Police admit they're 'stumped' by mystery car thefts • Hacker News Board

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

#51

Post by fragmede » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 5:43 PM UTC

mindcrime wrote: post #26

corresation wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

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 like nobody has even the slightest clue that this stuff is possible

It's almost as if the news has some sort of agenda!

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

#52

Post by speedyrev » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 5:44 PM UTC

dclowd9901 wrote: post #20

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…

And notice they're also touching the door handle with their bare hands. There's probably some sort of exploit dealing with theses vehicles' touch-activated car unlocking feature.

If a fab is in your pocket or purse, touching the handle will open the lock.

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

#53

Post by javert » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 5:47 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #49

The advice given in the article sounds ridiculous to my (brazilian) ears. - "Don't leave valuables in the car". Really? I'd have to deal with smashed windows every single day if I left anything that could possibly be of value sitting overnight (or for a few minutes in some places). Perhaps even an empty shoe box. And that's with tinted windows so dark they are not even supposed to be street legal. - "Keep your car re…

That stuff really isn't necessary in much of the US (many non-urban areas... thought not all). I don't even always lock my car doors in some places. To someone who's not used to it, it's probably amazing how benevolent people and society really can be.

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

#54

Post by cglace » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 5:59 PM UTC

javert wrote: post #53

outworlder wrote: post #49

The advice given in the article sounds ridiculous to my (brazilian) ears. - "Don't leave valuables in the car". Really? I'd have to deal with smashed windows every single day if I left anything that could possibly be of value sitting overnight (or for a few minutes in some places). Perhaps even an empty shoe box. And that's with tinted windows so dark they are not even supposed to be street legal. - "Keep your car re…

That stuff really isn't necessary in much of the US (many non-urban areas... thought not all). I don't even always lock my car doors in some places. To someone who's not used to it, it's probably amazing how benevolent people and society really can be.

In urban areas I don't lock my doors to avoid having my windows smashed for some change.

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

#55

Post by Pxtl » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:00 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #49

The advice given in the article sounds ridiculous to my (brazilian) ears. - "Don't leave valuables in the car". Really? I'd have to deal with smashed windows every single day if I left anything that could possibly be of value sitting overnight (or for a few minutes in some places). Perhaps even an empty shoe box. And that's with tinted windows so dark they are not even supposed to be street legal. - "Keep your car re…

Yup. In some places it actually feels best just to leave your car doors unlocked - then the thief doesn't have to smash your window before they root through your car and find it contains nothing of value.

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

#56

Post by Zimahl » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:03 PM UTC

jcampbell1 wrote: post #31

mindcrime wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or they are just really smart thieves. Better to get caught with petty theft than grand theft auto. Also, maybe keeping the crime as just theft is keeping it under the radar - the cops aren't going to throw up any road blocks for that level of crime.

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

#57

Post by DanBC » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:10 PM UTC

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…

Enclosed, but not encrypted (http://www.h-online.com/security/features/Enclosed-but-not-e...)

A make of USB drive enclosure that claimed to be using AES 128 bit encryption, but it turns out that wasn't for the data.

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

#58

Post by incision » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:10 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #49

The advice given in the article sounds ridiculous to my (brazilian) ears. - "Don't leave valuables in the car". Really? I'd have to deal with smashed windows every single day if I left anything that could possibly be of value sitting overnight (or for a few minutes in some places). Perhaps even an empty shoe box. And that's with tinted windows so dark they are not even supposed to be street legal. - "Keep your car re…

>I guess some places have such a low crime rate that people just forget basic security precautions?

Yes.

I've lived most of my life within 25 miles of where I was born in the US.

Within that area there are places where your windows will be smashed for $0.74 in a cupholder and others where people don't even lock their doors.

I grew up in the former and even though I've lived in the latter for a long time I don't think I'll ever get used to it.

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

#59

Post by daeken » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:12 PM UTC

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…

Jim Stickley is -- being kind -- a hack. He was on the Today Show showing off my hotel lock exploit without credit, and got zero details correct. Gotta respect his ability to press-whore (I tend to think I'm fairly good, but he puts me to shame), but that's about it.

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

#60

Post by DanBlake » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 6:13 PM UTC

I never understood why keyfobs work in a UDP style, when communication between the remote and car would be infinitely better.

For instance, instead of just sending "12345" and having the doors open since the code was expected, What about if the remote said "hey car, whats your random number" - the car then transmits back "54321" at which point the transmitter sends a hashed reply sha512(54321 + unique-random-id-set-per-car) which the car receives then verifies matches expected output.

The takeaway being that both the car and the remote know what "unique-random-id-set-per-car" is, but nobody else does. It should be randomly set at the factory so each car and the remotes have a unique id.

My only thoughts as to why its not like this is that the logic required to do that type of operation might not be possible without a higher wattage 'processor' in the keyfob which would eat through batteries. Im totally out of the know in that area though.

Also, unrelated- but the passenger door thing is likely just coincidence because they want to get in the glove box. But, there is another thing that could explain it. On my last car (mercedes) when I wanted to reprogram a new keyfob to work with the car, I had to do a long process of certain actions to make it work. It was like "press on brake, release brake, press on brake for 3 seconds then release, open drivers window, open passenger door, close drivers window, press open button on keyfob" So the car CPU is definitely aware and can take actions specific to which door is being opened, so its possible its related.