3 ms·

The problem is that I think these hands free remote start locks are more expensive than actual real physical locks which are immune to the types of attacks so t

The problem is that I think these hands free remote start locks are more expensive than actual real physical locks which are immune to the types of attacks so that argument just actually doesnt work at all.

saint_fiasco 3y ago
My bad, I was thinking in terms of the expensive remote start lock vs an even more expensive and safer remote start lock. But if the fancy insecure lock is more expensive, the problem should fix itself eventually, right? Consumers will switch back to the cheaper system of their own accord. It sucks for the people who bought the insecure cars without knowing, but banning insecure cars is not going to help them retroactively in any way.
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  Where I live the used car market is hot. It is hard to find a car made before 2012 because for the most part they are as reliable and fuel efficient as modern cars, are cheaper to repair, and cheaper to insure. I dont think they are so desirable just because they are more secure but they dont have remote start options so they are at least in part more secure than modern remote start cars. The problem I am getting at is that there are no secure modern car options. None.
  - saint_fiasco 3y ago
    > there are no secure modern car options I don't think there can be such a thing as a secure remote start option. The only way they can make it more secure than traditional keys is if they also make it less convenient to use than traditional keys, and then there is no point because the traditional keys will be easier and cheaper. What happened is that consumers did not know that the remote keys were unsafe, and now they know. What I don't understand is why insecure cars should be banned by law. Now that everyone knows about the issue, surely everyone will switch to a more secure system of their own accord.

3 ms·

The problem is that I think these hands free remote start locks are more expensive than actual real physical locks which are immune to the types of attacks so t

by MeImCounting 3y ago

saint_fiasco 3y ago
My bad, I was thinking in terms of the expensive remote start lock vs an even more expensive and safer remote start lock. But if the fancy insecure lock is more expensive, the problem should fix itself eventually, right? Consumers will switch back to the cheaper system of their own accord. It sucks for the people who bought the insecure cars without knowing, but banning insecure cars is not going to help them retroactively in any way.
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  Where I live the used car market is hot. It is hard to find a car made before 2012 because for the most part they are as reliable and fuel efficient as modern cars, are cheaper to repair, and cheaper to insure. I dont think they are so desirable just because they are more secure but they dont have remote start options so they are at least in part more secure than modern remote start cars. The problem I am getting at is that there are no secure modern car options. None.
  - saint_fiasco 3y ago
    > there are no secure modern car options I don't think there can be such a thing as a secure remote start option. The only way they can make it more secure than traditional keys is if they also make it less convenient to use than traditional keys, and then there is no point because the traditional keys will be easier and cheaper. What happened is that consumers did not know that the remote keys were unsafe, and now they know. What I don't understand is why insecure cars should be banned by law. Now that everyone knows about the issue, surely everyone will switch to a more secure system of their own accord.