Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 280 posts

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#161

Post by smohare »

wwweston wrote: post #83
otterley wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not futile. Write your congressperson and state representatives. If enough people do this around the country, laws will eventually be passed to prevent it.

This is why there are moral panics about things people feel in their guts: most people are reasonably easily unsettled and distracted by queer people, people who look different, people their people don’t trust being in charge. It works. Most people are happier focusing and holding forth on that and repeating familiar statements than they are talking to congressional staff about policy. Your car that you paid a lot fo…

[dead]

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#162

Post by lotsofpulp »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #160
lotsofpulp wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how the statement below makes sense? >The fuse stops it but the real issue is the owner is the only one without the record.

If I take your two sentence comment and remove one sentence it also is non-sensical. Stop removing context. >Your mileage went from VW->telematics vendor->broker->carfax, thats the chain it usually follows. The fuse stops it but the real... Prior commentary advised removing the fuse to stop the telemetry. This comment points out that the chain of information flow precludes the owner of the car.

>the real issue is the owner is the only one without the record

I don't understand what "the record" is referring to here. The mileage is presumably still on the odometer of the car. So what is "the record" that the owner does not have and how is that causing the owner an issue?

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#163

Post by porkshoe »

jboggan wrote: post #147

I'd like to point out that the CA assembly has passed AB-1542 and it is likely going to be signed by the governor this week. This would make the sale and sharing of "sensitive" personal information illegal, and one of the sensitive personal categories is geolocation data that can map an individual to within a 1850-ft radius. In my understanding, this pretty much makes this type of driver data illegal to sell or share…

Another note for Californians -- the California DROP (delete request and opt-out platform) takes VINs as one of the inputs.

https://privacy.ca.gov/drop/

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#164

Post by fn-mote »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #150
taraindara wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share the sentiment. I want a new car, but only if I can guarantee all telemetry is hard disabled. But I don’t have the kind of money to buy a new car and risk bricking it. Luckily I’m pretty handy, so I’ll have to keep my 2014< cars forcefully running as long as I can.

I have non concerns about having a built in button to phone emergency services. I don’t even mind if it auto rings in a crash. I’m even happy to provide position to the emergency service in the event of dialing them. Manufacturers use this capacity as an excuse to push more adtech penny and dime data abuse, knowing half the world will blame the government.

Your cell phone could easily call for help in a crash without the car being involved at all.

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#165

Post by kaladin-jasnah »

CommenterPerson wrote: post #158
bitparadox wrote: post #34

I posted a flavor of this comment on an article a few months ago, but it's relevant here: I have a seven year old Volkswagen, not financed. I'm security conscious and made sure to disable all the data collection I could find in the companion app before removing my account, turn off remote access services, dig through the infotainment to turn off what I could, etc. Last year I requested a Carfax on it, and one of the…

I have been thinking of upgrading from my 2003 Corolla to an electric (not Tesla). The Corolla hasn't had a single repair problem in 23 years! My main motivation to get a better car was, DD goes to a super prestigious college and it seems degrading to put their bumper sticker on a 23 year old car! But I guess I won't get another car. Serves you right mfr mfrs!

See my other comment, but the fuse pulling stuff still works on GM EVs and disables connectivity, but the telematics unit may still be collecting offline to batch upload.

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#166

Post by tmnvix »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #162
_carbyau_ wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I take your two sentence comment and remove one sentence it also is non-sensical. Stop removing context. >Your mileage went from VW->telematics vendor->broker->carfax, thats the chain it usually follows. The fuse stops it but the real... Prior commentary advised removing the fuse to stop the telemetry. This comment points out that the chain of information flow precludes the owner of the car.

>the real issue is the owner is the only one without the record I don't understand what "the record" is referring to here. The mileage is presumably still on the odometer of the car. So what is "the record" that the owner does not have and how is that causing the owner an issue?

Presumably the mileage is a subset of the data that makes up "the record"?

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#167

Post by steelframe »

bitparadox wrote: post #34

I posted a flavor of this comment on an article a few months ago, but it's relevant here: I have a seven year old Volkswagen, not financed. I'm security conscious and made sure to disable all the data collection I could find in the companion app before removing my account, turn off remote access services, dig through the infotainment to turn off what I could, etc. Last year I requested a Carfax on it, and one of the…

This is why I pulled the fuse on the Data Communications Module (DCM) on my car. The device that transmits the telemetry simply doesn't get any juice.

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#168

Post by otterley »

heaney-555 wrote: post #99
otterley wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why doesn’t it happen with them?

Tesla charges a $10/month subscription for its connected features, with relatively high uptake because its software is actually great (unlike the dogshit UX of most cars), so it doesn't need to sell data. Plus it just isn't how Tesla operates.

I wonder how long that will last. That may be their privacy policy today, but AFAIK that's merely a policy, not a binding agreement. I don't know whether anything stops them from changing their mind later, i.e., the classic rug-pull.

I appreciate Tesla's position on the matter, but I'd still rather have the collection and dissemination of the data more tightly regulated by law.

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#169

Post by sagarm »

octoberfranklin wrote: post #146
mannanj wrote: post #117

And the DMV (Department of Motor vehicle Services) has also sold registration data. In California, and Texas, they have been fined for this - I'm unsure they aren't completely barred from using a loophole to still do that. This is why I'm a vocal advocate for having an LLC own any vehicles you might drive. It protects you from the license-plate reading lookup as well from Flock et all. Though I don't know it guarante…

It won't protect you from the insurance agencies; they demand a DL ID# and a VIN. And you are required by law to purchase from them. And they're stautorily exempted from a whole boatload of privacy laws, like HIPAA.

In California you can post a surety bond in lieu of insurance. I'm sure the same applies in other states with governance that is not captured by corporate interests.

Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties

#170

Post by Loughla »

fn-mote wrote: post #164
hdgvhicv wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have non concerns about having a built in button to phone emergency services. I don’t even mind if it auto rings in a crash. I’m even happy to provide position to the emergency service in the event of dialing them. Manufacturers use this capacity as an excuse to push more adtech penny and dime data abuse, knowing half the world will blame the government.

Your cell phone could easily call for help in a crash without the car being involved at all.

Not if I'm unconscious?
Post reply on HN