4 ms·
I'm surprised everyone is ignoring the obvious elephant in the room: The car receives a signal to lock itself down. Therefore someone can impersonate the car
by sillysaurus2 13y ago
I'm surprised everyone is ignoring the obvious elephant in the room: The car receives a signal to lock itself down. Therefore someone can impersonate the car dealer and lock your car down (as long as their encryption is set up in a broken way, which it almost always is).
- mjolk 13y agoNo one is ignoring the "obvious elephant;" it's just not the most important discussion point.
- rosser 13y agoAssume the Bad Guys have figured out how to send the brick-yourself code to an arbitrary Zoe. Which do you think is going to happen more often: bricked because you couldn't afford your monthly payment, or bricked until you transfer 100 BTC to the haxx0r?
- mjolk 13y agoI feel like you're trolling by mentioning "haxx0r" and bitcoin, but here goes anyway. The fact that Renault is trying to sell a tangible, vendor-locked, remote-privileged/DRM-reliant device is more interesting than the "what if some jerk hacks the protocol?" >Which do you think is going to happen more often: bricked because you couldn't afford your monthly payment, or bricked until you transfer 100 BTC to the haxx0r? The former and by large a large margin.
- travisp 13y agoIs that substantially different than GM's OnStar? It's already been used to slow down/shut off stolen vehicles.
- sillysaurus2 13y agoThis is mandatory, whereas OnStar is optional.
- duaneb 13y agoOnStar is a feature that can be disabled. This is straight up DRM.
- travisp 13y agoThe comment I was responding to wasn't about DRM, it was about the possibility of someone else hacking into it. That same issue applies to every person who hasn't disabled OnStar (and I mean physically disabled, since GM can turn them back on by court order, I assume a "hacker" could too).