271–280 of 449 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This eliminates all of the convenience of keyless entry/start.
Isn't "keyless entry" basically same concept as "not locking a door"? You can trivially implement it on every vehicle without using any electronics at all.
I wonder how difficult it is to add some clock syncing and time-of-flight measurements to ensure a certain distance. If the speed of light is to fast, maybe using sound could work.
Apple claims that they use time-of-flight for their "Unlock with Apple Watch" feature on macOS, so it seems like something that a car maker/supplier could pull off, especially if they're willing to throw dedicated hardware at the problem. That said, the fob is much more battery-constrained than a watch that you charge on a daily basis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if you accidentally drop your keys while entering, or your passenger departs with your key, the car should lock itself 2 minutes later while you are driving?
Yeah, sounds reasonable to me. Either of those situations should already be solved. My car at least yells if the key goes away when the car is on and if you’re dumb enough to keep driving and that’s kinda on you.
The way it works is reasonable. Maybe tighten up the proximity. But honestly, I miss my classic keys.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This eliminates all of the convenience of keyless entry/start.
And what problem does keyless entry/start aim to solve?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What vehicle do you have?
BMW late 2000s were like this. Maybe still are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The latest insurance "incentive" is a tracking device in your car that tracks when and where you drive, how fast, how hard you corner and stop, etc. I've declined this but expect that insurers will push for it to become mandatory. They would love to be able to charge unsafe drivers more money, and in the abstract I don't have a problem with that, but the tracking is creepy.
Or to put a combative point on it: "How much money do I get when you abuse this data for any purpose other than your exclusive safety metrics?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The latest insurance "incentive" is a tracking device in your car that tracks when and where you drive, how fast, how hard you corner and stop, etc. I've declined this but expect that insurers will push for it to become mandatory. They would love to be able to charge unsafe drivers more money, and in the abstract I don't have a problem with that, but the tracking is creepy.
I think in California it's illegal for insurance to put in a black box that measures anything other than total # of miles driven.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A simple button on the fob (rather than in the car) that you must press to open the doors and to start the engine would mitigate the attack. Yes, reverting from passive-supported to active-only remote entry/start would eliminate the attack by eliminating the feature on which it is based. OTOH, the handsfree nature of passive remote entry is a major selling point.
As long as they’re not susceptible to replay attacks. If they are, just do a stakeout and then replay it later in the day to gain access.
Fly the drone into gated estates, or better yet a country club drive-up near the valet and record many high-value signals.
I work at very large OEM. We've run the numbers, and key fob exploits are _extremely_ rare. (most) Modern keys use rolling keys that are verified by the ECU, making cloning (let alone initial pairing) extremely time consuming. However, Keyless-go key fobs _can_ be captured and replayed (not necessarily exploited). 99.99% of the time that cars are stolen (which we find much more common in Europe due to small jurisdict…
Why clone? Why replay? You just need signal boosters so the key and the car think they are next to each other.