Slashdot Mirror


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..."

11 of 748 comments (clear)

  1. Audi Performance and Racing by LordNimon · · Score: 5, Informative
    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.

    --
    And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
    To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
  2. spare key by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  3. Evolution by uslinux.net · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. Car thieves have it all wrong.... by Restil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
    1. Re:Car thieves have it all wrong.... by spud_daemon · · Score: 5, Funny
      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.

  5. Step back and think about it. by karmaflux · · Score: 5, Informative
    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.

    --

    REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.

  6. Re:My Car Alarm Idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  7. Re:Their goal... by saider · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

    --


    Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  8. Re:Their goal... by TwoStep · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

    --
    There are 10 different types of people in this world... those who understand binary, and those who don't.
  9. Re:other ignition technologies by Tassach · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  10. OBD-3 and big brother by NastyGnat · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

    --
    -- this space for rent --