Live data from Hacker News

Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

neowin.net

41–50 of 225 posts

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#41
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know Hyundai corporate defenders were so unrealistic and childish.

I don't even like Hyundai. What's "unrealistic and childish" is expecting free labour.

I don't expect free labor. I expect the service workers to get paid by Hyundai

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#43
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also frustrating but for different reasons: > in 2023 over the “Kia Boyz” attacks that allowed thieves to bypass a vehicle’s security system using a USB cable. The USB cable happened to have the right size to engage the starter mechanism. Any physical object with similar dimensions could have been used. It really undercuts how absolutely terrible the Kia security design was around that component.

In some vehicles, their "software fix" literally did nothing but move thieves from smashing a window to screwdriver'ing the driver door lock. More work for the thieves, but hardly a fix to inspire confidence.

This is why, back when I owned a Jeep, I never locked it. Figured if someone wanted the 85 cents in change that badly I'd rather they not take a knife to my (plastic) windows.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#44
post #43
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some vehicles, their "software fix" literally did nothing but move thieves from smashing a window to screwdriver'ing the driver door lock. More work for the thieves, but hardly a fix to inspire confidence.

This is why, back when I owned a Jeep, I never locked it. Figured if someone wanted the 85 cents in change that badly I'd rather they not take a knife to my (plastic) windows.

The "Kia Boyz" saga was primarily motivated by theft of the vehicle itself, not the contents of the vehicle.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even like Hyundai. What's "unrealistic and childish" is expecting free labour.

It's not free labor, they already got paid for it. They just fucked it up the first time.

Nope. It requires new hardware installed.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#47

[flagged]

You missed some points 1. This is only in the UK, they are not doing the same in the US 2. Recalls are the responsibility of the manufacturer. Security lapses, even if "up to standards" at the time are not a legitimate exemption (imo)

In the automotive industry, pretty much the whole point of standards like cybersecurity (ISO21434) and functional safety (ISO26262) is to let the manufacturer claim in court that they followed “modern best practices” and therefore are not liable when something goes wrong.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#48
post #43
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some vehicles, their "software fix" literally did nothing but move thieves from smashing a window to screwdriver'ing the driver door lock. More work for the thieves, but hardly a fix to inspire confidence.

This is why, back when I owned a Jeep, I never locked it. Figured if someone wanted the 85 cents in change that badly I'd rather they not take a knife to my (plastic) windows.

Knowing folks with this problem, I've been looking into some way of adding some kind of "pulling or removing the door handle without first disabling the alarm triggers the alarm" circuit... but the necessary disassembly is a pain.
Post reply on HN