[HN Gopher] Modern cars are spying on you. Here's what you can d...
___________________________________________________________________
Modern cars are spying on you. Here's what you can do about it
Author : MilnerRoute
Score : 195 points
Date : 2025-11-30 15:52 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (apnews.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (apnews.com)
| cluckindan wrote:
| No doubt about this one. But, how much are the ubiquitous ride-
| for-hire e-scooters spying on you, and everyone else on the
| street?
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| It's where we are. Everything everywhere is collecting data and
| spying.
|
| If it exists in a database, then the government has access to
| that database if it ever wants to legally or otherwise. It's
| been like that since 9:11 and probably before.
|
| All we need now is for the right person to walk in and turn the
| key. We're lucky that Donald Trump is probably too stupid to
| understand what he's got under his thumb.
| josefritzishere wrote:
| Comment of the year.
| add-sub-mul-div wrote:
| He's a useful president surrounded by smarter people who will
| figure out ways to use this data rather than sit around
| tweeting all day.
| cmdoptesc wrote:
| Those e-scooters are a red herring. Ring cameras on everyone's
| front door and automated license plate readers (ALPR) on police
| vehicles and Flock cameras throughout cities are bigger
| concerns in America.
|
| Flock is already known to assist the government surveilling
| protestors:
|
| - [CBP is monitoring US drivers and detaining those with
| suspicious travel
| patterns](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45996860)
|
| - [How Cops Are Using Flock Safety's ALPR Network to Surveil
| Protesters and
| Activists](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/how-cops-are-
| using-flo...)
|
| - [Amazon has a form so police can get my (Ring) data without
| permission or a
| warrant](https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/14/23219419/amazon-
| ring-law-...)
| chneu wrote:
| The even worse part of Flock isn't that they cooperate with
| the government, it's that there is(or was) basically no
| security in the service. Cops from one state can/could use
| flock services from other states. A few cops got caught
| stalking via Flock.
|
| Flock takes the "do nothing until forced to" mentality.
| balamatom wrote:
| Enough to make sure the kids won't undercut the cartel this
| time around.
| jmclnx wrote:
| IIRC, Massachusetts passed a right-to-repair law a few years ago.
| Based upon the text of the law, all new cars purchased there have
| the spying disabled because they did not want to give up their
| proprietary info.
|
| There have been a lot of court cases about that law by the
| manufacturers, so I do not know the status at this point.
|
| So I wonder if that is still the case. If it is and an out of
| state person buys new there, will that "spying" remain disabled
| when they bring the car home ?
| anonymars wrote:
| Theoretically, that should be a catch-22, right?
|
| How would they know you're no longer in Massachusetts, without
| the spying enabled while within Massachusetts?
| sejje wrote:
| Because "spying" in this case means "sending data to the
| mothership."
|
| It doesn't mean "the car's gps is disabled"
| anonymars wrote:
| Perhaps. But what if a person living in Massachusetts
| travels to another state?
|
| I found this when looking into it more:
| https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/06/feds-tell-automakers-
| no...
|
| "Now, according to Reuters, NHTSA has written to automakers
| to advise them not to comply with the Massachusetts law.
| Among its problems are the fact that someone "could utilize
| such open access to remotely command vehicles to operate
| dangerously, including attacking multiple vehicles
| concurrently," and that "open access to vehicle
| manufacturers' telematics offerings with the ability to
| remotely send commands allows for manipulation of systems
| on a vehicle, including safety-critical functions such as
| steering, acceleration, or braking."
|
| Faced with this dilemma, it's quite possible the automakers
| will respond by simply disabling telematics and connected
| services for customers in the state. Subaru already took
| that step when it introduced its model year 2022 vehicles,
| and NHTSA says other OEMs may do the same."
| more_corn wrote:
| Is there anything we can do about it short of avoiding new cars?
| Our legislators have proven unwilling to pass real privacy laws.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Ride a bike.
| pixelpoet wrote:
| I've never had a driver's licence, lived in a zillion
| countries; don't think I could do that in America though.
| Retric wrote:
| Over half of New York City households are car-free. That
| jumps to 3/4 in Manhattan.
|
| Millions of American households don't have a car, but you
| rarely hear about it as a viable option.
| JoeBOFH wrote:
| Because as soon as you leave a major metropolitan area,
| not having a car is almost a nonstarter.
| add-sub-mul-div wrote:
| Over 100 million people live in just the top 20 metro
| areas alone. It's hardly an edge case.
| cwillu wrote:
| And _not_ living in one of the top 20 metro areas is also
| hardly an edge case.
| ghaff wrote:
| And even in most of those metros (OK. Leave aside
| Manhattan), not having a car tends to imply a lot of
| lifestyle choices in terms of activities, visiting
| friends outside of the metro, etc.
|
| There are certainly people who are OK with living like
| they did in their urban school for a few years after
| graduation. But that's not a long-term solution for most
| people.
| vel0city wrote:
| A _massive_ chunk (if not majority?) of those top 20
| metro areas are largely car dependent for most of their
| populations. Large areas don 't have _any_ public transit
| _at all_ , and the rest is often designed to be actively
| hostile to pedestrians.
|
| Try living without a car in these places, all in the 4th
| largest MSA.
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/mHmGidZRJaKptHeL8
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/5P4mW5iM6b5ab9Ve7
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/JCiBgESKs5ZWqGny8
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1iVwLCB28ooGhQL9
|
| These are all in "urban" areas and a part of DFW. But how
| about Houston, the 5th?
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yEAimERmyE1EGde6
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSQjPqifWUSv82H7
|
| I don't know how one would even get groceries without a
| car.
|
| And even then, you're then talking about less than 1/3 of
| Americans living in that mostly car dependent space.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| It's the same in Europe, but people pushing an agenda
| don't talk about that either.
| oblio wrote:
| The US takes this to an entirely different level.
|
| In places like Vegas, even on days with great weather,
| trying to WALK 2-3km in residential areas is a nightmare.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| "the best public transit in the densest US city barely
| manages to reach 50% of car-free lifestyle" is what
| you're leaving out.
| Retric wrote:
| A household not having a car is a much higher benchmark a
| car free lifestyle. Only 27% of people use a car/truck
| etc to get to work.
| drnick1 wrote:
| I would argue that even in NYC, having a car is necessary
| if you ever want to leave NYC (and you will want to).
| chneu wrote:
| Not possible when things are 10+ mile apart and a general
| grocery run takes 3+ hours and you can't carry more than a
| backpack, so you have to do it multiple times a week.
| Zigurd wrote:
| The US is ripe for an e-bike revolution. The distances, the
| wide roads with plenty of room for bike lanes, and the
| revulsion against things like Flock...
|
| Unfortunately it's as likely as this being the year of the
| Linux desktop because Windows 11.
| amelius wrote:
| Moving to the EU becomes a more appealing option every day.
| pixelpoet wrote:
| Greetz from Germany, we have Chat Control now even though
| we've been trying to reject it for at least 3 years.
|
| Autocracy is just everywhere these days, Noah get the boat.
| fsflover wrote:
| This is false,
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46063166
| jeroenhd wrote:
| The Chat Control problem isn't nearly as final as some news
| sources try to brand it. They were running up against
| deadlines and submitted their work knowing statistically
| their proposal would get shot down based on existing voting
| rounds.
|
| I, too, would rather see this bullshit die in committee
| before reaching the next stage, but this bullshit can still
| be stopped.
| f1shy wrote:
| No panacea here! Better in some points. In general privacy.
| OTOH many things are not afvancing.
| closewith wrote:
| In the EU, eCall is mandatory and disabling it fails most
| roadworthiness checks and voids most insurance policies, so
| it doesn't help much.
|
| Also, while the EU does (for now) have stronger privacy
| protections for citizens against corporate interests, the
| opposite is true in most EU countries for Government
| surveillance.
| deno wrote:
| eCall has very strong privacy protections, see Article 6:
| https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/758/oj
| closewith wrote:
| While eCall has some weak privacy protections (it's open
| to all the standard cellular network surveillance lawful
| in each country), it also means you cannot disable the
| vehicle's modem in most (maybe all) EU countries with
| failing roadworthiness checks and insurance policies.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| eCall mustn't be active until an accident occurs. The
| lawful interception lobby tried hard to turn every car
| into a free data point they could sell to the government,
| but their efforts have failed.
|
| Last I heard they've shifted their efforts to making
| remote activation of on-board cameras part of the 5/6G
| smart car bullshit (which will of course be part of road
| safety requirments not long after).
| closewith wrote:
| No, that's not correct. The eCall spec requires self-
| checks that include registering with the network on at
| least every ignition.
|
| However, more importantly, it means you can't lawfully
| disable the modem that the manufacturer uses for its own
| telemetry.
| Lio wrote:
| Are you sure about that? My understanding was that the
| eCall self test does not connect to a network.
|
| That's stated on the eCall page linked above. Do you have
| a source that contradicts that?
| closewith wrote:
| Yes, I am sure.
|
| Annex VII only rules out connecting to the PSAP/112 side,
| not routine network attaches. To detect faults in the
| "means of communication", the IVS has to verify that the
| SIM, baseband and RF path are actually usable, and you
| can't test that without a network attach.
|
| In practice that's what all current eCall implementations
| do. The modem attaches to the cellular network at each
| ignition so it can confirm it's capable of placing an
| eCall. If you block the modem or antenna, the IVS fails
| its self-test and the vehicle is no longer roadworthy.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| This crap is being done _because_ of EU rules. It 's "for
| your protection." The vehicles are being secured from _you_.
|
| https://www.coro.net/blog/what-new-eu-cybersecurity-rules-
| me...
|
| https://www.dw.com/en/new-eu-cybersecurity-rules-push-
| carmak...
| throwaway2027 wrote:
| No. Enjoy the ride.
| qmr wrote:
| Defeatist and cowardly.
| randallsquared wrote:
| Given that GP is accepting a level of additional risk which
| you profess not to be willing to accept, perhaps "cowardly"
| is not the correct adjective.
| markus_zhang wrote:
| Maybe there is a way to pollute the data? At least it makes
| data cleaning more expensive.
| chasing0entropy wrote:
| Yes - remove the telematics radio and GPS antennas. They are
| usually in the overhead console area around/behind the lighting
| and mirror controls.
|
| In BMWs, the gps antenna is behind the upper lights, the
| telematics and V2V antenna is in the sharkfin(unplug it from
| underneath the headliner)
| f1shy wrote:
| In some seem to be in the fin antenna:
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OqFdFO_STJ0
| encom wrote:
| But what's the point if you're just going to use Android Auto
| or Apple's car-thing instead? You're just letting some other
| company invade your privacy.
| baobun wrote:
| Assuming things much? It's actually totally reasonable to
| opt out of both of those, too.
|
| Then on the other hand, who cares about those when your car
| is already tracking you? /s That kind of helpless reasoning
| needs to die.
| Proofread0592 wrote:
| Consent and convenience. When I use google maps, I am
| trading my privacy for accurate directions and traffic
| times. When I buy a car that sells my location, and I get
| nothing in return, I feel like the deal is inequitable.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| OsmAnd works fine in Android Auto with WiFi and mobile data
| turned off. Sygic does too. I believe TomTom also sells
| navigation apps that will work fine under these conditions.
|
| I use Android Auto mostly because I don't trust
| manufacturers of car components to maintain their software
| and to put more than bargain bin SoCs in their infotainment
| consoles. There's no need for your Android phone to have a
| connection to the outside world if all you're using it for
| is locally installed apps.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Giving car companies your money (and then modifying your car)
| is still rewarding car companies for their bad behavior. We
| really need to stop buying new cars and somehow make it clear
| that telematics are the reason, but it's never going to
| happen. Not enough people care, and of those who care, not
| enough of them care enough to stop buying these cars.
| stavros wrote:
| In my BYD Seal, I removed the SIM card that's easily accessible
| from inside the armrest compartment.
| chasing0entropy wrote:
| Remove the antennas. Do not give in to the mirage of convenience.
|
| Use a stand alone generic GPS. Vehicle GPS devices are anti
| privacy for so many reasons.
|
| Listen to stored music from an SD card if terrestrial radio (NO
| SATELLITE). Did you know almost ALL late model cars can play a
| <128gb FAT32 USB drive with non- vbr mp3s? 64gb filled with 168kb
| mp3 audio would take roughly 3 years at 4 hours a day to listen
| to.
|
| TURN YOUR PHONE OFF. Your phone does more than track you - the
| Bluetooth and wifi beacon scanners are always running. When you
| come across another person, most phones track the intersection of
| your beacon with theirs making a new data point that compromises
| both individuals privacy. Now consider sitting at a stoplight;
| you and and the 10 phones around you have now correlated the time
| and position you were sitting there. The person jogging by with
| no phone(but a set of Bluetooth headphones) is also tracked by
| their Bluetooth signature. Terrifying.
|
| Disable autonomous driving hardware by unplugging the cables from
| the interior cameras. If your car needs to see and feel you in
| order to do it's job, it's co-dependent; break up with it.
|
| Ignore your car's complaints and error messages. Did you know
| Orange dash error lights are non critical?
| galleywest200 wrote:
| > Ignore your car's complaints and error messages. Did you know
| Orange dash error lights are non critical?
|
| "Tire pressure low" is one you should probably check out on a
| regular basis.
| chneu wrote:
| Yeah that's terrible advice. Learning to ignore safety
| warnings is an amazing way to wind up stranded or with a
| destroyed car because you decided to ignore a warning light
| potato3732842 wrote:
| The first 100yr of automobiles didn't have TPMS and it was
| mostly fine.
| pixl97 wrote:
| I mean if you consider that death rate per mile driven
| 'mostly fine'
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Check your tire pressures when you get gas, along with
| your oil and other fluid levels. Eyeball the tires every
| time you get in the car. These habits are not hard to
| develop and they will work even when the sensors
| malfunction (which is not infrequently).
|
| All that these sensor-based systems do is train you to be
| an inattentive car owner.
| mindslight wrote:
| Throughout my entire life, I don't know if I have ever
| seen anyone measuring their tire pressure or checking
| their oil at a gas station. Visually assessing tires can
| be quite misleading as well - my TPMS indicator was just
| on, visually it looked like one tire (its pressure was
| fine), and the tire that was 10psi low looked normal.
|
| Falling back to an attitude of not needing automation and
| instrumentation is _a cope_ , and often a poor cope at
| that. The problem isn't the dash warning lights of the
| past several decades, it's the built in corporate
| surveillance hardware of the past single decade (and the
| corresponding violation of user trust in favor of
| corporate control).
| everdrive wrote:
| >Falling back to an attitude of not needing automation
| and instrumentation is a cope, and often a poor cope at
| that.
|
| A lot of modern automation is not really automation. A
| washing machine is automation: it takes a task which
| would have wasted hours of your day and reduces it down
| to a few minutes. A lot of modern "automation" doesn't
| save you any actual time time, but just saves you from
| being attentive:
|
| - Checking your tire pressure doesn't take much time, but
| TPMS is a privacy problem and an added maintenance cost
| that you cannot opt out of.
|
| - A power rear lift gate actually takes _more_ time than
| just shutting it with your hands.
|
| - Power windows don't go down any more quickly than power
| windows. The only only benefit here is that you can open
| all 4 windows simultaneously. However this is a luxury,
| not something which saves you time. You never _need_ all
| 4 windows down. So maybe people like it, but it's not
| like the washing machine that actually saves you labor.
|
| - etc ....
|
| People think that needed to do or attend to anything is
| wasting time, but often modern automation saves no time
| whatsoever, and has other downsides. (privacy,
| maintenance cost, vehicle weight, etc.)
| mylifeandtimes wrote:
| maybe an age thing? When I was in high school I worked at
| a gas station where we would pump the gas for customers
| at the "full service" lane and also check their oil. The
| game was to upsell people an oil change. Point is,
| everyone saw people getting their oil checked every time
| they filled the tank.
|
| And checking tire pressure was a 1x/week thing.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| I don't see it often either, but my government has been
| very active trying to get people to do bi-monthly tire
| pressure checks at the very least.
|
| I don't think most people know how to do it, to be
| honest. Partially because people seem to think reading
| two pages in a manual is some kind of sisyphean task that
| no mortal should ever be cursed with.
|
| It's pretty crazy how little people care. Even if you
| don't care about the safety aspect, keeping your tires
| inflated well saves you a ton on fuel and tire
| replacements.
| rkomorn wrote:
| Tire pressure management was one of the striking
| differences between my experiences in France and in the
| US.
|
| In France, we'd check tire pressure at gas stations on
| nice machines that had built in dial gauges and were
| free.
|
| In the US, I had to use one of those hand gauges and the
| air pumps needed quarters (in most cases, especially if
| you weren't also buying gas).
|
| In Portugal now, the gas stations also have free air and
| pretty good pumps.
| ponector wrote:
| Many new cars have a tire repair kit instead of spare
| tire nowadays. At least there is a compressor in the kit
| which you can use to inflate the tire.
| elzbardico wrote:
| You don't see people checking tire pressures where you
| live?
| ghaff wrote:
| Checking oil at once universal full-service gas stations
| used to be extremely common. Think it pretty much went
| away in late-70s petroleum shortage in the US. With
| modern cars, it just doesn't make a lot of sense given
| any semblance of scheduled maintenance adherence.
|
| I (again) have a low pressure warning on one tire
| (getting colder in the Northern Hemisphere). It looks
| fine but I'll get my compressor out tomorrow and make the
| computer happy. A lot of modern tires can look pretty
| good even if, as you say, they can be quite a bit below
| recommended limits.
| ponector wrote:
| Many modern cars have no way to manually check oil or any
| fluid levels. Only way is to check the reading from the
| sensor via main screen.
| ErroneousBosh wrote:
| Tyre pressure sensors have done nothing to affect that.
| elzbardico wrote:
| Frankly? I do. Remove alcohol and drugs from the
| equation, and driving is an absurdly safe activity. Those
| intrusive features have very little to do with safety.
| sda2 wrote:
| it may be better to code out TPMS anyways. I had a BMW that
| wouldn't allow you to enter Sport/Sport+ when TPMS light was
| on, what a drag.
| everdrive wrote:
| But in exchange for being tracked we've been saved from the
| scourge of occasionally checking our tire pressure. Why, I'd
| give up almost anything just to be slightly more comfortable.
| gruez wrote:
| >TURN YOUR PHONE OFF. Your phone does more than track you - the
| Bluetooth and wifi beacon scanners are always running. When you
| come across another person, most phones track the intersection
| of your beacon with theirs making a new data point that
| compromises both individuals privacy. Now consider sitting at a
| stoplight; you and and the 10 phones around you have now
| correlated the time and position you were sitting there. The
| person jogging by with no phone(but a set of Bluetooth
| headphones) is also tracked by their Bluetooth signature.
| Terrifying.
|
| All phones nowadays have bluetooth/wifi mac address
| randomization, so it's basically useless for tracking, not to
| mention google/apple conscripting every phone into a wardriving
| network will kill battery life. Moreover all this effort in
| avoiding being tracked doesn't really mean much when all cars
| have a very visible and unique identifier that's mandated by
| law (ie. license plate).
| alwa wrote:
| And Flock Safety will gladly fingerprint the vehicles without
| said license plate, and distribute everyone's location
| histories nationally.
|
| See also (222 points, 19 comments, 14 days ago):
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45945960
| worldsavior wrote:
| Ok stop with the panicking.
|
| What's wrong with GPS in vehicles? If it's not connected to the
| internet, there is no issue.
|
| What's wrong with playing music from the phone on Bluetooth or
| Aux? Did you also know you can ride a horse instead of a car?
|
| Bluetooth and WiFi isn't running if you turned them off.
| Bluetooth also isn't really used for tracking unless someone is
| looking for you or you're part of some service like AirTags.
|
| > Ignore your car's complaints and error messages. Did you know
| Orange dash error lights are non critical?
|
| What? Worse advice out there regarding cars.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| _If it 's not connected to the internet, there is no issue._
|
| It's connected to the Internet. Every car has a SIM card now.
| gruez wrote:
| >It's connected to the Internet. Every car has a SIM card
| now.
|
| Maybe every new car, but the average car is 13 years old,
| and the OP made no clarification on whether his advice was
| for only new cars, or for a 2015 econobox as well.
| everdrive wrote:
| Most people don't know, and will never know whether their
| car is connected to the internet, so it's better to
| assume it is unless you have specific information. The
| app or phone you connect to the car could also be a major
| exfil point of this data.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| My car is older than that and came with an embedded SIM
| card. Quite a few navigation consoles had "live traffic
| updates" (often in trial format, but sometimes
| "lifetime") that basically consisted of 2G clients
| occasionally updating traffic data along planned routes.
| Not quite bottom of the line at the time, but also not
| uncommon at that point either. It's probably slightly
| worse than the dedicated satnav screens people were
| buying back when the car was new, although neither
| compares to what a smartphone will expose passively from
| just being inside of a moving car.
| 1313ed01 wrote:
| Probably the only good thing about this country shutting
| down the 2G and 3G networks now is all the spy devices
| that will go permanently offline.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| On the one hand, they won't be able to communicate with
| the home base anymore. On the other hand, they'll light
| up the map like a Christmas tree if someone ever turns on
| a stingray in their vicinity.
| encom wrote:
| >Do not give in to the mirage of convenience.
|
| I sympathise. However, being able to start de-icing my car
| while still in bed at 5:30 on a January morning is a powerful
| feature. And I'm the kind of person who wraps his tin foil hat
| no less than 10 layers thick.
|
| Ideally this shouldn't involve the internet, because the car is
| in wifi range, but what can I do about it?
| ryandrake wrote:
| People are suggesting all over these threads what we can do
| about it, but we (as a population) aren't. When my 2009 car
| dies, I'm going to deliberately NOT buy a new trackingmobile,
| and try to find another 2009 car to keep running. Yea, that
| means I occasionally need to take 30 seconds to scrape ice
| off the windshield. Big deal.
| rcbdev wrote:
| Why 2009? I've been driving the same 2003 Audi TT all my
| life, never failed me.
| m463 wrote:
| I have this with my keyfob.
|
| later vehicles "helpfully" removed this in favor of online
| remote starting (with added telematics)
| teeray wrote:
| > Remove the antennas. Do not give in to the mirage of
| convenience.
|
| ERROR: unable to start engine.
| m463 wrote:
| Please drink a verification can.
|
| Actually I wonder if cars will just adopt "oh-you-need-anti-
| theft" like phones do. To prevent auto theft, all cars will
| be tracked and all parts must match serial numbers.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| > Did you know Orange dash error lights are non critical?
|
| Your car will happily display an orange light while a bad fuel
| mixture is poisoning your catalytic converter to the point
| where it needs replacing to meet any kind of emissions test.
| Same with other signs of engine stress.
|
| Don't ignore dash lights unless you know what they mean or
| you're willing to pay the cost of disposing of your car.
|
| Of course many places won't even allow you to disconnect all
| the antennae as a non-functional TPMS makes your car
| unroadworthy in various jurisdictions. You could quickly
| reconnect everything and clear the error codes before testing,
| but I'm not sure if the hassle is even worth the illusion that
| of being untraceable.
| reppap wrote:
| No, I will use all this stuff and do so gladly.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| A 2013 Chevy Volt has a camera on the dashboard pointed at the
| driver. The entertainment dashboard has a dozen communication
| options, including those for safety? Zealots and the unhinged
| will quickly comment no doubt, but for the rational citizens I
| ask, when was this normalized? Was it automakers emboldened by
| the acceptance of cell phone central record keeping?
| balamatom wrote:
| > Zealots and the unhinged will quickly comment no doubt, but
| for the rational citizens I ask, when was this normalized?
|
| [laughs in unhinged zealot]
| potato3732842 wrote:
| "Safety" is a magic word like "god" was a thousand years ago.
| If you say it just right you can manufacture an excuse to do
| all sorts of stuff that'll clearly lead to bad stuff if left to
| run.
|
| They undoubtably said things like "if it saves even one person
| from falling asleep at the wheel it's worth it" or something
| along those lines.
| luqtas wrote:
| this is still a technology advancement... what if smartphone
| usage or asleep safely stops the car? what if this run
| locally? or what if it's linked to public entities that will
| add penalty points to your license?
|
| as a cyclist and public transport user with no driver
| license, i hope personal vehicles have so much sensors that
| they can detect if you are drunk or stressed and limit your
| reaches. fuck your metallic beetle
| potato3732842 wrote:
| >as a cyclist and public transport user with no driver
| license, i hope personal vehicles have so much sensors that
| they can detect if you are drunk or stressed and limit your
| reaches. fuck your metallic beetle
|
| What a great illustration of the sort of selfish opinions
| that people like to peddle under the guise of perceived
| common good.
|
| Are you willing to have your bike brakes linked up with GPS
| and red light signals? It's in the name of safety and
| progress after all.
| luqtas wrote:
| in a city that doesn't produce even 1/25 of microplastic
| thousand kilos vehicles produce? because that also has an
| impact on marine ecosystems, by the way, cars are linked
| as one of the highest if not the, pollutants of
| microplastic. in a city that doesn't have air pollution
| linked towards a bunch of disease? in a city that doesn't
| have noise pollution that also has a bazinga of negative
| impact?
|
| are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't respect
| traffic lights on a city designed after walk and public
| transportation? or are you thinking on the minimal
| cyclists that get killed by tresspasing this rule by
| vehicles that get a mild scratch? or the light or mild
| injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h are gonna cause between
| each other?
|
| edit: i would even go further and hope personal vehicles
| production is ceased and their circulation becomes a
| crime for citizens on non-legal or non essential services
| duties. i would live perfectly fine in a city without
| those but who controls the speed of my bicycle on cycle
| paths or that lock my brakes if i try to cycle high
| the_sleaze_ wrote:
| I don't totally disagree.
|
| The USA was designed by Ford motor company, for cars, by
| cars. That was a mistake.
| ryandrake wrote:
| You didn't answer his question: Would you be willing to
| have your bicycle brakes linked up with GPS and red light
| signals? Or loaded down with sensors monitoring and
| correcting your bicycling activity for your own safety?
| robocat wrote:
| Even just cycle number plates.
| kyboren wrote:
| > are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't
| respect traffic lights on a city designed after walk and
| public transportation? or are you thinking on the minimal
| cyclists that get killed by tresspasing this rule by
| vehicles that get a mild scratch? or the light or mild
| injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h are gonna cause between
| each other?
|
| An excellent demonstration of "cyclebrain syndrome", the
| urban twin to suburbia's "carbrain syndrome".
|
| > are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't
| respect traffic lights on a city designed after walk and
| public transportation?
|
| Translation: I am aware of cyclists' ubiquitous poor
| behavior on the roads but will reach for any
| justification to shift responsibility to someone else.
| "Drivers wouldn't be running red lights if you just added
| a couple more lanes, bro."
|
| > or are you thinking on the minimal cyclists that get
| killed by tresspasing this rule by vehicles that get a
| mild scratch?
|
| Translation: And when cyclists' poor behavior causes a
| fatal collision with a car, nobody cares about the
| damaged property. Or the mental anguish, or the
| collisions caused by narrowly avoiding killing an errant
| cyclist (who survives, oblivious, thanks to the driver's
| quick action choosing a more costly crash over a "mild
| scratch" that kills the cyclist).
|
| > or the light or mild injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h
| are gonna cause between each other?
|
| Translation: I don't give a shit about killing/injuring
| pedestrians any more than car drivers do. I only care
| about collisions with things that are about the size of
| my vehicle or bigger. And if those other things are
| bigger than my vehicle--I want them banned! That way I
| reduce the risk to me, which is what I really care about,
| and who cares what happens to anything smaller than me?
| emidln wrote:
| My 2025 Mazda Miata has a CAN connected Telematics Control Unit
| that sends a bunch of data to Mazda on ignition off. Among this
| data is acceleration and velocity data along with coordinates
| sampled for where you were. It is also used as a gateway for the
| Mazda app to start your car, query your vehicle's tire pressure,
| etc. It is claimed that you can opt out of this by calling Mazda
| and being persistent.
|
| The CAN traffic is unencrypted. It was pretty easy to MITM this
| module with a cheap arm Linux board and a can transceiver to
| enable writing a two way filter capable of blocking the traffic
| that didn't raise any DTCs (that I observed) and could be turned
| on/off by the user. I preferred this approach to complete
| disconnection of the module (which is noticeable via errors at
| the diagnostic port) or trying to faraday cage or disable the
| antennae on the TCU so it can't remotely send/receive. I can also
| turn off my module or completely remove it before I sell it.
|
| I fear the next version of Miata will be an encrypted CAN like
| most other cars have moved to and even with my expertise I won't
| be able to access the latest safety features from new cars
| without surrendering what little privacy I've been able to claw
| back.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| _I fear the next version of Miata will be an encrypted CAN like
| most other cars have moved to_
|
| As I understand it, they're required to do that now if they
| want to sell in the EU. They emphatically do not want anyone
| tinkering with their cars.
| bri3d wrote:
| They don't want people modifying ADAS systems mostly, and the
| main requirement is SecOC, which is cryptographic
| authentication but the message is still plaintext. Basically
| they don't want third party modifications able to randomly
| send the "steer left" message to the steering rack, for
| example.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Yes, and to do that, CAN must be encrypted. The idea isn't
| just to secure it from hackers. The idea is to secure it
| from _owners._
| bri3d wrote:
| > SecOC, which is cryptographic authentication but the
| message is still plaintext
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Oh, OK, that's better. I can see what my car is doing, I
| just can't do anything about it.
| rconti wrote:
| The ADAS systems mandated in Europe are insanely intrusive.
| I had a few rental cars in Europe this summer and wanted to
| send them off a cliff. (and I'm not an auto tech luddite,
| I've had modern cars in the US with autopilot type systems,
| lane keep, blind spot warning, rear traffic assist radar,
| forward collision warning, etc. IMO rear traffic
| assist/FCW/AEB tend to work really well, autopilot pretty
| well, and lane keep and blind spot silly gimmicks at best).
|
| Bring on the full self-driving cars, or let me drive my own
| car. This human-in-the-loop middle state is maddening.
| We're either supervising our "self-driving, but not really"
| cars, where the car does all of the work but we still have
| to be 100% aware and ready to "take over" the instant
| anything gets hard (which we know from studies is something
| humans are TERRIBLE at)... Or, we're actively _driving_ the
| car, but you're not really. The steering feel is going in
| and out as the car subtly corrects for you, so you can't
| trust your own human senses. Typically 40% brake pedal
| pressure gets you 40% brake pressure, unless you lift off
| the throttle and hop to the brakes quickly, in which case
| it decides when you apply 40% pedal pressure you actually
| want 80% brake pressure. Again, you can't trust your human
| senses. The same input gets different outputs depending on
| the foggy decisions of some computer. Add to that the
| beeping and ping-ponging and flashing lights in the
| cluster.
|
| It's like clippy all over again. They've decided that, if
| one warning is good and helpful, constant alerts are MORE
| good and MORE helpful. Not a thought has been given to
| alert fatigue or the consequences of this mixed human-in-
| the-loop mode.
| hdgvhicv wrote:
| "Lane keep" yanks the wheel dangerously because it
| incorrectly detects the lane, or because you don't
| indicate to pass a pothole on an empty road (which itself
| would be confusing to other road users)
|
| Forward collision warning has misfired on 2 occasions on
| me in the last 3 years
|
| The main issue is that so many cars have broken "auto
| dipping" headlights which don't dip, or matrix headlights
| which don't pick out other cars.
|
| This automation shit should stop, but it won't.
|
| parking beepers are reasonable, they simply come on
| occasionally and don't actually interfere when they go
| wrong. The rest of it just makes things far worse at
| scale.
| emidln wrote:
| > Forward collision warning has misfired on 2 occasions
| on me in the last 3 years
|
| My Lexus is afraid of a bush behind my garage in the
| alley. It's on a neighbors property and not really
| overgrown, but my car refuses to get within about 5 ft of
| it. Makes backing out a nightmare. I haven't figured out
| a way to disable it, and have considered just selling
| this 2025 NX.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| parking beepers -- that do not go off immediately when
| you start a parked car
| RealityVoid wrote:
| I integrated SecOC on some ECU's at work. I hate myself for
| it. I frigging hate what they're doing with this. I think
| it's going to make cars less repairable, less modifiable.
| It's a horrible horrible stupid initiative in the name of
| "cybersecurity".
| bri3d wrote:
| I understand notionally where they were going, but it all
| sort of went off the deep end somewhere along the line. A
| concern that someone buying some "mileage blocker" or
| whatever other shady device off of AliExpress might be
| vulnerable to the device steering their car into a wall
| is actually quite a valid one, but of course the solution
| is some overcomplicated AUTOSAR nightmare that doesn't
| solve for key provisioning in a way to make modules
| replaceable.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| I have less trust in their good intentions. I think OEM's
| want to lock down their platforms in order to squeeze
| extra revenue streams. And I tend to be quite charitable
| with my interpretations.
|
| As an aside, I checked out your GitHub. Cool projects,
| the vag flashing tool looks super useful, might actually
| give it a spin in sive development projects.
| M95D wrote:
| > The CAN traffic is unencrypted. It was pretty easy to MITM
| this module with a cheap arm Linux board
|
| And you _didn 't_ poison their databases and statistics with
| fake data?? OMG, I'm thinking of buying one of these cars just
| for this opportunity! (No, I'm not.)
| emidln wrote:
| I suspect this data is made "anonymous" and sold to insurance
| companies and misc data brokers. If it's linked to my
| insurance company, I don't want to jack my rates. Further,
| I've thus far avoided a CFAA conviction and I'd like to keep
| it that way.
| mindslight wrote:
| It would be an extremely totalitarian dynamic to be
| persecuted with the CFAA for modifying a device you own
| based on part of it having been (nonconsensually!)
| programmed by a third party to upload data to their own
| server. You own the device, so anything you do within that
| device is authorized. And the code that uploads the data is
| authorized to do so because it was put there by the same
| company that owns [controls] the servers themselves.
|
| I do know that the CFAA essentially gets interpreted to
| mean whatever the corpos want it to mean - it's basically
| an anti-witch law - so it's best to steer clear. And this
| goes double with with the current overtly pay-to-play
| regime. But just saying.
|
| (Awesome description btw! I really wish I'd find a buying
| guide for many makes/models of cars that detail how well
| they can be unshackled from digital authoritarianism. A
| Miata is not the type of vehicle I am in the market for
| (which is unfortunate, for several reasons))
| emidln wrote:
| If you can be prosecuted for guessing urls you can be
| prosecuted for sending garbage data in a way you know
| will be uploaded to a remote system.
| mindslight wrote:
| As a strictly logical assertion, I do not agree. Guessing
| URLs is crafting new types of interactions with a server.
| The built in surveillance uploader is still only
| accessing the server in the way it has already been
| explicitly authorized. Trying to tie some nebulous TOS to
| a situation that the manufacturer has deliberately
| created reeks of the same type of website-TOS shenanigans
| courts have (actually!) struck down.
|
| As a pragmatic matter, I do completely understand where
| you're coming from (my second paragraph). In a sense, if
| one can get to the point of being convicted they have
| been kind of fortunate - it means they didn't kill
| themselves under the crushing pressure of a team of
| federal persecutors whose day job is making your life
| miserable.
| monerozcash wrote:
| >(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program,
| information, code, or command, and as a result of such
| conduct, intentionally causes damage without
| authorization, to a protected computer;
|
| If your goal is to deliberately "poison" their data as
| suggested before, it's kind of obvious that you are
| knowingly causing the transmission of information in an
| effort to intentionally cause damage to a protected
| computer without authorization to cause such damage.
|
| >Trying to tie some nebulous TOS to a situation that the
| manufacturer has deliberately created reeks of the same
| type of website-TOS shenanigans courts have (actually!)
| struck down.
|
| This has very little to do with the TOS though, unless
| the TOS specifically states that you are in fact allowed
| to deliberately damage their systems.
|
| And no, causing damage to a computer does not refer to
| hackers turning computers into bombs. But rather
| specifically situations like this.
| Xss3 wrote:
| Any reasonable programmer (a peer) would say an
| unencrypted system that doesnt validate data is an
| unprotected system.
| vkou wrote:
| You think criminalizing guessing URLs is unreasonable.
|
| What about guessing passwords? Should someone be
| prosecuted for just trying to bruteforce them until one
| works?
| nkrisc wrote:
| How do I know which URLs of a website are legal to visit
| and which are illegal?
| monerozcash wrote:
| Prosecuting someone for deliberately injecting garbage
| data into another persons system hardly seems
| totalitarian.
|
| > You own the device, so anything you do within that
| device is authorized
|
| You're very clearly describing a situation where at least
| some of the things you're doing aren't happening on your
| own device.
|
| >I do know that the CFAA essentially gets interpreted to
| mean whatever the corpos want it to mean - it's basically
| an anti-witch law
|
| FWIW this is simply not true. The essence of the CFAA is
| "do not _deliberately_ do anything bad to computers that
| belong to other people ".
|
| The supreme court even recently tightened the definition
| of "unauthorized access" to ensure that you can't play
| silly games with terms of service and the CFAA. https://w
| ww.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-783_k53l.pdf
| elzbardico wrote:
| My device. I generate whatever the fuck the data I want.
| If you log it, kiss my ass.
| monerozcash wrote:
| Sure, I have the same attitude when it comes to the
| government telling me that I'm not allowed to use drugs.
| Doesn't mean I'm in the clear from a legal point of view.
|
| However, it's worth clarifying that the important detail
| isn't generating the data, but sending it. Particularly
| the clearly stated malicious intent of "poisoning" their
| data.
|
| This seems like exactly what the lawmakers writing CFAA
| sought to criminalize, and is frankly much better
| justified than perhaps the bulk of things they tend to
| come up with.
|
| >(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program,
| information, code, or command, and as a result of such
| conduct, intentionally causes damage without
| authorization, to a protected computer;
|
| Doesn't seem exactly unfair to me, even if facing federal
| charges over silly vandalism is perhaps a bit much. Of
| course, you'd realistically be facing a fine.
| Xss3 wrote:
| Could you argue the computer was unprotected? No
| encryption is wild.
| ponector wrote:
| If you paid for a device it doesn't mean you have no
| rules set up on how you can operate it. I'm sure the is
| an EULA you agreed to.
|
| As anecdote, while buying a new car I signed a statement
| that I'm not going to resell it to russia.
| elzbardico wrote:
| And you think it is all fine and dandy?
| andrei_says_ wrote:
| As anonymous as there are Miatas in your neighborhood
| parking in your driveway.
| elzbardico wrote:
| Oh man. Logging insane average speeds and ludicrous
| acceleration during rush hour. Deliciously tempting idea.
| tehjoker wrote:
| A data scientist will simply filter out impossible data
| when conducting an analysis
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| you give a lot of credit to an industry poisoned by the
| profit motive
| tehjoker wrote:
| Just make sure you are criticizing the industry on things
| that are real. Accurate data collection (put not
| necessarily publication to a broad audience) is something
| industry does. Decision makers want to understand
| reality, they don't necessarily want you to though.
| elzbardico wrote:
| That's why you make this as popular as possible
| idiotsecant wrote:
| Draw the old twig and berries in gps coordinates in
| hundreds of random cities, with velocity between points
| carefully kept to regular traffic speeds every single day
| until they shut the modem off.
| nja wrote:
| Have you posted any writeups or other information about how you
| built this? I'm eyeing a Mazda as a next car (I've never owned
| a car newer than a 2014, and outside of that one, any newer
| than 2006, but family safety needs may lead to getting a newer
| car soon), and telemetry seems like one of the few downsides to
| an otherwise good carmaker. Would be very interested to learn
| more!
| wormslayer666 wrote:
| I opted to try the "beg the manufacturer to turn off the
| panopticon" approach[1]. The first time I got 2 hours of
| elevator music before hanging up, the second I went through 3
| levels of customer support before they claimed it was done (3
| days later). Might have to steal your approach to verify that
| though...
|
| [1] https://www.mazdausa.com/site/privacy-connectedservices
| drnick1 wrote:
| I see absolutely no reason not to completely unplug the
| cellular modem. The only thing that would stop me is an
| annoying error message or warning light in the gauge cluster.
| My car does not display any of these, but unplugging the modem
| results in losing the right speaker and microphone, unless a
| bypass harness is used.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Here is something else you can do about it. By an older low
| mileage car. If we all did that the manufacturers would change
| tack soon enough
| closewith wrote:
| I did do this, but I also want a reasonable modern and safe car
| and in the EU, since 2018, that means a car with eCall. I have
| a 2017 that I will keep going as long as is economical, but
| after that, it will be nearly impossible to avoid these
| systems.
| ryandrake wrote:
| The idea that a 20 year old car is unsafe is auto industry
| FUD. Yes, there have been great safety advances since the
| 1970s and 1980s. They've kind of tapered off though. I would
| absolutely trust my family's lives in any year 2000+ vehicle.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Airbag and crumple zone safety requirements for crashes
| that aren't head-on are much more recent than the 2000s.
| Many car makers designed their cars to pass those, but will
| leave you dead or worse if you get T-boned.
|
| ABS wasn't even a requirement in the EU until 2004, and
| American cars could be sold without ABS all the way until
| 2012, when traction control was also made mandatory (which
| the EU then also followed).
|
| Things like the slightly-angled side pole crash test was
| only added to the Euro NCAP in 2015 and was updated five
| years later to make it a bit more realistic, though cars
| still woefully fail in many real-life scenarios.
|
| I wouldn't really consider a car "safe" unless it passes
| the ~2015 requirements for car safety well. A well-designed
| car full of optional safety features from the ~2010s is
| probably also safe, but I wouldn't count on it unless
| you've done research into it.
|
| I believe Volvo has had a reputation of being ahead of the
| curve with these kinds of crash safety tests, but even they
| had to improve over time.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Of course, just because it wasn't a requirement to have
| ABS, doesn't mean your car doesn't have it...
| closewith wrote:
| > I would absolutely trust my family's lives in any year
| 2000+ vehicle.
|
| I work partly in prehospital emergency medicine and I
| wouldn't.
|
| I already feel uneasy with our 2017 EuroNCAP 5 star SUV due
| to the improvements since then, in particular AEB and
| increased structural crash-protection, which greatly change
| the injury profiles of accidents.
| Sharlin wrote:
| Not driving seems to have worked pretty well thus far.
| SilverElfin wrote:
| The problem is a lot of the features of these cars require you to
| opt into giving your privacy away. And when you're shopping it's
| not clear where that line is.
| thepasswordapp wrote:
| The car data collection story is concerning, but it's part of a
| broader pattern: credentials and personal data are scattered
| across dozens of services we interact with daily.
|
| The automotive example shows how even "non-tech" products now
| collect and transmit data. Each service creates another attack
| surface, another set of credentials to manage, another potential
| breach vector.
|
| What's frustrating is that breach response still falls on
| individuals. When one of these services gets compromised, it's
| users who have to scramble to change passwords across potentially
| hundreds of connected accounts. The "change your password" advice
| is good but wildly impractical at scale.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Is all of this data collection from the driving aids actually us
| doing R&D for their autonomous car projects?
| toofy wrote:
| people participating as beta testers with no way to opt out is
| absolutely the norm now.
|
| from video games to software to "self-driving" cars, we're all
| unpaid beta testers for unfinished and often unsafe products.
| exhilaration wrote:
| Disabling the hardware can be really hard, my 2025 Toyota Sienna
| is always connected. You can't just pull a fuse or rip out an
| antenna, I have to take the entire dashboard apart to reach the
| Data Communication Module (DCM) module. If anyone's curious what
| that looks like, it's a little bit easier on the Toyota Tacoma,
| here are some pictures of the process:
| https://www.tacoma4g.com/forum/threads/disabling-dcm-telemat...
|
| It's complex enough that I haven't done it yet in my Sienna, but
| I plan to!
| ProllyInfamous wrote:
| On a 2021 Camry there is an below-dash fuse labeled "DCM" which
| you can remove (and it does disable OnStar/telemetry, but not
| sat.radio[0]) -- it also disables one of the speakers (used for
| phone calls), which there is a bypass to resolve (but it still
| requires removing infotainment, so at that point just unplug it
| there.?!).
|
| [0] It was my understanding that, like GPS-receivers, Sirius/XM
| was one-way streaming, only..?
| willis936 wrote:
| There are GPS antennas that land on that DCM and the data
| from that is forwarded over carplay/android auto. Phones fall
| back to their onboard GPS but it's a much worse experience
| than we're accustomed to. If you share the car with someone
| expect complaints. Pulling the cell antenna(s) is the most
| elegant solution. People shouldn't be afraid of a little
| work.
| tguvot wrote:
| There is spying and there is spying
|
| Back in august IDF banned Chinese cars from entering bases
|
| https://www.jns.org/report-idf-bans-chinese-cars-from-bases-...
|
| And now banned then from used by officers
|
| https://securityboulevard.com/2025/11/why-israel-just-banned...
|
| I wonder what IDF knows
| gogusrl wrote:
| Tesla cars to be banned from Chinese government buildings amid
| security fears.
|
| I wonder what China knows :)
|
| https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-vehicles-to-face-entry-b...
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| At consumer level - Tesla has been leader here for many
| years.
| vel0city wrote:
| I went to Carvana to get some idea on what my car might be worth.
| I gave them the license plate, and it gave me a questionnaire
| about specific trim and options along with asking about the
| current mileage. I couldn't remember the exact figure so I
| guessed rounded to the thousand. The app complained and wouldn't
| take it as they knew the mileage which was some 150ish miles
| more. Apparently my car has reported the mileage last time I
| drive it, which has been about an hour before.
|
| Carvana knew _exactly_ how many miles I had driven within an hour
| of me driving my car.
| humanrebar wrote:
| So why did they have you fill in that field then?
| bitwize wrote:
| For the same reason the IRS makes you fill out how much you
| made last year. They know--they know to the penny. But making
| _you_ fill it out is a humiliation exercise so they can
| "catch you out" and intimidate you.
|
| Well in the case of the IRS, that, and you know, Intuit.
| bmitch3020 wrote:
| I'd like to see a website that ranks vehicles by make and model.
| That would influence shopping behaviors, and consumers would
| influence manufacturer behaviors.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| nothing. And banning ALPR wont fix anything either. All cars have
| 4 unique serial numbers broadcast via radio at all times via the
| TPMS system. you don't even need a camera, just a radio receiver.
| 1shooner wrote:
| > banning ALPR wont fix anything either.
|
| Ideally the implementation would be immaterial to a ban. The
| ban (or more likely first, warrant requirement similar to cell
| data) would be on the tracking database, not the details of how
| the tracking was accomplished.
| ErroneousBosh wrote:
| > All cars have 4 unique serial numbers broadcast via radio at
| all times via the TPMS system.
|
| Mine doesn't.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| do you have some sort of indirect tire pressure checking like
| wheel speed?
| jeroenhd wrote:
| TPMS doesn't need to be unencrypted like that, although many
| car manufacturers do like to save a buck.
|
| If you get a car old enough, you won't need to worry about TPMS
| (but that car will not have been tested against recent crash
| test scenarios).
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| TPMS is over the air, each sesnor has a 32 bit unique ID. you
| have 4 per car... its easy to identify
| fh973 wrote:
| Checked how to receive those with SDR. Turns out they are very
| low power and you need to basically touch the tire. Also the
| transmit in minute intervals. Bit exactly a a smoking gun in
| terms of mass surveillance.
| jmward01 wrote:
| I won't mince words. This is criminal and should be dealt with
| that way. It is obvious I don't want my information collected and
| sold. I make it clear every reasonable chance I get. This goes
| beyond abuse of my privacy, this is digital assault and the
| company officers that allowed these 'features' should be thrown
| in jail for it.
| metalman wrote:
| so ya!
|
| My house is fairly close((125') to a rural "highway", and only
| internet here is mobile data that my phone shares with other
| devices and mornings(anytime) my older desktop with 2.5 ghz wifi
| gets bumped off with the passing of every car that has glaring
| supper white headlights,but, not the ones running yellow
| incandecents, whatever rf signal is comming of these things must
| be barely, or completly illegal, and could obviously be tracked
| in any number of ways, so not so much bieng spied on, as just
| flat out trasmitting everything you do in ridiculously fine
| grained detail.
| daft_pink wrote:
| The problem is that with Flock, you're basically being tracked
| incessantly anyways, so who cares if the automaker also does it?
| malwrar wrote:
| We need to resist this stuff or else there will be Flock,
| stalker cars, and some other new nightmare they excuse by
| saying "well we're already watching...". Can't let ourselves
| accept this is normal!
| daft_pink wrote:
| How do you resist automated license plate readers? Not having
| license plates doesn't seem practical.
| sys_64738 wrote:
| That's the slippery slope of shrugging your shoulders.
| constantcrying wrote:
| How do you write an article about this and not mention the GDPR
| or EU privacy laws?
|
| >"It's hard to figure out exactly how much data a modern car is
| collecting on you"
|
| You are a globally operating news agency. You can absolutely get
| some GDPR requests in and look at it. What kind of reporting is
| this? "We don"t know, but we also have not tried the one way
| which forces companies to answer this question".
|
| BMW is a German company, just ask them for the information they
| have on you and they are forced to give it to you.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Mozilla's concentrated efforts took a while, they're right that
| it's hard to figure out exactly what car manufacturers are
| doing. Unless you're willing to sue a bunch of them, plain GDPR
| requests won't be enough to get this information. Companies
| will happily lie or declare information collected as "non-
| personal" or "trade secrets" and if they're smart enough about
| the way they process their data they can probably convince a
| judge that the end result isn't personal enough that exposing
| their trade secrets weighs up against the GDPR.
|
| There's no way even a large news corporation is going to buy
| every model car from every brand that comes out in a year to
| get the legal rights to demand data, let alone pursue these
| data requests in court. Renting cars may be easier, but then
| your contract is with the rental company and they're
| responsible for getting you the information you require, and
| after the first three PII requests you're not going to be
| renting from them any time soon.
|
| I'm not saying they couldn't do a deeper dive with more
| detailed research, but it's not an easy task to evaluate an
| industry like this. All they'll be able to produce is general
| statements about a limited set of car models that'll quickly be
| outdated once the next software update comes out.
| hbarka wrote:
| I have an electric car and if I want to remotely turn on
| charging, it won't allow me unless the full data sharing option
| is enabled. Full data as in your driving data like a black box
| logger. I then have to go in the car, enable it, then I can
| remotely turn on charging. I have to remember to opt-out again
| later. Ironic I know because I can turn on charging from within
| the cabin without having to enable any of the data collection.
| What an inconvenient experience.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| What does "remotely turn on charging" mean? Doesn't charge when
| you plug in?
| hbarka wrote:
| There are a few options. You can plug it in your garage and
| charging can automatically begin due to a set schedule, like
| after midnight, or you can initiate it on demand using the
| cabin controls or using your iPhone as a remote.
| thrtythreeforty wrote:
| Which car is this?
| hbarka wrote:
| Ford
| jwr wrote:
| Amazingly but perhaps not surprisingly, cars in the EU do similar
| amounts of spying on you, but the EU is silent. Car manufacturers
| pretty much run the EU.
| Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
| Because the government wants the tracking. They want your car
| broadcasting its position.
| J_Shelby_J wrote:
| I wonder what the extremely rich do to get a car that isn't a
| security risk? I've heard you can throw money at high end car
| dealerships to disable spying, but I wonder what the internal
| process is.
| everdrive wrote:
| I haven't heard this. Do you have any examples?
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| This will probably be a thing, but it's not clear that folks
| are cognizant of the risks yet.
| drnick1 wrote:
| It's easier than that, you can remove the cellular modem.
| Dealers won't generally accept to make this mod, but any
| independent shop should be able to. There are also plenty of
| videos on YT to DIY.
| nimbius wrote:
| as a professional diesel mechanic for a small chain of midwest
| shops, this "telematics" feature is on long-haul trucks as well
| as tractors (john deer is notorious for using it to send mail
| marketing about services.)
|
| generally its not hard to disable.
|
| - identify the telematics module in your car - pull the fuse (not
| always an option, sometimes this disables bluetooth)
|
| - alternatively: identify the 1-2 SMC connectors on the
| telematics device. this is the LTE and low/alt channel for the
| cellular communications. disconnect these 1-2 connectors and
| connect the ports instead to a 50 ohm terminator. the vehicle
| will simply continue to collect data but never be able to send it
| anywhere. the system will assume it just cant find a tower.
| m463 wrote:
| I tried this with a wifi setup on a car charger. I connected a
| 50-ohm dummy load in place of the antenna using the mmcx
| connector.
|
| It didn't work - there was an on-module antenna that it
| switched to. Might not have worked as well, but it did work and
| the wifi access point still showed up.
|
| On the other hand, some cars have a self-contained telematics
| module like you said and you can just unpower the whole thing.
|
| I remember looking at a ford owners manual for a 2019. The
| fusebox section had a fuse with description "Telematics control
| unit - modem." I assume you can just pull that fuse.
| pfp wrote:
| I thought about getting a traditional navigator to avoid even
| relying on phone navigation.
|
| Well, of course all the Garmins and Tomtoms available now have
| "built-in wifi for updates" and often BT for phone notifications
| too. Sure, I could just not configure either but what if I want a
| navigator _without any radios_ and with controlled updates via SD
| card.
|
| Maybe a dedicated Android phone in the car with offline
| OpenStreetMaps installed and airplane mode on is more realistic.
| Or some old 2nd hand navi that's still updateable.
| drnick1 wrote:
| You could use a GrapheneOS phone without SIM and OSMand for
| that.
| CommenterPerson wrote:
| I use an older Garmin, purchased from ebay. Works fine, updated
| maps via a laptop recently. Needed an extra SD cards for space.
| rconti wrote:
| I think it's wild that people spend their own money to surveil
| themselves every second they're near their car. Maybe I've seen
| too much lawyering on TV and in movies, but if I'm in a collision
| with you, I'm definitely asking the cops to pull the SD card from
| your dashcam.
|
| Whenever I point out I think this self-surveillance is crazy, the
| response ends up sounding something like "oh, no big, if I think
| I did something wrong I'll just hide the evidence and lie to the
| police and say it doesn't work", which sure doesn't sit right
| with me.
| caconym_ wrote:
| Why do you think potentially self-incriminating self-
| surveillance is "crazy" when you also think lying to the cops
| and other involved parties about what happened is bad? If you
| believe it's important to tell the truth in these situations,
| you should have no problem providing your own recordings of a
| collision, regardless of who is at fault.
|
| Or is your point just about the cost of the dashcam being
| "crazy"? In that case, hypothetically, what if your insurance
| company cut you a check to buy a dashcam of your own choice and
| install it on your car?
| smeej wrote:
| I found the vehicleprivacyreport.com site awfully misleading. The
| "Vehicle Privacy Label" only lists what the manufacturer's
| current policies are, not what applies to _my_ vehicle. It makes
| it seem like Toyota is somehow remotely collecting and sharings
| tons of information about my...2007 Prius. But this car came out
| in 2006, well before people assumed easy internet connectivity
| everywhere. Shy of having physical access to my vehicle, they can
| 't read anything, but it's not easy to find that explanation on
| the site.
| kdazzle wrote:
| I worked on the data platform at a smaller car co, and there were
| tight controls around getting access to precise geo data, and
| there were strong privacy advocates at higher levels. Wasn't a
| perfect system, but "spying" would be far from what I saw
| meisel wrote:
| It wouldn't be surprising if cars also record audio of
| conversations to use for ad targeting. It has already been
| conclusively shown that TV companies have done this.
| elzbardico wrote:
| Cars, your TV, your phone, everything is fucking spying on you.
| At this moment I am more interested in how I generate a tsunami
| of more data about me to the powers that be to drown them in a
| deluge of irrelevant bits.
| drnick1 wrote:
| Yes, and that's very sad. However the solutions are pretty
| obvious:
|
| Car -> unplug the cellular modem (more or less easy)
|
| TV -> used as dumb monitor with a Linux HTPC
|
| Phone -> GrapheneOS
|
| PC -> Linux
|
| Social media -> /dev/null
|
| Email/DNS/cloud -> my own
|
| The real issue is that most people are not aware of these
| issues and may even (unintentionally) compromise your own
| privacy by posting information or pictures of you to Facebook
| or other similar places.
| ericmay wrote:
| Nothing you can realistically do about it. In America car
| ownership for most people is mandatory. It's unfortunate we don't
| have alternatives if you disagree with car manufacturers extra
| "features".
| drnick1 wrote:
| The alternative is to be aware of this abuse and unplug the
| cellular modem. It requires more or less effort depending on
| the car, but it can and should be done.
| ericmay wrote:
| It's not a good alternative though because it puts you into a
| losing competition with the manufacturers. Take out the
| cellular modem? Next one requires connectivity to drive the
| car and so forth.
|
| You could "ban" it, but the amount of effort required to
| raise public awareness for that and actually have our
| dickhead representatives due things like that is basically
| the same amount of effort, perhaps more, as building better
| cities and transportation modes.
|
| We build and subsidize highways, we could do the same with
| other methods of transportation and have competition instead
| of big gubmint cars.
| abdullahkhalids wrote:
| On the other hand, it is not mandatory to vote for politicians
| who continue to make our cities car centric.
|
| You are not doing anything wrong if you are forced into buying
| a car due to the circumstances of your living. But voting to
| continue that makes your culpable.
| m463 wrote:
| > The first thing drivers should do is be aware of what data
| their car is collecting
|
| > You can opt out
|
| lol
|
| this makes it seem so simple.
|
| I think
|
| - you will never be aware of what data is collected - they want
| to collect more data and never disclose it
|
| - you will never be able to opt-out. Even if you disconnect from
| cellular, at service time they will just download what is there.
|
| - car manufacturers will use any and all data to their benefit
|
| You know, here's an interesting story I remember reading:
|
| _I will give you a story - buddy owns a shop - buys new M5 - he
| went out joyriding - warped a rotor - he said it was not from him
| so he tried a warranty service - BMW printed a page that his car
| recorded. It had snapped a pic of his face and sent all the data
| on speed, location, etc every bit of data you can think of to the
| dealer and his insurance company. He sold the car. That was years
| ago. Ask any custom tuner today if they can touch a 22 BMW. Nope.
| It will disable the car if you try and get into the CPU to tune
| it. This is where the industry is heading_
|
| from: https://www.fordtremor.com/threads/disabling-the-modem-
| pulli...
| blackjack_ wrote:
| I ripped the wifi / onstar and gps antennas out of my 2020 Chevy
| Bolt the day after I bought it. Took me a couple of hours since
| the access was awful, but that's one time pain. No issues since,
| and I have a phone I use to drive the head unit so there was no
| need for those antennas to even exist.
| m463 wrote:
| I tried this once.
|
| I got a tesla home charger and it had a unnecessary wifi AP
| that kept showing up in my house. So I figured, I would stop
| this.
|
| Opened it up, and disconnected the wifi antenna mmcx connector.
|
| Nope, seemed when unplugged, it would switch to an onboard
| antenna for the wifi module.
|
| so I reconnected a dummy load antenna to the wifi module.
|
| and it still used the onboard antenna.
|
| at that point, I gave up.
|
| I think there might have been a possibility of downgrading the
| firmware to an older version that could disable wifi, but I
| didn't try to find it.
|
| I believe this kind of thing happens with onboard cellular,
| wifi and bt. They are more resilient to degraded or
| disconnected antennas than you think.
| mistercheph wrote:
| don't buy a modern car
| ris wrote:
| The only company that appear to be taking a different tack on
| this are https://www.slate.auto
|
| Anyone know of any others?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-30 23:01 UTC)