14 ms·

U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

477 points by tencentshill 5mo ago

EGreg 5mo ago
Worth pointing out that this is part of a much larger encroachment on user privacy, and not just in the US: https://community.qbix.com/t/increasing-state-of-surveillance-from-all-sides-around-the-world/804 https://community.qbix.com/t/increasing-state-of-surveillanc...
- squibonpig 5mo ago
  I wish that article wasn't extremely ai written
  - EGreg 5mo ago
    What would that improve in this case?
    - squibonpig 5mo ago
      It would be more concise and the analysis section at the end would be more useful. I still read it I just hate reading articles online knowing I could have run a chatgpt deep research to the same effect.
      - EGreg 5mo ago
        Can you tell me what you would cut, in this article, specifically, that would make it more meaningfully concise? The point isn't that you can't run the deep research. Everyone now has more capabilities, and if you want to waste time and tokens you can do it. The point is someone has done the work compiling these, and made it available once, for everyone to read. Think "caching". It has the exact amount of information needed to show the details of every attack. There is a lot. Sadly making it "concise" will remove information -- there is that much. I do usually make edits to an article after I get it from an AI, as an editor would do when a writer submits something. I hate having AI shibboleths like "It's not X. It's Y". So I make it more humanized. But at the end of the day, the article does what it's supposed to do: make people aware of things in one place, rather than have to research it themselves every time.
        ane 5mo ago
        Why not just write it yourself? We can all have ChatGPT regurgitate the same information. You're supposed to add value, editorializing isn't enough. Just like I don't want to look at AI art or listen to AI music, I don't want to read AI written blogslop. The web is now full of shit. What a waste.
        EGreg 5mo ago
        Writing it myself would mean doing the research myself. How would I do that? ChatGPT can do it faster at scale. Then the summaries are short enough that cutting any particular part wouldn't make sense. I could re-word it, I guess. Why don't you write all your assembly code yourself? Why do you use a compiler? Why do you generate images, when you can draw them yourself? You're supposed to add value. I don't think preparing a list of all the threats, editing it and publishing it for others is a "waste". I'm not publishing random stuff, this is important and in line with what I want people to know. Some people on HN downvote any criticism of AI, other people complain that things are written by AI. If you're such big fans of AI being used more and more, then accept the consequences!
        squibonpig 5mo ago
        The people doing the downvoting are different people from the whiners. I'm one of the whiners. That's kinda fair, like it's still useful to prepare a list, but it's also like if you didn't go research your information yourself why would I start from a position of charitability when I read it? When I research something with LLMs, I know to double-check everything myself before I use it as a basis for my thought or repeat it to other people. Knowing an article is AI written forces me to doubt every sentence. Or maybe it's worse, I have to assume nobody cared about the sentence. The old format was a guarantee that someone gave enough shits to put the article together. Relevance comes implicitly bundled in each sentence. It's like someone talking to you in public in that there's often a reason to pay attention. It's not as though that person is going to say something correct, or ethical, but I've had a lifetime of dealing with human kinds of wrongness. When stuff is wrong, I'll know it's wrong because the article is slanted or wrong because the author was lazy etc., which will let me discount it selectively and still get value from it when, e.g., a slanted author contradicts themselves. Reading an LLM article I have no clue whether the person who put it up even read the whole thing, so when I read sentences, I have no guarantee that the sentence communicates something worth paying attention to. I dislike that ambiguity and would prefer to guarantee that the text is slop by asking a bot myself. Then I know its worth upfront. I'd be fine with it if these sites included a direct statement in bold at the top: HEY THIS IS AI SLOP IF YOU DONT WANT THAT LEAVE. Then I know exactly how to parse it.
    - verall 5mo ago
      It's poorly structured. I think a better split between technical vs social measures and how they interact would result in a much better article. It also doesn't seem to even mention DPI or great firewall of China as prior art.
    - mzajc 5mo ago
      It would be written by a human. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: > Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.
      - EGreg 5mo ago
        The comment wasn’t AI generated. And the article was partially: it contained a list compiled by AI
  - khazhoux 5mo ago
    [dead]
embedding-shape 5mo ago
> The government says it needs this information to identify and interview witnesses who can testify about how the tools were actually used. Why start this whole thing, if you don't already have this information and have people willing to help you as witnesses? Sounds to me they're saying they don't have this already, but why is this investigation happening in the first place then? Rather than finding every user of the tool, find the users who use the tool in the way you don't approve of, then request the information for those? Really bananas approach to go for "Every single user of the app" and "Everyone who bought a dongle" when it has very real and legal use cases.
- seemaze 5mo ago
  Why stop there? Why not request the PII of every person who could have plausibly downloaded the app at any point in time?
  - khazhoux 5mo ago
    It's the only way to be sure. Also, think of the children.
  - lern_too_spel 5mo ago
    https://dictionary.justia.com/overbroad https://dictionary.justia.com/overbroad
- cogman10 5mo ago
  Yeah, I'd HAPPILY report every single truck rolling coal around me if there was a place to report that information. Hell, I've seen a truck roll coal around cop cars and, obviously, nothing happened. This is just gross privacy intrusion masquerading as "protecting the environment". We don't need 100% compliance to the law and simple prosecution/ticketing of obvious violations would go a long way towards solving the problem outright. Much like we didn't need our cars emailing prosecutors every time someone drove without a seat belt on. Cops giving out tickets for not wearing a seatbelt was enough.
  - 5mo ago
Danox 5mo ago
Get a warrant…
analogpixel 5mo ago
Hopefully they hand it over, and all of these people lose their licenses. I'm sick of breathing in their exhaust on the way to work. I think people should have the freedom to do what they want; if you want to have a truck that has horrible exhaust, fine, but we'll have it piped back into your cab for you to breathe instead of the people behind you, and if you want a car that sounds like a thousand go-carts racing down the street fine, but it'll be through headphones destroying your hearing every time you hit the gas.
- toss1 5mo ago
  Yeah I also absolutely loath the coal-rollers and everything about what they do, and if I could snap my fingers and have them lose both their trucks and their licenses to drive with no other consequences beyond their frustration, I'd do it. Nevertheless, we cannot allow this good reason for which be both agree to be used as a wedge to let the state just wholesale collect data for whatever reason they want. Very soon, the reason the state wants to wholesale collect data will be for a reason we entirely disagree. That is not an "IF", it is a "WHEN". So, no, this isn't a justification. Very soon, that ca
  - bethekidyouwant 5mo ago
    But this isn’t actually to throw the coal rollers in jail and take away their trucks it’s to get witnesses so they can build a case to get this mod taken off the market
    - xp84 5mo ago
      Yes. Supposedly they aren’t going to prosecute those people, though if I were them, I wouldn’t trust that promise. But if they get this thing taken off the market, that’s a huge loss for all of us because there are a ton of things this type of tool enables, many of them things people like us would be very interested in. Such as disabling privacy-invasive telematics, or disabling features like stop start, which I can personally attest has caused significant repair issues with the engine on my last car. Having access to a tool like this is to a car what having an administrator account is on a PC. Without it, you are merely a guest, not an owner of the system.
Yaa101 5mo ago
Welcome to our brave new digital world, governments and DOJs do this because now they can, I am afraid this is only the beginning.
- basilgohar 5mo ago
  Tyranny comes and goes, and sometimes just changes shape and serves some more than others, and that gives the illusion to those it serves that it's gone. It's always been around in some form or another.
- goolz 5mo ago
  The saddest part is, most people simply do not care, my parents constantly echo the sentiment that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. I would argue this slippery slope came about 20+ years ago during the initial Patriot Act. They normalize the behavior, take a few more freedoms, and keep on trucking. I used to be proud to be American. Now I am just worried.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5mo ago
    I understand why they don't care and I don't fault them. The truth is that this doesn't affect most people in their daily lives. It sounds entitled to say that this demands their attention.
    - goolz 5mo ago
      A totally fair point, and I think you are correct, wish I knew a solid answer. Because their indifference is watering down all of our rights.
    - bigyabai 5mo ago
      It affects everyone, the question is whether or not they're held to account. Some people think of themselves as low-risk until they're detained at the border for a Facebook post they made.
  - forshaper 5mo ago
codedokode 5mo ago
That's why you should be downloading from F-Droid anonymously.
- EvanAnderson 5mo ago
  For sure. Another demonstration of why "side loading" software is better.
- logicchains 5mo ago
  That's why F-Droid eventually won't work on new Android phones.
  - bigyabai 5mo ago
    It works right now, though.
  - nathanmills 5mo ago
    No, it will continue to work just fine. The restrictions are being added to Google Play Services, not Android itself. I and many others do not run closed source software like Google Play Services on our devices.
    - xp84 5mo ago
      And how long do you think that window will remain open? I expect anyone not running a closed system (hardware attestation) is going to not only be locked out of things like banking apps, government apps, etc., but also if Google has its way, you’ll be prevented from accessing those things on the web as well, maybe even from your desktop. We just saw that story a few days ago with them replacing CAPTCHA tech with “prove you have an unmodified locked-down Google or Apple phone.” Clearly there is a single driving agenda, which Google and the government are largely in harmony on, to try to approach 100% real-identity-tying to every activity done online. Where once, “online” meant generally greater anonymity than “IRL” activities, since most things could be signed up for with an arbitrary throwaway email address and no proof of identity. It is now or shortly will be the opposite.
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
Simulacra 5mo ago
Sounds like I need to download this app..
- caminante 5mo ago
  If you start tuning, then make sure you turn it off before bringing your car to the dealership. It'll void any warranty.
  - deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
  - rootusrootus 5mo ago
    > It'll void any warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act disagrees with you.
    - caminante 5mo ago
      What is your understanding of the Act and its limitations [0]? Here's a legal view that explains it further [1]. Basically, they can deny warranty service if you make modifications, and they can tie it to a failure. You can add 100s of HP to your engine profile with these things, and why would it be reasonable to expect a manufacturer to warrant related component repairs if they're pushed beyond spec? Here are relevant quotes, and []'s are mine. > The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act requires manufacturers to honor their warranties and auto manufacturers only warrant their vehicles against manufacturing defects. Your claim here could be denied because the failure was not due to a defect in a factory component. It was caused by something added to the car[...] That system caused a non-defective part to fail. Your mod did not void the [entire] warranty. It’s just that the failure was not caused by a factory defect. > Obviously, an aftermarket camshaft or a hopped up ECU won’t void the entire warranty on your car. The master cylinder failed? The blue tooth quit working? Unless there is a logical connection between the mod and the part or system that failed, you should be good to go. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty_Act#Limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty... [1] https://lehtoslaw.com/will-modifications-void-new-car-warranty/ https://lehtoslaw.com/will-modifications-void-new-car-warran...
lapetitejort 5mo ago
I am surprised that a lawsuit started in 2021 about maintaining emission standards survived up to this point. The DOGE search terms must have misspelled "emission"
- delecti 5mo ago
  Alternatively, given who was running the show, lawsuits against ICE cars (non-EVs) might have just been outside the bounds of what they cared about.
  - lotsofpulp 5mo ago
    The president's MO is to wait for bribes to whatever coin and then pardon/drop investigation. It's the art of the deal, you have something someone wants, don't give it away for free.
- wavemode 5mo ago
  I had the same thought. I suspect this lawsuit will be dropped once they notice. Probably if the appmaker donates to the Trump foundation it will be withdrawn within the day.
tehjoker 5mo ago
This does seem like a fishing expedition though there is a facially legitimate purpose. Fortunately, we have more powerful policy tools to clean the air than attacking individual gearheads... convert America to an electric car system. You need to attack these problems at the point of production. Consumption side approaches are petty and not very effective.
jmyeet 5mo ago
These companies will likely comply too [1]. Defenders will say "they have to comply with the law" but there's compliance and then there's compliance. For example, an adminstrative subpoena has no power. Companies can and should force the government to go to court and get a court-issued subpoena. This isn't really anything terribly new either. The government regardless of who the current president is will routinely go after individuals for (allaegedly) hurting coprorate profits. We saw it in the Napster/Limewire era, in the BitTorrent era and even with physical products far earlier than that. There's a ban on importing cars less than 25 years old because Mercedes-Benz dealerships lobbied for a law in the 1980s because too many people were importing them directly from Germany at a lower cost [2]. Heck, 60 years of Cuban embargoes and sanctions as well as the 1954 Guatemala coup were US efforts at the behest of the United Fruit Company. Same thing for oil and the 1953 Iranian coup. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/google-broke-its-promise-me-now-ice-has-my-data https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/google-broke-its-promi... [2]: https://www.jalopnik.com/the-25-year-import-rules-history-is-more-complicated-th-1848322467/ https://www.jalopnik.com/the-25-year-import-rules-history-is...
- like_any_other 5mo ago
  > Defenders will say "they have to comply with the law" but there's compliance and then there's compliance. More importantly, there's not spying on the user in the first place. The law doesn't force Google to spy, nor does it force Apple to lock consumers (for sure not "owners") out of their phones, so that they're left helpless when the CCP bans VPN and protest apps [1] (not to imply spying from Google alone isn't bad, before any other actors get involved). [1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-pulls-mapping-app-used-by-hong-kong-protesters-again https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-pulls-mapping-app-used-by-h...
motbus3 5mo ago
Will this turn into be a blow to anyone who gains access to the hardware paid with own money?
- traderj0e 5mo ago
  Certain car mods have already been illegal for a long time
  - motbus3 5mo ago
    Not exactly. You are supposed to be emitting certain pollution rates, certain speed limits, keep your car in order. All the rest is the brand convincing you that you need to pay them more for things you already paid, like heated seats. Don't tell me you believe you could've paid less because the heat was off
bethekidyouwant 5mo ago
The Department of justice needs witnesses because they’re trying to prove that ez lynk is profiting from the distribution of “emission disabling software” They are not going after any of these individual users. Tldr: they’re trying to get the mod taken off the market.
- jjk166 5mo ago
  That's the narrative. In reality, you don't need a list of every user to find a handful of witnesses. This is very clearly a power play - the feds can't make their case so they're making distributing the app a major PR headache for the platforms distributing the app. Apple and google will quietly change their user agreements to not permit these sorts of apps on their stores. The company's leadership will likely escape prosecution but their business will be crippled if not destroyed despite not being proved guilty of violating any law.
CommenterPerson 5mo ago
Missing key points: Why is this administration, which is all for coal, oil, and against environmental policies pursuing THIS? This DOJ is all about pursuing cases for retribution. It could be, they already know someone they want to punish, and already found they're using the device. Or, use it as a source for finding people they want to punish.
- tencentshill 5mo ago
  Also strange as it would disproportionately affect modified diesel trucks, who are overwhelmingly Trump supporters.
- 15155 5mo ago
  US Attorneys aren't forced to toe the party line on every issue. This issue is just not directly politically important enough to get the "don't touch" treatment. Donors and party power brokers aren't rolling coal.
- JoBrad 5mo ago
  It’s not about this administration. The lawsuit was filed in 2021.
curt15 5mo ago
This is a classic cautionary tale for the over-centralization of app distribution.
dmitrygr 5mo ago
There are already proper procedures for doing this. If the users did something illegal, you can go after them. If you prove that somebody actively enabled or encouraged them, you go after them. But even if the app actively enabled or encouraged something (which would still need to be proven) it would be a pretty tall order to prove that Google or Apple actively enabled or encouraged anyone to break the law. Both of them could fight the subpoena, and almost certainly win.
numpad0 5mo ago
> These tools allegedly allow users to bypass factory emissions controls on diesel vehicles Oh so AdBlue shortage is about to hit the US too?
midtake 5mo ago
This "car-tinkering app" is used as a glorified GameShark for deleting factory emissions controls, I don't feel sorry for anyone who uses this to roll coal or whatever. Instead of investigating everyone on the list of users of this app, should the government instead ban diesel engines knowing their emissions controls software will be defeated? Should environmental regulations be relaxed? What is really the solution here?
- traderj0e 5mo ago
  They want testimonies to use against the app. The solution they're trying to pursue is to outlaw the app, not investigate its users.
  - m463 5mo ago
    ...via investigating users.
    - traderj0e 5mo ago
      That would suggest the users are defendants. They supposedly just want witnesses. I had another comment questioning this though.
- repiret 5mo ago
  Periodic vehicle inspection for emissions and safety compliance. Many jurisdictions already have this for gas engine emissions, a handful of states already have safety inspections. Done right, it can be low burden and low cost, and basically put an end to Def deletion. Done poorly it's grift to the shops that do the inspections, and an economically external annoyance to vehicle owners, and unnecessarily limits the ability of people to tinker with their own vehicles.
  - traderj0e 5mo ago
    I don't really care how it affects car modders or people with sports cars. I have a sports car, and yeah the California smog test has been super annoying cause of electrical problems with that are unrelated to its actual emissions, but I knew what I was getting into when I bought something known for unreliability. Fixed it myself. There's a dude across the street with a modded car who always complains he has to bribe the smog guy $500, as if he was forced into driving a track car on the street. I just want regular cars to be drivable without undue burdens, and the enthusiasts can deal with it. California gasoline tax pisses me off more because it's higher than anywhere else and the money seemingly goes nowhere.
AdmiralAsshat 5mo ago
It will start with subpoenaing this information against people who modified their car to do "bad" things. But once they have the precedent, I would predict that it will very quickly be used at the behest of car manufacturers to go after people who modify their cars to, say, disable GPS tracking.
- newsclues 5mo ago
  Then go after the people that modify their console, fridge or your phone. Slippery slope is fully lubed
  - emdash 5mo ago
    Sony already sent people to prison for developing a way to let users jailbreak their PS3's. And the jailbreak was just to re-enable features that Sony advertised at launch then took away after people bought the consoles.
traderj0e 5mo ago
So if someone used this app to do something illegal with his car (rolling coal or otherwise), is he really going to testify in court that he did this? The lawsuit is only against EZ Lynk, but it's conceivable that he could face his own consequences later.
oceanplexian 5mo ago
These vehicle emissions laws are almost always fake compliance theater and were dreamed up by idiots. They are a huge drag on the economy and achieve absolutely nothing. For example, the reason we don’t have super efficient turbodiesel subcompacts that are perfectly legal in the EU is thanks to the so called “Clean” air act. Since the law is based on vehicle weight I can go buy a 8,000 pound truck and commute to work alone in it and pollute all I want. But if I want a super clean 80MPG diesel subcompact that’s 1/4 the gross weight supposedly bad for the environment. But it gets worse in all sorts of ways, the law grandfathers coal plants from all these emissions standards. One coal plant can emit more pollution than millions of trucks. Guess which polluter the government is aggressively pursuing and violating the rights of? You guessed it, car enthusiasts who downloaded an app. Give me a break.
- traderj0e 5mo ago
  I don't buy that those are actually clean. EU has always had majority high-MPG non-diesel cars that you also don't see here as often, simply because gas is cheap in the US. People complain that it's expensive but then 2/3 times go buy a truck or SUV anyway.
  - AngryData 5mo ago
    How much of the new car market is represented by the average person though? If 70% of the population wants fuel economy but only 10% of the population can afford new cars it is easy to see how the wealthier new car buyers can shape what cars are even available to the average person. Buying a user car in the US gives limited offers for super and turbo charged vehicles, and many turbo cars will want turbo maintence when they hit the used market with lower availability of turbo experienced mechanics.
    - traderj0e 5mo ago
      That's a good point, but it looks like the top-selling used cars are trucks and SUVs too. It's possible on the face of it that this is just because they retain less value than efficient cars and buyers are weighing that vs the cost of gas, but doesn't seem like it from the pricing I've seen.
dec0dedab0de 5mo ago
This is outrageous, especially since there are many other ways that you could violate emissions laws. If they really cared they could equip federal agents, and state/local police with testing equipment. It is easy to see/hear vehicles that are likely to be violating these rules. Heck, make a hotline, I would rat them out all day. Just incorporate it with rate-limiting how often each vehicle could get pulled over for it, so it doesn't get abused. This really comes down to corporations and the government colluding to make us not actually own anything. The fact that they would refer to a tool for making modifications to your car a "defeat device" is so telling. Coupled with phones not allowing side loading is really fucked up. Everything is awful, and it's been getting worse for as long as I can remember. I think I'm going to lose it and just cut ties with the internet, and computers in general very soon. The power, and freedom I used to feel has been replaced with oppression disguised as convenience. One Token Ring to rule them all.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5mo ago
There are HN commenters ("developers") that want readers to believe that telemetry should be on by default. Maybe some readers, e.g., other "developers", think, "Yeah, that sounds reasonable" so long as the telemetry collecter is a random "developer" and not the government. But they probably fail to consider that this collected data is just a subpoena away from going to the government Corporate mobile operating systems suck. Including "apps" to run on them, generally There are some that do not require corporate approval and do not try to phone home but it's a relatively small fraction
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5mo ago
  Now on HN front page: https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2026/05/01/where-to-buy-a-non-apple-non-google-smartphone/5219681 https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2026/05/01/where-to-buy-... It appears there could be demand for alternatives, even if viable alternatives do not yet exist
selectively 5mo ago
Lunatic, likely AI generated comments here. This is an app for deliberately causing pollution. The users of that app should be criminally prosecuted and lose their license/spend a few months in prison. The price differential between this device/app and a generic ODB dongle you can buy on Amazon for ~$10 is entirely made up by the criminal features EZ Lynk offers. The app being software versus hardware doesn't change the legal or moral situation involving it. Much like the DOJ would demand identities of people importing PlayStation 1 modchips back in the 90s, the users of this equally criminal application will be provided to the DOJ.
opengrass 5mo ago
That's why you use Aurora and F-Droid.
tamimio 5mo ago
I somehow suspect this is a pretext to ban OBD monitoring/control tools. I have two in my car, one to monitor everything and log the performance, the other to control the gas intake accurately and safely as opposed to non-obd ones. I hope obd won’t become like radar detectors.
- The_President 5mo ago
  Detectors are legal in most states except two where they've managed to regulate the detection of light waves.
neilv 5mo ago
> It has already submitted forum posts and social media evidence showing some users employing the system to disable emissions controls. Is right-to-repair going to get scrod by illegal activity, like everyone got scrod by media piracy? We knew we'd get scrod back when MP3 piracy started, and many people were warned what would happen, but they still did it, and it played out just like was warned. Illegal activity creates both reason and pretext for forcibly taking away what should be rights. And those rights will be forcibly taken away, for both reasons. Often by crappy people, because you either forced their hand, or you handed the pretext to them on a silver platter. This is one reason for tech freedom advocates to fully appreciate that they're operating in a political context, so that they're a sustainable positive force, not a counterproductive one.
- paulryanrogers 5mo ago
  scrod?
- closetohome 5mo ago
  Was the terrible consequence of pirating MP3s that music is now cheap and widely available because media outlets had to compete with Napster?
seany 5mo ago
Are there any good open source implementations of these kinds of tools? They really are useful for things other than def deletes (though I support that too)
oofbey 5mo ago
This app has legitimate uses (custom tune performance on their engines) and also makes it easy to do illegal things. (Defeat emissions controls and roll coal.) The people who are using it to do illegal things are crying “privacy!” People who break the law generally do want less government power, more anonymity, etc. Sometimes they’ll argue the law is wrong and they should be allowed to break it, but I don’t think we’ll find many sympathizers of that here. It’s a genuinely complicated issue, and relates to a lot of things in tech and software. But IMHO if an app makes it easy to do something illegal which is otherwise difficult, then there’s reason for the government to be interested. If that app could be written in a way that blocks the illegal behavior, and has chosen not to put those restrictions in place, then I think the government is justified in interfering. That’s what seems to be happening here. I have a hard time believing that it would be difficult for EZ Lynk to distinguish between a “delete tune” that rolls coal or blows past emission regs and a legitimate clean tune. Maybe some things get blurry around the edges, but they’re clearly not even trying. And you know that’s why this app is popular. The clean tunes just don’t change anything much, because the manufacturer already tunes the engine for maximum legal power, or close to it.
- 9x39 5mo ago
  The laptop crowd and the car crowd have little overlap, which explains the collective amnesia around rights and skepticism of authority that’s normally present.
hedora 5mo ago
I was concerned because I'm about to spend a few coffees on OBD-II scanning apps, but since this particular app is an emissions defeat device, good. This is the... *checking notes* ... second thing this administration has done that seems reasonable, or at least not overtly evil.
- bigyabai 5mo ago
  This is still evil. The ultimate motive is to ratchet up the abuse of centralized control, and this absolutely sets us down that path.
Razengan 5mo ago
... Americans: How did you let it get this way?
jadbox 5mo ago
[flagged]
yieldcrv 5mo ago
I think everyone here is playing their part But I don’t see this as absurd, intermediaries are always loose ends The only news here is if the intermediaries complied or not If the idea of “being on a list” actually guides your behavior, then argue that chilling effect in federal court. I mean if you have the rights as a naturalized-since-birth citizen, since others might not be able to reach a federal court before being kidnapped and renditioned Downloading an app isn't a crime, you can still have TSA-precheck and run for office just because the government knows you downloaded an app or have the tor browser or something
isodev 5mo ago
Now can we agree that App Stores as only means of getting software and call home components you can’t disable or replace are a bad idea? We’re slowly normalising that everything happens on whats is effectively a device managed by either Apple or Google.
chris_explicare 5mo ago
What's missing here is the extraterritorial angle. The Cloud Act lets US authorities compel Apple and Google to hand over user data worldwide, including EU residents who assumed GDPR covers them. It doesn't. Apple and Google are US companies, and GDPR Article 48's restrictions on foreign court orders don't apply to them. Those 100k users almost certianly include Europeans with no idea their download history was reachable by the DOJ.
tedk-42 5mo ago
'Cyclists sue bolt cutter manufacturer over recent surge in bicycle theft'

477 points by tencentshill 5mo ago

EGreg 5mo ago

Worth pointing out that this is part of a much larger encroachment on user privacy, and not just in the US: https://community.qbix.com/t/increasing-state-of-surveillance-from-all-sides-around-the-world/804 https://community.qbix.com/t/increasing-state-of-surveillanc...

squibonpig 5mo ago
I wish that article wasn't extremely ai written
- EGreg 5mo ago
  What would that improve in this case?
  - squibonpig 5mo ago
    It would be more concise and the analysis section at the end would be more useful. I still read it I just hate reading articles online knowing I could have run a chatgpt deep research to the same effect.
    - EGreg 5mo ago
      Can you tell me what you would cut, in this article, specifically, that would make it more meaningfully concise? The point isn't that you can't run the deep research. Everyone now has more capabilities, and if you want to waste time and tokens you can do it. The point is someone has done the work compiling these, and made it available once, for everyone to read. Think "caching". It has the exact amount of information needed to show the details of every attack. There is a lot. Sadly making it "concise" will remove information -- there is that much. I do usually make edits to an article after I get it from an AI, as an editor would do when a writer submits something. I hate having AI shibboleths like "It's not X. It's Y". So I make it more humanized. But at the end of the day, the article does what it's supposed to do: make people aware of things in one place, rather than have to research it themselves every time.
      - ane 5mo ago
        Why not just write it yourself? We can all have ChatGPT regurgitate the same information. You're supposed to add value, editorializing isn't enough. Just like I don't want to look at AI art or listen to AI music, I don't want to read AI written blogslop. The web is now full of shit. What a waste.
        EGreg 5mo ago
        Writing it myself would mean doing the research myself. How would I do that? ChatGPT can do it faster at scale. Then the summaries are short enough that cutting any particular part wouldn't make sense. I could re-word it, I guess. Why don't you write all your assembly code yourself? Why do you use a compiler? Why do you generate images, when you can draw them yourself? You're supposed to add value. I don't think preparing a list of all the threats, editing it and publishing it for others is a "waste". I'm not publishing random stuff, this is important and in line with what I want people to know. Some people on HN downvote any criticism of AI, other people complain that things are written by AI. If you're such big fans of AI being used more and more, then accept the consequences!
        squibonpig 5mo ago
        The people doing the downvoting are different people from the whiners. I'm one of the whiners. That's kinda fair, like it's still useful to prepare a list, but it's also like if you didn't go research your information yourself why would I start from a position of charitability when I read it? When I research something with LLMs, I know to double-check everything myself before I use it as a basis for my thought or repeat it to other people. Knowing an article is AI written forces me to doubt every sentence. Or maybe it's worse, I have to assume nobody cared about the sentence. The old format was a guarantee that someone gave enough shits to put the article together. Relevance comes implicitly bundled in each sentence. It's like someone talking to you in public in that there's often a reason to pay attention. It's not as though that person is going to say something correct, or ethical, but I've had a lifetime of dealing with human kinds of wrongness. When stuff is wrong, I'll know it's wrong because the article is slanted or wrong because the author was lazy etc., which will let me discount it selectively and still get value from it when, e.g., a slanted author contradicts themselves. Reading an LLM article I have no clue whether the person who put it up even read the whole thing, so when I read sentences, I have no guarantee that the sentence communicates something worth paying attention to. I dislike that ambiguity and would prefer to guarantee that the text is slop by asking a bot myself. Then I know its worth upfront. I'd be fine with it if these sites included a direct statement in bold at the top: HEY THIS IS AI SLOP IF YOU DONT WANT THAT LEAVE. Then I know exactly how to parse it.
  - verall 5mo ago
    It's poorly structured. I think a better split between technical vs social measures and how they interact would result in a much better article. It also doesn't seem to even mention DPI or great firewall of China as prior art.
  - mzajc 5mo ago
    It would be written by a human. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: > Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.
    - EGreg 5mo ago
      The comment wasn’t AI generated. And the article was partially: it contained a list compiled by AI
- khazhoux 5mo ago
  [dead]

embedding-shape 5mo ago

> The government says it needs this information to identify and interview witnesses who can testify about how the tools were actually used. Why start this whole thing, if you don't already have this information and have people willing to help you as witnesses? Sounds to me they're saying they don't have this already, but why is this investigation happening in the first place then? Rather than finding every user of the tool, find the users who use the tool in the way you don't approve of, then request the information for those? Really bananas approach to go for "Every single user of the app" and "Everyone who bought a dongle" when it has very real and legal use cases.

seemaze 5mo ago
Why stop there? Why not request the PII of every person who could have plausibly downloaded the app at any point in time?
- khazhoux 5mo ago
  It's the only way to be sure. Also, think of the children.
- lern_too_spel 5mo ago
  https://dictionary.justia.com/overbroad https://dictionary.justia.com/overbroad
cogman10 5mo ago
Yeah, I'd HAPPILY report every single truck rolling coal around me if there was a place to report that information. Hell, I've seen a truck roll coal around cop cars and, obviously, nothing happened. This is just gross privacy intrusion masquerading as "protecting the environment". We don't need 100% compliance to the law and simple prosecution/ticketing of obvious violations would go a long way towards solving the problem outright. Much like we didn't need our cars emailing prosecutors every time someone drove without a seat belt on. Cops giving out tickets for not wearing a seatbelt was enough.
- 5mo ago

Danox 5mo ago

Get a warrant…

analogpixel 5mo ago

Hopefully they hand it over, and all of these people lose their licenses. I'm sick of breathing in their exhaust on the way to work. I think people should have the freedom to do what they want; if you want to have a truck that has horrible exhaust, fine, but we'll have it piped back into your cab for you to breathe instead of the people behind you, and if you want a car that sounds like a thousand go-carts racing down the street fine, but it'll be through headphones destroying your hearing every time you hit the gas.

toss1 5mo ago
Yeah I also absolutely loath the coal-rollers and everything about what they do, and if I could snap my fingers and have them lose both their trucks and their licenses to drive with no other consequences beyond their frustration, I'd do it. Nevertheless, we cannot allow this good reason for which be both agree to be used as a wedge to let the state just wholesale collect data for whatever reason they want. Very soon, the reason the state wants to wholesale collect data will be for a reason we entirely disagree. That is not an "IF", it is a "WHEN". So, no, this isn't a justification. Very soon, that ca
- bethekidyouwant 5mo ago
  But this isn’t actually to throw the coal rollers in jail and take away their trucks it’s to get witnesses so they can build a case to get this mod taken off the market
  - xp84 5mo ago
    Yes. Supposedly they aren’t going to prosecute those people, though if I were them, I wouldn’t trust that promise. But if they get this thing taken off the market, that’s a huge loss for all of us because there are a ton of things this type of tool enables, many of them things people like us would be very interested in. Such as disabling privacy-invasive telematics, or disabling features like stop start, which I can personally attest has caused significant repair issues with the engine on my last car. Having access to a tool like this is to a car what having an administrator account is on a PC. Without it, you are merely a guest, not an owner of the system.

Yaa101 5mo ago

Welcome to our brave new digital world, governments and DOJs do this because now they can, I am afraid this is only the beginning.

basilgohar 5mo ago
Tyranny comes and goes, and sometimes just changes shape and serves some more than others, and that gives the illusion to those it serves that it's gone. It's always been around in some form or another.
goolz 5mo ago
The saddest part is, most people simply do not care, my parents constantly echo the sentiment that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. I would argue this slippery slope came about 20+ years ago during the initial Patriot Act. They normalize the behavior, take a few more freedoms, and keep on trucking. I used to be proud to be American. Now I am just worried.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5mo ago
  I understand why they don't care and I don't fault them. The truth is that this doesn't affect most people in their daily lives. It sounds entitled to say that this demands their attention.
  - goolz 5mo ago
    A totally fair point, and I think you are correct, wish I knew a solid answer. Because their indifference is watering down all of our rights.
  - bigyabai 5mo ago
    It affects everyone, the question is whether or not they're held to account. Some people think of themselves as low-risk until they're detained at the border for a Facebook post they made.
- forshaper 5mo ago

codedokode 5mo ago

That's why you should be downloading from F-Droid anonymously.

EvanAnderson 5mo ago
For sure. Another demonstration of why "side loading" software is better.
logicchains 5mo ago
That's why F-Droid eventually won't work on new Android phones.
- bigyabai 5mo ago
  It works right now, though.
- nathanmills 5mo ago
  No, it will continue to work just fine. The restrictions are being added to Google Play Services, not Android itself. I and many others do not run closed source software like Google Play Services on our devices.
  - xp84 5mo ago
    And how long do you think that window will remain open? I expect anyone not running a closed system (hardware attestation) is going to not only be locked out of things like banking apps, government apps, etc., but also if Google has its way, you’ll be prevented from accessing those things on the web as well, maybe even from your desktop. We just saw that story a few days ago with them replacing CAPTCHA tech with “prove you have an unmodified locked-down Google or Apple phone.” Clearly there is a single driving agenda, which Google and the government are largely in harmony on, to try to approach 100% real-identity-tying to every activity done online. Where once, “online” meant generally greater anonymity than “IRL” activities, since most things could be signed up for with an arbitrary throwaway email address and no proof of identity. It is now or shortly will be the opposite.

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

Simulacra 5mo ago

Sounds like I need to download this app..

caminante 5mo ago
If you start tuning, then make sure you turn it off before bringing your car to the dealership. It'll void any warranty.
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- rootusrootus 5mo ago
  > It'll void any warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act disagrees with you.
  - caminante 5mo ago
    What is your understanding of the Act and its limitations [0]? Here's a legal view that explains it further [1]. Basically, they can deny warranty service if you make modifications, and they can tie it to a failure. You can add 100s of HP to your engine profile with these things, and why would it be reasonable to expect a manufacturer to warrant related component repairs if they're pushed beyond spec? Here are relevant quotes, and []'s are mine. > The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act requires manufacturers to honor their warranties and auto manufacturers only warrant their vehicles against manufacturing defects. Your claim here could be denied because the failure was not due to a defect in a factory component. It was caused by something added to the car[...] That system caused a non-defective part to fail. Your mod did not void the [entire] warranty. It’s just that the failure was not caused by a factory defect. > Obviously, an aftermarket camshaft or a hopped up ECU won’t void the entire warranty on your car. The master cylinder failed? The blue tooth quit working? Unless there is a logical connection between the mod and the part or system that failed, you should be good to go. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty_Act#Limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty... [1] https://lehtoslaw.com/will-modifications-void-new-car-warranty/ https://lehtoslaw.com/will-modifications-void-new-car-warran...

lapetitejort 5mo ago

I am surprised that a lawsuit started in 2021 about maintaining emission standards survived up to this point. The DOGE search terms must have misspelled "emission"

delecti 5mo ago
Alternatively, given who was running the show, lawsuits against ICE cars (non-EVs) might have just been outside the bounds of what they cared about.
- lotsofpulp 5mo ago
  The president's MO is to wait for bribes to whatever coin and then pardon/drop investigation. It's the art of the deal, you have something someone wants, don't give it away for free.
wavemode 5mo ago
I had the same thought. I suspect this lawsuit will be dropped once they notice. Probably if the appmaker donates to the Trump foundation it will be withdrawn within the day.

tehjoker 5mo ago

This does seem like a fishing expedition though there is a facially legitimate purpose. Fortunately, we have more powerful policy tools to clean the air than attacking individual gearheads... convert America to an electric car system. You need to attack these problems at the point of production. Consumption side approaches are petty and not very effective.

jmyeet 5mo ago

These companies will likely comply too [1]. Defenders will say "they have to comply with the law" but there's compliance and then there's compliance. For example, an adminstrative subpoena has no power. Companies can and should force the government to go to court and get a court-issued subpoena. This isn't really anything terribly new either. The government regardless of who the current president is will routinely go after individuals for (allaegedly) hurting coprorate profits. We saw it in the Napster/Limewire era, in the BitTorrent era and even with physical products far earlier than that. There's a ban on importing cars less than 25 years old because Mercedes-Benz dealerships lobbied for a law in the 1980s because too many people were importing them directly from Germany at a lower cost [2]. Heck, 60 years of Cuban embargoes and sanctions as well as the 1954 Guatemala coup were US efforts at the behest of the United Fruit Company. Same thing for oil and the 1953 Iranian coup. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/google-broke-its-promise-me-now-ice-has-my-data https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/google-broke-its-promi... [2]: https://www.jalopnik.com/the-25-year-import-rules-history-is-more-complicated-th-1848322467/ https://www.jalopnik.com/the-25-year-import-rules-history-is...

like_any_other 5mo ago
> Defenders will say "they have to comply with the law" but there's compliance and then there's compliance. More importantly, there's not spying on the user in the first place. The law doesn't force Google to spy, nor does it force Apple to lock consumers (for sure not "owners") out of their phones, so that they're left helpless when the CCP bans VPN and protest apps [1] (not to imply spying from Google alone isn't bad, before any other actors get involved). [1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-pulls-mapping-app-used-by-hong-kong-protesters-again https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-pulls-mapping-app-used-by-h...

motbus3 5mo ago

Will this turn into be a blow to anyone who gains access to the hardware paid with own money?

traderj0e 5mo ago
Certain car mods have already been illegal for a long time
- motbus3 5mo ago
  Not exactly. You are supposed to be emitting certain pollution rates, certain speed limits, keep your car in order. All the rest is the brand convincing you that you need to pay them more for things you already paid, like heated seats. Don't tell me you believe you could've paid less because the heat was off

bethekidyouwant 5mo ago

The Department of justice needs witnesses because they’re trying to prove that ez lynk is profiting from the distribution of “emission disabling software” They are not going after any of these individual users. Tldr: they’re trying to get the mod taken off the market.

jjk166 5mo ago
That's the narrative. In reality, you don't need a list of every user to find a handful of witnesses. This is very clearly a power play - the feds can't make their case so they're making distributing the app a major PR headache for the platforms distributing the app. Apple and google will quietly change their user agreements to not permit these sorts of apps on their stores. The company's leadership will likely escape prosecution but their business will be crippled if not destroyed despite not being proved guilty of violating any law.

CommenterPerson 5mo ago

Missing key points: Why is this administration, which is all for coal, oil, and against environmental policies pursuing THIS? This DOJ is all about pursuing cases for retribution. It could be, they already know someone they want to punish, and already found they're using the device. Or, use it as a source for finding people they want to punish.

tencentshill 5mo ago
Also strange as it would disproportionately affect modified diesel trucks, who are overwhelmingly Trump supporters.
15155 5mo ago
US Attorneys aren't forced to toe the party line on every issue. This issue is just not directly politically important enough to get the "don't touch" treatment. Donors and party power brokers aren't rolling coal.
JoBrad 5mo ago
It’s not about this administration. The lawsuit was filed in 2021.

curt15 5mo ago

This is a classic cautionary tale for the over-centralization of app distribution.

dmitrygr 5mo ago

There are already proper procedures for doing this. If the users did something illegal, you can go after them. If you prove that somebody actively enabled or encouraged them, you go after them. But even if the app actively enabled or encouraged something (which would still need to be proven) it would be a pretty tall order to prove that Google or Apple actively enabled or encouraged anyone to break the law. Both of them could fight the subpoena, and almost certainly win.

numpad0 5mo ago

> These tools allegedly allow users to bypass factory emissions controls on diesel vehicles Oh so AdBlue shortage is about to hit the US too?

midtake 5mo ago

This "car-tinkering app" is used as a glorified GameShark for deleting factory emissions controls, I don't feel sorry for anyone who uses this to roll coal or whatever. Instead of investigating everyone on the list of users of this app, should the government instead ban diesel engines knowing their emissions controls software will be defeated? Should environmental regulations be relaxed? What is really the solution here?

traderj0e 5mo ago
They want testimonies to use against the app. The solution they're trying to pursue is to outlaw the app, not investigate its users.
- m463 5mo ago
  ...via investigating users.
  - traderj0e 5mo ago
    That would suggest the users are defendants. They supposedly just want witnesses. I had another comment questioning this though.
repiret 5mo ago
Periodic vehicle inspection for emissions and safety compliance. Many jurisdictions already have this for gas engine emissions, a handful of states already have safety inspections. Done right, it can be low burden and low cost, and basically put an end to Def deletion. Done poorly it's grift to the shops that do the inspections, and an economically external annoyance to vehicle owners, and unnecessarily limits the ability of people to tinker with their own vehicles.
- traderj0e 5mo ago
  I don't really care how it affects car modders or people with sports cars. I have a sports car, and yeah the California smog test has been super annoying cause of electrical problems with that are unrelated to its actual emissions, but I knew what I was getting into when I bought something known for unreliability. Fixed it myself. There's a dude across the street with a modded car who always complains he has to bribe the smog guy $500, as if he was forced into driving a track car on the street. I just want regular cars to be drivable without undue burdens, and the enthusiasts can deal with it. California gasoline tax pisses me off more because it's higher than anywhere else and the money seemingly goes nowhere.

AdmiralAsshat 5mo ago

It will start with subpoenaing this information against people who modified their car to do "bad" things. But once they have the precedent, I would predict that it will very quickly be used at the behest of car manufacturers to go after people who modify their cars to, say, disable GPS tracking.

newsclues 5mo ago
Then go after the people that modify their console, fridge or your phone. Slippery slope is fully lubed
- emdash 5mo ago
  Sony already sent people to prison for developing a way to let users jailbreak their PS3's. And the jailbreak was just to re-enable features that Sony advertised at launch then took away after people bought the consoles.

traderj0e 5mo ago

So if someone used this app to do something illegal with his car (rolling coal or otherwise), is he really going to testify in court that he did this? The lawsuit is only against EZ Lynk, but it's conceivable that he could face his own consequences later.

oceanplexian 5mo ago

These vehicle emissions laws are almost always fake compliance theater and were dreamed up by idiots. They are a huge drag on the economy and achieve absolutely nothing. For example, the reason we don’t have super efficient turbodiesel subcompacts that are perfectly legal in the EU is thanks to the so called “Clean” air act. Since the law is based on vehicle weight I can go buy a 8,000 pound truck and commute to work alone in it and pollute all I want. But if I want a super clean 80MPG diesel subcompact that’s 1/4 the gross weight supposedly bad for the environment. But it gets worse in all sorts of ways, the law grandfathers coal plants from all these emissions standards. One coal plant can emit more pollution than millions of trucks. Guess which polluter the government is aggressively pursuing and violating the rights of? You guessed it, car enthusiasts who downloaded an app. Give me a break.

traderj0e 5mo ago
I don't buy that those are actually clean. EU has always had majority high-MPG non-diesel cars that you also don't see here as often, simply because gas is cheap in the US. People complain that it's expensive but then 2/3 times go buy a truck or SUV anyway.
- AngryData 5mo ago
  How much of the new car market is represented by the average person though? If 70% of the population wants fuel economy but only 10% of the population can afford new cars it is easy to see how the wealthier new car buyers can shape what cars are even available to the average person. Buying a user car in the US gives limited offers for super and turbo charged vehicles, and many turbo cars will want turbo maintence when they hit the used market with lower availability of turbo experienced mechanics.
  - traderj0e 5mo ago
    That's a good point, but it looks like the top-selling used cars are trucks and SUVs too. It's possible on the face of it that this is just because they retain less value than efficient cars and buyers are weighing that vs the cost of gas, but doesn't seem like it from the pricing I've seen.

dec0dedab0de 5mo ago

This is outrageous, especially since there are many other ways that you could violate emissions laws. If they really cared they could equip federal agents, and state/local police with testing equipment. It is easy to see/hear vehicles that are likely to be violating these rules. Heck, make a hotline, I would rat them out all day. Just incorporate it with rate-limiting how often each vehicle could get pulled over for it, so it doesn't get abused. This really comes down to corporations and the government colluding to make us not actually own anything. The fact that they would refer to a tool for making modifications to your car a "defeat device" is so telling. Coupled with phones not allowing side loading is really fucked up. Everything is awful, and it's been getting worse for as long as I can remember. I think I'm going to lose it and just cut ties with the internet, and computers in general very soon. The power, and freedom I used to feel has been replaced with oppression disguised as convenience. One Token Ring to rule them all.

1vuio0pswjnm7 5mo ago

There are HN commenters ("developers") that want readers to believe that telemetry should be on by default. Maybe some readers, e.g., other "developers", think, "Yeah, that sounds reasonable" so long as the telemetry collecter is a random "developer" and not the government. But they probably fail to consider that this collected data is just a subpoena away from going to the government Corporate mobile operating systems suck. Including "apps" to run on them, generally There are some that do not require corporate approval and do not try to phone home but it's a relatively small fraction

1vuio0pswjnm7 5mo ago
Now on HN front page: https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2026/05/01/where-to-buy-a-non-apple-non-google-smartphone/5219681 https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2026/05/01/where-to-buy-... It appears there could be demand for alternatives, even if viable alternatives do not yet exist

selectively 5mo ago

Lunatic, likely AI generated comments here. This is an app for deliberately causing pollution. The users of that app should be criminally prosecuted and lose their license/spend a few months in prison. The price differential between this device/app and a generic ODB dongle you can buy on Amazon for ~$10 is entirely made up by the criminal features EZ Lynk offers. The app being software versus hardware doesn't change the legal or moral situation involving it. Much like the DOJ would demand identities of people importing PlayStation 1 modchips back in the 90s, the users of this equally criminal application will be provided to the DOJ.

opengrass 5mo ago

That's why you use Aurora and F-Droid.

tamimio 5mo ago

I somehow suspect this is a pretext to ban OBD monitoring/control tools. I have two in my car, one to monitor everything and log the performance, the other to control the gas intake accurately and safely as opposed to non-obd ones. I hope obd won’t become like radar detectors.

The_President 5mo ago
Detectors are legal in most states except two where they've managed to regulate the detection of light waves.

neilv 5mo ago

> It has already submitted forum posts and social media evidence showing some users employing the system to disable emissions controls. Is right-to-repair going to get scrod by illegal activity, like everyone got scrod by media piracy? We knew we'd get scrod back when MP3 piracy started, and many people were warned what would happen, but they still did it, and it played out just like was warned. Illegal activity creates both reason and pretext for forcibly taking away what should be rights. And those rights will be forcibly taken away, for both reasons. Often by crappy people, because you either forced their hand, or you handed the pretext to them on a silver platter. This is one reason for tech freedom advocates to fully appreciate that they're operating in a political context, so that they're a sustainable positive force, not a counterproductive one.

paulryanrogers 5mo ago
scrod?
closetohome 5mo ago
Was the terrible consequence of pirating MP3s that music is now cheap and widely available because media outlets had to compete with Napster?

seany 5mo ago

Are there any good open source implementations of these kinds of tools? They really are useful for things other than def deletes (though I support that too)

oofbey 5mo ago

This app has legitimate uses (custom tune performance on their engines) and also makes it easy to do illegal things. (Defeat emissions controls and roll coal.) The people who are using it to do illegal things are crying “privacy!” People who break the law generally do want less government power, more anonymity, etc. Sometimes they’ll argue the law is wrong and they should be allowed to break it, but I don’t think we’ll find many sympathizers of that here. It’s a genuinely complicated issue, and relates to a lot of things in tech and software. But IMHO if an app makes it easy to do something illegal which is otherwise difficult, then there’s reason for the government to be interested. If that app could be written in a way that blocks the illegal behavior, and has chosen not to put those restrictions in place, then I think the government is justified in interfering. That’s what seems to be happening here. I have a hard time believing that it would be difficult for EZ Lynk to distinguish between a “delete tune” that rolls coal or blows past emission regs and a legitimate clean tune. Maybe some things get blurry around the edges, but they’re clearly not even trying. And you know that’s why this app is popular. The clean tunes just don’t change anything much, because the manufacturer already tunes the engine for maximum legal power, or close to it.

9x39 5mo ago
The laptop crowd and the car crowd have little overlap, which explains the collective amnesia around rights and skepticism of authority that’s normally present.

hedora 5mo ago

I was concerned because I'm about to spend a few coffees on OBD-II scanning apps, but since this particular app is an emissions defeat device, good. This is the... *checking notes* ... second thing this administration has done that seems reasonable, or at least not overtly evil.

bigyabai 5mo ago
This is still evil. The ultimate motive is to ratchet up the abuse of centralized control, and this absolutely sets us down that path.

Razengan 5mo ago

... Americans: How did you let it get this way?

jadbox 5mo ago

[flagged]

yieldcrv 5mo ago

I think everyone here is playing their part But I don’t see this as absurd, intermediaries are always loose ends The only news here is if the intermediaries complied or not If the idea of “being on a list” actually guides your behavior, then argue that chilling effect in federal court. I mean if you have the rights as a naturalized-since-birth citizen, since others might not be able to reach a federal court before being kidnapped and renditioned Downloading an app isn't a crime, you can still have TSA-precheck and run for office just because the government knows you downloaded an app or have the tor browser or something

isodev 5mo ago

Now can we agree that App Stores as only means of getting software and call home components you can’t disable or replace are a bad idea? We’re slowly normalising that everything happens on whats is effectively a device managed by either Apple or Google.

chris_explicare 5mo ago

What's missing here is the extraterritorial angle. The Cloud Act lets US authorities compel Apple and Google to hand over user data worldwide, including EU residents who assumed GDPR covers them. It doesn't. Apple and Google are US companies, and GDPR Article 48's restrictions on foreign court orders don't apply to them. Those 100k users almost certianly include Europeans with no idea their download history was reachable by the DOJ.

tedk-42 5mo ago

'Cyclists sue bolt cutter manufacturer over recent surge in bicycle theft'