Slashdot Mirror
Auto Black-Box Data Being Used In Court
DrEnter writes "Yahoo! is running this USAToday article about automobile electronic data recorder (EDR or "black-box") data being used in civil and criminal court cases. Most owners of cars so equipped don't know they have them, or that they can be used against them. The NHTSA has been investigating EDRs and is collecting public comments to determine if and how these devices should be regulated."
I'm sure the privacy advocates will be screaming 'bloody murder' about this one, but with all the idiots out there on the road, if common knowledge of this device can make people think twice about their behaviour on the road, then I'm all for it. My only concern would be as to the accuracy of the data it collects.
when i read about this on some other site, there were lots of people worried about the privacy implications
i disagree. there things just record stuff like speed and when you hit the breaks. also, they keep on overwritting the old data, until you actually crash.
the way is see it is that these things are just unbiased information, and while they can obviously be bad for you if you actually were speeding and got into an accident, they can also help you out if you got falsly accused
Welcome to the Internet, the free-information Utopia imagined by writers such as Jon Katz. There are no boundaries, no walls, no way to contain the flow of information, including anything about your life: purchases, consumer preferences, physical address, etc.
While many thinkers have hearlded the dawning of this new information age as a way of having open access to art, history, science, the media, government, and other sources, they have in general failed to imagine the "negative" aspects of this openness: that wants you get it going, nothing can stop it. Further, you're the next target.
Now, you might be like me, an ordinary guy, just sitting at the computer, eating a Cadbury bar and drinking water, not thinking about your privacy, but at any given moment, you're information is being traded behind your back by any number of coporations, banks, government agencies, and private citizens. But should you be concerned?
Looking out the window, I see no black helicopters flying overhead. No g-men are breaking down my door to arrest me for having bootleg CDs. In fact, my life is no different than before. Sure, I get spam, sometimes, and tagreted banner ads, but spam gets deleted and I can just use IJB anyway. If these are you biggest problems, consider yourself lucky.
Personally, I think the privacy freaks have it all wrong. With the Internet, all digital material, including your personal info, can't be contained. So what if advertisers know that you're a raving Linux zealot? Isn't it their business to know how to offer you consumer goods targeted at tech-savvy buyers? As far as I'm concerned, the Internet and capitalism go hand-in-hand, and this exchange of information will help capitalism, which will in turn help out the Internet far more than government robots like Gore or George "there ought to be limits to freedom" Bush. Your privacy is long gone, but right now we can at least enjoy the benefits that it brings, as long as the U.S. government doesn't screw something up (I'm speaking as and for USians now).
So you have a choice: you can either accept your loss of privacy and get the great economic and technological benefits that it brings, or attempt to cripple the system with laws, which won't bring back your lost privacy anyway. Remember, it was us, the geeks, who wanted free information. This is our reward. Let's use it wisely.
I'm not Seth.
This reminds me a lot of hearing about the auto rental places using GPS information to charge fines on people they think are speeding. At the same time, GPS data was used by some police units to send automated tickets to people believed to be speeding...
--etrnl--
I would suspect that the police would have to go through the normal means of obtaining a warrant before they could grab the data from the GPS system in the car. This would be no different that the police getting a warrant to rifle through a guy's home looking for evidence to convict him. It's just that a GPS system gives much more accurate data than a few hairs or a spot of blood could, in terms of location and time.
If the government is able to have access to this data without a warrant, that would be unconstitutional, and might be a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. Even the patriot act doesn't allow that.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
This isn't some nasty privacy thing - cars are dangerous things. If someone is driving like an idiot and causes an accident, they need to be banned from driving, and if these black boxes - which only record the last five seconds of data before the airbag inflates anyway - are the only way to get the evidence to do so, then so be it. Conversely of course, if the other driver claims you were speeding and your black box records that you were doing 30mph in the last five seconds, it'll let you off the hook.
These things aren't recording your speed over large periods of time, they aren't downloading info to any police car that asks for it, they aren't transmitting your position to some control centre. So the engineer can look at it, so what, he/she gets to see how slowly you drove the car across their service station forecourt. So at the moment, I see them as nothing but good.
Car ECU's do seem to hold a lot more information than perhaps most people think they do... and I personally think its for the better.
I am certain that on a number of higher priced cars (such as Porsches or BMW's) they record lots of little details.. like the number of standing 'sprint' starts you have made as a pose to just regular pulling away from lights etc.
A friend recently had to visit the dealership to have his ECU reprogrammed on his brand new Peugeot 206 - they were able to determine from that what, amongst other things, his top speed had been since owning it.
I feel its a good idea for car manufacturers to do it though.. it helps them when it comes down to court cases and complaints about the 'quality' of their car, if they can see how their cars are been driven. They can then gauge if the wear on parts relates to the style of driving and can absolve themselves from any responsibility.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
From the ref. article:
"the data from black boxes, which are on about 40 million cars in the USA"
6 of the 8 posts so far show that they aren't even awware that such a thing exists on cars. Is this an informed society? Or a purposely misinformed, under-informed or engineered society?
Maybe 10 billion of our clothes already contain RFID tags? A few billion of our wrist watches already contain bugs? Seems like paranoia is the only sensible option to remain sane.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
These black boxes are virtually identical in function to the black boxes used in planes. As a matter of fact, for those who don't know, there's generally two black boxes located in cars, both of which are under the dashboard usually. One of these records speed, steering, traction, and other data the car's computer collects. This is similar to the flight data recorder. The other is connected to a small microphone, hidden somewhere in the car, that records sound inside the car. This black box is similar to the cockpit voice recorder. It's a concern because it can record conversations and it's possible that this could be used to monitor people. And there's no telling how this data could be used against people or how it can be used to invade privacy. Ever asked for directions before from your car. You talk to someone from your car and you can't tell when they stop listening. It's very possible someone can listen in on you that way, too. Really, it's kind of creepy. Just my two cents.
My '97 Starun SC2 had an electrical problem a little while ago, something called the RKE module fried. OK not a big deal I thought to myself, it's a machine and things fail. What caught my attention was the fact that I always ask for the old parts back. I think there is a california state law about it or something, and just to make sure I am not getting ripped off. The funny thing is the dealership refused to let me have it. Some BS about security and the car alarm ( At the time I thought the mechanic I was talking to just made this up for whatever reason) so I didn't argue as the car worked.
But now I read this and am wondering... is the standard GM "black box" contained in the RKE module? Does anyone know what exactly goes on in the RKE besides car alarm functions. Seems like a rather big box for just an alarm, even factoring in GM's bloated-lo-tech way of doing things.
Or am I just paranoid?
...I wished the other's car had such things. I was on bicycle, came from his right on a prioritary road, he had a stop, and he swore he braked when he saw me , but I only saw him swerve to try to pass anyway and there was no "braking" sound. Such a gadget would have put him back in place and forced him to pay my health care (skin and flesh ripped on my right leg, rib cage a bit bent, left hand ripped bleeding like hell and still not usable 100% 5 years after). He got off "lightly" with some point off his licence, instead of a big minus or a cancel since he andangered my life by not braking. A black box would have maybe proved it.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
...that the majority of Automobile vs. Bicycle accidents were caused by cyclists pretending they were pedestrians wearing body armour.
;-)
I don't know the specifics of your accident, so I won't make a judgement there, but the fact remains that the majority of cyclists (at least in my area) totally ignore the rules, 100%. This means that the very few legitimate cases tend to be downplayed. Sorry if you got the short end of the stick. Perhaps you might consider driving a vehicle that's a little more "respected" by the courts? (Don't take that personally!
Yes, I have never, not even once, seen a cyclist motion which way they intend to go. I've never seen a cyclist motion to slow or stop. I often see cyclists in the country riding AGAINST traffic (illegal, obviously). To top it all off, the less professional ones don't even wear HELMETS, and don't have any lighting or reflectors on their bikes at night at all! All of these are required (where I live), and if you don't do them, well, fuck, you're putting your life in danger. I'd rather have one of those new police video cameras strapped onto my car than a black box. That way I could tape the rule breaking cyclist if (sorry, at this rate, more like WHEN) I smash in to them and they sue me for their brain damage (most likely caused prior to the accident -- why else would you ride like you have a death wish).
Not that I'm saying you didn't. But hey...
Sorry for the rant.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
In the airplane industry, the hundreds of little black boxes that belong to a typical jetliner can only be read and interpreted by the specific airplane manufacturer that made them. The resulting simulation may appear to be an unbiased account of what truly happened, but we really don't know that -- the system used to decode them is a closely guarded trade secret.
In the automobile industry, those same black boxes will serve the interest of whoever develops them and puts them in your car. If your car manufacturer puts them in, they will be biased in favor of your car manufacturer. If your rental company puts them in, they will be biased in favor of your rental company. And if your car insurance company makes you put them in, they will biased in favor of your insurance company.
May be I'm just paranoid, but I would really like to see somekind of black box kit we could develop ourselves and install ourselves.
I guess I am torn on this issue.
On one hand, if black box data is used against you, you could claim discrimination since not all cars have the boxes and therefore you are being punished to a greater extent as a direct result of the car you chose to purchase.
On the other hand, I think it would be a good idea (Big Brother paranoia aside) for the industry to create a standard for what kind of dasta is collected and mandate the use of these devices on all new cars. Unbiased witnesses in courtrooms is badly needed these days due to blatant disregard for truth and justice.
Now how do you stop Big Brother from tapping this info? You KNOW they're gonna wanna give this thing an IP address that maps to your Social Security Number and is able to broadcast on wireless networks...
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
Yeah. I am a healthy young person (compared to most...), I am not unemployed or anything, why the hell do I still have to pay social security? Why do I have to pay for some cancer victim's expensive pills, or some kid's bracers? THEY use the service, let THEM pay, not ME!
(And if you think I really meant what I just said and agree with it, go and shoot yourself, you meanie...)
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
advocacy, informational website
Discusses OBDII, not from a completely unbiased source
information is accurate, some of it is incomplete though
Straight from the horses mouth,
US Environmental Protection Agency
More information than you care to read, in the search box, enter 'OBDII' without single quotes. This should enlighten you on the original intent of the OBD legislation, as well as the legal basis it stands on(see also, Clean Air Act,1970)
If you care about the future, this one is more serious than most as far as privacy goes. Please, please, if you don't ever write your representative again, write about this.
Here's a breakdown of OBDIII, what it means for your car, and what it means for your privacy
OBDIII summarized at University of Minnesota, Mechanical Engineering dept.
This talks about the current status of diagnostics, legislation, and what's coming on the horizon like locus in egypt.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
I did hear rumors about insurance companies wanting to charge drivers by the mile! This really pisses me off since I use to do copier repair. Why should I be charged for driving my own car so I can work? The insurance industry would love to own all cars to satisfy their stockholders like Microsoft loves to own all computers.
Anyway it would be nice if these boxes could stay but under some rules.
1. Search warrant required to review data
2. No GPS or protection from insurance companies watching my driving habits
3. Only be used in court of laws.
Speeding is hard to prove. Especially if you live in California and 90 to 100mhh is typically average on some highways during non rush hour. Where I am in Vegas route 15 to Los Angeles has Californians going 90 on average on the way back to LA. They are nuts. I would hate to be fined while driving at the same speed as everyone else on the road.
Anyway I do not have a problem if this is not abused.
But I do agree consumers have a right to know about black boxes upon purchasing as well as renting cars.
http://saveie6.com/
I hate the technology, but if it's there then people will use it.
:-( )
My 7-year-old nephew was killed by a drunk driver on his way to school this year, and if the guy would have had a black box, then believe me -- we would have used it in court.
The problem with technology is that it is dangerous, and once it's out there it will be used and abused. Just like anything else (like alcohol
Such is life...
Apparently our police department, without knowledge to the public, patrols condo and high end apartments placing fliers that say,
"Your car is attracting theft for the following reasons:
Your doors are unsecure, unlocked, convertible top down
You have _________ in plain view
You do not have a security system
Your custom _________ is unsecure
You have items on your porch that may attract theft
A note from the Greenville County Police Department"
At first, you think this sounds great. "I'm glad the police are patrolling and keeping me safe" Well, in this case, the man's insurance company wasn't going to pay because the police department apparently writes down your license information when they place a flier on your car. IF you do call to report a break-in that information is added to the police report that is sent to your insurance company when you go to make a claim.
To bring this back to topic. There are many things that we have to be aware of when we purchase with anonimity or use things that can be traced to us (IE car through license plate) This is one reason I like to try to get records of any traceable thing I have (credit cards, license, email, phone, local police, BBB report, eBay, etc) every 3 years. ( I have a list of 25 sources that collect information about me and a form letter I use to request information)
I was surprised to find out a couple weeks ago that the post office even has a rap sheet on me. (Rude to desk clerks, mailing in improper boxes, mailing improper rate)
Without trying to instill FUD, just be aware of how FREE you are and how FREE you are not in a trackable, traceable with seamless technology society.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
I'm familiar with onboard computers, codes, etc. I was involved when Ford asked Aerospace to design their STAR system diagnostics back in the 80's, but I haven't touched a car computer for over 5 years.
Didn't expect a physical reset...just curious if there is a direct 'accident data' purge, or if that data is co-mingled with routine, gathered driving parameters, etc.
If accident data is distinct, I'd be curious if it is protected from being purged.
That depends soley on the manufacturer. If an airbag is deployed, for instance, many ECU's will not overwrite the data logged, but will continue to log OBDII mandated data if the engine continues to run. Some ECU's will, in the event the car is driven, simply overwrite the previously stored data. Did you read the part where 40(or 60%, can't remember now) of datalogging capable ECU's couldn't be retrieved. Part of this is programming, part of this is electrical disruption, and the other part is physical damage to the ECU/datalogger.
Yes, there is a datalog purge function, but you have to have the manufacturers ID key for your car. It is for authentication and is proprietary. With this ID key, they are able to reprogram ECU's, find problems that aren't available to independant repair shops, as well as purge usage/accident data.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Some of the posters don't think these black boxes should exist, but there is at least one very legitimate reason for its continued existence. In the 1980's, there were claims that the Audi 5000 sometimes accelerated on its own, with no input to the gas pedal, and despite hard braking. Some injuries were involved. Unfortunately, IIRC, nobody could pinpoint the exact reason for these claims. Some suggested that the real problem was that the design and placement of the gas and brake pedals were causing drivers to erroneously accelerate when they intended to decelerate.
Audi US sales plunged to oblivion. Audi was forced to discontinue the 5000, and it took several years for the public relations nightmare to subside. If the black box were available then, we could easily have determined the true cause of the problem. If it were indeed a legitimate defect in the car, it could have been resolved very quickly, thereby preventing further injuries. If it were driver error, Audi could have been spared the tremendous losses they suffered. Both the manufacturer and the consumer would have benefited from this technology.
Come to think of it, based on the timing, I wonder if this isn't what motivated the development of automobile black boxes in the first place?
Not Found
The requested URL
OK, if everyone'e car had one of these devices it would make reconstruction of an accident a bit easier. However what happens if you're in an accident with someone who drives an older car?
Would the other driver be able to introduce your black box into evidence even though he had no such box? So he could say "I swear that I was driving within the speed limits, the black box shows that the other guy was going 5 MPH over the limit, therefore the accident was clearly his fault." You could only prove the speed of the car with the black box, not the other car.
That frightens me because it would only give a biased view of the accident. Maybe I sped up to avoid his speeding car. Maybe I was blindsided so I didn't hit the breaks. But only my black box would be revealed, so I'd be the only one with direct proof against him.
The article posted shows a very clear-cut example of how this technology could be good, and does not give any example of how it could be misused. Heck, by reading the article, you'd agree that a non-consenting blood alcohol test would be a good idea, but that clearly was not permissible in this case. Why would a non-consenting black-box reading be permissible? Why are the two things different?
I know I'm in the minority here, but the slippery slope and big brother aside, how bad are these things, really?
Lurking around a bit, I noted that many people are saying "How come nobody's been told about these things? Is it a CONSPIRACY?" I doubt it.
This so-called "black box" is nothing but the OBDII diagnostics module, which every car built after 1996 has. It keeps track of how just about every subsystem in your car is functioning, as well as realtime statistics such as speed, RPM, temperature, mixture, etc. For a complete list of general error codes, take a look at these pages:
Chassis
Body
Powertrain
Network
When "Check Engine" comes on, OBDII has detected a failure in one of these subsystems and logged it. Your dealer plugs their computer into the diagnostics port, finds out what the error is, and fixes the problem (usually), and clears the code. The site I referenced for the error codes, Scantool has circuit specs and software you can use to access this data. The downside is that there are three OBDII protocols, and with this system you need a separate module to read each one. There are other places you can go to get a universal reader, but prices are usually pretty expensive.
The upshot is that's it's relatively cheap, and if you like electronics and want to build it yourself it's even cheaper. Autozone stopped doing the free OBD scans, so I used this little project as an excuse to learn how to print my own PCB and have my own diagnostics card for when I need it. Also a big plus is that the software source code is available.
Allright, now that I'm off my tangent, I'll get back to the original subject. It's pure conjecture to guess why the realtime statistics are put in a rolling log for 5 seconds. Could it be a deal with insurance companies? Maybe the computer averages the saved statistics to determine if there's an event? Maybe the orgininal intent was for safety? Who knows?
But remember the data not only can be used against you (which won't happen, you are all safe drivers, right??), but also to exonerate you if the other driver tries to set you up.
And in the article, I didn't see any uses of the logs I particularly disagreed with. If your drunk ass is doing 120mph and you kill two teenage girls, maybe you need to be put in the cooler for awhile.
-R
I have one of these units pointed out my window right now, looking at an intersection. (I'm testing one for a robotics application.) Here's what it reports:
-
[151] # 68: 101.1 ft. -5.3 fps 0.046 radians
(Target #68 is 101.1 feet away, approaching at -5.3fps on a relative bearing of 0.046 radians. Target #70 is 224.6 feet away, etc.) The data is updated every 65 milliseconds.[151] # 70: 224.6 ft. 38.2 fps -0.032 radians
[152] # 68: 100.8 ft. -5.3 fps 0.046 radians
[152] # 70: 226.9 ft. 38.4 fps -0.032 radians
[153] # 68: 100.4 ft. -5.3 fps 0.048 radians
[153] # 70: 229.0 ft. 38.4 fps -0.032 radians
[154] # 68: 100.1 ft. -5.4 fps 0.050 radians
[154] # 70: 232.0 ft. 38.5 fps -0.032 radians
[155] # 68: Dropped.
[155] # 70: 234.5 ft. 38.6 fps -0.032 radians
[156] # 70: Dropped.
This allows detailed accident reconstruction. The data can be viewed graphically, of course, and trajectories and speeds can be plotted right up to the crash. If any vehicle in a collision has this equipment, it's possible to tell what the other vehicles are doing.
There are tens of thousands of big rigs on the road with these units right now. They're starting to appear in RVs. A few more years will see them in cars, as the price comes down.
They do more than log. There are warning alarms. Some versions will slow down the vehicle. These devices are already reducing accident rates for big trucks. Another generation of this technology and radar/computer control will prevent many more collisions.
Dividing the braking task between the driver and the computers is tough. But we already have elaborate ABS systems with computers and gyros, and those are well-accepted. This is the next step. It's reasonably clear that when a collision is inevitable if braking isn't started within a few hundred milliseconds, the anti-collision system should apply the brakes. At that point, it's too late for human intervention. Whether the system should always prevent tailgating is less clear. VORAD units will do that in cruise control mode, but the driver has to turn that on.
The joke that went around a while ago about the government requiring voice data recorders in cars: Most of them picked up prayers, cussing etc. before the crash except those in pickup trucks sold in the south that all seemed to end with, "Y'all watch this."
BTW, you're using a public highway supposedly in compliance with law. The argument that this is an invasion of privacy stinks. If a cop or a whitness sees you doing it, its a legitimate infraction but if you're car records you doing it its an invasion of privacy? I don't think so. How does getting you're speed from your car's data recorder differ from measuring the skid marks you left on the pavement before you hit the other vehicle? Both give the same information although the data recorder will be more accurate.
I would also point out that hacking the recorder either before or after the fact would probably be a very bad idea. If what's recorded by the recorder doesn't match physical reality, I'm guess the recorder will simply be assumed to be damaged. If the alteration is shown to have been made "after the fact", I'm guessing that "tampering with evidence" (a felony) will be added to the list of charges.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
After dealing with *LOTS* of automotive documents (Crash investigations and product defect allegations), I can tell you that ALL air bag systems, ABS systems, and car computers store a wealth of information including: codes related to air bag systems (diagnostics, near deployments, deceleration values), number of times ABS system kicked on (to judge if you are an aggressive driver), all recent computer actions (fuel mixture adjustments..again to see if you are driving aggresively, etc).
Supposedly the new US computers would have GPS/Wireless capabilities standard and could possibly tattle on you if you ignore a "service" light too long (a warranty violation).
I hate to say it though, most investigations show that the driver is at fault (product liability cases) either due to excessive speed or following too close. An example of a real case was a women who claimed the ABS failed on her SUV (early 90's) and she rear-ended another vehicle. She claimed she started braking 50 yards out. Between the ABS data and the physical evidence at the scene, it was closer to 10 feet (she was cited for following too close). When the claimant was interviewed, she was asked to judge a preset distance for the investigator and she was shown just how far 50 yards was. She withdrew her allegation.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.