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

731–740 of 916 posts

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

#731

Post by mulmen »

technofiend wrote: post #728
strangattractor wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At one time is was possible to open car doors with a coat hanger. Nobody suggested banning coat hangers. They fixed the doors.

I locked myself out of my car so often I ended up wedging a coat hanger under the rear bumper. You're right: car doors used to be trivial to yank open when you knew the trick. These days I'd love to create a little side project that sets the alarm off on my car any time a relay attack is detected. I'm sure Mark Rober or someone will end up doing it.

Wouldn't it have been easier to put a second key under there?

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

#732

Post by pierat »

madmountaingoat wrote: post #662
RHSeeger wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I left a million dollars out on my front porch, and someone stole it, that would not be my fault in any sort of way It's possible for multiple people to share the blame for something. You _are_ the victim. The person who stole it _is_ the bad guy / criminal. But you _both_ share the blame, because you did something to put yourself at risk when you had better options. If I'm out late at night, wearing expensive j…

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#733

Post by vsuperpower2020 »

the_optimist wrote: post #700
vsuperpower2020 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My proposed response has been making cars safer and more reliable for years. I don't care if it applies to bitcoin or not, we're talking about cars. Next!

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

#735

Post by YeBanKo »

phpisthebest wrote: post #717
vsuperpower2020 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In the age of information ignorance is no longer an option, Before I buy a car, most often the second largest purchase a person will make in their life next to housing. I do i TON of research, I look at insurance rates, I look at Theft Rates for that model, I look on Car Complaints and other Database for common failure items for that model, I have it inspected by a independent mechanic having them pay extra attention…

Should we allow cars without seatbelt? Everyone knows cars with seatbelts are safer. If consumers don’t like it, they can just choose to buy the ones with seatbelts.

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

#736

Post by YeBanKo »

dog_boxer72 wrote: post #722
phpisthebest wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the age of information ignorance is no longer an option, Before I buy a car, most often the second largest purchase a person will make in their life next to housing. I do i TON of research, I look at insurance rates, I look at Theft Rates for that model, I look on Car Complaints and other Database for common failure items for that model, I have it inspected by a independent mechanic having them pay extra attention…

Yes anyone who doesn’t have the knowledge/time/motivation/cynicism to prevent themselves getting taken advantage of is basically asking for it, nay “deserves” it. /sarcasm

Yeah, and if you did not read T&S and now going to become a part of human centipede, that’s on you. I mean, how hard can it be to read a 22 page legalese, before going through a sign up flow, that was heavily optimized to increase conversion?

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

#737

Post by Retric »

the_optimist wrote: post #700
vsuperpower2020 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The ability to leave your car in a public space while shopping is a major part of their utility. Cars are therefore common, left in the open, and valuable, but not particularly portable without being turned on.

Jewelry, TV’s, bitcoin wallets etc aren’t just left in the open. Your house, front lawn etc is valuable and accessible but not generally mobile.

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

#738

Post by philwelch »

mywittyname wrote: post #416
philwelch wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is that true, or is it not a problem in South Korea because they have less crime?

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

#740

Post by kube-system »

acdha wrote: post #730
kube-system wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My prediction: 1. As a result, we'll see costs like losing the keys to a rental car go from a $250-500 fee to a $2500-5000 fee, due to the additional costs to process and the additional loss of use. 2. Criminal rings that steal high value cars will go from often using tow trucks, to exclusively using tow trucks. 3. The number of cars stolen via stolen keys will remain unchanged. Yes, the key itself will be more secur…

Your second point is leaving out a lot: there’s no way adding a requirement that you have heavy equipment and a skilled operator isn’t going to reduce the number of thefts, and those trucks are in more limited supply and easier to track than a small tablet. They’re also way less stealthy so there’s a lot more time to get caught. The third point may be true for classic theft but would not be true for the growing categ…

Commercial tow trucks are not hard to get in many places, but it is also not required to tow a car. There are many consumer oriented solutions for towing a car. Tow dollies are about $40 to rent in my city. Or if you're a thief, trailers aren't hard to steal either.

> If you can’t easily get a new key, the resell value for that car is going down dramatically.

Most of the vehicles that are stolen for resale are high value and sent overseas to parts of the world where the labor cheap to do something like entirely rip out all of the security components. I don't really think that these criminals will stuff a G-wagon in a shipping container for $100,000 but they won't do it for $80k or $90k.

Post reply on HN