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

911–916 of 916 posts

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

#911

Post by Draiken »

nemo44x wrote: post #387
Draiken wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Works for who? The corporations profiting from slave prison labor? If we at least arrested the corrupt white collar criminals that never get punished, then we could look at this as something more than an uninformed extreme measure. Imagine if wage theft wasn't merely a fine? Imagine if corruption was actually prosecuted? Then we can talk! /s

Your argument is that because in your opinion we don't arrest enough white color criminals that we shouldn't bother with violent criminals? I don't understand how these are related? This isn't a trade or a negotiation. Locking up violent criminals and their affiliates for extended periods of time works. We give way too many chances to people today.

Never said that. My sarcastic rant was there because locking people up is simply not a good enough solution.

I can guarantee you the vast majority of people in prison can be reformed and reintegrated. But most prison systems don't want that. They work towards punishment/revenge, and as a bonus, give out slave labor for dirty companies.

Suggesting "locking more people up" is a good solution is so bad that it's laughable in my view. It's so short-sighted and simplistic that it's not worth arguing about. Locking more people up translates to locking more poor people up, for the crime of being poor.

I even added a "/s" to make it clear I was being ironic, but clearly that didn't work as I intended.

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

#912

Post by sonicanatidae »

badgersnake wrote: post #870
sonicanatidae wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They gave everyone a plastic case for free, after the world went nuts over just how stupid that issue was. Let's not paint Apple with an altruistic brush.

Of course they’re not altruistic, it was a damage limitation PR exercise. The point was that the didn’t, as you suggested they would, charge people on this occasion.

They cost people a lot of time and grief over a goddamn boutique phone, that they were warned would have antenna issues, by the guy that was...Apple's most senior antenna expert, Rubén Caballero, and he was ignored.

When physics caught up the Apple marketing, it took months for Apple to roll out a cheap bumper guard and acted like they were doing everyone a favor.

They never reimbursed people who bought a case to mitigate the issue. They did reimburse those that did have to purchase a rubber bumper.

While you are technically correct, that's about it. The whole thing was a shitshow and Apple acted like the users were the problem until enough of the world mocked them into providing a work-around for a problem that they should have addressed before it was even sold.

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

#913

Post by aosmith »

SoftTalker wrote: post #584
aosmith wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what's happening. This is not a wireless attack, it's a physical access problem.

Hard to prevent theft of something parked on the street. Thieves can show up with a tow truck, hook the car, and drive away.

Don't hook the headlights up to the can bus or implement UAC... The headlights shouldn't have access to the alarm or ignition.

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

#914

Post by aosmith »

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?

A lot of headlights steer with the car, the can bus is a giant network without any authentication.

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

#915

Post by aosmith »

maxerickson wrote: post #837
sleepybrett wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

CAN is a 2 wire serial bus using differential signaling. So a couple small wires and maybe some shielding.

It's not about the cost of wire, it's about the cost of software. This is the auto industry version of MCAS. I wish I was joking.

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

#916

Post by aosmith »

ddalex wrote: post #905
EasyMark wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

There are usually two can buses a car, a slow one and a fast one. The slow one controls the lights, infotaiment, climate, etc, while the fast one controls the ECU, driver assist, all related to driving.

If you have access to one you generally have access to both.
Post reply on HN