5 ms·

> your connected car knows when you've hacked it, and it might be logging that data to use against you in a future warranty claim. [..] Nobody except Tesla real

> your connected car knows when you've hacked it, and it might be logging that data to use against you in a future warranty claim. [..] Nobody except Tesla really knows the answer to this right now, but knowing that my car could potentially tattle on me to its mommy is a bit unnerving. It's almost like the car is a hostile entity, loyal to its manufacturer instead of its owner..

mtgx 6y ago
The fact that Tesla can use the car logs AGAINST drivers when an accident happens, but the owners/drivers themselves don't get access to the same data to defend themselves should have been clue #1 years ago.
- caspper69 6y ago
  This is why discovery exists, no?
  - rbecker 6y ago
    One shouldn't need a court order to get data logged by one's own car.
- patagurbon 6y ago
  I wonder, does the GDPR apply here?
TheChaplain 6y ago
Well imagine you download Te5lA-b00ster-5.zip from Pirate Bay and install it into the car. Next thing you know the autopilot goes haywire and kills you. Who do you think will get the blame?
- rbecker 6y ago
  If the logs were in a nice, user-readable form, tamper-evident, and the user was in control of if the car connected remotely to Tesla, and could examine what is sent, or was at least informed of it, you might have a point.
  - jpgvm 6y ago
    Apart from being directly exposed to the user that pretty much is the case AFAIK. You can't snoop on them however because communication with Tesla services are all TLS encrypted and certs are verified so you can't MITM. They are tamper-proof assuming someone doesn't have a 0day for the firmware that also bypasses secure boot + filesystem verification.
    - rbecker 6y ago
      What do you mean? Can I tell it not to send Tesla any logs? While still getting updates? Can I delete the logs? Can I see what's in the logs? Can I tell it not to create logs in the first place?
- serf 6y ago
  well, historically in the US, if I modify a car and have an incident, if the modification is found to be the cause the liability falls to me, the person who modified it, not the manufacturer. One can say that Tesla is further still limiting liability by going to these measures, but if other manufacturers have not chosen to take such measures , even with the same practical liability and ability to do so, then one can surmise that Tesla is acting in a way that is against consumers who feel strongly about personal ownership and right-to-repair/right-to-modify. If car companies considered liability to be the penultimate measure of success they wouldn't sell 500+ horsepower sports cars. The risk is worth taking for a chance to capture the market sector. Same here -- Tesla might find this a good business decision, but a portion of their market will be inevitably lost on matters of personal principal. It's up to them whether or not that gamble is worth taking. Given that sports-cars and car modification in general seem to have been on a downward decline, they're probably correct to assume such postures; but i'm not a fan.
  - TheChaplain 6y ago
    Yes from a legal perspective I agree. But what I am talking about is the MSM and they having field day. "Tesla autopilots off a bridge", "Telsa hacked, killed driver" etc etc. And bad press is a real threat for business, especially when it comes to comes to safety of the driver/passenger. For the downward car modification trend, I get the impression it's improved protection from manufacturers that are the reason, wouldn't you agree?
    - kllrnohj 6y ago
      We have almost 100 years of history to show such concerns are largely not real. Nobody blamed Honda for the Fast & Furious movies, for example. Nobody blames Chevrolet for lowriders. Nobody blames Ford for these asshats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4 There's vanishingly few examples of modified cars generating mainstream media shitstorms. Appealing to fear is rarely a good justification for stripping rights & freedoms.
- stale2002 6y ago
  > Who do you think will get the blame? I don't care? That is not an excuse to overrule existing US law, which gives consumers a right to modify cars that they own.
isoprophlex 6y ago
> It's almost like the car is a hostile entity, loyal to its manufacturer instead of its owner.. Replace car for OS, phone, IoT device, app, ... Welcome to surveillance capitalism
coronadisaster 6y ago
All cars are like this though... Reminds me of this article from 2014: https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-exec-gps-2014-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-exec-gps-2014-1

mtgx 6y ago

The fact that Tesla can use the car logs AGAINST drivers when an accident happens, but the owners/drivers themselves don't get access to the same data to defend themselves should have been clue #1 years ago.

caspper69 6y ago
This is why discovery exists, no?
- rbecker 6y ago
  One shouldn't need a court order to get data logged by one's own car.
patagurbon 6y ago
I wonder, does the GDPR apply here?

TheChaplain 6y ago

Well imagine you download Te5lA-b00ster-5.zip from Pirate Bay and install it into the car. Next thing you know the autopilot goes haywire and kills you. Who do you think will get the blame?

rbecker 6y ago
If the logs were in a nice, user-readable form, tamper-evident, and the user was in control of if the car connected remotely to Tesla, and could examine what is sent, or was at least informed of it, you might have a point.
- jpgvm 6y ago
  Apart from being directly exposed to the user that pretty much is the case AFAIK. You can't snoop on them however because communication with Tesla services are all TLS encrypted and certs are verified so you can't MITM. They are tamper-proof assuming someone doesn't have a 0day for the firmware that also bypasses secure boot + filesystem verification.
  - rbecker 6y ago
    What do you mean? Can I tell it not to send Tesla any logs? While still getting updates? Can I delete the logs? Can I see what's in the logs? Can I tell it not to create logs in the first place?
serf 6y ago
well, historically in the US, if I modify a car and have an incident, if the modification is found to be the cause the liability falls to me, the person who modified it, not the manufacturer. One can say that Tesla is further still limiting liability by going to these measures, but if other manufacturers have not chosen to take such measures , even with the same practical liability and ability to do so, then one can surmise that Tesla is acting in a way that is against consumers who feel strongly about personal ownership and right-to-repair/right-to-modify. If car companies considered liability to be the penultimate measure of success they wouldn't sell 500+ horsepower sports cars. The risk is worth taking for a chance to capture the market sector. Same here -- Tesla might find this a good business decision, but a portion of their market will be inevitably lost on matters of personal principal. It's up to them whether or not that gamble is worth taking. Given that sports-cars and car modification in general seem to have been on a downward decline, they're probably correct to assume such postures; but i'm not a fan.
- TheChaplain 6y ago
  Yes from a legal perspective I agree. But what I am talking about is the MSM and they having field day. "Tesla autopilots off a bridge", "Telsa hacked, killed driver" etc etc. And bad press is a real threat for business, especially when it comes to comes to safety of the driver/passenger. For the downward car modification trend, I get the impression it's improved protection from manufacturers that are the reason, wouldn't you agree?
  - kllrnohj 6y ago
    We have almost 100 years of history to show such concerns are largely not real. Nobody blamed Honda for the Fast & Furious movies, for example. Nobody blames Chevrolet for lowriders. Nobody blames Ford for these asshats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4 There's vanishingly few examples of modified cars generating mainstream media shitstorms. Appealing to fear is rarely a good justification for stripping rights & freedoms.
stale2002 6y ago
> Who do you think will get the blame? I don't care? That is not an excuse to overrule existing US law, which gives consumers a right to modify cars that they own.

isoprophlex 6y ago

> It's almost like the car is a hostile entity, loyal to its manufacturer instead of its owner.. Replace car for OS, phone, IoT device, app, ... Welcome to surveillance capitalism

coronadisaster 6y ago

All cars are like this though... Reminds me of this article from 2014: https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-exec-gps-2014-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-exec-gps-2014-1