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

Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

today.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 139 posts

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#31

Post by jcampbell1 »

mindcrime wrote: post #24
jcampbell1 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you describe a challenge based authentication system that uses 128-bit AES? I find the reporter's description reasonable.

Your comment piqued my interest, as I wasn't sure if car manufacturers were really using 128-bit AES or not. That led me to this page: http://ir.atmel.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=665225 Where Atmel announced a new transponder chip & microcontroller, which do, indeed, use 128-bit AES. This is from 2012 though, so I'm not sure how widely adopted this particular chip is, or if other, older chips are in widespread us…

To me this looks like a Honda/Acura specific exploit to unlock the passenger side door. It doesn't look like a replay attack, nor do these guys have the ability to start and steal the car, which uses separate encryption keys from the locks.

I agree with you that this crypto system failure, not an algorithm exploit.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#32

Post by droopybuns »

mindcrime wrote: post #16

I was intrigued by their mention of this "Jim Stickley" who was cited as a top security expert. I had never heard of him before, so did a quick search to find out a little more about him. He seems to be a pretty legit and well known security guy[1], but it surprises me that he said: This is really frustrating because clearly they've figured out something that looks really simple and whatever it is they're doing, it t…

I agree with your skepticism but I disagree with your analysis of Stickley. This looks like the typical security clown out there writing his own wikipedia entry. His article's main point seems to be that he found a buffer overflow. There, he's a security expert.

What security professional worth his salt says "that should not be possible"? The entire security profession is about identifying assumptions and then challenging them. He sounds more like a software developer cashing in on the "s" word because he found a buffer overrun than a security profesional assessing an attack.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#33

Post by guttermaw »

corresation wrote: post #23
mindcrime wrote: post #3

What's the big mystery here? There have been published articles on the ease of hacking car remotes (and even the onboard electronics) going back at least a couple of years. For example: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/01... http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/07/hacking_bmws_r... http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20085131-48/remote-unlo... http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/…

You ask what the big mystery is, and then link to a lot of unrelated hacks/exploits. Yes, the article is that someone hacked/exploited the remote door open specifically, apparently on seemingly random cars. It is a mystery how they are doing it, though it is painfully obvious that they are exploiting something .

I agree. The technique described differs from anything OP linked. The fact that thieves are smashing windows to get at diagnostic ports suggests that this method of entering the vehicle is fairly novel.

Exploits have been demonstrated by researchers, but are mostly pretty make/model specific.

Certainly, I'd bet that every car with bluetooth/wifi integrated has some sort of flaw whereby it might be possible to use that to bridge to the cars Canbus and request a door unlock. That doesn't mean that these are easily exploitable by individuals willing to commit petty theft.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#34

Post by mindcrime »

corresation wrote: post #29
mindcrime wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You ask what the big mystery is, and then link to a lot of unrelated hacks/exploits. I don't see how you can say that is "unrelated". Even if our "mystery" thieves aren't using those exact exploits, there is NO "mystery" that hackers have demonstrated the ability to break car remote systems. But the article and the quotes from the police make it sound like the police are just staring at the wall, drooling and going "…

The article makes it sound exactly like what it seems to be -- that the thieves are using an exploit that they don't know, and thus they want to know. One of the guys quoted makes a profession out of this and he doesn't know what they're doing. But apparently lots of people on HN do.

Nobody here has claimed to know exactly what exploit the thieves are using. But a lot of people are claiming (rightly) that general knowledge that these car systems have vulnerabilities is widespread. And that point is what seemed, to me, to be missing from TFA.

If TFA had given some more context, and said "exploits which would allow this type of access were shown at a recent hacker conference, and some cars have known exploitable vulnerabilities... but we don't know if this crop of thieves are using that or a newer, unpublished exploit" then it would, IMO, have been a better article. Instead, it leaves people with the idea that this whole concept (hacking cars) is something brand new, unknown, and unexpected. And it's not.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#35

Post by adammil »

michael_h wrote: post #14
Glyptodon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were using key reprogramming/hacking there's no reason to 'always use' the passenger side front door as claimed in the video. So I don't think it's clear that these thieves are using any of those techniques. I imagine it might be stupider, like maybe there's a way to induce the unlock button or motor to trigger via induction or something. Though I'm pretty poorly informed about that kind of thing scientifical…

I would assume that they use the passenger side front door because that is where the storage compartment is located.

They use the passenger side door because its the one facing the sidewalk.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#36

Post by jordan_clark »

They didn't release all of the details. We would need to know which makes and models and years this does/does not work on. In the videos they only showed Honda products (Acura) (The MDX was a 2000-2006 model) but does not work on GM or Ford. So this is most likely is manufacturer specific.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#37

Post by mindcrime »

droopybuns wrote: post #32
mindcrime wrote: post #16

I was intrigued by their mention of this "Jim Stickley" who was cited as a top security expert. I had never heard of him before, so did a quick search to find out a little more about him. He seems to be a pretty legit and well known security guy[1], but it surprises me that he said: This is really frustrating because clearly they've figured out something that looks really simple and whatever it is they're doing, it t…

I agree with your skepticism but I disagree with your analysis of Stickley. This looks like the typical security clown out there writing his own wikipedia entry. His article's main point seems to be that he found a buffer overflow. There, he's a security expert. What security professional worth his salt says "that should not be possible"? The entire security profession is about identifying assumptions and then challe…

You're right, actually. I was trying to be charitable though, and I didn't feel like I had time to do a serious deep dive into this background and credentials. Nor am I necessarily qualified to pass any serious judgement on his knowledge.

A quote from somebody like Bruce Schneier, or tptacek, would have been a lot better.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#39

Post by seanalltogether »

Glyptodon wrote: post #21
Hyrum_Graff wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was a thief then I'd always hit the passenger side front door as it gives me the quickest access to the glove compartment, where valuables are likely to be stored. Not sure what the mystery is here.

Do people actually put valuable things in their glove boxes? I didn't think people put stuff besides proof of insurance and their car manuals in them. I'd think it a lot more likely that valuables were in the center console storage.

I left my checkbook in the glove compartment for like a month before realizing it. I don't write physical checks often and just forgot it was in there after needing to hide it real quick.

Re: Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts

#40

Post by iblaine »

mindcrime wrote: post #3

What's the big mystery here? There have been published articles on the ease of hacking car remotes (and even the onboard electronics) going back at least a couple of years. For example: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/01... http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/07/hacking_bmws_r... http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20085131-48/remote-unlo... http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2011/…

>What's the big mystery here? The method that the thieves are using is unknown.

While those links to may be useful to shed light on this type of crime, they do little to confirm the method that these thieves are employing. Hence, there is mystery.

Post reply on HN