5 ms·

This is going to slowly evolve into "law enforcement needs a killswitch" which is a scary thought

wwweston 4y ago
Eh, of all the threats I can think of, law enforcement being able to killswitch autopilot on my car is not even gonna make the top 100. Whether on the run for crimes or being pursued by sinister oppressors the automotive autopilot is not gonna be a key margin of liberty. And being able to HERF any vehicle dead is probably coming no matter what: https://boingboing.net/2018/04/30/zapguns-r-us.html https://boingboing.net/2018/04/30/zapguns-r-us.html On the other hand, I can actually see a lot of merit in autopilot killswitches for anybody, including law enforcement.
- thangalin 4y ago
  > On the other hand, I can actually see a lot of merit in autopilot killswitches for anybody, including law enforcement. Including thieves?
  - tpmx 4y ago
    The human driver could still take command (I presume), so I don't see that as a relevant attack vector.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
tenpies 4y ago
The really scary part is when the kill switch is in reference to your life rather than the car's movement. Like the theories about the death of Michael Hastings in 2013. Hacks of cars were demonstrated in 2015 and documents from the CIA released by Wikileaks showed they have explored the idea as early as 2014[1], but at the time it was still presumed that killing someone by hacking their vehicle would be quite resource-extensive. --- [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/08/what-we-know-about-car-hacking-the-cia-and-those-wikileaks-claims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/0...
kube-system 4y ago
This is factory equipment on many cars for over a decade. (GM, Toyota, Mercedes, BMW) e.g.: https://www.onstar.com/public-safety/emergency-situations https://www.onstar.com/public-safety/emergency-situations
rdedev 4y ago
A probably better idea would be giving law enforcement/ emergency services the capability to enforce a no autonomous driving zone. Autonomous cars should either find another route or give up control to the driver while in the zone
palijer 4y ago
Don't they already have a kill switch in the fact that they have the authority to stop vehicles? Or us the scary thought that it would be software/hardware and therefore insecure?
- wheats 4y ago
  The insecurity is an issue, sure, but also just the fact you are turning over a crucial human activity to be far more strictly regulated. A "no fly lists" could be extended to "no drive lists" for instance; turning off the cars that don't pay vehicle registration, etc.
  - rcpt 4y ago
    "No drive list" is the default. Without a current license you should not be driving.
flaque 4y ago
I'm not sure why this is that scary of a thought. Right now law enforcement already has a "killswitch": a traffic stop. If you don't stop at the traffic stop, the "killswitch" is a chase & spikes on the road. A "killswitch" in which someone can just have the car pull-over seems like objectively safer.
- BurningFrog 4y ago
  Once there is a killswitch, it can be accessed by people and purposes it wasn't intended for.
  - williamcotton 4y ago
    Think this through. Like, really, think this through. What’s the goal? You want to steel a car? Rob the passengers? Kidnap the passengers? Kill the passengers? So what are your options in this world where there is the equivalent of a firefighters key in elevator, but probably using PKE and periodic private key cycling? Steal a key? From where? Buy one? From who and for how much? Ok, so now you’re needing to commit some rather risky crimes before you even move onto the next step. And then let’s say you get the key. So you disable a taxi. And then what? I assume the passengers can lock the doors. So you smash the window open and, well, maybe it’s best to have a gun… But why not just get a gun and approach someone stuck at a red light? Why kind of risk/reward calculus is going on inside the mind of the criminal deciding to forcibly stop a moving vehicle and rob or murder the passengers? So yes, what you said is true, but the likelihood is very low and the benefit to emergency responders is high. I guess it makes for a good plot device for a spy movie.
    - BurningFrog 4y ago
      I was thinking more that I pissed off a cop, and now my car randomly won't start.
      - williamcotton 4y ago
        Well if I was working on such a system I would definitely want to log every shutdown event on storage in the vehicle itself. It could then be seen what key was used and compared to which officer had been assigned that key for the day at the beginning of their shift. So yes, a pissed off (and stupid) cop could do this, but then you can turn around and go to the press with the information, call up a lawyer, and proceed in any other manner where you're being harassed by a police officer. Cue some unrelated critique on policing in general that has nothing to do with what we're talking about...
goodpoint 4y ago
They already have a killswitch for humans and they use it often.
quickthrower2 4y ago
IoT killswitch, outsourced to a private outfit, is scary.

Eh, of all the threats I can think of, law enforcement being able to killswitch autopilot on my car is not even gonna make the top 100. Whether on the run for crimes or being pursued by sinister oppressors the automotive autopilot is not gonna be a key margin of liberty. And being able to HERF any vehicle dead is probably coming no matter what: https://boingboing.net/2018/04/30/zapguns-r-us.html https://boingboing.net/2018/04/30/zapguns-r-us.html On the other hand, I can actually see a lot of merit in autopilot killswitches for anybody, including law enforcement.

thangalin 4y ago
> On the other hand, I can actually see a lot of merit in autopilot killswitches for anybody, including law enforcement. Including thieves?
- tpmx 4y ago
  The human driver could still take command (I presume), so I don't see that as a relevant attack vector.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

tenpies 4y ago

The really scary part is when the kill switch is in reference to your life rather than the car's movement. Like the theories about the death of Michael Hastings in 2013. Hacks of cars were demonstrated in 2015 and documents from the CIA released by Wikileaks showed they have explored the idea as early as 2014[1], but at the time it was still presumed that killing someone by hacking their vehicle would be quite resource-extensive. --- [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/08/what-we-know-about-car-hacking-the-cia-and-those-wikileaks-claims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/0...

kube-system 4y ago

This is factory equipment on many cars for over a decade. (GM, Toyota, Mercedes, BMW) e.g.: https://www.onstar.com/public-safety/emergency-situations https://www.onstar.com/public-safety/emergency-situations

rdedev 4y ago

A probably better idea would be giving law enforcement/ emergency services the capability to enforce a no autonomous driving zone. Autonomous cars should either find another route or give up control to the driver while in the zone

palijer 4y ago

Don't they already have a kill switch in the fact that they have the authority to stop vehicles? Or us the scary thought that it would be software/hardware and therefore insecure?

wheats 4y ago
The insecurity is an issue, sure, but also just the fact you are turning over a crucial human activity to be far more strictly regulated. A "no fly lists" could be extended to "no drive lists" for instance; turning off the cars that don't pay vehicle registration, etc.
- rcpt 4y ago
  "No drive list" is the default. Without a current license you should not be driving.

flaque 4y ago

I'm not sure why this is that scary of a thought. Right now law enforcement already has a "killswitch": a traffic stop. If you don't stop at the traffic stop, the "killswitch" is a chase & spikes on the road. A "killswitch" in which someone can just have the car pull-over seems like objectively safer.

BurningFrog 4y ago
Once there is a killswitch, it can be accessed by people and purposes it wasn't intended for.
- williamcotton 4y ago
  Think this through. Like, really, think this through. What’s the goal? You want to steel a car? Rob the passengers? Kidnap the passengers? Kill the passengers? So what are your options in this world where there is the equivalent of a firefighters key in elevator, but probably using PKE and periodic private key cycling? Steal a key? From where? Buy one? From who and for how much? Ok, so now you’re needing to commit some rather risky crimes before you even move onto the next step. And then let’s say you get the key. So you disable a taxi. And then what? I assume the passengers can lock the doors. So you smash the window open and, well, maybe it’s best to have a gun… But why not just get a gun and approach someone stuck at a red light? Why kind of risk/reward calculus is going on inside the mind of the criminal deciding to forcibly stop a moving vehicle and rob or murder the passengers? So yes, what you said is true, but the likelihood is very low and the benefit to emergency responders is high. I guess it makes for a good plot device for a spy movie.
  - BurningFrog 4y ago
    I was thinking more that I pissed off a cop, and now my car randomly won't start.
    - williamcotton 4y ago
      Well if I was working on such a system I would definitely want to log every shutdown event on storage in the vehicle itself. It could then be seen what key was used and compared to which officer had been assigned that key for the day at the beginning of their shift. So yes, a pissed off (and stupid) cop could do this, but then you can turn around and go to the press with the information, call up a lawyer, and proceed in any other manner where you're being harassed by a police officer. Cue some unrelated critique on policing in general that has nothing to do with what we're talking about...

goodpoint 4y ago

They already have a killswitch for humans and they use it often.

quickthrower2 4y ago

IoT killswitch, outsourced to a private outfit, is scary.