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

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

neowin.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 225 posts

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

#101

Post by WayToDoor »

gambiting wrote: post #90
birdfood wrote: post #75

I want a dumb EV. No infotainment system. Just speakers and a way to plug my device into them. Anything critical to the car should be completely air gapped and require an absolute minimum amount of software, preferably zero.

We have a Volkswagen e-Up, it's basically that. Analog cluster, a very small radio screen that also displays the world's smallest reverse camera view, and a dashboard mount for your phone. It's a fantastic little car, I honestly like it more than our 400bhp Volvo XC60.

The e-Up is great, but there is still the remote control modem installed by default that lets Volkswagen « Cloud » and the app control the car remotely, and get data such as the GPS location of the car.

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

#102

Post by axiolite »

dyauspitr wrote: post #66
topato wrote: post #37

Jesus, when did commenters on neowin get so stupid? Thank God I'm back to the safety of HN.... Weren't they a slightly subversive tech site a decade or so ago?

What’s wrong with the comments?

Perhaps the guy suggesting that you: "cut off your balls"

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

#103

Post by themafia »

Terr_ wrote: post #54
anonym29 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Right, and even un-sexy and inexpensive vehicles get targeted these days, because they can be used as tools to commit other crimes, not just a commodity to be resold or scavenged.

The thing I did not expect is that most of these criminals will gladly connect their phone to the cars entertainment system so they can play their music while they do this.

They can then brag about the number of thefts they've engaged in by the number of Kia vehicles listed in their phones bluetooth connection list.

The surprise is that the police don't seem to understand how to incorporate these facts into their tactics.

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

#104

Post by king_geedorah »

florbnit wrote: post #100
king_geedorah wrote: post #98

If the ignition and door locks in your vehicle were mistakenly designed in such a way that they are trivially shimmed or could be operated by any key it seems absurd to suggest the customer should pay you to replace these mechanisms with ones that are properly secured. This seems roughly analogous to that situation at least to my understanding.

The story has a bad spin yes. But it’s just as much of a controversy if they had require people themselves pay the cost if they found out the cars where shipped with defective breaks. It’s a product error not wear and tear or user error, they should eat the costs, but the cybersecurity framing of it is being used to attempt to push the cost to the consumer.

This is precisely the point I intended to make with my comment. Perhaps my phrasing was unclear.

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

#105

Post by throwaway290 »

4ndrewl wrote: post #70
akamaka wrote: post #14

This seems like a clickbait title because I’ve never hear of a hardware upgrade being called a “patch”.

"The term "patch" came from early use in telephony and radio studios, where extra equipment kept on standby could be temporarily substituted for failed devices." - from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_cable But yeah, the term patch just seems weird in this article. Why not just "upgrade" or "fix"?

"Service"?

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

#106

Post by wucke13 »

4ndrewl wrote: post #70
akamaka wrote: post #14

This seems like a clickbait title because I’ve never hear of a hardware upgrade being called a “patch”.

"The term "patch" came from early use in telephony and radio studios, where extra equipment kept on standby could be temporarily substituted for failed devices." - from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_cable But yeah, the term patch just seems weird in this article. Why not just "upgrade" or "fix"?

I'm not so sure, I thought "patch" originated from hole punching cards to program stuff. A software patch was literally a patch of tape that hides an errorneously punched hole in such a card.

The term patch-cable seems to be way younger.

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

#107

Post by bestouff »

Mistletoe wrote: post #77
birdfood wrote: post #75

I want a dumb EV. No infotainment system. Just speakers and a way to plug my device into them. Anything critical to the car should be completely air gapped and require an absolute minimum amount of software, preferably zero.

Check out Slate trucks. I want that too and this seems to be perfect. Has windows you roll down even. Fingers crossed it actually launches. https://www.slate.auto/en

This thing has no autonomy

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

#108

Post by throwaway290 »

mirzap wrote: post #76
jjani wrote: post #22

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleading.

It doesn't matter. If a customer buys faulty hardware, it's the seller's responsibility to replace it with working hardware. If the breaks had a manufacturing defect, you wouldn't expect the customer to pay for the replacement.

I bet the stock car is 100% secure in Korea.

Maybe you live in a country where car thieves hack into cars left and right. Maybe you live in a country where thieves just tow your car in the middle of the day and don't care about your locks at all. Do you expect car maker to ship you free fixes against every scenario? Security is a spectrum. Make your police better if you don't like it.

/controversial opinion

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

#109

Post by makeitdouble »

whirlwin wrote: post #64

Would be interesting to see insurance companies stand on this. Are you expected to pay for the security upgrade or not. Will it be deemed missing as "unpatched - that's your fault".

Given that many door locks and other portable locks are laughably bad and can be opened with sometimes simple shimmering, or at most basic picking tools, that would mean insurance companies could already have sued Master locks for instance. So at least, bad security is probably not enough for it.

From there, making customer pay to fix bad security doesn't sound like a significant step.

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

#110

Post by antonvs »

jader201 wrote: post #33
jjani wrote: post #22

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleading.

Agree the title is a bit misleading, but addressing what sounds like an exploit still feels like a patch of sorts. But yeah, “patch” usually implies software vs. hardware. Either way, agree with other comments that Hyundai should just eat the costs if it prevents theft due to an exploit. Having said that, given what the car costs, the fee doesn’t seem completely unreasonable.

Starting MSRP of US$42,600? Seems like there’s some room there to cover manufacturer mistakes.
Post reply on HN