Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 33 posts

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#11

Post by crazysim »

stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

LSSP? I've noticed that some TSSP openpilot users use an alternate steering angle sensor for their openpilot installations called ZSS because the stock sensor isn't too accurate.

If this is stock though, there's more than just timing I think.

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#12

Post by kfarr »

stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

Maybe it's just me, but the regulatory oversight around these automated features seems insufficient. I'm trying to imagine equivalents from older passive safety technology like seatbelts that don't always work, airbags that pop out prematurely, or cruise control that accelerates without warning. Doesn't seem like those would pass muster "back in the day"? (Not to mention Uber autonomous vehicle flat out killing a pedestrian with no criminal culpability.)

Maybe it's a case of severity -- automated lane guidance isn't viewed as a serious problem when it fails? But who makes that decision?

I don't drive much anymore but when I do it's in a Zipcar with relatively recent Subarus that have this lane guidance technology. I always turn it off as it invariably makes mistakes within a few hours of usage and seems more dangerous on than deactivated.

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#13

Post by o-__-o »

crazysim wrote: post #11
stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

LSSP? I've noticed that some TSSP openpilot users use an alternate steering angle sensor for their openpilot installations called ZSS because the stock sensor isn't too accurate. If this is stock though, there's more than just timing I think.

On Ford it’s timing. The LKAS is read by the PCM which then relays info to the PSCM. The idea is that the steering module is fire walled by the PCM. The CCM and ABS are similar. Toyota and Lexus expose the power steering controller to the CANBUS allowing takeover attempts

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#14

Post by [deleted] »

stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

[deleted]

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#15

Post by jboy55 »

Is this a 'man in the middle' attack for 3rd party nefarious purposes, like controlling someone else's Audi ... Or just plain reverse engineering of a communications protocol to hack the software for 1st party education and extension? Why the click-baity title as if this is some great compromise to the integrity of the Audi? Am I missing something?

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#16

Post by [deleted] »

stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

[deleted]

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#17

Post by UweSchmidt »

kfarr wrote: post #12
stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

Maybe it's just me, but the regulatory oversight around these automated features seems insufficient. I'm trying to imagine equivalents from older passive safety technology like seatbelts that don't always work, airbags that pop out prematurely, or cruise control that accelerates without warning. Doesn't seem like those would pass muster "back in the day"? (Not to mention Uber autonomous vehicle flat out killing a ped…

Regulating technology is difficult. You can easily set up a mechanical seatbelt test that tests a mechanism 1000 times, but how would you test an algorithm? Also, many people died before seatbelts became mandatory; so much for "back in the day".

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#18

Post by mtreis86 »

jboy55 wrote: post #15

Is this a 'man in the middle' attack for 3rd party nefarious purposes, like controlling someone else's Audi ... Or just plain reverse engineering of a communications protocol to hack the software for 1st party education and extension? Why the click-baity title as if this is some great compromise to the integrity of the Audi? Am I missing something?

The latter, "We built a python script to read a joystick and used a panda to send the CAN messages to the FPGA, which overrides the appropriate bits on the FlexRay bus to control the EPS. By combining the results from the previous steps, we were able to control the steering with a joystick."

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#19

Post by numpad0 »

kfarr wrote: post #12
stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

Maybe it's just me, but the regulatory oversight around these automated features seems insufficient. I'm trying to imagine equivalents from older passive safety technology like seatbelts that don't always work, airbags that pop out prematurely, or cruise control that accelerates without warning. Doesn't seem like those would pass muster "back in the day"? (Not to mention Uber autonomous vehicle flat out killing a ped…

Automotive peoples’ mindset of safety and computing is weird.

They say it’s better to floor it when leading car is not moving, or better to engage lane centering at a borderline safe moment, to make drivers used to it. Or they say they want computers to delay software edge-case issues after it had occurred.

They have passions but the whole industry don’t seem to have much background handling sentient beings.

Re: Hacking an Audi: performing a man-in-the-middle attack on FlexRay

#20

Post by numpad0 »

alphabettsy wrote: post #4
stuff4ben wrote: post #3

I wish I could hack my Lexus RX350's LKAS. It's pretty bad and seems to bounce left and right between the lanes. It gets to the point that I just shut it off since I don't want to fight it when driving long distances as it's very tiring. It's probably a timing issue as the computer isn't getting updates fast enough and has to keep correcting which causes the bouncing between the lane. A Tesla this is not!

Does your vehicle actually have lane centering or just lane keep? Lane keep, which is more common, does not attempt to keep the vehicle in the middle of the lane. It just prevents departing the lane without signaling.

Actually when Subaru first built their EyeSight system, it was almost Tesla Autopilot, but Japanese authority feared it’ll lead to Autopilot type crashes.

The authority was right in hindsight, but then couldn’t conceive the idea of mandatory driver monitoring system, and instead ordered Subaru to ensure driver is alert by making intervention too little and late.

So most LKA/LKAS should do just as well as Tesla’s, only the firmwares are built deliberately with different parameters. Technology wise it should be the same.

Post reply on HN