, a company specialising in the prevention of computer hacking, has sent round a press release questioning the security of in-flight internet. Netragard claims that Gogo Inflight, an internet service run by Aircell and used by American Airlines, Delta and Virgin, does not encrypt communications between passengers and the plane’s wireless access points.



“As a result,” says the company, “it is extremely easy for a hacker on board to intercept and record all data sent and received by passengers.”



This all sounds very serious. Is it true?

Joe Cruz, Aircell's Chief Technology Officer, clears matters up.



"Our capabilities are not much different from what you encounter in hotel rooms, in Starbucks and in public hotspots," he tells me. "And if you're on the ground, you're actually more susceptible to spamming because hackers know where you are."

So there doesn't seem to be any great need to heed Netragard's claim. Indeed, Mr Cruz suggests that you're actually safer using Wi-Fi in the air than on the ground. "If you’re in an airplane, you’re with a select group of people," he says. "One of the great screeners is the $365 you pay to get on the plane."

Gulliver doesn't see why the price of a ticket would necessarily put off a hacker, or why hackers would refrain from their dodgy habit in the air. But if Wi-Fi security is essentially the same in the air as on the ground, that sounds good enough. After all, if you want more security, you can use a virtual private network.

And I can't help wondering how much sensitive information a hacker at 36,000 feet would actually find. Tom Weigman, Aircell's Executive Vice President of Wireless Services, says e-mail accounts for 40% of Gogo's “usage count” (essentially, time users are spending online). After e-mail, the most popular sites are Google, Facebook, Yahoo, etc: the usual suspects.

So yes, it pays to surf sensibly. But the plane is no less safe an internet environment than the coffee house or the hotel lobby. Netragard’s case is not proved.

UPDATE May 7th 2009 Gulliver spoke to Adriel Desautels, one of Netragard’s co-founders, earlier today. He reiterated a number of the points made in his company's name in the comments below. “When you purchase Wi-Fi at Starbucks,” he says, “you get protection with WPA2. Aircell has no protection.”



WPA2 encrypts communications between a user's computer and wireless access points, so even if a hacker can access the communications, they will be unintelligible.

Mr Desautels adds that, contrary to Aircell's belief, hackers will indeed be attracted to planes. "There's a high concentration of business users," he says. "For hackers to spend $365 for a ticket is nothing."

If hackers in the air can use their skills to get access to credit-card details and business networks, then he is right. But Aircell's Mr Cruz is not going to debate with him: "I don't want to engage them [Netragard] in public/tell them where they are wrong," he says, "since that would involve revealing our security processes."

Hmm. Gulliver is no technology expert and puts forward these opinions without being able to add a whole lot. But those of you who know your WAP2 from your SSL should offer guidance below.

(Photo credit: Shutterstock)