The car stealing device is $20k, could someone do some math to see what kind of ROI a criminal could expect if they use it to steal cars and part them out?
Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
131–140 of 225 posts
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#132“Gameboy-like device” - are they referring to Flipper Zeros with the firmware to exploit RF rolling codes? https://www.rtl-sdr.com/flipperzero-darkweb-firmware-bypasse...
No, some dedicated hardware device, about five years old, that looks like a Game Boy. The flipper firmware is only about six months old, and it is still not as convenient and distributed. The actual firmware exploit is the same idea.
Wow, that really is Gameboy-like!
This time the reporters weren't wrong.
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
As eCall is now mandatory you can't build a car without a cellular modem anymore.
* in the EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECall
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#134They'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've been holding my breath ever since spectre/meltdown for a free cpu upgrade to make up for the slower performance that the mitigations cause.
It's intel's bug, they promised a certain processor speed, shouldn't it be their responsibility to replace it since their own security oversight resulted in the hardware not working as advertised?
Did you expect the same from intel/amd when those bugs came out? Is it different from this situation?
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patchboard
patchboard
: a switchboard in which circuits are interconnected by patch cords
First Known Use
1934, in the meaning defined above
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I’ve seen these posted here previously! Probably the most appealing new car to me at the moment. Hopefully they take off and we can get them outside the US
Have you seen Telo? https://www.telotrucks.com/
I've seen this before, and I like the design. It's cute yet functional. It would fit in well on European roads.
One thing that stands out to me is the front wheels protrude beyond the body. I don't recall ever seeing that on a consumer road vehicle before, at least one designed after the 1930s.
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#137I don't know about the Hyundai Ioniq, but the Kia Niro has no way to permanently disable keyless entry, which would be the obvious, super easy s/w fix. You can disable it each time you lock your car by holding extra buttons on the fob for a few secs, but it's auto re-enabled next time you unlock. It's everything you need to know before you make your smart decision not to buy a Kia. Cheap(er) for a reason. But looks f…
My 2021 Ioniq 5 does not have keyless entry at all. You need to press the button to open the door.
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#138I understand that development costs are not free, and there's extra hardware involved, but IMO they should take this as marketing cost.
That's easy to say when you aren't the one footing the bill.
It is easy to say as a customer that already paid money in return for a working/safe/functional car.
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
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've been holding my breath ever since spectre/meltdown for a free cpu upgrade to make up for the slower performance that the mitigations cause. It's intel's bug, they promised a certain processor speed, shouldn't it be their responsibility to replace it since their own security oversight resulted in the hardware not working as advertised? Did you expect the same from intel/amd when those bugs came out? Is it differe…
> they promised a certain processor speed
How have they advertised that? Was it clock frequency? Their mitigations mean it still runs at that clock frequency.
Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been holding my breath ever since spectre/meltdown for a free cpu upgrade to make up for the slower performance that the mitigations cause. It's intel's bug, they promised a certain processor speed, shouldn't it be their responsibility to replace it since their own security oversight resulted in the hardware not working as advertised? Did you expect the same from intel/amd when those bugs came out? Is it differe…
> they promised a certain processor speed How have they advertised that? Was it clock frequency? Their mitigations mean it still runs at that clock frequency.
The last desktop processor that actually promised a certain speed was probably the 68020. Everything since then has had inscrutable performance characteristics.