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

Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 660 posts

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#511

Post by briffle »

stork19 wrote: post #443
SoftTalker wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatics are more fuel efficient, and govenment keeps raising the efficiency requirements. Automatics do this by having a lot of gears and changing up very aggressively. It would suck to drive a 7 or 9 speed manual (maybe truck drivers feel differently; I think 5 is optimal for a car) but automatics can manage it and squeeeze out another tenth of an MPG. I love manual transmissions and will never buy an automatic u…

Noooo. Manuals are on average much more efficient. I drive a 1st generation Honda Insight, and the manual version gets ~10 mpg more than the automatic.

Modern pickups have 8-10 speed transmissions. They do a better job of keeping you in the power band.

In addtion, no heavy duty pickup comes with a manual anymore, but the ones that did years ago, de-tuned the engines in the manuals, so people didn't burn up the clutch. Modern Diesel Heavy Duty pickups only put their full 1000 ft/lbs to the wheels in 3rd gear or higher, something they can't enforce in a manual. Also, in most manuals (granted, its been a few years since I drove one) with turbos, pushing the clutch stats unspooling the turbo, where in most automatics, it does not. (since its knows your shifting, and not just coasting)

Yes, these are all related to driver skill, and a skilled driver will not cause problems. But I wouldn't want to warranty the systems on an 'average' driver..

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#512

Post by toast0 »

dylan604 wrote: post #503
toast0 wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience with two cars with factory nav, it's nice because it will show the next instructions in the the dash area, so when you're looking down to check speed you also get that. And, one of my cars has an option to show the next several instructions (Ford Sync2, which everybody hates because the UI is really slow, and kind of ugly). On the other hand, pay to play for data updates sucks. And most importantly…

>sometimes the phone gets tired of listening to GPS. I'm sorry, what?

I was recently driving to visit a friend near Mt Baker, WA. and about 10 miles out, in a not particularly wooded area, the phone said 'lost GPS signal' and just assumed I had stopped moving, and wasn't able to pick up GPS again for the rest of the drive. Not a huge deal, because I was just following the road and only had one last turn to make, and I had directions from the car's nav anyway.

GPS seemed to work ok on the return trip. And I was getting an LTE signal for most of the drive too (gets pretty spotty at my friend's house, but I was streaming music when the GPS stopped, and that kept working)

Sorry, I don't have a debugging tale here; almost all of my excursions into figuring out why an Android device is doing something wrong leave me wondering if the device is doing anything right, and usually without any more insight into the original problem. Not going to try to do it, unless it's important, and probably not on a vacation.

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#513

Post by PrimeMcFly »

throw3747874747 wrote: post #105
justinclift wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Oops, how did that happen..." ;)

It is EURO5 or EURO6 emmision norm. It also handles firmware updates, reaction to Volkswagen cheating. Car needs to be online, check for latest firmware and all sort of nasty DRM. There is also a black box, that records position and speed. It may call emergency if it detects crash. If DRM is violated, car may refuse to start, or only drive like 50 kms. I don't have a source, but anyone should be able to find relevant…

That's just creating a blackmarket for people that can crack the DRM without the car losing functionality.

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#514

Post by RealityVoid »

EricE wrote: post #371
ashafer wrote: post #247

Certain cars let you physically disable this. For example, the Tacoma has a "Data Communication Module" (DCM) that performs all of this and has a cell radio to phone home. There's a fuse in the fusebox you can pull to prevent the DCM from getting any power. Only side effect is the in-cabin microphone stops working and you can reconnect the fuse at any time. It's as if the engineering team didn't want to develop a spy…

lol - if they were only that altruistic. Toyota doesn't make the tech, they buy modules from suppliers and integrate the tech. Better hope someone doesn't come out with a fancy super module that has everything integrated because there will be no disabling it as soon as that happens :/ Don't forget Toyota was the manufacturer that was going to charge a monthly subscription just for the key fob (!) to work until they g…

> Better hope someone doesn't come out with a fancy super module that has everything integrated because there will be no disabling it as soon as that happens :/

Well, hello there, zone ECU!

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#515

Post by PrimeMcFly »

lost_tourist wrote: post #163
throw3747874747 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure that is (or soon will be) illegal in EU. Car needs to be able to call emergency, if accident is detected.

Is there some EU police that go around arresting people if you clip it?

It wouldn't be surprising if there was. Look at how they go around enforcing people paying a tax just to be able to use televisions they legally own.

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#516

Post by ravenstine »

bityard wrote: post #279
hashtag-til wrote: post #3

I think it will be a good differentiation factor in a few years, that a brand comes up with an offline car, i.e. a car that you just refuel/charge and drive - no telemetry/connected features involved. It may be a niche thing in future, but certainly something that would be appealing to me as a consumer.

I'm with you 100%, but reality is strongly not in our favor. In order to bring a new car brand to the market, it literally takes the resources of a narcissistic billionaire, and even those are much more like upper-middle class status symbols than affordable conveyance for everyone. The regulatory hill is a steep climb on its own and the incumbents have a literal 100-year head start on how to sell cars to normal peopl…

And unfortunately, the history of narcissistic rich people making cars is none too good. Such cars will either be overly expensive and require parts to be shipped from Italy, or they'll be totally shoddy "look at me" cars like Tesla or DeLorean.

> Even if we just look at the tech sector... where are the privacy-preserving cell phones?

PinePhone?

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#517

Post by neurostimulant »

foxyv wrote: post #474
cduzz wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never really seen the issue with "manual in traffic" -- there's almost always a gear or two that allow you to go a the speed of traffic without tons of shifting. Stop and go? 2nd probably goes from "creep" to "moderate speed" Anyhow, electric cars are better all around -- at least those with "one pedal driving" where the speed pedal goes all the way to zero or nearly zero. My dislike of automatics is the indeter…

Ahh sweet summer child. Traffic that has a speed isn't really traffic in my book. It isn't really traffic until you spend more time stopped than moving. Joking aside, the worst traffic is when you stop every 4 seconds and then creep forward ten feet before stopping again. If I wasn't planning to go car-less I think I would buy an electric car for that nonsense.

I swear my left foot got a little bit more muscular than the right foot when I had to go through such traffics everyday in a manual.

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#518

Post by rootusrootus »

Digory wrote: post #189
stanski wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume it's a cost thing. Slapping a tablet everywhere and letting the code monkeys figure it out is probably cheaper than making various knobs and buttons. I dread the day I have to get a new car. Even Subaru, who are usually behind the curve, have gone all touch screen.

The feds have mandated a screen (for backup cameras). Then the makers try to minimize costs by having the screen do everything. I’d like to say I’d pay more for real buttons, but I’d never buy a new car.

The backup camera screen compliance was solved early on by just putting a 2-3 inch screen in the regular rear view mirror. There's no legal requirement to make it a big screen in the dash, that is 100% a design choice by the manufacturers unrelated to the backup camera.

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#519

Post by neogodless »

dv_dt wrote: post #449
neogodless wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just bought a 2023 Mazda CX-5 Select for $29k. No touchscreens in the whole car! And no dealer markup - we paid slightly under MSRP. But... it is certainly satellite connected (you can manage locks, windows, etc. from your phone, as well as remote start). Wish it was included in this privacy investigation. I'd love to know more about what they do with what they know about our car and how we use it.

I had a close in-law that had a total braking failure with their ~2017 Mazda Cx-9, which was one thing, but then the dealer was pretty horrible about acknowledging or even diagnosing it. In the end, they sold it off early instead of continuing to own it with the unknowns on the brakes. So it's an anecdote, but one that makes me look pretty seriously against Mazda - though maybe it was more the dealer than the company…

It's hard to say. Of course the OEM should care what their dealers do and how they treat customers, but ultimately the dealers decide how they are going to handle things.

I haven't had any failures on any of our Mazdas so far (2013 CX-5, though only had it for 2 years. I change cars like clothes, 2014 CX-5 - spouse had for ~70k / 6 years, 2015 Mazda 3 - had for 27k / 6 years). Only issue I had was a battery that died during the pandemic, and it didn't really die - I was able to nurse it back to health and then it kept working through when I sold the car 3 years later. All that to say, I haven't been able to test our dealership with a major failure. But the buying experience did exceed what we experienced at the other dealerships we visited (Hyundai, Chevrolet - lots of unwanted sales contact and in person pressure.)

Re: Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted by Mozilla

#520

Post by BluePen7 »

scott_w wrote: post #401
cpursley wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manuals suck in traffic. Americans sit in a lot of traffic. And I say this as somebody who loves manuals (I’m an amateur race car driver).

That’s odd because I like the control a clutch pedal gives me in heavy traffic. And I drive a 15 year old diesel!

I'm only 30, but at this point a 15 year old car still feels kinda "new" to me. Up until a few months ago, I drove a 2008 Lexus, felt perfectly modern.

But in regards to driving a manual in traffic, does a diesel not make it easier? An engine suited to lower RPMs, but with more torque, seems perfectly suited to clutching in/out to shuffle along.

Post reply on HN