5 ms·

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleadi

by jjani 1y ago

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleading.

jader201 1y ago
Agree the title is a bit misleading, but addressing what sounds like an exploit still feels like a patch of sorts. But yeah, “patch” usually implies software vs. hardware. Either way, agree with other comments that Hyundai should just eat the costs if it prevents theft due to an exploit. Having said that, given what the car costs, the fee doesn’t seem completely unreasonable.
- GlacierFox 1y ago
  Given what the car costs, you'd think they'd do this out of courtesy.
  - cmcaleer 1y ago
    It seems short-sighted to not do this as a courtesy, given the reputational hit from the Kia/Hyundai Boyz saga just a few years ago. Who wants to be a manufacturer with a reputation for making easy-to-steal cars? Who wants to (for a reasonable price) insure cars made by said manufacturer?
    - GlacierFox 1y ago
      Exactly.
  - jader201 1y ago
    Yeah, definitely. I have a Kia EV6, and just saying that if the same “patch” is offered for it, I won’t think twice about paying $65 for it. I’d also not be super happy they didn’t cover it, but I saw a comment about never buying a Hyundai because of this, and not sure I’d be that upset about it. There’s a line, for sure, but $65 wouldn’t be it, for me.
- antonvs 1y ago
  Starting MSRP of US$42,600? Seems like there’s some room there to cover manufacturer mistakes.
mirzap 1y ago
It doesn't matter. If a customer buys faulty hardware, it's the seller's responsibility to replace it with working hardware. If the breaks had a manufacturing defect, you wouldn't expect the customer to pay for the replacement.
- quantumcotton 1y ago
  What if, the software is significantly more robust than Dodge Chevy Honda or Kia. But! Check this out what if you were offered an additional layer of security? You can choose it or not. It's an option. I didn't see these being easier to steal than a car using a canbus.... If it is. Sure free upgrade. But if this is improving a system that is already less vulnerable than 50% of vehicles. I can see why they'd charge.
- throwaway290 1y ago
  I bet the stock car is 100% secure in Korea. Maybe you live in a country where car thieves hack into cars left and right. Maybe you live in a country where thieves just tow your car in the middle of the day and don't care about your locks at all. Do you expect car maker to ship you free fixes against every scenario? Security is a spectrum. Make your police better if you don't like it. /controversial opinion
  - bobthepanda 1y ago
    South Korea has a fairly active neighbor in the cybercrime scene.
    - throwaway290 1y ago
      North Koreans don't walk around Seoul streets stealing cars!
- ponector 1y ago
  There is nothing faulty in the hardware, why they should replace it? Following the same logic: old phones, even iphones can be hacked. Should manufacturers replace the hardware?
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
agilob 1y ago
Swapping software, pentesting, testing, QA, CI/CD pipelines, image caches aren't free either. Can we then start making more money as software developers to patch CVEs? We clearly should consider holding ourselves to a lower standard. Your requests are getting 5xx errors? Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing.
- florbnit 1y ago
  > Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing. If you are employed in a position where there is a defect in the product then you are already being paid. Imagine going to a restaurant and you get an uncooked frozen steak, and when you tell the waiter they tell you that since the cook will need to spend more time on it you now have to pay extra.
  - throwaway290 1y ago
    Look at the price of the car compared to other electric SUVs. This is a mcdonalds type of situation. not a restaurant where you can request to cook a rare steak a bit more and not get charged extra
    - robinsonb5 1y ago
      Even in McDonalds if what they give you is defective they will replace it without question once you bring it to their attention. If it turned out the door locks on the car were defective you'd expect them to be replaced under warranty. If the warranty had expired the situation would, admittedly, be a bit murkier - but you could still make a case that since the locks had always been faulty they'd be the manufacturer's responsibility. Someone I used to work with had a car a few years ago on which the battery would mysteriously drain for no obvious reason. It turned out to be a defect in the infotainment system's firmware - and he was furious that he was expected to pay for the firmware update to fix it. (The car was long out of warranty, though.)
      - reactordev 1y ago
sorokod 1y ago
Why would the price/cost of hardware replacement be treated differently from the price/cost of software replacement?

by jjani 1y ago

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleading.

jader201 1y ago

Agree the title is a bit misleading, but addressing what sounds like an exploit still feels like a patch of sorts. But yeah, “patch” usually implies software vs. hardware. Either way, agree with other comments that Hyundai should just eat the costs if it prevents theft due to an exploit. Having said that, given what the car costs, the fee doesn’t seem completely unreasonable.

GlacierFox 1y ago
Given what the car costs, you'd think they'd do this out of courtesy.
- cmcaleer 1y ago
  It seems short-sighted to not do this as a courtesy, given the reputational hit from the Kia/Hyundai Boyz saga just a few years ago. Who wants to be a manufacturer with a reputation for making easy-to-steal cars? Who wants to (for a reasonable price) insure cars made by said manufacturer?
  - GlacierFox 1y ago
    Exactly.
- jader201 1y ago
  Yeah, definitely. I have a Kia EV6, and just saying that if the same “patch” is offered for it, I won’t think twice about paying $65 for it. I’d also not be super happy they didn’t cover it, but I saw a comment about never buying a Hyundai because of this, and not sure I’d be that upset about it. There’s a line, for sure, but $65 wouldn’t be it, for me.
antonvs 1y ago
Starting MSRP of US$42,600? Seems like there’s some room there to cover manufacturer mistakes.

mirzap 1y ago

It doesn't matter. If a customer buys faulty hardware, it's the seller's responsibility to replace it with working hardware. If the breaks had a manufacturing defect, you wouldn't expect the customer to pay for the replacement.

quantumcotton 1y ago
What if, the software is significantly more robust than Dodge Chevy Honda or Kia. But! Check this out what if you were offered an additional layer of security? You can choose it or not. It's an option. I didn't see these being easier to steal than a car using a canbus.... If it is. Sure free upgrade. But if this is improving a system that is already less vulnerable than 50% of vehicles. I can see why they'd charge.
throwaway290 1y ago
I bet the stock car is 100% secure in Korea. Maybe you live in a country where car thieves hack into cars left and right. Maybe you live in a country where thieves just tow your car in the middle of the day and don't care about your locks at all. Do you expect car maker to ship you free fixes against every scenario? Security is a spectrum. Make your police better if you don't like it. /controversial opinion
- bobthepanda 1y ago
  South Korea has a fairly active neighbor in the cybercrime scene.
  - throwaway290 1y ago
    North Koreans don't walk around Seoul streets stealing cars!
ponector 1y ago
There is nothing faulty in the hardware, why they should replace it? Following the same logic: old phones, even iphones can be hacked. Should manufacturers replace the hardware?

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

agilob 1y ago

Swapping software, pentesting, testing, QA, CI/CD pipelines, image caches aren't free either. Can we then start making more money as software developers to patch CVEs? We clearly should consider holding ourselves to a lower standard. Your requests are getting 5xx errors? Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing.

florbnit 1y ago
> Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing. If you are employed in a position where there is a defect in the product then you are already being paid. Imagine going to a restaurant and you get an uncooked frozen steak, and when you tell the waiter they tell you that since the cook will need to spend more time on it you now have to pay extra.
- throwaway290 1y ago
  Look at the price of the car compared to other electric SUVs. This is a mcdonalds type of situation. not a restaurant where you can request to cook a rare steak a bit more and not get charged extra
  - robinsonb5 1y ago
    Even in McDonalds if what they give you is defective they will replace it without question once you bring it to their attention. If it turned out the door locks on the car were defective you'd expect them to be replaced under warranty. If the warranty had expired the situation would, admittedly, be a bit murkier - but you could still make a case that since the locks had always been faulty they'd be the manufacturer's responsibility. Someone I used to work with had a car a few years ago on which the battery would mysteriously drain for no obvious reason. It turned out to be a defect in the infotainment system's firmware - and he was furious that he was expected to pay for the firmware update to fix it. (The car was long out of warranty, though.)
    - reactordev 1y ago

sorokod 1y ago

Why would the price/cost of hardware replacement be treated differently from the price/cost of software replacement?