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

Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

saveflipper.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 916 posts

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#181

Post by cute_boi »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #77
eli wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These cars are being sold with defective security measures. They don't work the way manufactures promise or customers expect. It shouldn't be any different than a car sold with headlights that are too dim

But that is my point. All security measures are defective. I can always tie a chain to your vehicle and leave with it. Security measures deter criminals, they can never stop them. Only the government can do that. The government is not obliged to do that in the US. Thus, no one can stop criminals To metaphorically put it: no matter how good your 2FA is, I can always get around it if I can torture you or threaten your…

I think instead of making excuses we should harden the security and regulation should enforce such things. There is always a hole in security, but we gotta choose the best option we have.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#182

Post by sidewndr46 »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #150
sidewndr46 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that is my point. All security measures are defective. I can always tie a chain to your vehicle and leave with it. Security measures deter criminals, they can never stop them. Only the government can do that. The government is not obliged to do that in the US. Thus, no one can stop criminals To metaphorically put it: no matter how good your 2FA is, I can always get around it if I can torture you or threaten your…

This is a different discussion. There doesn't seem to have been any abuse of a loved one before the perps drove off in the cars. The cars weren't sold as "unstealable". The whole point is that what was sold (some kind of key security) was half-assedly implemented.

You can extrapolate this argument to almost anything about a vehicle in North America. I've been working on them for decades. The way manufacturers make money is by half-assing things. Where a chain should be used, a belt is used. Where a 10 cent switch should be used, a touchscreen replaces it. Where a shifter should be, some knob is used to replace which actually kills a guy because he didn't realize his SUV was in gear.

I had to replace part of the engine on my personal truck recently because it was made of plastic and obviously failed. The replacement parts were metal because all I did was order the previous generations part number which works perfectly fine but costs more.

What you call "half assed" is what everyone in the industry calls a profit margin.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#183

Post by 2024throwaway »

engineer_22 wrote: post #159
2024throwaway wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> religious or ethical norms Truly confused why `religious` norms come into play here.

Religious norms guide behavior. They are a course in ethics for those without undergraduate education.

[flagged]

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#184

Post by bryanlarsen »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #160
nulbyte wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead of discussing how car theft is fundamentally an unethical behavior, the discussion is about preventing some thing from being sold or existing, whether that be insecure vehicles or Flipper Zeroes. There are already laws against theft. They apply to vehicles, secure and insecure alike. A law mandating a minimum level of security, as GP suggests, seems to me to fit the suggestion, that auto manufacturers have…

We aren’t very serious about enforcing our laws, especially when kids are involved. We had police catch 12 and 13 year olds (Kia Boyz) this weekend in a car with guns, and they are out already. They will get some restorative justice, but no real correction in behavior and I’m sure they will do it again. Our real problem is just the pendulum swinging too far towards assuming people want to be good and they just need s…

I don't think there's anything more guaranteed to turn a 12 or 13 year old into a lifelong criminal than what I think you're implying by "real correction in behaviour"; aka a multi-year prison sentence.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#185

Post by MeImCounting »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #10

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. All vehicles are insecure. I can hook a tow truck to almost any vehicle, including an 80,000 lbs tractor trailer and drive off with it. That'd actually attract less attention that outright hotwiring a vehicle. The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US.

This is like saying "bank transactions have been getting MITMed and peoples money has been stolen. All crypto protocols are insecure I can hook a supercomputer up to any transaction and decrypt it given enough time

The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals"

Do you see why this is not a coherent idea? Aside from the fact that locking people in cages is disgusting and wrong and something no reasonable adult should do to another person the entire premise of this argument is nonsensical and a little weird when you actually think about it.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#186

Post by sidewndr46 »

Chris2048 wrote: post #82
sidewndr46 wrote: post #10

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. All vehicles are insecure. I can hook a tow truck to almost any vehicle, including an 80,000 lbs tractor trailer and drive off with it. That'd actually attract less attention that outright hotwiring a vehicle. The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US.

but then you'd need a tow truck.. Doesn't seem a lot simpler, anyone could snap a pic of your registration plate. I think towing a vehicle does attract a fair amount of attention, especially if there is no obvious reason for it. Also, they don't need to steal the car - if they can freely open it can can just steal anything inside.

No idea where you are at but I wouldn't think twice about someone towing a car. If someone was hotwiring a neighbor's vehicle I think I'd definitely at least start videoing them as a deterrent.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#187

Post by whimsicalism »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #157
nonethewiser wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That anecdote is a non sequitur, but nonetheless: I assume you didn't see the full video, where it turned out that the police assaulted the "illegals" unprovoked? https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/02/08/times-square-migrants-arr... That Fox News article is mostly information-free, but my takeaway is that it's blaming "bail reform" for the release of the people the police assaulted, which is abjectly false: they were charg…

I mean - an arrest, even if wrongful, is not the same as an assault. I don’t think I have the ability to judge what is a wrongful arrest simply from the video.

This video does not really vindicate the people attacking the cops imo.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#188

Post by nativeit »

MikeSchurman wrote: post #149
keiferski wrote: post #98

Philosophy warning: I don't know if there is a term for it, or if a philosopher/etc. has written about this phenomenon, but: a noticeable trend to me is what I'll call "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws." Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics ) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pas…

Ishmael or My Ishmael touches on this subject. Thank you for reminding me. I forget exactly, but, the basic idea is primitive people didn't have all these laws about what to do. They expected you to behave, and if you did not, the tribe did not necessarily punish you, they taught you and made it right somehow (justice). Any MY description does not give this idea justice, so I need to go back and find the reference in…

Do you remember the guy who took hostages at the Discovery Channel offices in Washington DC, and tried to force them to promote his Ishmael-based manifesto on television? He was part of a MySpace group that I frequented where we discussed Quinn’s work. I remember having pretty strong disagreements with him in the forums, before he took up arms anyway…

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#189

Post by fargle »

ceejayoz wrote: post #42
lupusreal wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll end up banning windows at this rate, they're an egregious vulnerability in cars and buildings alike. American cities, soft on crime, can't stop thieves from breaking windows so maybe they'll go after car manufacturers and construction firms instead. Going after companies instead of criminals is more aligned with their left-wing sensibilities, I think that's what this is really about.

That's not what egregious means.

yeah it kinda is

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#190

Post by keiferski »

2024throwaway wrote: post #178
keiferski wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the modern Western world is in a "religion hangover" where it wants to reject all outwardly religious ideas, while simultaneously denying that a) religions have been the foundation of pretty much all ethical behavior since the beginning of civilization and b) many supposedly secular belief systems are really just extensions of religious ones with the "I believe in..." statement cut off.

> religions have been the foundation of pretty much all ethical behavior since the beginning of civilization I reject this statement wholeheartedly, and find it a pretty disgusting stance. The idea that the only reason not to kill someone (or otherwise act ethically) is due to religion is horrendous, especially given most religions historical track record on murdering others and other ethical violations.

I think you'd have a pretty difficult time constructing a history of morality that doesn't involve what we refer to as "religion." Certainly that doesn't mean that all religious beliefs are good or justifiable, but that isn't what I claimed, either. I just claimed they were the foundation.
Post reply on HN