In response, the journalist would say "This was absolutely a real test; there was nothing fake about it. The conditions were as real-world as you can get: the v

In response, the journalist would say "This was absolutely a real test; there was nothing fake about it. The conditions were as real-world as you can get: the vehicle was being operated at highway speeds with an average driver behind the wheel, the car's systems were connected to the internet in the exact same way as every other car of that model is, and the attackers were operating their exploit from a remote location as would be the case with every other vulnerable vehicle on the road. That the test was performed on a closed track is obviously for safety reasons as we did not want to endanger the public by causing the vehicle to fail in the middle of a busy highway." For bonus points, throw in something like: "It's no different than your vehicle's advertisements displaying 'performed on a closed track' -- surely you're not arguing that the vehicle's performance in those advertisements is completely fake and you're deceiving consumers with said non-real-world advertising, are you?"