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

201–210 of 225 posts

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

#201

Post by DamnableNook »

ungreased0675 wrote: post #178
ponector wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Locks are working. They perfectly fulfill requirements for the lock. Open/close with a key, stay closed if tried to be opened without a key. There is no such thing as secure lock. Any lock could be open without original key. The difference is in the amount of effort. Still baffles me that KIA sold cars which can be driven away using screwdriver and USB cable.

There are some locks that cannot be opened without the correct key. Abloy and BiLock are two examples.

I assure you, Abloy locks can be picked, e.g. https://youtu.be/oxfUmcMzx08

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

#202

Post by inferiorhuman »

dotancohen wrote: post #198
lnsru wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once ordered Kia EV6, but after a year I canceled the order. I am now glad I canceled it. Bi-yearly inspections and coolant change for 600€ are ridiculous ripoffs. ICCU failures are handled really badly in Germany. I really like the EV6 and EV3 cars, but the manufacturer isn’t that attractive anymore

> Of course I'm in California so EVs are more expensive to run than ICE cars so it's all moot. Does California have an oil industry that I'm not familiar with?

Unsure what you're familiar with but California does indeed have an oil industry, although it's much smaller than other states known for oil production like Texas and Alaska.

We also have a governor fueled by Getty (oil) money. The people he's appointed to oversee the electric utilities have rubber stamped rate hikes to the point where even heat pumps barely make financial sense because natural gas is so much cheaper (well under $2.50/therm).

https://www.pge.com/content/dam/pge/docs/account/rate-plans/...

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

#203

Post by sjdrc »

throwaway290 wrote: post #185
dghlsakjg wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyundai has car factories in 10 countries. The car in question is made in at least 2 countries. The defect being fixed applies to cars sold by a British subsidiary in Britain to Britons with the promise that it meets British market standards. It’s not even clear to me that these cars were manufactured in Korea, if they were, they couldn’t be sold there due to the right hand drive. The cars in question were very much…

Absurd. McDonald chose to participate in Korean market and I see no kimchi burgs there?

What an absolutely absurd thing to say

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

#204

Post by dotancohen »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #202
dotancohen wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course I'm in California so EVs are more expensive to run than ICE cars so it's all moot. Does California have an oil industry that I'm not familiar with?

Unsure what you're familiar with but California does indeed have an oil industry, although it's much smaller than other states known for oil production like Texas and Alaska. We also have a governor fueled by Getty (oil) money. The people he's appointed to oversee the electric utilities have rubber stamped rate hikes to the point where even heat pumps barely make financial sense because natural gas is so much cheaper…

That's the exact opposite of how the rest of the world perceives sunny California. Car guys the world over know about the CARB standards, and that cars sold in California are supposed to be more "green".

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

#205

Post by OutOfHere »

throwaway290 wrote: post #184
OutOfHere wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's absurd logic as cybersecurity applies everywhere. Also, they need to secure it the international markets they're selling it in.

You are confusing infosec on the internet which is global and local crime which is not global and VERY different per country

In the internet age, all it takes is a generic programmable radio signal emitter device. The logic is probably even free available on some GitHub repo.

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

#206

Post by hamburglar »

terribleperson wrote: post #97
hamburglar wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no bright line that defines “defect” and makes this determination. What Hyundai should be considering here is whether consumers will decide that buying a car from a company that doesn’t fully own their security mistakes isn’t worth it.

I agree it's hard to draw a bright line, but I'm personally comfortable erring heavily on the side of defect for security issues. I'd be willing to agree that certain security issues might not constitute a manufacturing or design defect. If a thought-to-be-secure encryption was cracked tomorrow, that doesn't make products using it defective at the time of manufacture.

The point is, it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is how consumers feel about whether the company’s reaction makes them feel like they want to trust that company with their next purchase.

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

#207

Post by bobthepanda »

throwaway290 wrote: post #108
mirzap wrote: post #76

Earlier 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 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

South Korea has a fairly active neighbor in the cybercrime scene.

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

#208

Post by throwaway290 »

sjdrc wrote: post #203
throwaway290 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absurd. McDonald chose to participate in Korean market and I see no kimchi burgs there?

What an absolutely absurd thing to say

I agree the mere notion is ridiculous yet here we are! Hyundai is not making the kimchi burger of free theft protection upgrades for places with rampant crime and we are so angry!

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

#209

Post by throwaway290 »

OutOfHere wrote: post #205
throwaway290 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confusing infosec on the internet which is global and local crime which is not global and VERY different per country

In the internet age, all it takes is a generic programmable radio signal emitter device. The logic is probably even free available on some GitHub repo.

You don't seem to understand the idea:

For internet security, you get everyone hack you from north koreans and beyond.

For house and car security it depends on what crime is in your location and how police work. Some places have almost zero so people literally don't care to lock doors. Some places need locks to stop opportunists. Some places you need electric fences and 24/7 security with guns and keep valuables in safes to hopefully slow down their removal until security comes. It's not comparable to cyber

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

#210

Post by TylerE »

Terr_ wrote: post #48
TylerE wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why, back when I owned a Jeep, I never locked it. Figured if someone wanted the 85 cents in change that badly I'd rather they not take a knife to my (plastic) windows.

Knowing folks with this problem, I've been looking into some way of adding some kind of "pulling or removing the door handle without first disabling the alarm triggers the alarm" circuit... but the necessary disassembly is a pain.

Mine was so old and basic there wasn't any wiring going to the door at all.
Post reply on HN