Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

news.ycombinator.com

51–60 of 133 posts

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#51

ISO 26262 is the functional safety standard that automobile manufacturers adhere to. Furthermore, companies with a strong safety culture may also have other safety controls, including MISRA, AUTOSAR, and others. I think reputable car companies take this stuff very seriously, but your concern is also well placed.

I've been out of automotive safety critical software (engine, brake, controllers, etc...) but still have friends in it. Proper best practice is still followed by the likes of Toyota, Jaguar and Ford as the ones I've had experience in. That means the coding standards mentioned. Full requirements->design->implementation with functional unit testing, module unit testing and system testing including using simulators. Mul…

Strange you mention Toyota as manufacturer, as they are the one who fucked up with the unintended acceleration issue mentioned earlier. The thing is that they "forgot" to implement the mechanism which ignore gas pedal when both brake and gas pedal are pressed. This was a recommended safety feature for accelerator by wire implementation (egas norm).

Then a few years later they got hit again with one of their suppliers: Takata's killing airbags

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#52
post #32

Don't buy a Tesla and you'll be fine. I work in auto insurance and the other OEMs actually care about safety and testing of software. Tesla has the most bugs by far.

I don't know about tesla since I haven't had a chance to drive one yet, but the number of bugs especially in the interface but also in driver's "assistance" in other cars(VW, BMW) makes me doubt that it makes a noticeable difference - at least with tesla there is a chance they will fix it

Many of the electronic systems in traditional automaker's vehicles are made by a variety of other OEMs anyway. So judging by automaker brand may not really be a good judge of the engineering development of those subsystems. The infotainment might be made by Panasonic and the driver assistance might be made by Bosch.

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#53

I don't think it is bugs which worries you, but rather the completely wrong concept of modern day car production. Almost all cars built in the past 20-years have 0 compliance with the laws of physics, being extremely front-heavy and with transversely-mounted engines - disbalanced even on the Y-axis. What keeps them from spinning is the so-called DSC/ESC/ESP which is basically a neural network. We all know how reliabl…

I don’t have numbers in front of me, but my impression is that carmakers have done a much better job in the last decade with front-rear balance decent on nearly all cars. Versus decades past when some were wildly front-heavy (or occasionally, wildly back-heavy, ouch).

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#54
Your concern is well founded given the proliferation of utter shit that is modern car "entertainment" centers. Scare quotes because some safety important things are handled by those. If you don't think so, drive my 2017 Ford Expedition when it's -10F outside and the windshield fogs up beyond visibility levels because the damn defroster (and other environment controls) doesn't work and and the windshield is fogging up. Or try to back up and see the backup-camera glitching out.

However, most of the safety systems software is held to a very high standard, and much happens in embedded systems where the surface level for software foot-guns (such as state) are minimal. I wouldn't worry about buying a new car for these reasons. Though I would try to find one with as many physical buttons as possible.

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#55
post #7

Your link of Sudden unintended acceleration contains a lot of entries related to this issue which don't involve computers at all. It lists pedal misapplication, entrapped pedals, stuck throttles, electrical shorts, and diesel engine runaway as other things which can cause such an issue. A lot of the reported incidents had nothing to do with software. Either way, if you've had a fuel injected car you were still expose…

> It lists pedal misapplication, entrapped pedals, stuck throttles, electrical shorts, and diesel engine runaway as other things which can cause such an issue. And modern cars are much better at handling these types of scenarios. For example, in my late model car, if you apply the accelerator and brake at the same time, the vehicle will ignore the accelerator input. This solves two potential problems from the past: s…

> someone accidentally stomping on both pedals when they meant to hit the brake

This happens to me (sometimes) in parking lots where pedestrians walk between cars. Mine (2019 Mazda Miata) does not do this, instead I get an engine rev while standing half on brakes, half on accelerator, full on clutch. I end up feeling embarrassed as I tend to get glared at by the pedestrian (no, I did not intentionally rev it to scare you).

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#56

I am scared of the infotainment system myself as it could distract you to death. That goes for cell phone and tablet and the stick-on GPS which gets confused in the most complex urban areas, falls into your lap when the suction cup fails, etc.

My big complaint is with the transition of controls from dedicated, tactile knobs, switches, and levers to touch-screen buttons or menus which demand more visual attention (i.e. distraction from driving) to operate.

Mazda did the research, and transitioned back to real tactile controls in 2019. I expect more automakers will be or are already following their lead.

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-pur...

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It lists pedal misapplication, entrapped pedals, stuck throttles, electrical shorts, and diesel engine runaway as other things which can cause such an issue. And modern cars are much better at handling these types of scenarios. For example, in my late model car, if you apply the accelerator and brake at the same time, the vehicle will ignore the accelerator input. This solves two potential problems from the past: s…

> someone accidentally stomping on both pedals when they meant to hit the brake This happens to me (sometimes) in parking lots where pedestrians walk between cars. Mine (2019 Mazda Miata) does not do this, instead I get an engine rev while standing half on brakes, half on accelerator, full on clutch. I end up feeling embarrassed as I tend to get glared at by the pedestrian ( no, I did not intentionally rev it to scar…

I'm glad that's not the behavior on a manual Miata, that would totally kill the prospects of heel-toe downshifting. ;)

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#58
post #45

A long time ago I attended a DEFCON where this was discussed. Long before it became a big deal in the industry to have all this tech in cars. CANBUS was broken reliably, and if my memory serves me they even had a car you could take a shot at hacking yourself. After playing with it the entire conference I came to the conclusion I would never own a modern car if I can avoid it. Any car running CANBUS is vulnerable to a…

> Any car running CANBUS is vulnerable to a potentially fatal attack. No, it isn't. CANBUS is a non-safe protocol ("black channel" in safety parlance) and if anything safety-relevant is sent over it, there is a safety protocol on top.

Black channel schemes are not resistant to malicious input unless security was intentionally built in. Safety and security are separate (but related) concerns. Besides, white channel is still (unfortunately) a thing in some parts of the industry.

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#59
I know a connected car, as most modern cars are, can potentially be controlled from remote.

That means you can get OTA upgrades that 99% of the times will work flawlessly, but a day may do not, the day you are in a rush in the early morning.

Since most connected cars are de-facto owned by their vendor a potential breach or deliberate sabotage might brick ALL at once across the globe or in some specific areas/countries.

...

A modern car is a car co-piloted by a human and a computer. A local airgapped computer might have bugs, a connected one might have vulnerabilities. Be more scared about them.

In mere local safety terms I can say most cars I know are partially mechanical that means for instance your steering wheel can auto-steer BUT with (more than) a bit of force you can steer it mechanically even if automation completely fail. Similar the break pedal have some servo systems but still partially work in mechanical forms, so might became very hard to push but still able to break a bit.

The most dangerous common design I know are:

- impossibility to turn off certain ADAS who might act really badly in certain weather condition, like the classic ABS on icy roads;

- automatic doors lock when car move, NO DAMN WAYS to unlock them while the car still moving;

- manual parking break disappeared so a kind of emergency breaking ALSO usable by a passenger (for instance if the driver fell ill suddenly) ABSENT and no electronic replacement either since the electronic one if present refuse to engage if the car is moving;

- cockpit design that makes very hard/slow for a passenger to push the driver feet out of accelerator etc if he/she fell ill suddenly.

I consider the above as a sign of VERY BAD design, so I doubt those who made it can be trusted for anything else in safety terms...

Re: Ask HN: Risk of unsafe software in automobiles?

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about tesla since I haven't had a chance to drive one yet, but the number of bugs especially in the interface but also in driver's "assistance" in other cars(VW, BMW) makes me doubt that it makes a noticeable difference - at least with tesla there is a chance they will fix it

Many of the electronic systems in traditional automaker's vehicles are made by a variety of other OEMs anyway. So judging by automaker brand may not really be a good judge of the engineering development of those subsystems. The infotainment might be made by Panasonic and the driver assistance might be made by Bosch.

They are interconnected though. Reputation for faults add up. To me the following is vw's fault.

I've recently had an id4's location fail, and the map was all over the place. It got worse as I drove on.

Annoying, but I thought not a safety issue until the speed limiter caused the car to attempt to slow down by more than 100kph as it was reporting it was somewhere else.

Post reply on HN