Identifying drones.

Network Remote ID technology would not raise the same concerns, Wing explains: “This method of RID leverages the internet — the most ubiquitous technological tool of our time — to share a drone’s location and identity information, like a license plate number, with anyone who has access to a cell phone or web browser,” says the response. “This allows a drone to be identified as it flies over without necessarily sharing that drone’s complete flight path or flight history, and that information, which can be more sensitive, is not displayed to the public and only available to law enforcement if they have proper credentials and a reason to need that information.”

This is google plot, actually a google spin off, Wing, plot. 

Who enforces the contract?  No matter the physical method of communication, the system still requires that the whole package, including GPS and flight controls, be hidden from human intervention, be counterfeit proof.

The drone, instead, has to identify the person responsible for flying the drone.  The contract states: 

I, the person releasing this drone, can be identified securely, and that I have a proven insurance contract and I have been registered with the FAA. If the person is not identified in a way that is counterfeit proof, then we shoot the drone down.

How does the observer know the ID is the proper one? The observer must carry the public decoding key for drones in his area. So the user must have a device.

The standards the Wing proposed I have not read, but i am certain they missed this whole issue.  Wing will say that any drone I see that is on one of the correct flight paths will be insured by Wing.  All drones in the area? The culprit follows a Wing drone. Once it is near the victims house,  then Wing actually ends up responsible for all the drones. That would include the ones who bombed the victims house, good luck with that. The observer sees two drones, he wants to secure responses identifying the insurance company.   Wing has not thought this completely out. 

Wing has the same problem, personal secure identity is what is needed, and that means the unknown core and that means the NSA.  Me, NSA, the flight control and the insurance have the same problem. We all want a human being to put their personal secure ID on the drone.  nothing else works. secret bots must execute the identity protocol. And for the most part, independent observers need a public key, and that means the same technology is likely ending up in their hands.

If Wing makes he drones it is entirely possible for them to counterfeit proof the drone to their liking at the factory. But that still means some human installs a secure personal identity. I still have to worry about exact duplicates.

Folks, we will have it, the unknown core, Apples desired solution. Then we can chain contracts sufficient to solve these problems. I think Microsoft has suddenly agreed. We will Spectre proof.