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

741–750 of 916 posts

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

#741

Post by ummonk »

strangattractor wrote: post #707
GuB-42 wrote: post #617

> Security tools like Flipper Zero are essentially programmable radios, known as Software Defined Radios (SDRs) The Flipper Zero is not a SDR, it is less capable than that. That's the ironic part, the Flipper Zero is a rather weak hacking tool. It can open car doors, but it is so impractical that it is not much more than a party trick. You have to record the code by pressing the button on the keyfob out of range of t…

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

Not a great analogy though, since a coat hanger’s primary use is not to break into cars.

Note: I’m not advocating banning the flipper zero anymore than I’d advocate banning lock picks. I just don’t think the analogy is apt.

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

#742

Post by gridspy »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #664
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…

> i'm not negligent for not doing enough to prevent the crimes of some other asshole. If you entire job is selling locks and they don’t prevent crime, then it’s not negligent, it’s fraudulent. You want to be in the clear? Sell a car without a lock, see how many people buy that. > if kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it And if Boeing makes a cheap, unsafe plane, don’t fly on it I would be happy…

> If you entire job is selling locks and they don’t prevent crime

Does MasterLock making famously easy to pick / rake locks count? I'm sure they reduce crime compared to no lock but they are not as secure as the customer expects.

https://www.art-of-lockpicking.com/how-to-pick-a-master-lock...

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

#743

Post by ndesaulniers »

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?

I suspect fancier headlights can pivot based on incline and steering wheel angle.

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

#744

Post by [deleted] »

hoofhearted wrote: post #21

Sooo they have been stealing Infiniti's from my area recently with relative ease allegedly by using a Bluetooth obd2 reader connected to an android tablet running a pirated copy of some Nissan service tech software. Nobody from any of the Infiniti groups is 100% certain how they are doing it, but the best theory out there is above. Just the other night, a crew of dudes stole 3 Q50’s from my neighborhood with relative…

[deleted]

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

#745

Post by msla »

anigbrowl wrote: post #693
topspin wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

People understood your words and pointed out the implications.

Only infants refuse to think through their statements.

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

#747

Post by EasyMark »

electriclove wrote: post #710
franga2000 wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The manufacturer is not the victim here, the buyer is. If I pay a contractor to install a new door and lock on my apartment and it turns out they did a terrible job which made it trivial for a thief to break in, the contractor should be liable. Crime exists, this is the world we live in. Failing to implement even the most basic security measure, which is considered industry standard, in a high-value product that is k…

But people ARE saying the thieves are not at fault.. “it’s just kids”, “we don’t want to put them in jail because that would ruin their future”, “they can’t pay a fine anyway so there is no point in going after them”

No one is saying that, there are multiple contributors to the problem here, sure the thieves own the bulk of it, but manufacturers could fix the issue or offer a solution like a cheap install of an immobilizer.

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

#748

Post by dlgeek »

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.

Yes, and they generally are. In almost all states, sellers have to ensure that the things they sell are "fit for purpose". It's reasonable for us to ensure that they meet the basic requirements of being whatever they are - and for cars, part of their basic purpose is to sit in insecure areas and ensure only authorized users can operate them.

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

#749

Post by from-nibly »

bhickey wrote: post #702
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…

> if it was really negligent of kia to "save a couple bucks", then it's equally negligent on you for not spending a couple bucks. if kids didn't want lead in their apple sauce they'd start their own testing labs.

Good thing the government has those testing labs and prevented that from ever happening.

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

#750

Post by EasyMark »

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 cuts way down on the amount and expense of wiring, copper is expensive. It makes it easier to pocket some more profit.
Post reply on HN