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

691–700 of 916 posts

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

#691

Post by vsuperpower2020 »

fargle wrote: post #583

stupid on stupid. - it's incredibly stupid to ban the flipper zero because it's factually not even part of the problem - but it's equally stupid to "ban insecure vehicles". if kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it (because maybe insurance) or add and aftermarket immobilizer or a steering wheel lock. if it was really negligent of kia to "save a couple bucks", then it's equally negligent on you fo…

Nobody knows a vehicle is insecure when they buy it. It's simpler, more cost efficient, and more valuable to society just to require cars to have basic security features. Your idea of market correction doesn't work in this case, because it's never advertised as having shitty security, and the average (or even informed) consumer will have no idea this is a problem until after they've bought the car.

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

#692

Post by sleepybrett »

whycome wrote: post #622
fargle wrote: post #583

stupid on stupid. - it's incredibly stupid to ban the flipper zero because it's factually not even part of the problem - but it's equally stupid to "ban insecure vehicles". if kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it (because maybe insurance) or add and aftermarket immobilizer or a steering wheel lock. if it was really negligent of kia to "save a couple bucks", then it's equally negligent on you fo…

Let's say a hardware exploit for iPhones becomes obvious and is spread through social media. Something absurd like "attaching a shorted iphone cable". Are you going to be the first to buy an add-on lock or immobilizer? And everyone should also have to purchase an add-on?

It's called a recall, it happens all the time. Ask elon, lol.

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

#693

Post by anigbrowl »

topspin wrote: post #637
anigbrowl wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with the premise that car manufacturers should do better, but the same people that insist messing around with a Flipper Zero is Serious Business tend to be the same people who say regulation of things like vehicle standards and an unwelcome interference with the free market. I stand by my claim that the headline reflects a childish mindset instead of looking at both sides of the issue.

> the headline reflects a childish mindset The mature mindset being the frictionless acceptance of new laws to empower more minders and more law enforcement to utterly fail at preventing new "crime." Understood.

Don't put words in my mouth. I wrote what I meant, not what you want to project onto it.

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

#694

Post by sleepybrett »

arjvik wrote: post #690
aosmith wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See all that time the thief spends near the drivers side headlight? The headlights are on the can bus, if you can tap a couple wires in there the cars is yours.

Genuine question - why do headlights need to be on the main CAN bus? Could they not be operated from somewhere closer to the ECU by wires that just carry power and maybe some very simple data lines?

It may be something as stupid as a wiring harness layout optimization. You can put the headlights controller at the headlights and only run a single set of CAN bus wires (which are probably in that area anyways), haven't played with CAN I assume they are fairly few and fairly thing gauge, through the firewall of the car.

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

#695

Post by sleepybrett »

raizer88 wrote: post #47
markhahn wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, we want owners to have full access to their car's CANBUS. So the question is: how should the OBD-2 plug (or wiring) be protected?

All CANBUS packages that are useful to drive a car should be encrypted using a public/private key that is in the owner key. Decryption chips are cheap and fast.

Right now many of the components of your iphone are paired to the phone through signing. It's a huge fucking pain in the ass, and it makes the whole 'right to repair' a huge can of worms.

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

#696

Post by LoganDark »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #689
badRNG wrote: post #3

It seems like the most straightforward path here is to ban auto thefts all together.

I think you're being a little bigoted. Auto theft is an important part of some cultures and it's important for us to be more inclusive of them.

Like San Francisco

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

#697

Post by sleepybrett »

kube-system wrote: post #266
Chris2048 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same problem exist for car keys. The answer is, when a person "inevitably lose[s] it", they need to pay to get their electronics refit.

The result of that may be that losing a key is financially devastating enough that it totals many vehicles. And/or if the odometer and other local storage is affected, that may cause permanent title issues for the car. The number of people who lose their keys vastly dwarfs the number of people who are having their car stolen with a flipper zero.

0 people are getting their car stolen with a flipper zero.

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

#698

Post by autoexec »

freedomben wrote: post #642
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then don't punish. Reform, correct, fix. A lot of people will still see that as punishment (like they would see army bootcamp as punishment), but then we would just start disagreeing.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. It can be difficult to sync on terminology and philosophy though because in theory for most people the justice system is supposed to be about rehabilitation. The idea that you should serve your time and return to society is almost universally agreed saving the most extreme cases. Yet our system doesn't achieve that because a lot of the structures are based on "punishment"…

> It's a tremendously challenging problem.

It's also one many other countries don't have, so we have plenty of examples to benefit from. I'd say a few "easy" patches would be things like: treating people with mental health issues, treating addicts, housing homeless people, clearing most people's records when they've severed their time/making it illegal for most employers to ask about past arrests/convictions, providing better assistance to people post-release and lessening or delaying some of the additional burdens we put on them (fines, fees, inflexible meetings/appointments), etc.

The biggest challenge will be convincing the fearful and the revenge/punishment fetishists that more and harsher punishment isn't the solution and that they aren't being endangered by making the needed changes.

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

#699

Post by sleepybrett »

TylerE wrote: post #540
Chris2048 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same problem exist for car keys. The answer is, when a person "inevitably lose[s] it", they need to pay to get their electronics refit.

A traditional car key can be trivially duplicated at any hardware store. That's the difference. You can make as many spares as you want for a couple bucks a pop. No dependencies. No network.

Not fully true. Just as it's not true with non-car keys. Some blanks are heavily protected. Now these days with the dissemination of cheap cnc mills, maybe thats a bit more trivial, but you are paying a lot more for a cnc mill than you pay for a old key grinder.

Same issue we have now with ghost guns honestly. CNC mills are powerful tools, with the right software you can essentially just place the properly sized chunk of metal in the box and hit go.

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

#700

Post by the_optimist »

vsuperpower2020 wrote: post #691
fargle wrote: post #583

stupid on stupid. - it's incredibly stupid to ban the flipper zero because it's factually not even part of the problem - but it's equally stupid to "ban insecure vehicles". if kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it (because maybe insurance) or add and aftermarket immobilizer or a steering wheel lock. if it was really negligent of kia to "save a couple bucks", then it's equally negligent on you fo…

Nobody knows a vehicle is insecure when they buy it. It's simpler, more cost efficient, and more valuable to society just to require cars to have basic security features. Your idea of market correction doesn't work in this case, because it's never advertised as having shitty security, and the average (or even informed) consumer will have no idea this is a problem until after they've bought the car.

Should other physical objects also be subject to this same regulation? What about bitcoins? Your proposed response is unsuccessful as policy reasoning.
Post reply on HN