAP were very robust. However, when asked the further questions, it seemed that the AISD was considered almost expendable in the malware on board scenario. When asked about the response was that the AISD can be entirely functioning and it will not affect the airworthiness, which can be interpreted as the AISD can be riddled with malware and the aircraft can still be operated legally. Finally, however, that got me thinking to the operational side. And I wondered how many pilots knowing that an aircraft is infected with malware yet still legal to fly would actually fly it. What if, as an attacker, my goal was not to take control of the aircraft but to affect the operations of an airline as a coordinated extortion or blackmail attack. Now, everyone in the industry knows, regardless of the airline, that this USB port is off limits, even to crew. Yet I have spoken to cabin crew from multiple airlines and they have confirmed that they are told this in training. However, everyone in the industry also knows that this port is used extensively to charge crew devices, both official and personal, in spite of the rules. I have also seen passenger devices being charged in the FAP as the USB port in this scene wasn't working and it was actually the crew who had done this as a courtesy for the passenger. So what is clear from this is that while people know there is a risk, it is clearly awareness training isn't working, not all the time in it. I thought it important to also include some detail on some of the more general issues I found and I must state again, I am heavily bound by NDA but I have reached out for advice and agreed parameters of what I can divulge here prior to this talk. So one team I was in had been working on the security design of their ESDs and we have planned project milestones to ensure that build documentation was accurate and that the device was built according to design. A lot of work had gone into locking the operating system down, it was windows based and this is where I had a lot of extensive experience and knowledge. So this is where I focus my attention.  This is the manufacturer provided software. I had naively assumed that this software would be fine or at least not too bad. When it came to the pentest I knew the build was solid so I was surprised when on day two of the test, day two of the five day test Andrew pentester called. Now anyone that deals with pentests know that if they call you prior to the planned end date and it isn't a question then it's bad duty. Andrew had not only found an API that was completely unprotected, there was no authentication, there was no encryption but had written some code but also written some code to export it. It was quite short so I sent a message to the manufacturer straight away and we see the response that this was not a vulnerability but in fact a feature. All I can say is that when I repeated this response to my colleagues, jaws across the room dropped the floor. I took a step back and realised that in order to make the manufacturer understand I had to do more analysis. Now back when I was in the British Army I was taught to analyse attack scenarios by asking so what and some you reached the answer. So I took the same approach with Andrew's code and turned the dial to 11. I found every single parameter I could. At the end it would not have taken much to turn that resulting code into a very feasible malware for EFBs. I spoke with flight operations, pilots and EOSEC and demonstrated the rather trivial attack. Everyone I spoke to agreed that this was bad. So despite this feedback which included a dossier of potential outcomes which I had compiled from pilots and operations feedback, the only action taken by the manufacturer was to reduce the attack surface. They replied in their opinion the scenarios I had described were not feasible and the whole vulnerability was dismissed. Now it wasn't like I was proposing aliens would come down and attack planet Earth although 2020 isn't over yet. One threat which they dismissed as unrealistic was the insider threat. Now I found that really strange because this threat was on the operator's risk register and I had been asked specifically to consider this threat when giving my updates to high level security boards. Consequently sometime later however I was informed that the software in question was going through a complete life cycle upgrade and that the project would include not just a secure DevOps approach but security milestones with qualifiers as well. Now I cannot take full credit for that change because I know that somebody had moved into a new role covering the security of such software which means that they had already knew that there were issues and that they were moving to close the gap when I had spoken from about this issue with the APR and I know this person from my dealings with the manufacturer and I'm very confident he would do good work. Further investigations I've made on other aircraft having covered examples of the same unprotected API different API but unprotected all the same and these are inside the AISD so they are accessible from the EFB they're accessible from other systems on board and despite going through the responsible disclosure route as an independent researcher I was not only dismissed for making unrealistic assumptions but I had to fight for updates. Now the assumption I made was based on a proposed commercial offering from the manufacturer coupled with their own API documentation detailing how it would work yet it was still considered unrealistic. Now they may have made a separate assessment themselves and started going down a different more secure pathway for the release of this new functionality which would be great but I was not made privy to the details so I have to say that for now I don't know. If I do find out more I will certainly update you. So hopefully that has given you a sufficient introduction into a network domain that is often overlooked by security researchers but which has a lot of juicy issues that need to be addressed. Like I said attacking the adionics are really interesting but getting access to them to exploit vulnerabilities is pretty difficult. While the AISD may not be as sexy or interesting on the surface when you scratch a bit deeper there's a lot to decipher. Touchpoints while still quite difficult to exploit are more accessible. Considerable traditional to an attacker and this means everyone from cabin crew to engineers, flight ops and infosec all have an important role to play in securing enabled aircraft at the operator level. Some advice I'd give to operators is do not take the security of provided software for granted. Now obviously I'm not talking about FLS and LSAPs here what I'm talking about is the software that is provided to connect to your aircraft so the EFBs, the ground systems etc. Even the most modern aircraft today have some very basic vulnerabilities in the code. What is more worrying for me is that this software will have achieved some kind of approval in spite of these weaknesses. So don't assume because they have approvals that they are 100% secure. Make sure you perform some kind of assurance on software and systems either using your internal teams or if you don't have the skills in-house hire an external expert or pen tester. It may be costly but having an aircraft AOG for several weeks while you investigate a cyber attack and have to replace all the onboard FLS or LSAPs could probably cost you a lot more. Security in the operations is not the realm of one department alone. The multiple business areas that make up the operations require that infosec understand aviation and what cyber risks actually mean to aircraft. Infosec also need to make sure that engineers and other business areas understand the risk context. It is a two-way street. I've seen that some operators have implanted a multi-discipline groupings which handle these challenges. They're often called a cyber-inputing cell which is a really cool name to have on your CV, just a little hint there. So these groupings often have at least one board member and they combine knowledge and experience from multiple departments and they ensure that issues are tackled in the best possible way for the business. From what I hear they are extremely effective and I would certainly recommend that you if you don't have one or the implemented new business and you operate a new aircraft that you certainly look into it and I suppose it finally goes without saying that you must involve your regulator as much as you can. They have access to the right people, the information and the frameworks with the right advice and the right guidance to guide you through difficult scenarios. So make sure you engage them as much as you can and if you don't get satisfactory results from your regulators, sure, pop me a line, I can certainly help where I can. But finally I'll sign off with a small piece of advice for operators. If you have someone in your organization who isn't as effective and competent an engineer as they are with InfoSec and cybersecurity, my advice would be to make sure that person never leaves your business. I'm not an engineer. I was lucky I had access to excellent engineers who were able to communicate to me exactly what the problems were and to better understand systems so I could evaluate the risks. At the same time these engineers were, they have a high level of intelligence engineers, so they could understand what I was telling them and together we worked really well. But if you could incorporate that into one person, that's a very valuable asset indeed. So that's the end of the presentation. Hopefully that's enough information to weight your appetites on the AISD. There is a lot more there. I have to cram it into 50 minutes. So I will be available for questions in a session in the Discord channel from where you linked to this presentation. Please head over there and join in the discussion. Alternatively, you can grab me on Twitter or on my website. There's an email link you can get on me and I hope to speak to you all soon. Take care.


Good evening aspirants, I have an important announcement to make. 2023 prelims is fast approaching, there is only 5 more months. If you are serious about boosting your prelim score, make use of the pre-storming by Shankar Ace Academy. The next batch of pre-storming is starting today, the registration link for pre-storming is provided in the description below. Now let's get back into the Indonesia analysis by Shankar Ace Academy for the 14th of December 2022, displayed here are the list of news articles we will be going through today. Now without wasting time, let's get into the discussion. Look at this editorial article, this editorial article talks about the gradually moderating inflation rates in the economy. We all know how the pandemic affected the global economy as a whole, and obviously India is not an exception, right? We saw price hikes during the pandemic. The author here talks about how the prices are again moderating to a normal level. Further, to get a deeper understanding of this news article, we will start by understanding what inflation is all about. In simple terms, inflation is nothing but the raise in prices of most goods and services that we use daily. It is basically the average price raise of a basket of commodities. Here you should know the opposite of this phenomena, which is deflation. In deflation, the price starts decreasing. This is the basic about inflation and deflation. In India, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation measures inflation. We also practice something called as inflation targeting, which is done by the RBI. This simply means RBI is tasked with the role of keeping inflation rates in check. The central government usually notifies the target and it is currently set at 4% consumer price index inflation. The upper tolerance limit is at 6% and the lower tolerance limit is at 2%. Note that RBI targets CPA and not wholesale price index or WPI. The WPI is the general change in price level at the wholesale market. And CPA is the change in price level in the goods and services of common use, mostly in the last stage of transaction that is in the retail market. From the film's perspective, we should know the difference between CPA and WPI. And another concept that we should learn about is the headline inflation and core inflation. We know that the prices of food and fuel are too volatile, so a small change in price of these two commodities would seriously affect the rate of inflation. The headline inflation is the normal inflation rate that is traditionally targeted by the RBI. In the basket of commodities that are used to calculate this inflation rate, if we take out food and the fuel component, it brings out the core price inflation. In simple terms, core inflation is headline inflation minus food and fuel inflation. The author here mentioned about something called as sticky inflation. Let's learn about that as well. Sticky inflation is a condition where there is a combination of stubbornly high inflation and often stagnant growth. Normally, what does the RBI do when the inflation in the economy is increasing? It will increase the policy rates.  When the money supply decreases, then the demand will decrease, which will bring down inflation. But you have to note here that this method only brings down demand pull inflation. In some cases, there might be inflation due to cost push factors. In such a case, the increase in policy rate by RBI does not result in decreasing the inflation. This kind of inflation is only called as sticky inflation. Sticky inflation usually occurs not due to increase in demand in the economy, but due to increase in raw material and labor cost. So basically sticky inflation is cost push inflation that is immune to the inflation control measures of the RBI. So this is the basic about sticky inflation. No coming back to the editorial. At the end of the editorial, the author suggests some measures to ensure that inflation stays in check in the future also. The author suggests that the government must take steps to control inflation along with the RBI. Right now, RBI is controlling inflation by increasing the reporate. When reporate keeps on increasing, borrowing becomes costly. This brings down private investment and economic growth of our country. So in addition to RBI, if the government also through its fiscal policy tries to control inflation, it will have long term positive impacts in the economy. For example, currently in the global market, crude oil prices have come down. But we consumers are still paying the same price for our fuel. Government must take steps so that the fall in crude oil prices in the global market reflects for our consumers also. This move of the government will bring down inflation. So basically, the author suggests that both the RBI and the government must act hand in hand to control inflation in our economy. So that's all regarding this editorial. In this discussion, we saw the basics about inflation, deflation. We saw the difference between headline inflation and core inflation. We also saw the difference between CPA and WPA. Then we saw the basics about sticky inflation. And finally, we saw the steps suggested by the author to control inflation in the long run. So that's all regarding this discussion. With this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Now look at this article. It says that the apportion members were denied the opportunity to seek clarifications regarding the India-China standoff. So the apportion members reminded the Modi government about the 1962 India-China war. It was said that during the 1962 war, parliament discussed the incursions at length. Even the then Prime Minister, Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru, he rejected outrightly the idea of holding a secret session at that time. And this is about the news article given here. In this context, let us briefly see about the Sino-India war of 1962. And we will also understand about what is this secret session. First of all, let us take the Sino-India war. China got its independence in the year 1947 and the People's Republic of China was formed in the year 1949. At that time, Indian government was maintaining a cordial relationship with China. The first sign of discord between India and China came in the year 1950. It was when China invaded Tibet. The disagreement is because India supported Tibet and India proposed negotiations. The second issue is with regards to the borders. China started to deploy troops near the border area. India now had to contend China in its northern and eastern borders, that is near Akshay-Chin region and the Arunachal Pradesh region respectively. After this, India entered into the Panchashil agreement with China in the year 1954. This is called as the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. This was done in hope to put an end to the Chinese provocation. But what happened? On the contrary, in the year 1957, China illegally occupied the Akshay-Chin region and completed construction of their western highway through it. So to counter continued Chinese aggression, India started the policy of establishing series of small posts along its northern and eastern borders with China. This is done to prevent further Chinese incursions into India's territory. And this is only called as forward policy. But the problem is that most posts were not capable of giving a fight and they were logistically unsustainable. So various conflict and military incidents between China and India happened throughout the summer of 1962. On October 20, 1962, China's People's Liberation Army invaded India in Ladakh and across the McMohon line in the Arunachal Pradesh region. So this is the crux about the Sino-India war of 1962. Now coming back to the article. In the article, I mentioned about a term called secret sitting, right? Now in our discussion, we will see about this secret sitting. As the name suggests, secret sitting means sitting happening in secrecy. If the leader of the house makes a request for secret sitting, then the speaker will fix a day or part of the sitting of the house in secret. Now on the side note, interested aspirants can post in the comment section who is the leader of the house in Lokshabha, okay? Now coming back, when the house sits in secret, no stranger will be permitted to be present in the chamber, lobby or gallery of the parliament. But the members of the council, that is the Rajeshabha, may be present in their gallery. Apart from the members of the Rajeshabha, persons who are authorized by the speaker may also be present in the chamber, lobby or gallery of the city. So this is about the term secret sitting. So that's all regarding this discussion. In this discussion, we saw about the basics about Sino-India war of 1962. In addition to this, we saw the details about the term secret sitting. So with this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Look at this op-ed article, this article talks about the urban-rural manufacturing shift. The author of this article says that this shift has both advantages and challenges. So in this article discussion, let us understand what is urban-rural manufacturing shift, the reason for such a shift and the challenges associated with it. First what is urban-rural manufacturing shift? That by this term, the author is referring to a trending India's manufacturing sector where employment and manufacturing activities are moving from large cities to smaller towns and rural areas. This phenomenon is evident from the report released a decade ago. The report was released by the World Bank and its title is India's manufacturing sector moving away from cities, policy research working paper. See you can note this down and use it in your main censor as a value addition, okay? Now let us see the reasons for the movement of the manufacturing sector from urban to rural areas. The first reason is the factory floor space supply constraints. Let me explain. Whenever a factory decides to replace labor by machinery, they need to expand the floor space of the factory. But the issue here is when the factory is located in urban area, it cannot expand easily as the urban areas are usually constructed. So this factor does not allow the factory to expand like it can do in the rural areas. We can say that increased capital intensity of the production is one of the reasons for the factories to move from urban to rural areas. Here capital intensive refers to the production process that requires higher percentage of investment in fixed capitals like buildings and machines. In capital intensive sector, they invest more in capital assets to increase productivity and profit. Opposite to capital intensive is labor intensive. If a sector is labor intensive, they invest more in labor like training and upskilling. So this is the first reason for the factories to move from urban to rural areas. Moving on to the second reason, the second reason is production cost differentials. See many firms experience substantial higher operating cost in cities when compared to rural areas. Usually cost of living is also much higher in cities than in rural areas. So this is one of the reasons that is pushing factories from urban areas towards rural areas. The third reason is the possibility of capital restructuring. The large multi plant corporations will have a tendency for increasingly accumulating capital and centralizing their operation. In order to do that, these big corporations deliberately shift their production from cities to rural areas. Why are they doing so? They are doing so to take the advantage of less skilled, less unionized and less costly rural labor which is not present in cities. So just to exploit this, that is low cost labor, the big corporations are moving from the urban area to rural area. So these are the three reasons why manufacturing sector is moving from India's urban areas to rural areas. See one of the main advantage of this trend is, this trend will help in industrializing the rural areas of India. See in India after the LPG reforms, the contribution of agriculture to our economy has been declining. But on the other hand, agriculture continues to employ most number of Indians in our country. So what we have to do is, we have to reduce the employment provided by agriculture and move them to the manufacturing sector. And this trend of moving factories from urban areas to rural areas will provide additional job in the rural areas which will ease the transition of the labor from agriculture to manufacturing. Ok, in addition to this, it will also industrialize the rural areas. This is one of the major advantage of the urban to rural manufacturing shift. See, this shift also has some challenges associated with it. Let us see them one by one. The first challenge is cost of capital, we saw that factories move from urban areas to rural areas to take advantage of the low cost labor and lower rent. And this advantage is compensated or negated by higher cost of capital. Because in rural areas, borrowing is very difficult and to borrow, they have to pay more interest. So the cost the factories save by low cost labor and lower rent is compensated by the higher cost of capital. This is the first challenge associated with the urban to rural manufacturing shift. Moving on to the second challenge, the second challenge is related to the skill shortage in rural areas. We know that the present day high technology global new economy needs highly skilled workers. Manufacturers who depend only on low wage workers simply cannot sustain their competitive edge for a longer period as their cost advantage might vanish over time. So the low skilled labor or the shortage of skilled labor in the rural areas is the second challenge associated with the urban to rural manufacturing shift. So to conclude, to actually realize the potential of rural areas are more educated and skilled rural workforce is required. If such a thing is ensured, then the factories can enjoy the comparative advantage of lower wages, higher reliability and increased productivity. This in turn will fasten the transition of our rural economy from agriculture to high paying manufacturing sector. So that's all regarding this discussion. This discussion is very relevant for your GS3 main paper. So see the points that we discussed very carefully. Here we discussed the reasons for urban to rural manufacturing shift, the advantage of this shift and the challenges associated with the shift. So make note of all the points we discussed. So with this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Have a look at this editorial article. This editorial article talks about the Wildlife Protection Amendment Bill 2021. Recently, this amendment bill was passed by both Lokshaba and Rajeshaba. So in this editorial discussion, we will see some of the major changes made by the amendment and also we will see the significance of the amendment and the issues associated with the amendment. This is the plan for this discussion. Before getting into the discussion, I have highlighted the syllabus regarding this discussion. You can go through it. The Wildlife Protection Amendment Bill 2021 was introduced in Lokshaba by the Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The bill amends the Wildlife Protection Act 1972. We know that the Act regulates the protection of wild animals, birds and plants. And the 2021 amendment seeks to increase the species protected under the Act. Also, this amendment seeks to implement the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, that is, CITES. Here CITES is an international agreement signed between governments in 1973. And CITES tries to ensure that international trade in wild animals and plants does not threaten the species, okay? Now let us see the major changes made by the amendment. Firstly, take CITES. Under CITES, plants and animal specimens are classified into three categories, which we call it as appendices. And this is based on the threat to their extension. The Convention requires countries to regulate the trade of all the listed specimens through permits. Then it also seeks to regulate the possession of live animal specimens. So this amendment seeks to implement these provisions of CITES, okay? This is the first major change made by the 2021 amendment. Secondly, the amendment rationalizes the schedules. See, previously the 1972 Act had six schedules, that is, one for specially protected plants, four for specially protected animals and one for vermin species. And here vermin refers to animals that carry disease and destroy food, okay? What the amendment does is it reduces the total number of schedules to four. This is done by reducing the number of schedules for specially protected animals to two. Then it also removed the schedule for vermin species. And instead of that, it inserted a new schedule for the specimens listed in the appendices under CITES. This is the second major change. Thirdly, the amendment implements the obligations under CITES. The amendment provides for the central government to designate different authorities for different purposes. First is the management authority. Management authority is to grant, export or import permits for trade of specimens. Second is the scientific authority. It gives advices related to impacts on the survival of the species that are being traded, okay? Every person engaged in trade of scheduled specimens must report the details of the transaction to the management authority. The authority can use an identification mark for a specimen. Also, no one can modify or remove the identification mark on the specimen. Additionally, persons possessing live specimens of scheduled animals must obtain a registration certificate from the management authority. So, these are the two different authorities established by the recent amendment. And this is in obligation to CITES. Moving on to the next major change. It is in regards to invasive alien species. The amendment empowers the central government to regulate or prohibit the import, trade, possession and proliferation of invasive alien species. Here, invasive alien species refers to plant or animal species which are not native to the home country. And in our case, it is India. And the introduction of these kinds of invasive species may adversely impact the wildlife and its habitat. So, the central government, after the amendment, may authorize an officer to cease and dispose of the invasive alien species, okay? Now, moving on to the next major change. This is regarding the control of sanctuaries. Earlier, that is according to the 1972 act, the chief wildlife warden is interested with the control, management and the maintenance of all the sanctuaries in a state. And the chief wildlife warden is appointed by the state government. What the amendment addresses, it specifies that the actions of the chief wildlife warden must be in accordance with the management plans of the sanctuary. And these plans must be prepared as per the guidelines of the central government. And it should be approved by the chief warden. Then, for sanctuaries falling under special areas, the management plan must be prepared after due consultation with the concerned Gram Sabha, okay? Here, special areas include scheduled areas or areas where scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers act 2006 is applicable, okay? These scheduled areas are economically backward areas with the predominantly tribal population notified under the fifth schedule of the constitution, okay? So, basically earlier, it is the state government that had major say in the control of sanctuaries. Now, the central government is indirectly controlling the chief wildlife warden by making him stick to the management plan proposed for each sanctuary, okay? This is the fifth major change. Moving on, the next major change is regarding the conservation resource. See, before the amendment, it is the state government that can declare areas adjacent to National Park and wildlife sanctuaries as conservation resource. But after the amendment, the central government can also notify conservation resource near national parks and sanctuaries. The next major change is regarding the surrender of captive animals. The amendment provides for a person to voluntarily surrender any captive animals or animal products to the chief wildlife warden. Here, you have to note that no compensation will be paid to the person for surrendering such specimen. And the surrendered specimen becomes the property of the state government. The last major change is in regards to penalties. The 1972 act also provided imprisonment and penalties for violation of the act. What the amendment did is it increased the penalties for violations of the act. So, these are all the major changes made by the 2021 amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act. Now, let us see the significance of these amendments. First is, through the amendment, our government is trying to merge the national law with the international law. This will enable our country to curb illegal trade of wild species. Second major significance is that by increasing the penalties provided for the offenses committed under Wildlife Protection Act, the government is signaling that the government will not tolerate further crimes against wildlife. The third major significance is that by making the amendment, our government is signaling that community participation is necessary for the conservation of wildlife. How it is doing so? It is doing so by involving gram sabers in making conservation plans in the scheduled areas. So, through this, the government is signaling that it is community participation that is one of the major requirement for the conservation of wildlife in our country. The last major significance of the amendment is regarding to invasive species. While discussing, we saw that the government can designate an officer who is specifically appointed to seize and dispose invasive alien species. So, these are all the four major significance of the 2021 amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act. The amendment is not without its fair share of issues. Now, let us see some of the issues with the amendment. The first issue is regarding penalties. We saw that the government has increased the penalties for violations under the Wildlife Protection Act. But the problem is there is no proper policing. The bill does not mention how the penalties will be implemented and how the policing will be done to implement the penalties. So, there is a void in the recent amendment. This is the first issue. The second issue is regarding forest raids. See, the 1972 act criminalized collective forest raids like fishing. And we know that collective forest raids like fishing forms one of the important part of subsistence of tribal communities. But this recent amendment also did not make any changes regarding this. After this amendment also, raids like fishing by scheduled tribes remains a criminal offense under the Wildlife Protection Act. So, this is the second major issue. These are the two major issues associated with the recent amendment. So, that's all regarding this discussion. In this discussion, we saw some of the major changes proposed by the 2021 amendment. Then we saw some of the significance and the issues associated with the amendment. I hope this discussion was useful. Now, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Look at this article here. This article talks about the sixth schedule of the Constitution. On August 5th, 2019, the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir was bifurcated into union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. This led to the removal of special status that was earlier granted to the unified Jammu and Kashmir. After the removal of special status, several political groups in Ladakh have been demanding that land, employment and cultural identity of Ladakh should be protected under the sixth schedule of the Constitution. To address this issue, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs was constituted. Later, the committee tabled a report in the Rajesh Saba. The report recommended that special status may be granted to the union territory of Ladakh by considering the developmental requirement of the tribal population. Responding to this report, the Home Ministry said that the main objective for inclusion of tribal population under 5th or the 6th schedule is to ensure their overall socio-economic development. And the ministry also highlighted that the developmental process in Ladakh has already started and also sufficient funds are being provided to Ladakh to meet their developmental requirements. So overall, the Home Ministry said that it is not necessary to provide special status to the union territory of Ladakh under 6th schedule. So this is about the news article. In this context, let us learn about the 6th schedule of the Indian Constitution. First of all, the provisions relating to the 6th schedule are provided under Article 244, Class 2 and Article 275, Class 1 of the Indian Constitution. The 6th schedule consists of provisions relating to the administration of tribal areas in the states of Assam, Meghalaya, Thirupura and Misoram, AM, TM. The 6th schedule provides for administration of certain tribal areas in these four states as autonomous districts and autonomous regions. So this is the basic introduction about the 6th schedule. Now moving on, we will see the powers of the governor under the 6th schedule. Under the provisions of the 6th schedule, the governor of the state is empowered to determine the area or areas as administrative units of the autonomous districts and autonomous regions. The governor has the power to create new autonomous district or region. The governor also has the power to alter the territorial jurisdiction or even alter the name of any autonomous districts or autonomous region. So these are the powers in regards to governor under the 6th schedule of the Constitution. Now moving on, let us see about the autonomous district councils and the regional councils. The 6th schedule has the provisions for the creation of autonomous district councils and regional councils in states which are placed under the 6th schedule. The councils are endowed with certain legislative, executive, judicial and financial powers. However, the administrative powers and functions of the district council and regional council differ from state to state. This is about the autonomous district council and regional council. Now let us see about the composition of the council. According to the 6th schedule, each autonomous district shall have a district council and the council shall consist of not more than 30 members. Among the 30 members, four are nominated by the governor while the rest are elected on the basis of adult franchise. Note one point here, there is one exception. That is, Bodo Land Territorial Council in Assam can have up to 46 members in the council. This is about the composition of the council. Now finally, let us see about the important powers of the councils. The 6th schedule confers certain executive, legislative and judicial powers to the district council. They have the autonomy to make laws for their land. The councils also have the power to manage their forest that are other than the reserved forest. Even the councils have the power to appoint traditional chiefs and headmen for their land. So this is about the powers of the district council. See, I have not covered every aspect of the 6th schedule due to the time limitation, but I have given a basic introduction and basic points about the 6th schedule. So in the future discussion, if the news article again appears, let us cover the 6th schedule in detail. So with this, let us conclude this discussion. In this discussion, we saw about the issue in Ladakh and also some of the major provisions of the 6th schedule. So with this, let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Look at this news article here. It speaks about District Disability Rehabilitation Centres, that is, DDRC. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment has said that so far, only 55 to 60 DDRCs have been made functional. But the target was to establish 269 centres in designated districts. So the committee advocated that the government should lay down a proper roadmap to establish District Disability Rehabilitation Centres in every district of the country as targeted. This is about the news article. So in this discussion today, let us learn about District Disability Rehabilitation Centres, that is DDRCs. The DDRC is a initiative by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. It aims to facilitate comprehensive services to the persons with disabilities who are residing in the rural areas. The Rehabilitation Centres provides services like identification of persons with disabilities, then awareness generation, then early detection and also intervention. This is the basic about DDRC. Now let us talk about the administration of DDRC. The Rehabilitation Centres are run jointly by the district management team headed by the collector and a reputed NGO. Here the NGO is usually Indian Red Cross Society. The DDRC is a joint venture of central and state government. Here the role of the central government is to establish, initiate and implement the Rehabilitation Centres. The central government also provides funding for manpower contingencies and they also provide required equipment and coordination. Now coming to the role of the state government. The state government has to provide rent free well constructed buildings for the Rehabilitation Centres. Then the state government also provides support system to the centers like telephone facility, furniture, etc. The state government also monitors and coordinates the activities of the Rehabilitation Centres through the district management team. So that's all regarding this discussion. In this discussion we saw some important points about the district disability Rehabilitation Centres. With this let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Have a look at this news article. This news article speaks about Sri Arbindo Ghosh. Yesterday our Prime Minister released a commemorative coin and postage stamp to mark the ongoing 150th birthday anniversary celebrations of Sri Arbindo Ghosh. In his virtual address, our Prime Minister hailed Sri Arbindo's life and work. He said that the modern thoughts, higher consciousness and uncompromising nationalism of Sri Arbindo should inspire India's leadership role in the world in greater measure. This is about the news article given here. In this context let us learn about the contributions of Sri Arbindo Ghosh in India's Immunerence Movement and we will also learn about some of the points related to Alipur bomb case. First let us see in brief about Sri Arbindo Ghosh. Arbindo Ghosh was born in 15th August 1872 in Kolkata. He was an Indian philosopher, poet and nationalist. When Arbindo was five years old, he was sent to a convent school at Darjali. Then after two years in 1879, Arbindo was sent to England along with his brothers for higher studies and he completed his schooling from St. Paul's in London. Then in the year 1890, Arbindo got admission into the University of Cambridge. To comply with the wishes of his father, Arbindo also applied for ICS while at Cambridge and he passed the Indian Civil Service examination with great merit in 1890. However, he failed in the horsemanship test and hence he was not allowed to enter the civil service of the Indian government. Then in 1893, Arbindo Ghosh returned to India. This is the brief about Sri Arbindo Ghosh. Now moving on, let us see about the contributions of Sri Arbindo Ghosh in India's Immunerence Movement. After returning to India, Arbindo became the vice-principal of State College in Baroda. Then in 1906, Arbindo resigned his job in the wake of partition of Bengal and he joined as a professor in the Bengal National College. From there, he became involved in the revolutionary movement against the British. Then from 1908, Arbindo Ghosh played a leading role in India's freedom struggle. He was one of the pioneers of the political awakening India. Arbindo functioned as the editor of English Daily Bandhe Mataram. In that, he openly advocated the boycott of British goods and British courts. Also, he asked the people to prepare themselves for passive resistance against the British. This is all about the contribution of Arbindo Ghosh in India's freedom struggle. Now moving on, let us see about the famous Alipur bomb case. In 1908, the British judge Kingsford had imposed severe sentences against Indian nationalists. This made anger amongst the Indian revolutionaries. Some revolutionaries, including Kudiram Bose and Perfulla Chakki, tried to kill the judge. They threw bomb at the judge Kingsford's horse carriage and the bomb lost its target and instead landed in another carriage and the bomb blast killed two British women. In that case, Arbindo was also arrested on charges of plotting and overseeing the attack. Then he was jailed in Alipur jail in the trail of Alipur bomb case, which lasted for over an year. Arbindo eventually was acquitted in 6th May 1909. The defense council of Arbindo was Chittaran Dandas, that is C.R. Das. Before he was acquitted, he was placed in the jail. During the jail term of Arbindo, his path of life was radically modified. He was influenced by spiritual experiences and relations. Due to various spiritual experiences, Arbindo devoted his life for service and liberation of the country. So this is about the Alipur bomb case. Okay, so that's all regarding this discussion. In this discussion, we saw about the contribution of C. Arbindo Ghosh for India's freedom struggle and we also saw about the Alipur bomb case. Now let us conclude this discussion and take up the next news article. Have a look at this news article. The news article says that 13 tribal settlements from Pillur and Palamalai forest areas in Coimbatore districts were recently accorded community forest rights. It was accorded after the forest area that they dwell and collect minor forest produce for generations were mapped using GPS based land survey. It was a year long process and it was the first case in the state where GPS based land survey was done to accord community forest rights to the forest dwellers. Okay, this is the crux of the news article given here. The community forest rights in India is provided under the Forest Rights Act 2006. So in this discussion, let us revise about this act. The Forest Rights Act 2006 recognizes the rights of the forest dwelling tribal communities and other traditional forest dwellers. This is to ensure their right on forest resource because these communities were dependent on these resources for a variety of needs like livelihood, habitation and other socio-cultural needs. This act recognizes the symbiotic relationship of the scheduled tribes with the forest. So it reflected the scheduled tribes dependence on the forest as well as their traditional wisdom regarding conservation of the forest. Now let us see the objectives of the act. Firstly, the act tries to undo the historical injustice that is committed on the forest dwelling communities. The second objective is the act tries to ensure land tenure, livelihood and food security to the forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers. The third major objective is the act tries to strengthen the conservation regime of the forest. This is done by including the responsibilities and authority of forest right holders for sustainable use. Also, the conservation of biodiversity and maintenance of ecological balance is strengthened through this act. Now let us see the rights that are provided by this act. The act provided right to self-cultivation and habitation. These are usually regarded as individual rights. Then it provides community rights such as grazing, fishing and access to water bodies in forest. Then it provides habitat rights for particularly vulnerable tribal groups. Not only this, it ensures access to biodiversity and traditional seasonal resources. Then the act ensures the community right to intellectual property and traditional knowledge. And it also recognizes the traditional customary rights. It also provides the right to allocation of forest land for developmental purposes. This is mainly done to fulfill the basic infrastructural needs of the community. Then it also protects the tribal population from eviction without rehabilitation and settlement. Then the act envisages the Gram Sabha and rights holders the responsibility of conservation and protection of biodiversity, wildlife, forest, water resource and ecologically sensitive areas. Also, it gives them responsibility to stop any destructive practices affecting these resources or cultural or natural heritage of the tribals. So, the Gram Sabha is also a highly empowered body under the act because it enables a tribal population to have a decisive say in the determination of the local policies and schemes impacting them. So, we can conclude that this act empowers the forest dwellers to access and use forest resources in their traditional ways. Also, it envisages the forest dwellers and other communities dependent on forest the responsibility of protection, conservation and management of forest. Then it protects forest dwellers from unlawful evictions and provides basic development facilities to the community of forest dwellers to access facilities of education, health, nutrition and the infrastructure. So, that's all regarding this discussion. With this, let us conclude the news article discussion session and take up the practice problems questions. We have five practice problems questions. Let us see them one by one. Let us take up the first question. Three statements are given. We have to find the incorrect statements here. So, let us take up the first statement. WPI captures changes in the service prices. This statement is wrong. Actually, WPI, that is wholesale price index measures change in prices of goods only, okay? Moving on to the second statement. CPA is released by RBI. This statement is also incorrect because CPA, that is consumer price index is released by the NSO, that is National Statistical Office. Moving on to the third statement. Clothing and footwear is a component of WPI. This statement is also wrong. Actually, clothing and footwear is a component under CPA. Since all the three statements are incorrect and they are asking for the incorrect statements here, the correct answer here is option C123. Moving on to the second question. Two statements regarding secret sitting of the houses given. We have to find the correct statements. Let us take up the first statement. The term secret sitting is found nowhere in the constitution of India. See, actually, this statement is incorrect because the term secret sitting is mentioned in the article 361A. This article is concerned with protection of publication of proceedings of parliament and state legislature. According to this article, no person shall be liable to any proceedings, civil or criminal, in any court. This protection is applicable only if true report of proceeding of either house of parliament or either house of state legislature are published in a newspaper. The article also says that if the publication is proved to have been made with malice, that is with wrong intention, then this protection will not be available to any person. Additionally, it says that nothing in this class shall apply to the publication of any report of the proceedings of secret sitting of either house of the parliament or either house of the legislature of the state. So, the term secret sitting is mentioned in article 361A. But the definition and conditions are not given in the constitution. It is given in the rules of procedure of the house. So, statement one in essence is incorrect. Moving on to the second statement. Disclosure of proceedings or decisions of a secret sitting by any person in any manner shall be treated as a gross breach of privilege of the house. This statement is correct. In addition to this, you have to know that when the necessity for maintaining secrecy in secret sitting has ceased to exist and subject to the consent of the speaker, the leader of the house or any member may move a motion that the proceeding of the house during the secret sitting has no longer be treated as a secret. On adoption of such a motion, the secretary general of the house shall prepare a report of the proceeding of the secret sitting and publish it in such a manner as the speaker may direct. So, after this motion only, proceedings of the secret sitting will be published. Until then, only speaker decides how to make a report of the proceeding of secret sitting and no other person shall keep a note or record of the proceedings or decisions of the secret sitting. So, statement two is correct. So, the correct answer here is option B, two only. Moving on to the third question. Three statements regarding Shri Arabindu Ghosh is given, we have to find the correct statement. Let us take up the first statement. Arabindu Ghosh edited the English newspaper Bandhe Matram. This statement is correct. This we saw in our discussion itself. Moving on to the second statement. Arabindu Ghosh was arrested in the infamous Alipur bomb conspiracy case along with Kudiram Bose and Parfula Chakki. This statement is also correct. Moving on to the third statement. Arabindu Ghosh opposed the spiritual experience. Actually, this statement is incorrect because Arabindu Ghosh got influenced by the spiritual experiences and realization and he did not oppose it. Since they are asking for the correct statement, the correct answer here is option A, one and two only. Moving on to the fourth question. Here, two statements regarding sixth schedule is given. We have to find the correct statements. Let us take up the first statement. It consists of provisions related to the administration of tribal areas in the states and unit territories of Assam, Mahalaya, Ladakh and Andhamaran Nicobar. This statement is incorrect. The sixth schedule consists of provisions related to the administration of tribal areas in the states of Assam, Mahalaya, Tirupura and Visoram, that is AMTM. So statement one is incorrect. Moving on to the second statement. Under the sixth schedule, the president of India is empowered to create a new autonomous region or district. This statement is also incorrect because in our discussion we saw that under the provision of sixth schedule, it is the governor of the state who is empowered to create a new autonomous district or region and not the president. Since both the statements are incorrect, the correct answer here is option D, neither one nor two. This is a quiz question for you. Interested aspirants can post the answer for this question in the comment section. The main questions based on today's discussion are displayed here. Interested aspirants can write the answers and post it in the comment section. If you like today's video, you can like, comment and share it with your friends. For more updates regarding UPSC preparation, subscribe to Shankara IS Academy's YouTube channel. Thank you.


Russia's security forces granted access to Yevgeny Prigazin's burial site in St. Petersburg on Wednesday, August 30, after a low-key private funeral for the Wagner boss was held on Tuesday. Most of the first people to visit the grave were members of the press, with only a handful of members of the public and people wearing Wagner insignia scene at the burial site. Secrecy surrounded arrangements for Tuesday's closed funeral meaning it could not turn into a large-scale show of support for the man whose massive mutiny in June amounted to the largest-ever threat to President Vladimir Putin's rule. Putin did not attend the ceremony, according to the Kremlin. Russia says Prigazin was on a plane that crashed into a region on August 23 killing all ten people on board, including key Wagner figures Dmitry Utkin and Valery Chekolov. Russian authorities have not said why the plane crashed, and the Kremlin has rejected speculation that Putin ordered Prigazin's death over the mutiny as an absolute lie.