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

411–420 of 916 posts

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

#411

Post by dfxm12 »

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…

I think in the general case you're describing, it seems like law enforcement & strong arm politicians are generally leading the charge. Others pick it up from there, top down in fancy slogans, like law & order, tough on crime, or scare tactics etc. It's part of the prison industrial complex - make many things illegal, jail who you want, get a kickback, bonus if you end up disenfranchising them in the process.

This specific case is closer to outlawing encryption - the government doesn't fully understand or care about this product's uses but suspects it could make it harder for them to do what they want.

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

#412

Post by mywittyname »

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.

> That'd actually attract less attention that outright hotwiring a vehicle.

Disagree. Depending on the approach taken, the theft can look like a legitimate owner getting into a car. Even the break the window and reprogram a key via ODBII port technique takes about a minute to complete. Plenty of people have posted videos of their cars being stolen (I'm part of several Camaro communities, which are big theft targets) via this technique and it's crazy how fast the thieves are.

Tow trucks attract a shitload of attention. My neighbor had her car towed yesterday and two neighbors came out to check on it.

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

#414

Post by AndrewKemendo »

pdonis wrote: post #394
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just described the “rule of law” and this is the basis for how modern governments are formed and function A constitution is written and codifies the process for making ratifying and enforcing laws. That then is the common standard for some subset of behaviors as defined by the constitution which defines who it does and does not apply to. Different constitutions outline different processes but the structure of the…

> You just described the “rule of law” What the article is describing is not the rule of law. The rule of law would be: make theft a crime, and enforce that. Not : criminalize the use of security research tools to show which vehicles are more susceptible to theft. > What you seem to want is for civil law to be subordinated in favor of common law I think what the GP poster wants is to have the law limited to criminali…

Please list all of the “actual crimes”

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

#415

Post by tomrod »

pdonis wrote: post #397
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason the rule of law exists at the scale it does is precisely because what you describe, has not shown to create functional long term societies that are resilient to exogenous threats. The rule of law is literally humanity’s best attempt so far to explicitly codify human desires into a common set of descriptions. This is why the UN exists and the LON before it etc…

> This is why the UN exists and the LON before it Um, you do realize that the League of Nations was a failure ? And that the UN, although at least it still exists (unlike the LON, which only lasted a decade or so), has not accomplished anything meaningful in terms of enforcing actual norms of behavior?

Are you kidding? UN has had tremendous impact in the world.

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

#416

Post by mywittyname »

philwelch wrote: post #110
nonethewiser wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US. I think it will take a multi-pronged approach that includes exactly this. Individuals must be held responsible for their actions. Car security also needs to be beefed up though. It's clearly not good enough.

Korean car brands like Hyundai and Kia are commonly criticized for being too easy to steal. Yet somehow the rate of car theft in South Korea, where these companies have a much higher market share, is a fraction of that in the United States.

Because the SK versions of KIA/Hyundais have anti-theft measures. It's only USDM cars where they cut corners to remove the immobilizers.

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

#417

Post by brabel »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #348
darkwater wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a Catholic, I think I can tell you that it might be more nuanced. I believe that ethical norms are not some arbitrary rules, but are a bit like the part of a manual for some device that says under what conditions the device works properly and under what conditions it may break, only for humans. As in "if you commit adultery, you will end up unhappy; you have been warned". Forewords: I was raised in a Catholic fa…

You could make a similar argument about capitalism. We _should_ have grown past it by now, but we haven't, and every time we try to invent a replacement system we end up making things worse. You can see the ethical decay unfolding in real-time as societies turn replaced the old, rigorously tested system of religion with shiny new secular ethics.

> You can see the ethical decay unfolding...

The Nordic countries are all among the least religious countries in the world, yet they seem to have some of the most ethical societies on the planet if you consider human rights, democracy and low violence to be the result of an ethical society.

The most religious countries in the world are all at the very bottom of rankings taking into consideration any of those factors.

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

#418

Post by dghlsakjg »

whimsicalism wrote: post #66
newsclues wrote: post #41

Canada needs to reinstate the national port police, and actually do their job in policing. Policy changes for cars or technology will not solve the lawlessness in Canada.

Agreed. I am not sure why Canada has had so much comparative trouble with organized crime

Canadian police are shockingly bad at higher level crimes.

We have had a series of expensive public inquiries in BC about high-level money laundering that is very obvious to most citizens for years, and has had any number of whistle-blowers come forward over the past decade. The estimated amount is in the 10s of billions per year for just BC.

Currently we are at the point where BC has decided to create its own money-laundering investigation team since the findings are basically: the feds are completely unable to manage this crisis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cullen_Commission

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

#419

Post by saint_fiasco »

MeImCounting wrote: post #208
saint_fiasco wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We require cars to have seatbelts Seatbelts are not adversarial. A better seatbelt does not encourage other drivers to crash their cars into you even harder or anything like that, it's people versus nature. Security systems are in a permanent arms race, people versus people. You could have a more expensive lock that requires a more expensive device to defeat, but this makes your car more expensive to make, so it ha…

The problem is that I think these hands free remote start locks are more expensive than actual real physical locks which are immune to the types of attacks so that argument just actually doesnt work at all.

My bad, I was thinking in terms of the expensive remote start lock vs an even more expensive and safer remote start lock.

But if the fancy insecure lock is more expensive, the problem should fix itself eventually, right? Consumers will switch back to the cheaper system of their own accord.

It sucks for the people who bought the insecure cars without knowing, but banning insecure cars is not going to help them retroactively in any way.

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

#420

Post by joe_the_user »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #298
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…

You just described the “rule of law” and this is the basis for how modern governments are formed and function A constitution is written and codifies the process for making ratifying and enforcing laws. That then is the common standard for some subset of behaviors as defined by the constitution which defines who it does and does not apply to. Different constitutions outline different processes but the structure of the…

I have to object that the rule of law isn't about the extent of laws and enforcement but rather about making whatever enforce exists systematic, fair and so-forth.

The concept of rule of law never implied the replacement of custom with bureaucracy - although that often happens. It implied the replacement of the venal authority of kings and nobles with codified principles. Especially, as the parent points out, customary honesty isn't based on any enforcement system.

Post reply on HN