[HN Gopher] Assignment 5: Cars and Key Fobs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Assignment 5: Cars and Key Fobs
        
       Author : Pikamander2
       Score  : 175 points
       Date   : 2025-04-24 09:53 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (web.stanford.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (web.stanford.edu)
        
       | trishmapow2 wrote:
       | Did a high school project on the jam and replay attack mentioned
       | here: https://github.com/trishmapow/rf-jam-replay. Low cost SDRs
       | have been a real game changer in letting the average Joe get
       | started in this space. Good to see that more unis have courses
       | with this type of hands on experimentation.
        
       | spacebanana7 wrote:
       | One thing I would've liked about an Apple car is the security.
       | Imagine FaceID, secure enclaves and MFA. An iPhone on wheels
       | would be immune to most, if not all, of these attacks.
        
         | jimktrains2 wrote:
         | And then how do I loan it to a friend without the rigamarole of
         | adding them as an authenticated user?
         | 
         | What if I'm not able to add them as an authenticated user or
         | authentic myself to let them drive, e.g. I'm injured or very
         | drunk?
        
           | krisoft wrote:
           | > And then how do I loan it to a friend without the
           | rigamarole of adding them as an authenticated user?
           | 
           | By making adding an authenticated driver not a rigamarole,
           | but easy and intuitive.
           | 
           | > What if I'm not able to add them as an authenticated user
           | or authentic myself to let them drive, e.g. I'm injured or
           | very drunk?
           | 
           | They call you an ambulance.
        
             | jimktrains2 wrote:
             | > By making adding an authenticated driver not a
             | rigamarole, but easy and intuitive.
             | 
             | We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't believe that this
             | will be possible in many situations. What if I'm not near
             | my car? What if my phone is dead? What if my car's battery
             | is dead and it needs jumped?
             | 
             | I'm also just cynical that the automakers or app developers
             | are able to not enshittify the process.
             | 
             | What if when I set my wife up I added her as a user but not
             | admin and now she can't share with someone without having
             | to involve me, which may not be physically possible in all
             | circumstances.
             | 
             | > They call you an ambulance.
             | 
             | You don't call an ambulance to take a drunk person home.
             | Calling a taxi when there is someone able to drive is a
             | waste of money and a huge inconvenience the next day to
             | retrieve the car.
             | 
             | You also can't call an ambulance in the wilderness.
             | 
             | I also meant injured in a more broad sense. What if I just
             | have a bad headache or migraine? I don't want to be
             | fumbling with my phone or car electronics trying to
             | navigate adding someone.
        
             | RandomBacon wrote:
             | In the future?
             | 
             | They call 911, and they read the license plate number and
             | the authorities send an override signal that turns on the
             | car and only allows it to be driven to the nearest hospital
             | that appears on the screen on the console. If they go off
             | course, they have 30 seconds to get back on course before
             | it coasts into a 5mph limp mode (to find a safe place to
             | pull over) for 1 minute before it completely stops and
             | shutsdown and locks them inside for the police to come get
             | them.
             | 
             | Eh, the car will probably be self-driving at that point, so
             | probably only the first half.
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | The _last thing_ I want to see on any car is the ability
               | for the government to just remotely hijack random cars.
               | Not just because cops already and routinely abuse their
               | privileges (imagine some crazy police officer doing that
               | to their ex girlfriend!), but also because any such
               | capability can and eventually will be abused by malicious
               | actors. Think of the usual  "for the lulz" trolls,
               | organized crime rings involved in looting people, or
               | nation-state enemies.
        
               | abenga wrote:
               | Aren't authorities notoriously unable to get into Apple
               | products unless allowed?
        
           | os2warpman wrote:
           | I imagine the same way you share a key for a HomeKit-enabled
           | smart lock.
           | 
           | The only scenarios where one is so injured and/or drunk as to
           | not be able to complete the non-rigamarolish process of
           | sharing a HomeKit home key either by doing it themselves or
           | walking someone through the process are ones where the key
           | holder is so incapacitated that they would be unable to share
           | a physical key.
           | 
           | All of that is someone irrelevant because Express Mode is
           | enabled by default, so if you are unconscious all a person
           | has to do is pull your phone out of your pocket and use it to
           | unlock and start your car the exact same way physical keys
           | work in that situation. It even works if the phone's battery
           | is dead.
           | 
           | https://support.apple.com/en-us/118271
           | 
           | Also, every implementation of CarKit Car Keys I have seen is
           | the same as HomeKit home keys: there is a backup. Either a
           | physical key, PIN, fob, or card.
        
             | jimktrains2 wrote:
             | > non-rigamarolish process of sharing a HomeKit home key
             | 
             | I have not used homekit, but from some searches it only
             | seems to be a non-rigamarole process to add someone as a
             | homekit user if the other person has an apple device? Also,
             | is the Internet required to enroll someone?
             | 
             | > ones where the key holder is so incapacitated that they
             | would be unable to share a physical key.
             | 
             | I don't need to be conscious or my phone have battery (or
             | reception) to have someone take a key from my pocket.
             | 
             | > Also, every implementation of CarKit Car Keys I have seen
             | is the same as HomeKit home keys: there is a backup. Either
             | a physical key, PIN, fob, or card.
             | 
             | I was responding to gp who wanted none of this as it all
             | defeats the security they desired. A 1-factor physical
             | authentication token as a backup would be suitable for
             | nearly all edge cases I can think of. As long as the person
             | carries it, but then we are at worst where we are today, at
             | best I could potentially authenticate or add someone from
             | afar.
             | 
             | I'm not saying that smart locks aren't useful, just that
             | they can't only be "smart", which I assume you would agree
             | with since you brought up things currently having backup
             | methods?
        
           | woobar wrote:
           | I have my BMW key in Apple Wallet. When I was out of town and
           | needed to share the key with another person, all I did use a
           | standard share sheet for the key. It let it share via SMS,
           | email, AirDrop, etc.You can revoke the key later.
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | Which makes you dependent on a third party, that doesn't
         | necessarily have the motive to keep it updated. Having a mobile
         | as a secondary key is a better idea, my Polestar 2 has keys,
         | but also an app that can use Face ID (or the equivalent Android
         | security measure) to drive the car. Once the app is set up you
         | don't need to carry the physical keys.
        
       | sorenjan wrote:
       | BMW has a page describing the use of UWB (Ultra Wide Bandwidth)
       | radio in key fobs and how it helps against relay attacks. In
       | short it's because the wide bandwidth allows for very short
       | pulses which lets them measure the distance between the car and
       | the key, and using a relay will inevitably add distance and
       | therefore time between the signal is sent and the reply is
       | received.
       | 
       | https://www.bmw.com/en/innovation/bmw-digital-key-plus-ultra...
        
         | H8crilA wrote:
         | The core problem is that older systems never proved distance in
         | any rigorous sense, they only proved connectivity/liveness.
         | Pretending that you're closer than you are is sometimes called
         | in research "the mafia fraud attack".
        
         | pwarner wrote:
         | I believe this was ratified into a standard so it should show
         | up in more new cars. https://carconnectivity.org/car-
         | connectivity-consortium-publ...
        
       | relaxing wrote:
       | Only two lecture slide decks?
       | 
       | Did the professor get tired of uploading the material for
       | students to review post lecture?
        
       | H8crilA wrote:
       | BTW, car keys (physical keys) are notoriously weak, generally
       | susceptible to simple raking attacks. You can learn how to rake a
       | lock in a few minutes, and the rake+tensioner itself costs around
       | $5. And all cars include a physical key as a backup entry method.
       | This was partially solved by adding another device that cuts off
       | the engine, the immobilizer, which still allows the attacker to
       | get in, but not to drive off.
        
         | XorNot wrote:
         | The thing is if you have time to rake a car lock, you can also
         | just break the window if you're going to rob the interior.
         | 
         | The key fob attack is superior since no one looks twice if you
         | walk up to a car, it unlocks from a hand held device and then
         | you get in and drive off.
        
           | H8crilA wrote:
           | It is superior, but a lot more difficult to pull off. And
           | what if raking takes just 5-15 seconds? Because that's how
           | fast it often is.
           | 
           | And in either case you still need to deal with the
           | immobilizer, and turn the core of the ignition lock. Unless
           | your radio device is that comprehensive :)
        
             | Crosseye_Jack wrote:
             | Presuming its a modern car (and if we are talking about
             | keyless entry/start we are), well then you just plug an
             | "Emergency Start Device" into the OBD port or to the BCM
             | module, and drive away. Heck a lot of these "Emergency
             | Start Devices" can also unlock the car, but often involve
             | pulling panels/lights from the car to get to the can bus to
             | run the attack.
             | 
             | So that attack when done on its own is mainly left to
             | stealing cars off drives at night rather than say from a
             | supermarkets car park during the day.
        
             | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
             | Push-to-start eliminates the need to turn a physical lock.
             | They drop to zero security once their RF is broken.
        
           | Crosseye_Jack wrote:
           | With practice raking doesn't take that much time and
           | "usually" comes with the benefit of not tripping the alarm
           | that the door was opened (because the car "thinks" the door
           | has just been unlocked with a key).
           | 
           | <EDIT> Seems HN has different experiences with their cars
           | then my own, So I'll concede the idea that the alarm doesn't
           | trip when using the key. It seems the cars I've had in the
           | past are the exception to the rule. </EDIT>
           | 
           | The thing is, in the real world, no one really looks twice
           | when someone gets into a car unless they are using obvious
           | brute force to get into the car.
        
             | HPsquared wrote:
             | I think that mechanical key behaviour depends on the car.
             | I'm pretty sure my BMW sets off the alarm if I use the
             | mechanical backup key, but it turns off when I put the key
             | in the ignition slot.
        
               | Crosseye_Jack wrote:
               | Yeah, I think it is car dependant. But the car I use
               | (gave up my own car, but the family has a shared "work
               | horse" car we are all insured on.) is a 10 year old UK
               | Ford fiesta and that car doesn't trip the alarm if the
               | door is unlocked with the key, and its not the
               | transponder in the key, cause one of the keys to that car
               | doesn't have a transponder and the keys get mixed up from
               | time to time (So you only know you have picked up the
               | wrong key only when you insert the key into the ignition
               | and the immobilizer light is a solid red light - 3 keys,
               | one with a fob, 2 without a fob, one of which has a
               | failed transponder chip in it, these two keys look the
               | same and not one of us has been arsed enough to take both
               | keys to the car, figure out which doesn't work and label
               | it :-P).
               | 
               | (One day, when I can be arsed, I'll rekey the car and
               | reprogram it with fresh transponders, but today is not
               | that day!)
        
               | dornan wrote:
               | Put a piece of tape or some paint on the handle part of
               | the no-transponder key so you don't mix it up any more.
               | Less effort than the "full-arse" solution.
        
               | Crosseye_Jack wrote:
               | We keep saying we are going to do something like that,
               | but we keep forgetting because we normally in "Go do
               | task" mode when we grab the keys. Its not too much of an
               | issue because we will normally grab the fob key, it only
               | becomes and issue when one of us forget to put the fob
               | key back when being done with the car.
               | 
               | But "reprogramming" a key (more like adding a key) on
               | that model of ford just involves doing a dance with the
               | fob key then inserting the key with the new transponder.
               | So we plan to get all keys working on the car at some
               | point. I was just going to order a new chip but my bother
               | was complaining about the key barrel being a bit loose on
               | him so just doing to replace everything at some point.
               | Its just more about not being lazy about it :-P
               | 
               | Thing is, its what we call "the work horse" car of the
               | family, it gets used about once a week to do tasks no one
               | wants to do in their own cars (or when I need to do
               | something in a car), so its not really a high priority
               | thing to fix, but if we are going fix it might as well do
               | it "right")
        
             | testing22321 wrote:
             | I had a non electronic key cut for my Jeep so I could zip
             | tie it under the frame for emergency use. It will not start
             | the engine, but does open the door locks. When I open the
             | doors with it, the alarm goes off.
        
             | Kirby64 wrote:
             | Not true for most alarm systems. If the car is locked, then
             | any opening without the key fob unlock button will trigger
             | the alarm in my experience.
        
               | xeromal wrote:
               | My 2001 seqouia's battery recently died. I unlocked the
               | car with the key and when I hooked up the jumper cables
               | the alarm went off until I turned the ignition to on. I
               | was surprised it was that good
        
         | PinguTS wrote:
         | Funfact: in the past Ford and Volkswagen had only a number of
         | different variations for the coding of the physical keys. So
         | that you could open and start several cars with the very same
         | physical key.
         | 
         | I assume that this was also true for other brands.
        
           | jabart wrote:
           | This happened to me! Friend had a similar car and at night
           | they went to mine and the door unlocked but the car wouldn't
           | start. The door only had a few pins it checked while the
           | ignition used every pin. We compared our keys and sure enough
           | one part of it was the same.
        
             | thrtythreeforty wrote:
             | OBS Ford F-150s do this and it's not common knowledge even
             | among enthusiasts. The back 4 pins work the door, the front
             | 6 or so pins work the ignition. A common problem is that
             | the ignition barrel keyswitch dies and you have to replace
             | it, but then you have separate keys for the door and
             | ignition. I took the new ignition key to a locksmith and
             | had him copy the 4 back pins from the factory key, and I
             | was back to a single key!
        
             | devmor wrote:
             | I had a similar experience once when I drove a Prius.
             | Walked out of the grocery store, hit the unlock button, got
             | into my car, then wondered why the seat was too far forward
             | - before realizing it was not my Prius.
        
           | dornan wrote:
           | Fun fact: the same applies to common household locks. If you
           | take your household key and try all the same-brand locks in
           | your neighborhood (~50) you'll likely find a match. Don't
           | actually do this, your neighbors will think you're causing
           | trouble.
        
           | stevenAthompson wrote:
           | Many fleet vehicles are still this way. The 1284x key, for
           | example, can open a surprising number of things including
           | many older police vehicles.
           | 
           | A few hundred dollars more on Amazon will net you a magic
           | keyring that can open a surprising number of vehicles,
           | buildings, control systems, and vending machines.
           | 
           | If you're into that sort of thing check out Deviant Ollam's
           | physical pentesting videos on Youtube.
        
             | fnord77 wrote:
             | > magic keyring
             | 
             | Are you talking about the "1284x FEO-K1 16120 222343 CH751
             | CH501 C346A C390A E114 " set?
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | That's a good start. To do better you'll need to do some
               | reading or watch a ton of youtube videos to identify the
               | keys that will get you the most bang for the buck.
               | 
               | I think mine has something like 20 keys on it now, and it
               | will open a truly surprising number of things that it
               | shouldn't.
        
           | CableNinja wrote:
           | My mom amd my friends mom both drove toyotas, completely
           | different models and many years apart. By coincidence the key
           | for my friends moms car worked for my moms, for unlock and
           | start, but, my moms could only unlock the other one.
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | In the 1970s, I unlocked the door on what I took to be the
           | family VW Rabbit and got behind the wheel. It turned out that
           | the ignition lock was fussier than the door lock, and I
           | discovered my mistake without driving away.
        
             | ethagnawl wrote:
             | I have a Honda from the late 90s which behaves in a similar
             | way and whose ignition is also fussy but only to a point.
             | With enough wiggling, a key from a different model from ~10
             | years prior will also start it.
        
         | thimkerbell wrote:
         | What does Tesla have?
        
           | DaSHacka wrote:
           | An RFID key with an optional mobile app, AFAIK.
        
         | graemep wrote:
         | > And all cars include a physical key as a backup entry method.
         | 
         | Which means you are safer with just keys rather than keys plus
         | another way to open the doors.
         | 
         | > This was partially solved by adding another device that cuts
         | off the engine, the immobilizer
         | 
         | If they key does not need to be physically inserted to start
         | the engine (which is true in many cars) then that is liable to
         | attack using the remotes too, right?
        
         | gwbas1c wrote:
         | The two times I had a car break-in, it was purely physical.
         | Once it was smashed glass, and the other someone pried open my
         | door with a crowbar.
        
       | myself248 wrote:
       | For the time being, I just store my keys in a little cast iron
       | dutch oven, sitting on top of the fridge.
       | 
       | It's extremely effective as a shield for the 125kHz LF wake-up
       | signal, and I've been unable to elicit a response when they're in
       | there, even with a relay setup that reliably wakes them up from
       | several feet away otherwise.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | Unrelatedly, I didn't realize "Dutch oven" had a non-fart-
         | related meaning, thanks for the new word.
        
           | xeromal wrote:
           | haha, I think the fart connotation is just that you're
           | trapped with the lid (blanket) on.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | It all makes sense now.
        
           | onionisafruit wrote:
           | I learn something new here every day.
           | 
           | - I ain't cut out to be Jessie James -You don't go writing
           | hot checks down in Mississippi - Dutch oven has a non fart
           | meaning
        
             | karmajunkie wrote:
             | My father used to be a prosecutor in MS, and one of my
             | earliest going-to-work-with-dad memories is watching him
             | sign off on warrants for people writing hot checks. I asked
             | him once if he thought that was a bit heavy-handed and he
             | gave me a very stern lecture about people who write hot
             | checks.
             | 
             | So yeah, don't do that in Mississippi.
        
         | abirch wrote:
         | I purchased some cheap key fob faraday bags on Amazon.
         | 
         | The bags work while I'm in the car.
        
         | brk wrote:
         | Your microwave oven also makes a good Faraday cage.
        
           | asciimov wrote:
           | That's an expensive mistake waiting to happen.
        
             | potato3732842 wrote:
             | Why would you ever turn on your microwave without opening
             | it to put something in it? It's not like an oven that has
             | to preheat.
        
               | Figs wrote:
               | Mistakes when setting a timer.
               | 
               | My current microwave will complain if the door hasn't
               | been opened recently, but my old one would just turn on
               | if I fucked up the time entry and tried to set a timer
               | while I already had a timer going...
        
               | ElijahLynn wrote:
               | Kids
        
               | azeirah wrote:
               | adhd
        
         | gambiting wrote:
         | I just don't understand why manufacturers don't follow Volvo on
         | this - their keyless keys just go to sleep if they aren't moved
         | for a few seconds, and they won't respond to any signal while
         | sitting on a table for example.
        
           | dzhiurgis wrote:
           | Phone based keys leapfrogged this
        
             | hamburglar wrote:
             | Except phone based keys are terrible in many other ways
        
           | roelschroeven wrote:
           | That solves part of the problem, but doesn't help when you're
           | in a supermarket or any other event where you're moving
           | around.
           | 
           | My previous cars had keys that I could manually switch off
           | and on, which is also not a full solution because it only
           | works for people who take the effort to always do that, but
           | at least it gives people to opportunity to complete prevent
           | relay attacks.
           | 
           | All in all I'm not a big fan of key-less entry. Having to
           | press a button on a key to gain entry can maybe be a bit of
           | an annoyance, but in my opinion it's not a big deal compared
           | to the advantage of completely preventing relay attacks.
        
             | gambiting wrote:
             | My previous car(a Mercedes) had a very very simple solution
             | to this - you clicked on the lock button twice and it just
             | disabled the keyless entry entirely until you pressed any
             | other button.
             | 
             | >>the advantage of completely preventing relay attacks.
             | 
             | From my understanding ToF sensors are good enough now to
             | completely prevent relay attacks, the added time for the
             | relay just adds too much of a delay and it gets rejected. I
             | believe the newest range rovers use that, they went from
             | being extremely susceptible to relay attacks to relay
             | attacks against them being impossible.
        
               | emeril wrote:
               | that's a nice solution too but re: mercedes it requires
               | the user to actively use that feature which I suspect
               | most won't remember to do
        
             | emeril wrote:
             | maybe so, but this would seemingly solve most of the
             | problem with easy to implement tech
             | 
             | the real test is to find out if this effectively eliminated
             | all fob hacks for volvo since they may not be faster than
             | the tiger, they just need to be faster than everyone
             | else...
        
           | ethagnawl wrote:
           | Related: I've found that replacing/programming Volvo keys is
           | _extraordinarily expensive_ and I 've yet to find a third-
           | party locksmith who will touch them. (The latter applies to
           | both fobs and a basic key.)
        
             | gambiting wrote:
             | Yep - which is why I always add key insurance to my car
             | insurance, it's a very cheap add on annually but saves a
             | lot of money if you need a new key.
        
               | ethagnawl wrote:
               | Wow. I had no idea this was an option. It kind of breaks
               | my brain a bit because, based on the majority of my
               | experience with car ownership (91, 98 and 2K models),
               | it's an absurd notion.
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | I've heard BMW does it too. Hoping that it's true and I can
           | preserve battery by just keeping my key on the table, since
           | it burns through a charge.
        
         | chiph wrote:
         | You know those Danish butter cookie tins that everyone's mom
         | uses for sewing supplies? They also make good Faraday cages.
        
       | DebtDeflation wrote:
       | The current gold standard for vehicle theft protection is:
       | 
       | IGLA system to block the CAN bus, LIN bus, and ODBII port. It
       | also protects against key fob cloning/relay attacks.
       | 
       | +
       | 
       | A hidden physical kill switch that cuts off the fuel pump relay
       | (the company 41.22 makes a drop in that doesn't require wire
       | splicing).
       | 
       | +
       | 
       | A hidden GPS tracker with an onboard backup battery in the event
       | the car battery is disconnected.
       | 
       | None of this stops someone with a flatbed from simply towing your
       | vehicle away, but at least the GPS tracker will give you a window
       | to locate them.
        
         | unnouinceput wrote:
         | If I have a towing tool for your car, be sure I have a Faraday
         | cage too to block all your GPS trackers while I dismantle the
         | car. Think big truck that is isolated from both sound and
         | electromagnetism and I simply hack at your car with my
         | wrenches, selling your expensive Tesla for parts.
        
           | DebtDeflation wrote:
           | That's an issue once the tow truck gets where it's going, but
           | the GPS tracker will record/broadcast the path there.
        
             | exhilaration wrote:
             | GPS jammers are less than $30 on Alibaba, truck drivers
             | have been using them for over 10 years [1] to defeat their
             | bosses tracking devices.
             | 
             | Multi-Band Jammers are $1000, burglary rings are using
             | those to block all Wi-Fi, cell, GPS signals - check out
             | this arrest report from last week in Pennsylvania [2]. If I
             | was a high-end car thief, like in Gone in 60 Seconds,
             | that's what I would use.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.theregister.com/2013/08/12/feds_arrest_rogu
             | e_tru...
             | 
             | [2] https://dauphin.crimewatchpa.com/lowerpaxtonpd/3730/cas
             | es/or...
        
               | avidiax wrote:
               | That's a professional car thief starter pack right there.
               | I wonder what the Windex and shaving cream are for.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | It doesn't take much to jam GPS, I'd imagine a small
             | handheld device could easily do it. The GPS signal is
             | already below the noise floor.
        
       | ta1243 wrote:
       | I have a physical key which I physically put in a hole in the
       | steering column. This means I know exactly where it is when I
       | come to parking the car, and you need to physically have it in
       | contact to drive the car away.
       | 
       | I don't get the appeal of keyless ignition.
        
         | marxisttemp wrote:
         | People with bulky keychains often just throw them in their bag
         | or purse and it can be annoying to fish them out.
         | 
         | I personally put a very high value on having a minimal keychain
         | and wallet since I rarely carry a bag with me. The goal is to
         | someday live in a state with Apple Wallet drivers' license
         | support, in a house with NFC smart locks, driving a car with
         | Apple Car Key, at which point I could finally completely
         | jettison my keys and my MagSafe wallet. I don't want to carry
         | physical keys when I'm already constantly carrying a device
         | with a Secure Enclave and biometrics.
        
           | brk wrote:
           | Not sure why you're being downvoted, I'm exactly the same.
           | House locks are already electronic/automated, haven't carried
           | a physical house key in year. Cars use fobs, for newer
           | vehicles there is no option for physical keys anyway. When I
           | leave the house I take my phone, plus the solo fob for
           | whatever vehicle I am driving. I have no desire to have a
           | ring of multiple physical keys and fobs with me.
        
             | cholantesh wrote:
             | Because it's a wild rube goldberg solution to a minor
             | inconvenience.
        
           | blacksmith_tb wrote:
           | A beautiful aspiration, until you lose or break your phone...
        
             | vel0city wrote:
             | People lose wallets. People lose car keys.
             | 
             | My PaaK car has a backup passphrase to start it. I can be
             | used in a pinch if my phone isn't working. I can't say the
             | same if I lose my car key.
             | 
             | If I go on a long trip I'm likely to bring multiple car
             | keys and multiple payment methods. This is still true if
             | I'm doing PaaK.
        
               | cholantesh wrote:
               | And people don't lose phones?
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > My PaaK car has a backup passphrase to start it
               | 
               | Cars that need a physical cut key to go into a cylinder
               | don't usually have backup passphrases.
        
               | ethagnawl wrote:
               | No, but you can ziptie spares of said keys to an
               | inconspicuous location on the vehicle -- just the valet
               | key or the door key, depending on your tolerance for risk
               | and whether or not the car came with them. (Credit to
               | DeviantOllam for the idea.)
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | Cars should have pin pads to unlock them. They're so
               | useful on my Fords.
        
               | blacksmith_tb wrote:
               | They do, and obviously it's a huge headache. But now we
               | can imagine a bright future where you can lose both, and
               | your normal way to try and get help, all at once!
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > But now we can imagine a bright future where you can
               | lose both, and your normal way to try and get help, all
               | at once!
               | 
               | Still a possibility with cut keys, paper currency, and
               | dumb cell phones. Ever have all of those things in a bag
               | and have that bag stolen?
               | 
               | At least with the PaaK car I have, there's a backup
               | passphrase as well.
               | 
               | As I mentioned elsewhere, I'll trade the slightly worse
               | day maybe once a decade+ (or quite possibly _never!_ )
               | for the convenience every single other day. If I'm
               | smashing my phone every few days I'll probably rethink
               | that strategy. But I'll probably want to change whatever
               | is causing me to smash my phone every few days.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Or if you don't tend to bring your phone with you to do a
             | bunch of errands. If all my locks were tied to my phone,
             | I'd have to fish it out of the drawer whenever I go
             | anywhere. OP said he "constantly" carries his phone with
             | him, so maybe not a problem for him. Am I the only person
             | in the world who leaves the phone at home if I'm not
             | planning to use it?
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > Am I the only person in the world who leaves the phone
               | at home if I'm not planning to use it?
               | 
               | But I would use it, even on a trip to get groceries. I'd
               | use it as the source of the media I listen to in the car,
               | so my audiobook starts playing wirelessly when I get in.
               | My phone has the shopping list on it shared between my
               | wife and I, so we always have it if either one of us
               | decide to make a quick stop.
        
               | zzyzxd wrote:
               | I am also one of those guys don't always carry my phone
               | around. That's why I load my keys and credit cards on
               | Apple Watch, turned off most of the notifications on it,
               | and only allow calls and text messages from wife.
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | This is as easy to break and and susceptible to theft as
         | keyless, so what's the benefit?
        
         | kenjackson wrote:
         | I'm honestly very surprised that you don't see the appeal. Are
         | there other things people view as conveniences that you don't
         | see the appeal of? E.g., keyless entry or remote lock?
        
           | cholantesh wrote:
           | Do they really, though? I don't know anyone who raves about
           | how much more convenient button start is, they either
           | dislike/distrust it or don't really care either way.
        
             | vel0city wrote:
             | I absolutely rave about it. Every time I get a rental car
             | that needs a cut key in an ignition cylinder it's a massive
             | pain. I wouldn't buy a car that doesn't have push button
             | ignition and would prefer for all cars I buy going forward
             | to have phone as a key as an option.
             | 
             | For my personal cars I either use phone as a key or I'll
             | keep the key fob in my bag. So I just walk up to the car,
             | the car either auto unlocks or I press the button on the
             | door, I get in, I press the button, and I go. When I'm done
             | I just grab my bag and walk away and the car will auto-lock
             | or I just press the door button. So smooth, I never need to
             | really handle the key at all. It just stays in its specific
             | pocket in my bag or it's just my phone in my pocket.
             | 
             | With a cut key, I walk up to the car. I need to fish around
             | in my bag to grab the key. I then need to stick the key in
             | the door and turn it, using care to not scratch the paint.
             | I get in the car, need to insert the key, turn it and hold
             | it long enough for it to start. When I'm done driving, I
             | take the key out, grab my bag, and get out of the car. I
             | then need to once again insert my key into the door once
             | again being careful to not scratch anything, turn it to
             | lock. Then I need to put the key away again.
             | 
             | And then phone as a key is incredibly nice, definitely my
             | preferred way. I can easily leave the house for most
             | errands with nothing but my phone on me. It's my car key,
             | my payment method, my transit pass, my paperback novel, my
             | portable music player, my camera, my maps, my communicator,
             | all in one tiny package. Incredibly freeing compared to
             | having to carry a bunch of junk in my pockets just to get
             | groceries or whatever.
        
               | graemep wrote:
               | I do not get the appeal either. You have to put something
               | in your pocket and take it out occasionally.
               | 
               | > And then phone as a key is incredibly nice, definitely
               | my preferred way.
               | 
               | Your phone becomes a point of failure for one more thing.
               | 
               | > Incredibly freeing compared to having to carry a bunch
               | of junk in my pockets just to get groceries or whatever.
               | 
               | All I put in my pocket to buy groceries are keys and a
               | wallet.
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > Your phone becomes a point of failure for one more
               | thing.
               | 
               | So one critical point of failure instead of multiple
               | critical points of failure. If you lose your car keys on
               | your trip, your trip is still a failure and you're
               | stranded. If you lose your wallet on your trip it's still
               | a failure, and now you have to go cancel a handful of
               | cards and you're out the cash in the wallet and what not
               | and need to get a new ID. If you lose your phone it's
               | still a bad day, a potentially expensive and useful
               | device went missing.
               | 
               | If I lose my phone it's the same bad day as if you lose
               | yours, a potentially expensive device went missing. I can
               | use my backup passphrase on the car to get home. I still
               | have my regular wallet at home to fall back on, and all
               | my payment info was encrypted and can be remotely wiped
               | with a few clicks. I didn't lose any government
               | documents.
               | 
               | And in the end, it's not like I'm breaking my phone every
               | day or something. Phones are pretty resilient these days
               | especially when thinking about short trips around town.
               | I've had one phone break from physical damage in the past
               | decade. Seems like an overblown concern to me. As for
               | "what if your phone dies?", the car is a 74kWh battery.
               | If my phone dies while I'm next to 74kWh of electricity
               | I'm an idiot and failed to have extremely basic plans.
               | 
               | > All I put in my pocket to buy groceries are keys and a
               | wallet.
               | 
               | So 3x more junk than me for otherwise no reason.
        
               | graemep wrote:
               | > . If you lose your car keys on your trip, your trip is
               | still a failure
               | 
               | I have my phone so i can phone for help. I have my wallet
               | so I can pay for things.
               | 
               | > If I lose my phone it's the same bad day as if you lose
               | yours, a potentially expensive device went missing
               | 
               | Nope, because its like everything that could happen to me
               | happening at once.
               | 
               | You have a lot less backup.
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > Nope, because its like everything that could happen to
               | me happening at once
               | 
               | No, because I can still drive home even if I lose my
               | phone.
               | 
               | If you lose your wallet, you're not buying the groceries.
               | If you lose your keys, those groceries aren't getting
               | home anytime soon.
               | 
               | And even then, this is still a massively rare occurrence.
               | How often do you smash your phone on the ground, daily?
               | Weekly? Monthly? I'll gladly trade a slightly less
               | convenient day once a decade+ for having to deal with all
               | this business of having to carry extra junk _every day of
               | my life_.
        
               | cholantesh wrote:
               | >With a cut key, I walk up to the car. I need to fish
               | around in my bag to grab the key. I then need to stick
               | the key in the door and turn it, using care to not
               | scratch the paint. I get in the car, need to insert the
               | key, turn it and hold it long enough for it to start.
               | When I'm done driving, I take the key out, grab my bag,
               | and get out of the car. I then need to once again insert
               | my key into the door once again being careful to not
               | scratch anything, turn it to lock. Then I need to put the
               | key away again.
               | 
               | I'll be honest, this reads like a drastic
               | overcomplication of a very simple transaction. Why can't
               | you just put them in your pocket? Are you walking around
               | like a frontier town sheriff with cylinder lock keys on
               | an antique keyring?
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | > Why can't you just put them in your pocket?
               | 
               | Modern car keys, even cut ones, are often giant behemoths
               | of keys. They need transponders for the immobilizer. They
               | choose to integrate the remote into it, and either way
               | I'd probably still have the remote on the same keychain.
               | They're annoying and uncomfortable to have in my pocket.
               | If I have a choice to not have to have an expensive big
               | giant chunk of plastic in my pocket every moment I'm out
               | of my house or choose to have that giant expensive chunk
               | of plastic in my pocket every moment, which do you think
               | I'd rather choose?
               | 
               | And then if I have to actually take it out of my pocket
               | and stick it into things? Even more annoying when there's
               | the option of just not having to do that. Why would I
               | _prefer_ to have to take this annoying chunk of plastic
               | out of my pocket every time I want to get into and start
               | my car?
               | 
               | Imagine if every time you wanted to open your fridge you
               | had to fish out a key from your pocket, put it in a
               | cylinder, and turn it. Imagine if every time you wanted
               | to flush out your toilet you had to do a couple of extra
               | steps _just because_. To turn on the sink, you have to do
               | this extra little pattern before you just lift the
               | handle! Sounds great, why not add a bunch of extra little
               | steps to everything in your life when you don 't have to.
               | 
               | Its like I'm talking to the people in the cave. You don't
               | even see how nice it is to just _not have to carry_ the
               | car key because its been just so ingrained into your
               | life, that you accept it as something normal and
               | expected. Who wouldn 't want to carry around a $200 chunk
               | of plastic half the size of a baseball in their pocket
               | everywhere they go that does nothing but unlock and start
               | their car?!
               | 
               | Its freeing to not have to carry a ton of junk with you
               | everywhere you go.
        
               | cholantesh wrote:
               | >You don't even see how nice it is to just not have to
               | carry the car key because its been just so ingrained into
               | your life, that you accept it as something normal and
               | expected.
               | 
               | Possibly, but alternatively, you've rationalized that a
               | litany of features that proffer negligible improvements
               | to the experience of driving a car and entrench car
               | dependency are in fact worth having what you regard as
               | cartoonishly oversized keys* that can give malicious
               | actors faster access to a $50000 vehicle.
               | 
               | * I've very recently had about 5 different ones in my
               | pockets on extended test drives and only the CX-5 I think
               | fits this rubric, but meh
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | Yes, because car theft was unheard of before wireless key
               | fobs. Seriously? Are you not familiar with the Kia Boys?
               | Having wireless transponders has _massively reduced_ the
               | rates of theft over the days of cut keys. And if it 's
               | all going to be relying on the security of a wireless
               | handshake anyways, there's little point in having the
               | tumbler that can be trivially raked. Or just overpowered
               | and turned anyways.
               | 
               | And hilarious you're tying the idea of people having
               | pushbutton ignitions to continuing car dependency. Yes,
               | if only we still required cut keys on cars, we would have
               | eliminated car dependency in the US! Tons of people were
               | thinking "maybe cars aren't all they're cracked up to
               | be..." but then they saw "ooh, push button ignition!
               | Nevermind, defund public transit!"
               | 
               | I'm very pro public transit. I ride it, I vote for it, I
               | write to my congress critters about it, I champion it to
               | my friends and strangers all the time. I want to see it
               | succeed. But guess what...I have my transit pass _on my
               | phone as well!_ Eee gads!
               | 
               | Once again, it all boils down to why would I _choose_ to
               | do the more annoying process when I don 't have to? The
               | cut key isn't really providing _any_ extra security (once
               | again, see Kia Boys). Would you choose to have to insert
               | a key and turn it to open your fridge? Why would I want
               | to have to do that instead of just pressing a button on
               | my car? Personally, even pressing the button is a bit
               | overkill, but I guess I 'm a little old fashioned. In the
               | end I do still prefer thinking about the car is either
               | "on" or "off", as in is the drive train ready to operate
               | or not.
        
             | whartung wrote:
             | I love the entry on my '14 Jeep.
             | 
             | Walk up, put your hand in the handle, and it unlocks. Get
             | in, press the button, and it starts. This is a fabulous
             | "happy path" that is seamless.
             | 
             | Nothing happens without an actual action, but the actions
             | are natural and organic to the task. The sensor is inside
             | the door handle, combined with the key fob, and it just
             | opens when you slide your hand into. It's a, truly,
             | marvelous experience.
             | 
             | My keys stay in my pocket. Since I open the door for my
             | wife anyway, it just works. (She can open the door, I just
             | have to be close.)
             | 
             | Similarly, when we open the rear lift gate, it just opens.
             | This also unlocks the rest of the vehicle (in contrast to
             | if I push the gate open button on the fob, only the rear
             | gate is open, not the rest -- which I find odd).
             | 
             | When leaving, I press a lock button on the handle to lock
             | the car.
             | 
             | It's a great compromise, and works really well.
        
             | shepherdjerred wrote:
             | I like it quite a bit. It wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me,
             | but I would prefer having it than not.
        
         | dzhiurgis wrote:
         | My phone has a card, opens my car and my garage door. Haven't
         | had a trouble for years. Saved me hours from looking for each
         | of those items separately.
        
         | hermitcrab wrote:
         | I had a car that unlocked as soon as you walked near with the
         | fob. I hated this feature, because you were never sure if the
         | car (with your expensive laptop in the boot/trunk) was actually
         | locked. I ended up giving the key to a family member and
         | getting them to walk a distance away, so I could try the door
         | handle and check it was actually locked.
        
           | RunningDroid wrote:
           | My family have both a Chrysler and a Subaru that try to do
           | this, but they can't always keep up. (Sometimes I walk too
           | fast and pull on the handle before it unlocks the door.)
        
         | somerandomqaguy wrote:
         | Trying to dig your keys out of your pockets when it's extremely
         | cold and having mittens on is not fun. Double the fun if it's
         | night time, because the sun sets at 4:30 on those kinds of
         | days.
         | 
         | Also it not being possible to lock yourself out of your car is
         | neat.
         | 
         | It's not a must have but it's really nice.
         | 
         | Source: Canada
        
       | zero_k wrote:
       | Broke a few of these for my old work -- HiTag2 and Megamos, some
       | of the code&knowledge used for the attack is online&published,
       | but neither can be used to actually break the ciphers as-is
       | [1][2]. The issue used to be that the cipher employed needed to
       | be low-power, fast, and reliable. With current technology, one
       | could easily use AES, and no serious auto maker should be using
       | HiTag2/Megamos. They were hand-rolled ciphers. The way AES is
       | used (i.e. the protocol itself) could still be wrong, of course,
       | e.g. allowing for replay attacks, etc.
       | 
       | [1] Doesn't have some features which you need to use to actually
       | attack HiTag2: https://github.com/msoos/grainofsalt
       | 
       | [2] Used for various pre-processing that is useful (but not
       | neccessary) to break Megamos, but _far_ from the actual attack:
       | https://github.com/meelgroup/bosphorus/
        
       | gadders wrote:
       | So many Range Rovers are being stolen in the UK that the
       | manufacturer has started contributing towards insurance costs:
       | https://www.whatcar.com/news/range-rover-insurance-owners-to...
        
         | Tagbert wrote:
         | perhaps they should also contribute to a solution to the weak
         | encryption?
        
       | mppm wrote:
       | I'm confused why this is still an unsolved problem. A simple
       | cryptographic challenge with pre-shared keys + button press ought
       | to make key fobs perfectly secure for all practical purposes. Is
       | there something I'm missing here?
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | Battery life maybe? AFAIK most of the remotes works one way
         | only, they don't have a receiver and very low processing power.
        
         | PinguTS wrote:
         | This adds complexity and with complexity there comes a price
         | tag. That would make the key fob more expansive. It also adds
         | higher power requirements this then comes with new requirements
         | for the battery.
        
           | mppm wrote:
           | Re price tag: you can buy a smartphone for 100$. Surely it is
           | possible to mass produce cheap key fobs with send/receive
           | capability and a tiny crypto module.
           | 
           | Re power: Key fobs already do some form of crypto and
           | broadcast. Adding reception capabilities ought not to be that
           | power hungry.
        
             | Iolaum wrote:
             | Even Better, they can use a smartphone app. We already have
             | a battery-powered device that can emit radio signals in
             | various frequencies!
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | I've got an even better solution: Picture a piece of
               | metal, cut in a specific way as to allow metal "tumblers"
               | inside a small cylinder to turn, engaging and disengaging
               | the locks and/or ignition, whereas other pieces of metal,
               | cut differently, would not allow any motion. I know, it
               | sounds far out there, but we should give it a shot.
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | That doesn't sound very secure at all. I've heard there
               | are little known techniques called "lockpicking" and
               | "rakes" that make such technology practically useless.
        
         | unnouinceput wrote:
         | And how that will protect you from repeater attack? I just
         | steal your car while you are in mall with this just as easy,
         | encryption or not. I don't care about the signal, just that I
         | capture it, send it to my other device near your car and
         | kaboom!, your car unlocked.
        
           | SirMaster wrote:
           | How does repeating work if both the car and key use a code
           | that changes every time, like 2FA app.
        
             | AlotOfReading wrote:
             | TOTP relies on synchronized clocks, which is far, far too
             | complicated to work here.
        
         | mberger wrote:
         | You have to be able to get new keys made without having an
         | original to read. A database of vin, key would be too big of a
         | target and would have to be shared with dealers anyway so they
         | could program new ones. I'm not a security expert but it seems
         | like it would really shorten battery life on the fob if you
         | wanted to protect against replay attacks by adding a time
         | sensitive value.
        
           | mppm wrote:
           | Key distribution is (as always) an important, but solvable
           | problem. There are some tradeoffs involving centralization vs
           | cost of replacement, but those apply generally, not just in
           | this particular case.
           | 
           | As for replay attacks, that's where the button press comes in
           | (like on a hardware security token) -- the key only responds
           | to challenges within a second or so of a button press and the
           | car sets a similar timeout for validity.
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | It requires two-way communication, which makes the system more
         | complex, with all the negatives that come with it.
         | 
         | Cars are not very secure by nature: they have easy to break
         | glass windows, and are made of relatively lightweight
         | materials. The key system just needs to match that level of
         | security, and AFAIK, attacks on the keyfob are uncommon
         | compared to other, less subtle techniques.
         | 
         | The more complex and sensitive "PKES" system, according to the
         | article already has a challenge-response system, but it doesn't
         | help with relay attacks.
        
         | blibble wrote:
         | yeah, this is what the article is describing as to what it was
         | like in the early 2000s (assuming no moronic key reuse)
         | 
         | the problem is they "improved" the usability
         | 
         | it was safe when you had to push a button, but now roles are
         | flipped so the car is the initiator, and doing it constantly
         | 
         | the protocol is now subject to a whole entire extra class of
         | attacks it was never designed to deal with
        
       | stewx wrote:
       | We should just GPS track the cars and arrest the thieves.
        
         | rikkert wrote:
         | Good luck when the car is stripped for parts within 24h
        
           | Noumenon72 wrote:
           | We could have the police work 24 hours also.
        
         | Hamuko wrote:
         | There's an UK-based company providing anti-theft tracking
         | services for cars, motorcycles, heavy equipment etc. and they
         | have a YouTube channel where they document some recovery
         | operations. It's quite remarkable how fast a car goes from
         | stolen to stripped. They also can't rely on just GPS to
         | actually recover stolen goods. For example:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdGoxDPMv9Y
        
       | madphilosopher wrote:
       | Vulnerabilities like this lead to car thefts. Some models of cars
       | are more susceptible than others, and the manufacturers seem
       | unwilling to fix the problem. The insurance companies know which
       | models are more trouble for them, and so they set higher rates
       | for these, which punishes the driver/owner for something outside
       | of their control.
       | 
       | My solution? Require the manufacturers of vulnerable models to
       | pay the insurance on behalf of the driver/owner as long as the
       | vulnerabilities go unfixed.
        
         | emeril wrote:
         | part of what helps is, at least, before buying a car, to get
         | insurance quotes and then you see the true cost of THAT car
        
           | pinko wrote:
           | Consumer Reports will also inform you of things like this in
           | advance, if you look. (For this and 100 other reasons, It's
           | worth paying for a digital sub.)
        
             | potato3732842 wrote:
             | Consumer Reports reporting is bought and paid for by the
             | OEMs. They'll make a big issue out of nothing or minimize
             | real issues depending on where the money is coming from.
             | This goes back at least as far as the Samurai rollover
             | scandal.
             | 
             | Pretty much all industry journalism where the journalists
             | depend on being in the good graces of the manufacturers to
             | get the access they need to make their content is like
             | this.
        
               | dripton wrote:
               | Consumer Reports buys all the items they review,
               | anonymously.
        
               | potato3732842 wrote:
               | That doesn't stop them from doing questionable stuff and
               | playing favorites. All this was aired publicly in the
               | lawsuit Suzuki filed.
        
               | dripton wrote:
               | Yes, many people make many claims. You should think about
               | which ones to believe.
        
               | weaksauce wrote:
               | i don't know how you can say they play favorites.
               | internal memos show that suzuki knew that they had a
               | rollover issue because of the narrow wheelbase and CR
               | called them out on it through testing.
        
               | pinko wrote:
               | This is quite literally the opposite of true. Consumer
               | Reports remains the shining exception to this practice,
               | unlike Wirecutter, etc.
        
         | Mister_Snuggles wrote:
         | Do people not look at the operating costs before buying a
         | vehicle? Do they really just negotiate a monthly payment and
         | get surprised at the amount they have to pay for
         | fuel/maintenance/insurance?
         | 
         | When I bought my most recent car I had a spreadsheet which
         | projected fuel (whether that's gas, electricity, or
         | gas+electricity) and maintenance costs (there was some ball-
         | parking here) for a dozen different models based on our driving
         | habits. Once the list was narrowed down a bit I did some online
         | quotes at my insurance company to add that in.
         | 
         | There were no financial surprises when I bought the car.
        
           | lsy wrote:
           | This is unnecessarily self-congratulating. The problem is
           | that vulnerabilities are found in cars _after_ they are on
           | the market for a while and already purchased, so existing
           | owners get their rates hiked, but the manufacturer never
           | fixes the issue. No amount of research is going to guarantee
           | your operating cost _next_ year.
        
           | vel0city wrote:
           | > When I bought my most recent car I had a spreadsheet
           | 
           | Yeah so already different from like 90% of car buyers out
           | there.
        
         | ActorNightly wrote:
         | My friends Truck was stolen by some people with a tow truck.
         | Key access doesn't really matter in the long run.
         | 
         | If you want to prevent theft, you have to make stealing
         | "expensive" enough for people not to bother with it.
        
       | throw0101d wrote:
       | For a good modern day automobile security system, at least in the
       | US, get a car with a manual transmission.
        
         | recursive wrote:
         | How do people learn to drive manuals in 2025? It used to be
         | that you used your buddy's/parent's beater in the back of the
         | mall parking lot.
         | 
         | But no one has one anymore. I tried to learn in the 90s for
         | about an hour, and never managed to get the car moving forward
         | rather than bouncing. At this point, I don't have much desire
         | to try again, but I wouldn't know how to try if I wanted to.
        
           | ge96 wrote:
           | Cheap standard cars like a miata are fun to drive
           | 
           | edit: if you buy em old I mean
           | 
           | me I want an Exige
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | Twenty years ago, I supervised a beginner in an office
           | parking lot that was generally empty on Saturdays. But you're
           | right, we haven't had a car with a manual transmission in a
           | dozen years now.
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | So funny the guy towing my car couldn't drive it so I had to
         | drive it onto the ramp
        
         | SoleilAbsolu wrote:
         | A patina of filth, slightly faded paint and maybe a few dings
         | and dents also help make a car invisible.
        
       | Ballas wrote:
       | Code-hopping remotes have existed for a very long time, and I am
       | really surprised that it's not the case here. I have had cars
       | that were made in the 90's that used keeloq, a technology from
       | the mid 80's.
       | 
       | In fact, all of my door openers and car remotes have some form of
       | code-hopping and it's certainly not because they were
       | specifically chosen for that aspect.
       | 
       | Sure, there are attacks for code-hopping systems as well, but
       | it's a completely different league.
        
       | bufferoverflow wrote:
       | Why can't it be very simple and secure. Car and fob share a
       | secret key.
       | 
       | When you click on the open button on the fob, you send
       | 
       | SHA256(key)
       | 
       | Car responds with a random challenge
       | 
       | RND
       | 
       | Fob sends
       | 
       | SHA256(key XOR RND)
       | 
       | Car does the same calculation and compares.
        
         | kilburn wrote:
         | There's no car identification in this protocol, meaning that
         | impersonation/mitm attacks are trivial. Try again :)
        
       | crustycoder wrote:
       | This is an old article and whilst there are undoubtedly still
       | vulnerable vehicles, with the advent of UWB it seems to be a
       | solved problem.
       | 
       | My car has UWB, there's a LED on the fob that blinks when it is
       | in range and if it's stationary for a short time, it inactivates
       | as well. Some experimentation suggests you need to be within
       | about 5m of the car to open the doors.
       | 
       | The localisation seems to be very accurate, even if you can open
       | the car from a distance it won't start unless the fob is
       | physically within it. If I sit in the driver seat the fob has to
       | be less than 10mm away from the outside of driver's window,
       | otherwise it refuses to start.
        
       | mrinterweb wrote:
       | I have a 2021 Toyota that I lost one of two key fobs. Toyota has
       | a strict policy that only Toyota dealerships can program key fobs
       | for their newer cars, so buying a key fob replacement from a 3rd
       | party was not an option. Total out of pocket expense for getting
       | new key fob, programming that key fob to the car, and making sure
       | the other fob still worked; cost about $550. I feel that is an
       | absurd amount of money to spend because of a lost fob. I
       | appreciate people looking into and exposing weaknesses of car
       | fobs because it might expose ways to circumvent the monopolistic
       | costs associated with replacements. Wish there was a way to
       | retrofit my car to use Ultra Wide Bandwidth as a key.
        
         | throw678937 wrote:
         | Used to be, you could get a seedy OBD cable off Amazon and it
         | came with instructions on how to "acquire" the dealer software,
         | which let you reprogram the car to accept any fob. Not sure if
         | things have changed in the last 5 years.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | I HATE to say it, but 'enter your password to unlock your car' is
       | the only reasonable alternative when 'something you have' is
       | pseudo-secure.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-24 23:01 UTC)