3 ms·
If researchers really want to underscore a point: hang out outside the IIHS testing facility, and when they're testing the vehicle in question, then mess with t
by discardorama 11y ago
If researchers really want to underscore a point: hang out outside the IIHS testing facility, and when they're testing the vehicle in question, then mess with the systems.
Maybe IIHS needs to include "remote hackability" as a criterion in their testing?
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago> Maybe IIHS needs to include "remote hackability" as a criterion in their testing? I think so but just include hacking in general. Remote hacking is the worst but if someone can get physical access to some part of your car for a brief period of time (maybe the door's are unlocked and they plug something in or maybe they get under the hood and mess with the car's computer) you still have a major problem on your hands. Granted it's far harder to secure a device when someone has physical access to it but they need to test and harder for this the best they can as well. In my opinion anyway.
- dsfyu404ed 11y agoIIHS uses cars that aren't running and don't have fluids in them. They don't want to clean up that mess (or have the car destroyed by fire). They do test fuel system integrity though. I'm not sure if they use some other fluid (water + dye) or something like pressurized air or leakdown test after the fact. I guess you could engage in other antics but none of them would be all that effective since the car is towed by a cable until it's a few feet from whatever it's hitting.
- discardorama 11y agoActually, you are right. I was thinking of NHTSA, which does braking tests on an actual track.