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

Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 773 posts

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#321

Post by gruez »

Cornbilly wrote: post #277
umvi wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it rent seeking/overreach? I make a video game and charge $50 for it. Later I make a DLC and charge $25 for it. Is your claim that if I keep them as separate purchasable downloads, I'm not rent seeking? But if instead combine the game and dlc into a single executable (to simplify build and distribution) and put the dlc behind a software lock, somehow that is now rent seeking/overreach and I deserve to have hackers…

Yes. You've already distributed the binary to their machine and are using their resources to store it. In my view, it belongs to them and they should have full access.

By that logic, do you think that after someone has paid for 1 month of netflix, and downloaded their entire catalog to your phone for offline viewing, that all the videos "belongs to them and they should have full access"?

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#322

Post by eldaisfish »

shagie wrote: post #93
eldaisfish wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If something is opened or modified without manufacturer consent, there is no question of liability because there is none.

So if you're using unlocked a version of FSD that has been recalled and don't get an OTA update then any and all faults that may be traced back to FSD even if it was clear that this is a bug in the software (e.g. the reason for the recall) the vehicle owner has full liability? https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/16/tesla-recalls-362758-vehicle...

Software is a legal grey area as others pointed out. In your example, the vehicle owner modified the software version and used an unsupported one. The manufacturer cannot be liable when there is no legal contract.

The problem here is that this is functionally similar to using an outdated version of photoshop but the consequences are vastly different.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#323

Post by [deleted] »

alistairSH wrote: post #258
johnl1479 wrote: post #7

I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.

It's relatively clear to me... Features cost money, so I should pay for them. Wether that's via an option package (traditional) at order time OR via a software update (Tesla) after purchase doesn't matter. BUT! As long as that feature doesn't have recurring costs to the manufacturer (heated seats), it should be a one-time fee, and transfer with ownership. Something like self-driving, where there might be an active in…

[deleted]

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#324

Post by logifail »

ngneer wrote: post #184

Game theory at play. Tesla and its customers are adversaries, vying for the same dollars. Tesla implementing these security measures directly translates to being able to charge more for services. Same as John Deere and many others. This is a minmax problem. How to pay the least to cause the other actor to pay the most. If the feature costs $15K and breaking security costs $15K then it is effective security. Obviously…

> Game theory at play. Tesla and its customers are adversaries, vying for the same dollars

Umm, I think this is more like "airlines vs passengers" when passengers read about "hidden city ticketing" in a travel blog, think it sounds cool yet haven't properly understand it, yet decide to go to town on it anyway.[0]

Since most providers are entirely at liberty to tell a customer they're no longer welcome, as a customer you have to be really really sure you want to own up to the provider as being an adversary, since you might end up needing another provider. For ever.

(Full disclosure: have been looking for, booking, and flying on less-than-entirely-legitimate airfares for a looong time. Have occasionally broken out in a cold sweat at an airport in some far-flung country on a dodgy itinerary when I think I've been rumbled...)

[0] https://www.insider.com/skiplagging-american-airlines-banned...

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#325

Post by cozzyd »

coolspot wrote: post #248
ddalex wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you could anonymize your location on Tesla's servers I already anonymise my location on Tesla's servers by simply not owning a Tesla

Your car is filmed and recognized by other teslas.

fortunately I only own a bike...though maybe this makes me ineligible for some Illinois class action lawsuit...

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#326

Post by jchw »

dathos wrote: post #294
jchw wrote: post #275

> Software-locked features that need to be activated by the owner paying or subscribing to a service are becoming increasingly popular in the auto industry. Popular is the wrong word. Common, maybe. But popular?

From the point of view of the auto industry I would say popular is the right word.

Call me pedantic but I think using the word popular without qualifying it any further really begs for you to interpret it more generally, even in this context. Prevalent or common are better terms here in my opinion, since they regard the status quo rather than opinions.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#327

Post by manuel_w »

matwood wrote: post #118
Aloha wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel different about extra cores on a CPU than I do about heated seats. The manufacturing price delta between an 8 core CPU and a 16 core, nowadays is functionally meaningless. The manufacturing cost between a car with heated seats and without headset seats is functioningaflly meaningful. The way I see it, for things like heated seats or CarPlay, I'm already paying for the base hardware cost (plus some margin) as p…

> The manufacturing cost between a car with heated seats and without headset seats is functioningaflly meaningful. Citation needed. The way assembly lines and product mix work, it could be meaningfully less expensive to have all the hardware be identical with software unlocks.

Electrical wiring typically involves materials gained through mining, which is carbon dioxide intensive.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#328

Post by xkcd1963 »

alistairSH wrote: post #258
johnl1479 wrote: post #7

I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.

It's relatively clear to me... Features cost money, so I should pay for them. Wether that's via an option package (traditional) at order time OR via a software update (Tesla) after purchase doesn't matter. BUT! As long as that feature doesn't have recurring costs to the manufacturer (heated seats), it should be a one-time fee, and transfer with ownership. Something like self-driving, where there might be an active in…

Heated seats is essentially a bool somewhere in the code implemented as artificial limitation.

Self-Driving is much more complex and abides much more as an argument to your view.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#329

Post by xwdv »

eschneider wrote: post #219
fragmede wrote: post #122

The real question is Tesla Supercharger capability. If you can't plug your car into that network, then you've lost a ton of value. But here's the thing. In order to disable supercharging, Tesla remotes into your vehicle to turn it off. It doesn't happen on the charger side, it happens on the vehicle. So if you have root on your Tesla, you can make sure you can always supercharge, which isn't mentioned anywhere else.

Here's a question for the lawyers out there: if you notify Tesla that they're no longer authorized to access YOUR car, and they remote into it anyways, would that come under Computer Fraud and Abuse?

You agreed to EULA.

Re: Hackers manage to unlock Tesla software-locked features

#330

Post by eschneider »

alerighi wrote: post #253
johnl1479 wrote: post #7

I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.

In a sense it's something car manufacturers have made for years. Most of the time the difference from one model of a car and another with more power is the mapping on the engine control computer. Till this day it wasn't a problem since this was not really locked down, and despite the fact that is illegal, people did modify the car software to unlock more power quite easily. But... that "locking" of feature kind of ma…

I've done a fair bit of work with engine ECUs and remapping for more power is almost never "free". It's not like manufactures are offering different power outputs strictly via software, though sometimes they'll make different _tradeoffs_ between power/drivability/reliability.

I mean, it's easy to get 20% more power out of an engine if you don't care if it idles like a washing machine. And for some applications, that's just fine.

Post reply on HN