Some white hat hackers took control of a Jeep Grand Cherokee’s brakes and throttle remotely, like 8 years ago. The only reason to have WiFi or cell service on a vehicle is to let the government kill you lol
Edit: it was ELEVEN years ago
https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/
There was also an investigative reporter driving a Mercedes who died in an odd accident in SoCal in and around then. It was suspicious, but swept away quickly in the news. I remember believing that he was murdered.
Edit: It was Michael Hastings. He had discredited General McChrystal which resulted in his resignation (The Runaway General). “His last story, “Why Democrats Love to Spy On Americans”, was published by BuzzFeed on June 7, 2013.” I love how Wikipedia mentions that his body tested positive for marijuana and methamphetamine, but leaves out that the coroner stated that it did not contribute to the crash. And of course the LAPD stating there was no foul play. Case closed!
I think a similar thing happened to an investigative journalist in DC
Remote hacking infotainment stuff is one thing, but if actual vehicle controls aren’t air-gapped, someone seriously fucked up. All vehicle controls should be strictly local.
They should be, of course- but in more than one case they are not
I think many vehicles still use the old CAN bus that just wasn’t setup with external connectivity in mind. It’s well known that even premium brands often reuse all the same components.
I’ve heard that Tesla were the first to replace this with something closer to a modern network in the cybertruck, of all things.
Hey not fair eleven years ago was like 2005
Is anyone actually surprised by this? It’s one of those things that any semi-competent programmer could have told you would be the case. The study just formalizes it and adds specifics.
Laughs in old, primitive, disconnected, paid for car
I’m sure that soon it will be illegal to drive a car that isn’t connected.
While I’m not surprised, it’s important that empirical research be done and published. It’s needed to bolster calls for regulation. Not that I, for one second, think we’ll get any meaningful regulation out of this in most countries.
Our best bet, as always, is to limit our technologies’ access to the internet as much as we can tolerate. Cars, doorbells, and refrigerators have no business connecting to the internet at all.
They will make it illegal to remove it from the internet, I think it long has been illegal to remove the onstar and that was a long time ago, but not sure it’s been 20 years since I think I learned that after seeing a sopranos episode where they paid someone to remove it from their new car.
I think it long has been illegal to remove the onstar
Oh yeah? What law would that possibly break?
I think I learned that after seeing a sopranos episode
Oh, never mind.
Remotely enabling heating/cooling of my car so it’s ready when I get to it is just so god damn nice. This is only possible with internet connection, if it’s limited by keyfob range to the vehicle then it may as well not exist.
I mean, yeah? You give anything a connection to a global network with billions of people, and there will always be a chance for it to be exploited. Hell, even my personal OpenVPN instance for remotely accessing my home servers has to fend off attacks.
This is why my next vehicle will be a slate truck. Zero internet connectivity by default, and updates can be done via USB-C from a phone (which can be vetted as needed).
The whole internet of things was a mistake. I say that as one of the biggest tech enthusiasts I know.
Secure software is mathematically possible, but secure engineering is mathematically improbable.
Internet of Things is a terrible no good idea, but Intranet of Things has some potential. Entirely local mesh networks like Zigbee and Z-wave solve most of your problems, doubly so if you properly confine their controllers into their own non Internet routable subnets.
It’s honestly my biggest complaint with the Matter standard, it has Internet bridging baked into the design while the prior standards made that completely optional.
Parts of Iot are great, but not the whole “smart home sending multiple video and microphone feeds to Amazon/Google/Facebook” thing.
The ability to set up remote sensors on critical infrastructure to give early alerts is a benefit.
And it can be done without a cloud connection.
Yes, that’s a great way to put it
No fucking shit
They were hacking cars with any kind of computer in them and even able to remotely control some newer models at the time when I was in high school. 20 years down the road, car makers have not done anything to improve security against such hacks, and also have added more computerization.
From what I’ve been reading, not only is this the least of what hackers can do, but it’s with any new vehicles. The CIA developed all sorts of hacking tools for cars I hear tell, that were revealed in the snowden leaks, and that was 15 years ago, that they can take control of the gas, brakes, and steering regardless of your controlls in the vehicle.
It’s not just academic either, 60 minutes a few years ago got a new vehicle in a parking lot and paid a hacker to take control in a parking lot and he got it to disregard their steering and braking and gas pedal.
There are a couple of suspicious deaths people think are from hacked vehicles causing accidents, Guiffre in Australia is one.
I seriously need a GrapheneMobile
A car is pretty much the last thing you’d want to have a network connection. I’d sooner hook up my refrigerator and let it send analytics data to Frigidaire.
The only secure computer is the one you’re holding the power cord you just yanked out of the back of it, and even then it’s only temporarily secure.
I mean yeah, thought this was common knowledge by now tbh…
Still… after more than a decade where some Wired article published the exact same fucking statement about being able to break a moving vehicle and take control of steering. This is old news.
Shocker.
And non connected cars too.
And water is wet.
