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

751–760 of 916 posts

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

#751

Post by fargle »

rale00 wrote: post #623
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 kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it Immobilizers were a standard feature on cars for decades. If you went to buy a car, no one was putting immobilizer on the list of features, and they certainly wouldn't let you try breaking the ignition lock on a test drive. If they had advertised that their vehicles were insecure, then sure, it's on the buyer, but they didn't.

it'd be bad to advertise that they have in immobilizer or anti-theft when providing either nothing or a badly broken implementation (like you often see in IOT).

it's not negligence to simply not provide a feature they didn't promise to provide and weren't required to (in the US). it is simply not their responsibility in any way to ensure your car's safety from theft. if you assumed it was and that they provided a feature you wanted because everybody else usually does, then the negligent party would be you for not RTFM. except that's wrong here too.

nobody is negligent here. you do not have a social responsibility to have an immobilizer on your car to prevent it from being stolen. and neither does the manufacturer. having it locked is plenty to legally make it "breaking-and-entering". and even if you leave the keys in the car and the engine running, it's still grand theft and your insurance will indeed pay out, which they would not do if they could claim negligence. the criminals are 100% at fault here. and bad things can happen without someone being negligent.

arguing about anything beyond that is just a fight about how good that anti-theft system has to be. are you negligent if you don't have an armed guard on your car?

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

#752

Post by deadbunny »

ummonk wrote: post #741
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.

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.

And a Flipper Zeros main purpose isn't to break into cars either...

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

#753

Post by [deleted] »

acdha wrote: post #549
2024throwaway wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP said the key is in the car key. You already give the car key to a mechanic, I don't see how this would make maintenance any harder.

Think about what happens when people lose their keys, which will reliably happen.

[deleted]

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

#754

Post by EasyMark »

ddalex wrote: post #688
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.

I'm very surprised to see that the ignition control is on the slow speed can bus...

What part of starting a car is fast compared to the canbus? Speed is relative

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

#755

Post by acdha »

kube-system wrote: post #740
acdha wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 v…

> 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.

Again, it’s possible but do you really think there isn’t even one thief who lacks easy access to a tow truck or will be caught firing up noisy equipment at 3am but not if they fumble around in their pocket while walking up to a car? Not a single teenager looking to joyride won’t give up if it’s harder than the Kia video they saw on Tik Tok?

Similarly, yes, people will still steal vehicles and ship them overseas but the more work they do the lower the resale market and value will be, and that will make it less tempting since you’d only be able to sell to people who are content never getting service from the manufacturer. Even if we assume that there are countries with skilled technicians and effectively no law enforcement, only something like 10-15% of stolen vehicles are shipped according to U.S. officials so even if you wrote those off entirely you would have plenty of room to improve by reducing the majority of thefts which never leave the country.

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

#756

Post by Daz1 »

tamimio wrote: post #678

Banning flipper zero because of car theft is like banning a hammer or screwdriver because is was used to break an all glass window.. going by the same logic, they should ban the USB-A port cables too since it’s what was used to steal most Hyundai/KIA cars, typical Canadian government policies, pretend you fix an issue instead of going to the root causes.

You might have a point if hammers or screwdrivers had no other purpose other than stealing cars, but they do, so you don't

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

#757

Post by EasyMark »

jonhohle wrote: post #101
ceejayoz wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kia and Hyundai saved like $20/car by skimping on a part that all the other major manufacturers include by default, leading to cars that were insecure by design. That's negligent. Punishing people for taking advantage of that vulnerability is certainly warranted, but it's also closing the barn door after the horse has already bolted.

What harm did Kia cause its customer? How are those locks adequate in say, South Korea, where there are 1:20,000 car thefts per capita yearly vs 1:350 in the US. The locks are not the problem. Stealing cars is the problem.

I do agree that these crimes should hold stiff penalties like at least 5 years in prison, no possibility of parole, including 1st offense. Liberal city DAs have been shirking their responsibility for at least the past 15 years. It's usually a pretty small percentage of the population executing these types of crimes. No more revolving doors. If I owned a kia I'd add an after market shutoff. They're not that expensive, rather than crying over how awful my world is living in a first world nation with a brand new vehicle with a security fault.

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

#758

Post by sundvor »

creaturemachine wrote: post #608
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…

Tik-Tok-inspired Kia thefts weren't a problem in Canada because they've required immobilizers since 2007, something Kia skimped on for the US market.

Speaking as an outsider: How are Kias sales going these days? How's their reputation as a result of this?

Imo for removing security for the US market they deserve to be properly thrashed and dragged through the mud, regardless of the fact that they are offering upgrades from free if I read the following correctly.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/hyundai-kia-campaign-pr...

It's not exactly an over the air "recall", and I understand a huge number are still out there unprotected.

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

#759

Post by Geisterde »

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.

I never understand this arguement. I hear it in the form "we should just regulate cars to be safer", why dont you just buy a safer car? "What do you take me for? I got a mustang GT, the last thing that car is worried about is safety". Interesting, you bought a car because its fast, not paying any consideration to whether it could safely get you from point A to B, and this is what you rely on to get you to work?

Its not social darwinism, the lack of critical thinking skills among the general population is alarming. Americans have apparently been coddled to the point that they arent worried about basic needs; if you go to buy a car you should have some simple considerations, is this car safe? What are the typical maintenance costs? Is it common for this car to be stolen?

Things like, housing, transportation, education, those are really central aspects of peoples lives. Its all well and good that you want to draw symbols on paper and make all these things safe, but it appears to have come at a pretty serious cost. That cost, is the inability for the US population to use critical thinking.

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

#760

Post by electriclove »

EasyMark wrote: post #747
electriclove wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In my left leaning workplace in my left leaning state, most colleagues do not want to assign the thieves any blame or have them face any consequences. These colleagues only want to blame and penalize the manufacturers.

I think the manufacturer should fix things so they are more in line with other manufacturers. But I also want to see some repercussions for the thieves.

Post reply on HN