25 ms·
I imagine improvements to the key fob could be made that would require a mechanical coupling with the car in order to start it. That would circumvent this attac
by nkrisc 8y ago
I imagine improvements to the key fob could be made that would require a mechanical coupling with the car in order to start it. That would circumvent this attack.
- wvenable 8y agoThat defeats the purpose of the fob. Be easier to put an on/off switch on the fob so you can turn it off at night.
- babypuncher 8y agoI think he was making a joke about regular car keys
- jamescostian 8y agoI'm not sure if this is a joke about old keys being better, but I'd argue you could have the benefits of new keys and old keys combined if you just made it so that new keys have to be inserted into some compartment inside of cars, where they are authenticated by those cars. You can imagine a fob with a USB that has a different authentication code than the wireless one it sends out, and unless the USB is plugged into the car, you can only start the car up but you can't drive it. In addition, you can make it so that the car doesn't unlock due to proximity with the fob, but rather, it only unlocks if you push the unlock button on the fob.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- lozaning 8y agoThats essentially how my car works right now, it's push to start, but you've got to have the fob slotted into a thing in the dash for the push to start button to actually work.
- r00fus 8y agoWhat vehicle do you have?
- lozaning 8y agoA 9 year old BMW without the comfort access package.
- Kirth 8y agoMy BMW did not come with such a fob slot but still required you to dig the key out to press the (un)lock buttons. Weird transition.
- pedrocr 8y agoBut that's the perfect fob! I keep it in my pocket and it has enough of a distinct shape I can press the buttons from the outside of the pocket. So I lock/unlock and open the trunk with no effort and yet am imune to this attack because a button press is always required. People I've driven were mistified how I was operating things because it's become so second nature you can hardly tell.
- cambalache 8y agoMine too! But only because the battery on my fob died and I am too poor now to replace it. Frankly I kinda like it that way, it makes me more conscious or the damn fob (I used to just drop it anywhere in the car).I have a Tucson 2011 FWIW
- homero 8y agoThe battery is like $1 on eBay
- Scoundreller 8y agoIt’s a 2032. Just snag one from an ewaste computer motherboard. Dollar stores usually have 3 for $1.
- r00fus 8y agoDoes this not sound exactly like what I had back in the 90s where my physical key would need to be inserted to start the vehicle and to unlock I'd press the keyfob to activate the unlocking. I imagine an smartphone with touch sensor + car remote app would be even safer than what we have now.
- jamescostian 8y agoThe difference is that you can start up your engine (read: have AC on so that your car is the right temperature when you get to it) and also unlock the doors for others from far away If that functionality was encapsulated on a smart phone, that would be fine too.
- jjeaff 8y agoMy 2007 vehicle does this just fine. And any signal from the fob require a press of the button. These key fobs use rolling codes as well. So you would need to capture a button press while the remote is too far away from the car to receive it. Then replay it to the vehicle. Of course you still need the key to unlock the steering wheel and of you touch the break without inserting the key, the ignition cuts off. I'm not sure why we are going backwards in the security department here. Seems like a lot to give up just to not have to stick the key in or press the unlock button.
- gsich 8y agoOr jam the signal with pseudo-random-noise. Afterwards you can remove the noise again and have the clear signal.
- wool_gather 8y ago> I'm not sure why we are going backwards in the security department here. Consumer products nearly always go features that have whizz-bang "it's so convenient" demo value, until a problem like this becomes prevalent enough to end up on everyone's nightly news.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- stronglikedan 8y agoBut then my mom would have to dump out her purse every time she wanted to unlock her car.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoHow does she unlock her front door?
- cglace 8y agoSmart door lock?
- stronglikedan 8y agoShe doesn't have her keys on her fob. Heck, last time I took her to get her oil changed, the key fob still had the little plastic removable key tag from the dealer she bought it from.
- rootusrootus 8y agoI imagine a lot of people don't use a key to get in their house, nor do they use the front door. Hit the button on the garage door remote, drive in, walk into house.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- H1Supreme 8y agoI got a notice in the mail from our county's assessor because they left three door tags at my house. I almost never open the front door. I go in and out of the garage, and let my cat out the back.
- Scoundreller 8y agoMy late grandpa would wear his on his belt. Classy.
- prawn 8y ago
- nkrisc 8y agoYes, I was making a joke, but I was also semi-serious. I personally wouldn't mind that the car unlocks based on the fob's proximity, but requires insertion of the key for ignition. I currently drive a 2009 car with the usual key fob and my biggest issue with it is not having to insert it to start the car, but unlocking the doors while my hands are full. Once I'm seated in the driver's seat I'm not carrying anything and starting the car is no problem.
- jamescostian 8y ago> unlocks based on the fob's proximity Unfortunately, that would be vulnerable to theives unlocking your car and taking everything in it. For me, the biggest convenience of fobs is the ability to start the car and have AC on so that the car isn't burning/freezing when I get to it
- jjeaff 8y agoAnd this is probably a more common scenario than stealing the car.
- nkrisc 8y agoIf they're stealing your car like in this article, then that's already happening anyway. At least if it was unlock only and not ignition as well then you'd at least still have your car.
- ams6110 8y agoI never like to have the car running when I'm not in it. If it's low on oil, or overheating, etc there's nobody watching the gauges.
- godelski 8y agoDo you have an old car or are you a pilot?
- Swizec 8y agoMy problem with modern cars is that there’s no good place to put the keys. They’re uncomfy in my pocket when sitting down and I’m too warm for a jacket with pockets. The old ignition hole was the perfect solution. You had a dedicated spot for your keys, you always knew where they are, were unlikely to forget them in the car, and it also happened to start your engine. Perfect
- burtonator 8y agoI'm not sure why we can't have some sort of challenge response protocol to prevent MITM...
- croshan 8y agoThat's exactly what I'm wondering. Maybe it has something to do with the additional battery consumption that doing this incurs, probably something like double/triple consumption, with the hashing.
- jwcacces 8y agoThe key fob does use challenge-response, the thief just uses a glorified range-extender to get the car started with the key normally out of range. The car stays on once started. There's no MITM involved.
- ken 8y agoHuh? The diagram in the article shows two men ("Thief 1", "Thief 2") between the fob and the car, with arrows showing communications going from fob to thief to car. According to the first sentence of the Wikipedia MITM article, that's the very definition.
- __jochen__ 8y agothe relay is of the radio signal, there is no inspection or tampering of the relayed messages. basically, the extender tricks the car into thinking the fob is closer than it is.
- Piskvorrr 8y agoIn other words, there's identification, there's authentication, but authorization is replaced by "if in range, then authorized." Two out of three is still game over.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- viraptor 8y agoToyota Prius does that. (Or at least the 2007 version did) You have the key fob (with emergency key inside). You have to insert the whole fob into a port on the dashboard for it to start.
- dpatrick86 8y agoNot required for the optional smart key system.
- cronix 8y agoA simple on/off button on the fob would work, and probably extend the battery life by a few years.
- JustSomeNobody 8y agoAh, yes, let's put the burden back on the user after we promised them something easier. We should just go back to traditional keys if this is the case.
- burfog 8y agoPlease yes. Traditional keys fit on my keyring, can survive the clothes washer, don't unlock doors by accident, can open a car with a dead battery, don't have their own battery issues, and can be brought into restricted work environments where radio transmitters are banned. I want key holes in all doors. I want to insert a key to start the car.
- rootusrootus 8y agoAbout half of those problems don't really exist, in my opinion. I've washed the keyfob (it is waterproof), it has a built in key if the car battery is ever dead, I've never actually had to replace a fob battery. Personally I don't carry any keys so having a small round-ish object in my pocket that doesn't stab me in the leg when I sit down is a preferable situation.
- calabin 8y agoMaybe I've just met an abnormal amount of lucky people, but in my role as one of the more mechanically inclined among my friends and family, I've seen three people completely locked out of their cars when under-door or other concealed keyholes have needed to be used. I'm not sure if it's been from rust, lack of use + time, or ice, but unused or backup keyholes on vehicles seem to fail far more often than those used for normal entry.
- 8y ago
- figers 8y agoMy Tesla requires a pin to drive like a phone
- jakobegger 8y agoThat was rolled out in a recent update, right? I think the over-the-air updates is one of the big advantages that Tesla has right now. They can respond quickly to critical vulnerabilities like that. I wonder how fast other car manufacturers are going to catch up? Volvo recently announced that they are working on an Android based system, but it's not going to be rolled out before 2020.
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 8y agoI dread the day when cars update over night. Drivers become testers, and anyone participating in traffic (aka everyone) has to fear a minor point release introduces a bug that might kill them.
- makomk 8y agoYes, it was rolled out in a recent update - mainly in response to security researchers discovering they were using weak 40-bit crypto that had been broken back in 2005 that meant an attacker could just outright clone their fobs. They couldn't fix that in a software update so they stuck a PIN on as a patch.
- samstave 8y agoHave there been any cases where a Tesla was under repossession and as such the delinquent owner was simply locked out of the car? Or maybe where the Tesla auto drives itself to the nearest repo-man?
- sn41 8y agoI kind of think OTA updates are a double-edged sword. It could also introduce partially tested software, or malicious code.
- starbeast 8y ago
- cjhanks 8y agoThis comment made me happy.
- cft 8y agoA simple button on the fob (rather than in the car) that you must press to open the doors and to start the engine would mitigate the attack. No need for coupling
- dragonwriter 8y ago> A simple button on the fob (rather than in the car) that you must press to open the doors and to start the engine would mitigate the attack. Yes, reverting from passive-supported to active-only remote entry/start would eliminate the attack by eliminating the feature on which it is based. OTOH, the handsfree nature of passive remote entry is a major selling point.
- kazinator 8y agoSelling point for some. For others, either a "do not buy" point or "crammed down your throat" point. There is a general trend that car electronics is increasingly acquiring behavioral features that annoy me, that cannot be disabled. This is all across the board; if you don't like it, you have fewer and fewer options: pretty soon, you will have to drive a used old beater if you don't like what new cars are doing.
- Scoundreller 8y agoAs long as they’re not susceptible to replay attacks. If they are, just do a stakeout and then replay it later in the day to gain access.
- samstave 8y agoMount the receiver to a drone and park it on the roof of a garage you want. Even hop around the neighborhood and capture - a whole new level of war-driving. Fly the drone into gated estates, or better yet a country club drive-up near the valet and record many high-value signals.
- cft 8y agoA challenge-response notification would not be susceptible for a replay attack
- ulkram 8y agoyou mean a key?
- sdinsn 8y ago(that's the joke)
- zitterbewegung 8y agoOr putting the key fob in a metal container.
- ce4 8y agoKey fobs inside a home have one property: They are laying on a desk or in a drawer and are not being touched/moved for extended periods. Maybe a simple mems step counter could help activate them for a short period of n seconds/minutes.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- starbeast 8y agoLock receives signal from Key, writes down time and picks a random key and uses these to create a ciphertext, encrypts that with the public key of Key to create a second ciphertext and sends. Key receives message, decrypts with private key to first ciphertext and encrypts that with the public key of Lock and sends back. Lock decrypts message with private key and earlier random key, compares to current time and if it has taken more than a set time period does not unlock. The clock has to be pretty fast, but you can get a secure time of flight measurement, so you can absolutely know the distance of the radio signal path.
- DBNO 8y agoThis is basically the solution. Light travels about 1 foot in one nanosecond, so the car needs to reject latent replies. I did research in this area a few years ago. Here's a research paper [1] from 1993 that goes into more detail about this type of "distance bounding" solution (i.e. authenticating received signal only if 1) it is received within a few nanoseconds AND 2) the decrypted received signal contains the previously sent random number) in order to defend against "relay attacks". The paper discloses many variations to this general solution as well. [1] Brands and Chaum, "Distance-Bounding Protocols" https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-48285-7_30 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-48285-7_30
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- starbeast 8y agoI realised after writing it that you don't actually need to send the time itself, but it was my first 5 minute stab. Plus it is sort of fun to have the time flying about. edit - thanks for the link, having a read through.
- marcosdumay 8y agoOr just requiring the key to be inside the car. It would only need more antennas.