Is Hacking Cars a Thing of the Past?

PhotoGuy asks: "I went to install a remote car starter in our Honda last week, which used to be kind of an elegant hack (like a controlled hot-wiring of your car), only to find out that additional expensive parts and modules were required, due to the anti-theft system on the vehicle, where the car's computer would not let it start, unless it received the right code from the magnetic encoding on the key! In order to install a car starter, you have to actually put a spare key to the vehicle *in* the add-on module to let the car starter do it's thing. Yeah, that makes me more comfortable, leaving a key installed the remote car starter. That sucker went back to the store pretty quickly, that's way too much work, when a dealership can do it for me. Is the slight reduction in risk of theft of your vehicle, worth that much loss of freedom of choice and control?"

"Ever since electronic ignitions, and especially ones controlled by computers, it seems the "hackability" and user-maintainability of cars has been declining. Your neighborhood grease monkey can't do much to a modern car without a bunch of electronic gear interfacing to the car's computer. It's almost a little anti-competitive.

Carbeurators, and the other mechanical systems which were fairly standard and visible and self-evident, really seem to be the equivalent of "open source", while the new computer-based systems seem to be more closed and proprietary. I know in the early days of cars with computers, there were third party ROM upgrades for performance tweaking; I'm guessing that's falling by the wayside more and more, as these systems get more and more complex.

It almost seems like a Microsoft-like statement, to tell you they're doing all of this to reduce theft, while really they're doing it to ensure you are forced into coming back to their dealerships..."

Comments

Their goal...

[smaug195]

Is to make more money for the dealers. I think that we are moving into many diffrent incompatible car computers that all are worked diffrently so a mechanic cant service more then 1 or 2 diffrent types. Bringing about the death of independent mechanics and the rise of the dealerships. Then again I could be paranoid.

Re:Their goal...

[saider]

Not too paranoid. Dealerships make a lot of their money servicing cars. Granted, most of the money comes from the parent company for warranty work. But this practice will not be opposed because there is a lot of money to be made.

1) End user maintenance. Why can't the car tell you why the check engine light is on? Because the dealers want you to come down to the shop and pay them $40 just to do a diagnosis.

2) Mechanics will get the machines that they need to read the computer codes. The car companies make money indirectly by working with the folks who build these boxes. The mechanics make money because they can charge somebody $40 because a light came on.

#2 really burns me. The computers in the shop are typically PCs housed in a big console with several cables coming out. The cables are simply a black box to the parallel port. There is no reason that this black box cannot be made available in you local Discount Auto.

Once my car is paid for, I'm going to set out to develop a replacement computer of my own design - Just to spite those guys. If anyone is interested or knows where I can get info on the Ford 4.6L engine, please let me know. I've got the shop manuals, and they do a pretty good job of describing the signals coming from the equipment. The next step is to design the hardware. OpenCar anyone? No...wait...that's a lousy name. How about RagTop?

Re:Their goal...

[TwoStep]

That "black-box" is available. Check this out. The whole rant is sort of flawed, because there is actually a standard for car diagnostic interfaces, called ODB-2. I had a link to the documentation, but can't find it right now.

Twostep

Re:Their goal...

[Pyrosz]

These guys sell a generic OBDII scan tool for your Palm or Handspring Visor PDA for $329.

On the whole "their making it more complex to make more money for dealers issue", its not even close to that. They make it more complex by adding computer controls to get finer control of the car. Mechanical switches and valves are not as good (emissions, gas mpg, etc..) as computer controlled (electronic) ones. I have a feeling a lot of geeks don't even change their own oil let a lone do something like change an engine. Please go to a local net forum about cars and read a little.

People Still Use Car Alarms?

[Zapaanese.Whore]

Does anyone even use those things anymore?

I mean, let's face it, when you hear a car alarm go off, do you even *LOOK* in that direction? I know I don't.

And even if I saw someone with a jimmy, the hood up, wires sticking out and a .45 in his back pocket, would I do anything? Of course not. Why should I? It's not *MY* car.

All car alarms do now is annoy people.

Oh and give kids a something to throw snowballs at during winter ;)

- Z

Re:People Still Use Car Alarms?

[Nos.]

Its not an alarm. Its an anti-theft device which is not the same thing. A lot (most?) new cars are coming with these now. I didn't know Hondas did, but GM and VW both have these "key readers" that will not allow the vehicle to start without receiving a (magnetic|electrical|???) signal from the key.

My car, a '99 Olds Alero, has the same thing. It's a nice feature, especially considering I live in the car theft capital of Canada (Regina). It can be a pain for things like car starters and getting extra keys made, but overall I like the idea.

Re:People Still Use Car Alarms?

[lizrd]

The GM device you refer to is really pretty simple. The little "chip" embedded in the key is just a resistor. The ignition switch contains a simple ohmmeter that checks to see if the proper key has been inserted, if not it disables the fuel pump for a few minutes. This link explains a bit about how it works. a bit of Google searching will turn up lots more links that describe the system.

other ignition technologies

[SirSlud]

well, I, for one, don't mind losing that kind of 'freedom and control' if it helps the deployment of ignition technologies to keep non-safe drivers out of cars: breathalizer, driver licence check, etc

to me, it is absolutely criminal that cars are not mandated to have at least some level of drunkdriving prevention. dunno if that would get in the way of alternative security systems, but if it does .. well, lets just say that the average human is a little too attached to their car in the first place :)

Re:other ignition technologies

[Tassach]

Sure, let's treat everyone like criminals because the might do somthing bad. Hell, while we're at it let's put speed governers in everyone's car so nobody can drive too fast. Let's put in proximity sensors to force them to slow down if they are tailgating someone. Let's put in a system to shut off the engine if they run a red light. Let's mandate GPS transponders and surveillance devices in all vehicles so the government can track our every move.

I have no problem with installing a breathalizer in the car of someone who has been convicted of DUI/DWI, but it's totally unacceptable to require it of someone who has not even been accused, let alone convicted, of a crime.

Re:other ignition technologies

[(H)elix1]

However, I challenge anyone to come up with a list of 10 legitamite reasons for drunk driving.

10) Natural selection?

Audi Performance and Racing

[LordNimon]

APR has been able to do some amazing things with Audis and Volkswagens. I'd say car hacking is far from dead, you just need to be a lot smarter nowadays.

Besides, installing a remote car starter isn't my idea of a real hack. How is that any more of a "hack" than installing a new car radio? Obviously, you weren't able to bypass the security system, so you're not much of a hacker.

Re:Audi Performance and Racing

[Nater]

I have far better torque and have beaten every vehicle (whether motorcycle, automobile, truck, or otherwise) off the line and out-paced it for the first 25 meters. Of course that's just in regular city traffic, but occassionally some punk in a fast car tries it. I also get infinite gas mileage. I drive a 1.15 horsepower Schwinn with a 24-speed manual transmission. I could turbocharge it, but I quit caffeine.

Cornering? Braking? 90 degree turn, 15 foot radius, 20 mph (on a daily basis using worn tires).

Expensive Car Parts Needed

[Anonymous Coward]

Really the only thing you need from the key is the VATS chip off of it. You really don't need a functioning key to make things work. Electric current goes through the chip, and if the car doesn't receive the correct change in current, the car doesn't start. Requiring a key with VATS doesn't do much for the professional car theif or the theif with access to a dealership with a corrupt car parts guy (imagine that).

Reb

Yeah, i'm pretty pissed off too...

[Wakko Warner]

I tried installing NetBSD on my car last week, only to find out the transmission in my Yugo is undocumented, and they won't tell me how to bootstrap the thing without having me sign an NDA first.

It's a shame, it really is.

"Loss of freedom and control"

[Skyshadow]

How on earth do you lose freedom here? You're still free to go buy a car that doesn't use this sort of antitheft system -- get a Kia or something. I don't recall seeing legislation requiring you to go buy a Honda.

Jesus, this is on the level of whining that you can't use the windshield wipers from your old car (which were brand new!) on a new car you just bought.

spare key

[TheSHAD0W]

The chip in the key is required to trigger the anti-theft system, but the key itself isn't needed. You could cut the metal tongue off the key, rendering it useless for actually turning the starter, while the chip would still work.

You would, of course, be essentially disabling that part of the anti-theft system, but thieves now have ways around it anyway. If the key profile is identical to pre-chipped versions, it would also mean you could run your car with a non-chipped key, which is a lot easier to fit on your keychain.

Evolution

[uslinux.net]

As the once proud owner of a 1966 Mustang, I remember what it was like to mod the hell out of my car. Now my wife has a Civic and I have a 4Runner (hey, we live in the mountains, so 4WD is a MUST on at least one vehicle). Modern cars are a LOT quiter, ride better, get better fuel economy, and are better for the environment. Equivalent sized (outside dimentions) vehicles actually have MORE room inside them now, more luxuries (all but the cheapest cars now have power windows/locks/disc brakes/etc, are much safer, etc, etc.

All of this comes at a price. You now nearly need to be a rocket scientist (or at least an automotive engineer) to work on them, but IMO, the price is worthwhile. Meanwhile, my 5.0L V8 '66 Mustang used to get about 16 MPG and had about 220HP, yet you can buy a 4-cylinder Subaru WRX with 225HP (Turbo) which gets ~27MPG, and will let you walk away in a crash.

Yes, cars have gotten harder to work on, but they've also gotten safer, lighter, less polluting, and more luxurious. If you want to tinker with your vehicle, buy a 2-door Civic and mod it up, or buy a classic to restore like I did. Or get a kit, and build it from scratch.

Car thieves have it all wrong....

[Restil]

I mean.. why break into cars, hotwire them, and drive them off. The smart thief would save up and get himself a tow truck. The ONLY person who would pay any attention at all is the owner. The alarm could be going off and nobody would give it a second glance. Chances are good, nobody would ever even get a plate #. You could steal the car in plain sight, and never hear a peep about it.

No antitheft system in the world will help against a dedicated theif. The most effective system would probably be to just remove the distributor cap, or a kludge to disconnect the battery easily. No car thief is gonna spend time under the hood finding out why the car won't start. Of course, you get bit on convienence issues. But you'll never have to concern yourself with car theft.

-Restil

Re:Car thieves have it all wrong....

[spud_daemon]

The most effective system would probably be to just remove the distributor cap, or a kludge to disconnect the battery easily. No car thief is gonna spend time under the hood finding out why the car won't start. Of course, you get bit on convienence issues. But you'll never have to concern yourself with car theft.

LOL, thats an interesting assesment. At a local car show I was near the security booth when one man came to report his 1969 camaro was stolen and he couldn't figure out how it was stolen since he had the rotor out of the distributor in his pocket. Literally within 5 minutes another man came in to report that someone stole the rotor out of the distributor on his chevy truck.

If theifs want it, they will take it. They are resourceful and will spend some time under the hood.

Step back and think about it.

[karmaflux]

I think that comparing fuel-injection to closed-source programming is a bit ridiculous. So it's not as easy to work on as a carburetor -- you can still buy a book and learn to work on your fuel injectors. Automobile engines have grown more complicated over time. All technology does. Honda's decision that fuel-injection is more efficient than carburetion does not indicate they are trying to force you out from under your hood.

As for third-party ROM upgrades, these things are falling by the wayside because, among other reasons, most onboard computers use EEPROMS now, and when most people monkey with their engines they just wind up wrecking the timing and trashing the performance anyway.

And there's not reason to compare everything you dislike to Microsoft. That radio keylock is a Honda option, nobody forced you to buy it, nobody is keeping you from removing that option from your car, and so on. A little time with a pair of diags and a soldering iron will remove the problem forever.

As for leaving a spare key installed, what makes you think that's less secure than installing a remote starter? I built a little gadget not six months ago. It's a lot of fun. I go into a mall parking lot and press a button. A couple of 555 timers start cranking... and a few seconds later so do all the tricked-out imports in the parking lot. Granted, I still can't get in the vehicles, but I sure can start 'em up.

In conclusion, if you want to play with your engine, or your ignition system, or whatever, buy a car you know how to work on. If you buy a 2002 model and can't figure out how to monkey with it, don't blame the auto manufacturer for knowing more about cars than you.

Re:Step back and think about it.

[Y2K is bogus]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Every advancement in car tuning has come at the hands of some VERY smart people. Ford doesn't publish information on how to tune their cars. Niether does GM, or Audi, or Volkswagen, or Honda, or Subaru, or BMW. All of these computers have been hacked in the truest sense of the word. There are people with logic analyzers sniffing the bus of running computers to figure out what's happening. People write emulators and disassemblers to understand where all the tables, functions, and scalars are.

OBD-II has made it a lot easier to hack computers, but the tuning of the engine is still an art practiced by people who have learned A LOT and still don't know everything. It's rare to find an aftermarket engine that is tuned to the quality of the OEM engine, it just doesn't happen all that often.

So what happens? There are several companies who manufacture aftermarket drop-in computers for controlling engine functions. For Fords SpeedBrain and the Ford SVO EPEC come to mind. For race cars the Edelbrock EFI, Accel DFI, Speedpro, and Motronic are used often. The upside to the aftermarket is that you get documentation and they rarely are as complex as OEM computers.

Here's a list off the top of my head of sensors and functions a Ford EEC-IV computer controls:

Mass Air Flow Sensor, Barometric pressure sensor, Throttle Position Sensor, Engine Coolant Temperature sensor, Air Charge Temperature sensor, O2 sensor, Vehicle Speed Sensor, Exhaust Gas Recirculator valve, Canister Purge Valve, Thermactor Control Valve, Thick Film Ignition module, Idle Stabilizer Valve, Automatic transmission accumulator pressure, 1st to 2nd gear shift point, 2nd to 3rd gear shift point, 3rd to 4th gear shift point, Torque Converter lockup RPM, Idle RPM, Automatic Transmission Drive Idle RPM, Neutral indicator, etc.

That's just sensors and some basic interactions. Most aftermarket computers don't use half those sensors, and on top of that they are usually Manifold Absolute Pressure based rather than Mass Air Flow.

So, as you can see, it isn't "Just buy a book". I have every book on Ford EFI, and none of them tell you the slightest thing about tuning an EEC-IV computer. Everything I've learned has been from the internet (there are enthusiasts who hack and document their hacks) and from hacking.

I've been there, I've done computer tweaking, and I know it's not simple or trivial, it's all just hacking and guesswork.

Re:My Car Alarm Idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be cool if it started off in a low-key mode than got progressively more hysterical.

Phase 1: *sound of clearing throat then woman's soft voice* Can you sort of leave now before it gets worse for you?
Phase 2: *loud voice but not screaming* "OK, You were warned. Step away from the vehicle, NOW!"
Phase 3: *screaming in woman's voice* "Thief! Thief! Help! Thief!"
Phase 4: *screaming hysterically/shrieking* I'M BEING RAPED! I'M BEING RAPED! HEEEELLLPPP!! HE'S STICKING IT IN MY ASSSS!!! MY ASSSS!!!"

And so it goes.

Computer Controls are our Friends

[Nightclaw]

Comparing modern computer-controlled cars to closed-source software is a bit unfair, really. Modern cars are VERY hackable, if you know what you're doing and don't mind voiding parts of your warranty. The car-modding game's the same, but the rules have changed is all. If you understand the rules, there is little you cannot mod on a new car.

To use my own car as an example, there is a program that would allow me to modify the fuel tables, ignition tables and other operational parameters on the on-board computer using a standard PC (program: LS1Edit). This acheives the same thing as playing with the distributor dwell and carb mixture on an older engine, and then some.

Or, for the less adventurous, Hypertech makes a device that allows you to apply "macros" to the onboard computer, doing the same thing as LS1Edit, but to a lesser degree.

Further, modern cars (with the appropriate computer hacks) still respond quite nicely to the old-school tricks: headers, camshafts, intakes, strokers, blowers, etc. It's like having the best of both worlds - the reliability and economy of computer control, and the performance and "hackability" of old-school tricks.

It all comes down to learning new rules to play the same old game. :-)

Some cars are more hackable, e.g. VW

[Malc]

My Passat has the same 1.8T engine that is used from Jettas/Golfs all the way up to Audi TTs. The computer chip that controls the engine is programmed to de-tune it compared with the Audis. Some of the things the chip does is control maximum turbo pressure, etc. Considering the price difference, I guess they don't want performance equality between VW and Audi. My Passat only gets 150hp, whereas the TT gets 225hp from the same engine. Seeing as some many components are shared with Audi, the car can easily take these changes. Another common hack is getting the tiptronic transmission re-programmed to modify the shift points and the time it takes to shift.

There is a big market in reprogramming or replacement ECM chips... I can easily get another 40hp and perhaps better millege by going down this route. The hp can be increased further with turbo replacements, etc, but apparently, you start having to make other big changes for the car to handle 200+hp.

Take a look around http://www.clubb5.com/ for some ideas... these B5 Passats are very hackable. Whether it's just plugging a laptop into the VAG-COM thing and re-programming the locks, or wiring in new tools like The Alien, or putting in Xenon lights and the Audi sport suspension.

OBD-3 and big brother

[NastyGnat]

You think ODB-II is screwing us, wait till OBD-III goes live. Here are some of the features as stated by the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA).
---
OBD-III TECHNOLOGIES

Three ways to send/receive data:
Roadside reader
Local station network
Satellite
---

That's right, a radio link to tell big brother where you are, and what your car is doing. Why??

---
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
Incorporate into biennial I/M program
Read fault code to screen for vehicles that need complete testing
Pass or short test for vehicles with no fault code
Does not speed up repair process
Out-of-cycle inspection
Compile and screen data
Mail notice to vehicle owner requiring out-of-cycle inspection within 10 days
Require Certificate of Compliance (C of C) on next registration/resale, or
Require C of C within 30-60 days, with citation for noncompliance
Enforce citation via court and/or DMV penalty at next registration
Roadside Pullover
CHP flags down vehicles with fault codes
Technician verifies problem by inspecting and/or testing vehicle
Issuance of notice requiring out-of-cycle inspection
Same enforcement (C of C /citation)
---

On the other hand they also realise that there are legal issues by this statement on their site.

---
OBD-III raises 4th Amendment search and seizure privacy issues:
''The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated...''
---

But afterwards state that the OBD system should be leagal because it's a nondiscrimitory, mass population product. Whereas the 4th amendment only protects individual privacy and not a group of individuals.

Read more about this at
Sema web site

Why Write A Ticket?

[Greyfox]

Versus, say, simply having the car refuse to go over the speed limit?

They were talking about that on CNN while I was travelling through Europe. It's quite feasible to implement it. It's also quite feasible to implement automatic ticketing that tickets all speeders all the time. Neither system would stand a chance of hell of ever getting implemented. In the case of the car just refusing to speed, that'd eliminate speeding ticket revenue and a lot of places depend on that revenue. In the case of the automatic ticketing thing, people would force the speed limits to be removed or raised to the actual speeds people drive at (Which again would have the effect of eliminating those lovely ticket revenues.)

What this adds up to is that there is a system that is arbitrairly enforced against a population which more or less completely ignores the posted limits.