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

Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 773 posts

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#131

Post by Denvercoder9 »

johnl1479 wrote: post #7

I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.

> I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc).

While I intuitively agree with you, I'm having a hard time arguing against the economic argument in favor it. Producing a single version of a product is generally cheaper than producing two different versions. Also offering a lower-margin, software-locked variant can (in certain conditions) make things cheaper for everyone, and it gives the consumer more choice: if you don't need or want the features of the premium model, you don't have to pay for it.

For example, imagine a manufacturer that sells two versions of its product, a basic model that makes up 20% of sales which costs $1000 to manufacture, and a premium model that makes up 80% of sales and costs $1250 to manufacture; this gives an average cost of $1200/unit. If they can save $100 per unit by only manufacturing the premium version and software-locking it, that reduces the average cost of goods sold to $1150/unit. They can pass on half of the savings to the customer, and still come out $50/unit ahead.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#132

Post by sowbug »

HWR_14 wrote: post #2

Good. People who buy things should own the things they buy.

I enthusiastically endorse this sentiment until I remember I'm a software engineer whose career depends pretty fundamentally on copyright law.

As an industry, we sell things that make hardware more useful. That's what software is. But the software we sell* comes with legal restrictions on what the buyer* can and can't do with it. Which means that we're restricting what our customers can do with the hardware that they own. And we do all that for money. *Substitute whatever you think the right terms are for these words (licensor, licensee, borrower, tenant, serf...)

If we sold an app on a mobile-phone store, and a h4ck0rz came out with a crack that unlocked the premium features on it, we'd take measures to stifle it (patching the code, increasing the obfuscation, sending a complaint upstream of whoever was distributing it, etc.), and I don't think any of us would think we're bad guys for doing so. We're just trying to feed our families. And I doubt any of us would feel compassion for someone who said they paid for that phone, own its hardware, and can do whatever they want with it including run your paid software for free.

Tesla's sin, if any, is that they sold us hardware that's designed to work only with their software. And "their" software could include software they licensed from your company, if you work in their software supply chain.

Where is the right line between "my hardware, my rules" and "my software, my rules"?

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#133

Post by RajT88 »

sokoloff wrote: post #26
MostlyStable wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm ok with charging subscription fees for services with ongoing costs (things like cell connectivity for remote monitoring or something), and I'm ok with charging one time fees for unlocking features that are already there, since it allows for price discrimination, cheaper and more efficient manufacturing, and better prices to the customer overall (potentially at least). But the flip side of that is that...if you pu…

> This kind of thing _should_ 100% be legal (if it isn't already, and my understanding is that it is). It may fall afoul of the (terribly written, but still law) Section 1201 of the DMCA, if it's arguable that the circumvention provides access to computer software (and I think it is arguable). I agree that this should be legal , but I'm not nearly as convinced that it is legal currently.

Agree with this. The DMCA makes stuff like this illegal.

Recall that when CD copy protection was starting to be deployed, you could negate it with a black marker. The DMCA then made black markers illegal, because it bans "tools which may be used to circumvent copyright" as well as the "circumvention of copy protection measures". (Not that anyone tried to enforce it, but the letter of the law was pretty clear that black markers were then illegal to possess)

The DMCA should be amended or revoked to make these shenanigans no longer enforceable.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#134

Post by fredoliveira »

retrocryptid wrote: post #95
froggertoaster wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

Let's say you have a Tesla, but you didn't buy the "full" self driving package. You sell your Tesla to a third-party. Tesla (of course) resets the system to disable "full" self driving, but you have the tool to activate it so you turn it on for the new owner. Presumably you received money in exchange for the vehicle, as is traditional in our culture. You take some of that money and buy a 1958 Dodge D100 pickup truck…

Care to elaborate without this much analogy? I suspect you're trying to say the value of a Tesla ain't going to be there in 10 years, but I'm not quite sure that's true.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#135

Post by martin8412 »

Libcat99 wrote: post #14
johnl1479 wrote: post #7

I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.

I'm somewhat torn too. IBM and I'm sure others have shipped enterprise hardware for years that was partially locked. You might get a machine with 16 cpus but you only paid for 8, for example, but you could license the rest as you grew. It seems a little similar and it was in no way underhanded, everyone knew what the deal was. However I'll echo what another poster said. I say Tesla should be free to sell whatever the…

AMD shipped CPUs for quite some time where if you were lucky you could unlock additional cores that had been disabled for various reasons

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#136

Post by paxys »

meindnoch wrote: post #76
rvnx wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The exact same way you should be able to install your own software on your iPhone

It shouldn't be illegal to bypass the security of your own property. On the other hand, it shouldn't be illegal either for manufacturers to make security features that are impossible to bypass.

> it shouldn't be illegal either for manufacturers to make security features that are impossible to bypass

No such thing as impossible to bypass, which is exactly why companies turn to the courts and police for enforcement instead.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#137

Post by [deleted] »

shmatt wrote: post #117
prussian wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to add agreement to this, but to be more precise: people should own the things they buy and artificial (software ) means of locking people out of features shouldn't be allowed.

If you opt out of the heated seat package when you purchase the car, that doesn't mean the manufacturer can't add that hardware in a disabled state. That also doesn't mean you own the heating feature after you opted out That's like asking Intel to fix a processor you overclocked

[deleted]

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#138

Post by filcuk »

jjulius wrote: post #85
matwood wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because of the way production lines work it can actually be cheaper to include it on every seat and unlock it with software.

Cheaper to manufacture, yes, but the cost of the hardware is still included in what you pay for the software-locked car. You've paid for the hardware and you own it, even if it's software-locked. At that point, you're just being asked to fork over $1k or whatever the additional charge is for what essentially amounts to an "on/off" switch. Edit: Hell, to make it sound even more stupid, you're being asked to fork over…

That's no different to paying $1K for a CAD licence. People just need to come to terms with the fact that the line between HW and SW is becoming blurry.

Obviously, I don't like up-paying for features I don't get to use. The price of the product must be the same, having benefited from mass production. With that being the case, I'm actually glad I have the option to save money now and upgrade later.

The concept isn't a problem, it's companies taking advantage of it (and us).

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#139

Post by martin8412 »

huhtenberg wrote: post #43
Libcat99 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm somewhat torn too. IBM and I'm sure others have shipped enterprise hardware for years that was partially locked. You might get a machine with 16 cpus but you only paid for 8, for example, but you could license the rest as you grew. It seems a little similar and it was in no way underhanded, everyone knew what the deal was. However I'll echo what another poster said. I say Tesla should be free to sell whatever the…

> I say Tesla should be free to sell whatever they want, but if the end user finds a way around it too bad. The same should go for DVDs, BluRays and streaming media and yet here we are looking at jail time for bypassing the DRM.

That certainly depends on the country. Breaking DRM to access something you've paid for is perfectly legal here.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#140

Post by pizzaknife »

HWR_14 wrote: post #127
shmatt wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you opt out of the heated seat package when you purchase the car, that doesn't mean the manufacturer can't add that hardware in a disabled state. That also doesn't mean you own the heating feature after you opted out That's like asking Intel to fix a processor you overclocked

The far better analogy for what Tesla is doing is "it's like Intel preventing you from overclocking your chip". Sure, you should not expect support for your hacked seat warmers.

i came here to say this
Post reply on HN