7 ms·
There have actually been a ton of examples over the years of researchers hacking into car systems wirelessly, some of which used the media system as the attack
by nekomancer 10y ago
There have actually been a ton of examples over the years of researchers hacking into car systems wirelessly, some of which used the media system as the attack vector.
Even if the media subsystem is running on dedicated hardware, the fact that it's networked with the rest of the car means that there's still a risk of it being used to gain access to other components.
- radiorental 10y agoWhich is worse, proprietary closed system from car manufacturer or OSS system. There's as many pros on one side as cons on the other.
- nisa 10y agoFalse dichotomy - I think it should be similar to Kerckhoffs's principle in the long run. OSS yes, but it's signed and audited when it's able to run. Maybe like an open source version of microcode updates for CPUs. You could file a pull request because you spotted a bug but you can't fuck around your car (bad, but not so bad) and other cars (very bad). If the Toyota code would be public we'd hear a lot of guys screaming and if you own the car and have the knowledge I guess you are keen on looking. Sure lots of noise for manufactures and likely new attack vectors but in the end public universities could look at it. On the other hand you'll end up with OpenSSL for cars. However it should be still safe when public that what should be the design goal. However what you read about embedded stuff in cars and airplanes...OSS would be likely an improvement. I for one would like to file a pull request against the A380 firmware :)
- radiorental 10y agoDoes the fact that most of the code in your car is autogenerated from tools like Modelica change your view on how likely this can/should be opened? That is, the 'model' is the truth and the IP. The generated code is spaghetti, the vendors components are black boxes, and their 'code' is nothing more than another locked subsystem in the model. Let's say in an ideal world, these mission critical systems must be opened - what do you propose everyone's business model should be? If everyone must see each others models... where is the free market competitive advantage to be gained?
- jokr004 10y ago>Even if the media subsystem is running on dedicated hardware, the fact that it's networked with the rest of the car means that there's still a risk of it being used to gain access to other components. I don't think anyone was claiming anything contrary to that, just that replacing the software running the media dash isn't going to fubar your car.
- deegles 10y agoBut it might fubar your warranty... "Your honor, we were not responsible for that AutoPilot crash because the driver did an unauthorized modification of the car's software!"
- jeena 10y agoThis should be handled like we handle replacing the breaks in your car if you do it yourself.
- fludlight 10y agoHow is that handled?
- msandford 10y agoI don't know, but if you decide to tint your windows it doesn't somehow magically invalidate your powertrain warranty.
- arohner 10y agoThis is part of the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty... In effect, the manufacturer can only deny warranty claims for a specific part iff the consumer's aftermarket repair/modifications were responsible for the warrantied part failing. i.e. "I tinted the windows, and now the brakes are failing" does not result in warranty claims on the brakes being denied. However, "I replaced the brake pads [with faulty pads], and now the brake rotors are failing" can result in a denied warranty claim.