Slashdot Mirror
California Protects Black-Box Data Privacy
Snowgen writes "According to a story at SFGate.com, California has recently passed a law regulating the little black boxes found in many modern automobiles. The new law requires that manufacturers disclose the existence of such boxes in the vehicle's operators' manual. The law also prohibits the use of data from such boxes without a court order or the permission of the vehicle's owner, unless the data is used in such a way that it can not be traced back to the owner."
...can be found here.
The new law requires that manufacturers disclose the existence of such boxes in the vehicle's operators' manual
Who reads the manual?
SCO to Hell
Finally a reason to be proud of california
I wonder if the cars work without the box? If they do I'll just take mine out
There is no replacement for displacement.
Getting Rid of Spam, *AND* protecting us from little black boxes. I'm starting to dig this whole recall thing...
It sure is helping us little guys...
Shoot.
How the heck am I going to determine if my kids have been:
1. speeding
2. not wearing seatbelt
3. popping air-bags
4. drifting
5. figure-eighting
6. parking off a secluded roadside
Big brother, I miss ya!
A wave of car manufactures will put stickers on the steering wheel saying "RTFM n00b".
So what they mean is, unless you get sued... You crash a car into someone. You say you were going under the limit, the insurance company knows your car has one of these black boxes in it. Insurance company says to court "we don't think he was going the limit due to skid marks/someone saying he looked like he was going pretty fast/previous record", gets court order, information obtained, insurance claim denied. say the person you hit wants a piece of the actio, they say "his insurance company isn't paying out, I think he was going too fast, give me the black box data", gets a court order, sues your ass off.
So basically it's as useful as the constitutional amendments that begin "Congress shall make no law..." and end in "unless it makes a law that says it can"
The collection of vehicle control evidence is a crucial step in the investigation of traffic accidents. Sheltering that information from the authorities has only one purpose, to shield delinquent drivers from retribution for their unlawful acts.
Even moreso, vehicular event recorders should hold at least 30 minutes of data, including video data, and be downloadable at distance by law enforcement.
Shall we also say again that driving a car is a mere PRIVILEGE and far from being a right????
The manufacturer could paint the box blue.
Now if only the government gave the foggiest shit about electronic privacy. People understand "little black box sitting in your car", and they just don't seem to get the other privacy atrocities that go on every day.
California is a weird state but sometimes ... they get things right. I'm impressed (and a bit shaken ... I didn't know the OBD modules were being used that way.)
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
For those interested, here is a link to the text of Assembly Bill 213, sponsored by Assemblyman Tim Leslie:
CA Assembly Bill 213
...if my insurance company in exchange would give me a sizable break on my $$$ premiums.
The recording is made in a constant 5 second loop to normal RAM. As soon as an airbag deployment event (or "near deployment" - whatever that means) occurs that 5 seconds of RAM data is copied to non-volatile write-once RAM. That is why you need to replace your SDM (Sensing Diagnostic Module) after the air bags have been deployed.
Check:w ww.accidentreconstruction.com/research/edr /faq.asp
http://slate.msn.com/id/2087207/
http://
They use the OBD-II interface (Same interface the DEQ guys use to make sure your car isn't pumping out too many noxious fumes.) 5 seconds of data are stored in an EEPROM.
The new law requires that manufacturers disclose the existence of such boxes in the vehicle's operators' manual.
Great idea. People should know that there's a balck box in their car. Maybe they'll think twice about that reckeless maneuver their going to pull.
A previous poster mentioned dupe, this is not. The previous article mentioned how someone was convicted of killing somone 'cause they decided to do ~100 mph down a 25mph resedential street.
Hypothetical future dialog: "Hey son, I trust you and all, but be aware that fi you do try to show off to your prom date tonight, and maybe, umm I dunno, kill someone while your at it, that blackbox recorder could put you away for a long time. Here are the keys, by the way."
Maybe some of this info could also be used to help prosecute people who stage accidents for insurance fruad. I get so sick of seeing these thigs happening. 6 people all loaded up in 2 cars, they bump at 10mph, cry neck and back pain, but they have no idead who they are sitting next to in the same vehicle!
...it could be very useful if manufacturers could get black-box telemetry in an anonymous way. think of how much we've learned from black-boxes about airplane crashes, why they happen, and how to prevent them.
there could perhaps be engineering flaws which would could be revealed a lot sooner by analyzing black-box data, possibly saving lives.
before going to court *you* should get your box's data analyzed by a third party. Obviously you have a right to view the data contained within your own automobile. This law doesn't restrict your personal use.
-
This does nothig to protect a person from the abuse of the information when they Rent a car (c.f. the story of the "speeding penalty" enacted by the one rental agency) or when a person has a "company car".
Finally, one wonders whether this separates the purchasers and leasees of cars into two separately and unequally protected classes.
After all, if you lease a car, your leasing company owns it. So the police could end-around and make a request of them to access the black-box.
Then again, section 215 lets the FBI do any dang thing they want in the search and seizure arena despite the Constitution.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
There might be some number of times where the devices could be used to prove your innocence or lack of liability, but I'd rather take my chances without the devices. I mean, how often does anyone really drive the speed limit on the highway?
Of course, my 2002 probably already has something of the sort and I'm probably just ignorant about it. Anyway, I think car safety can be improved over time almost as well without the boxes and the adjoining less of privacy.
I think 8-Track tapes were a continuously looping design. That's it -- we'll just make those silly black boxes play classic Grand Funk Railroad tunes while the airbag is deploying. Breathalyze that.
This is the first I've even heard of the box, but what's to keep someone from modding the input so ANY accident looks like they were sitting still? Heck, mod the box, pull up to the light in front of a guy you hate, slam into him in reverse, then use the box to sue his pants off.
The court shouldn't use a device like this without the appropriate wariness to it's vulnerabilities.
Your engine computer contains some non-voltile memory that saves any error codes your engine may throw up (misfire, malfunctioning O2 sensor, emissions problem..anything that causes your 'check engine' light to come on) so your mechanical can quickly diagnose problems. For economical reasons, they usually use this same nvram chip to hold the running data for the engine. O2 readings, fuel data and of course, Speed, because vehicle speed is integral to calculating optimum fuel and air consumption for the engine. Other things like spark timing and camshaft positions are recorded too. All kinds of mundane data.
As such, your engine computer usually holds a few seconds of this data in its memory. Now get in a wreck, computer loses power, but since they use nonvolatile memory the last few seconds of data are probably in there.
-
Sig Applied For
Who's to say what is speeding? Without data to confirm the speed of the cars around you, who's to say you were just not keeping up with traffic? On most roads/highways (at least here in Ontario) a slower driver is more likely to cause accidents due to pissed off people trying to pass. Unless there is data regarding the speed of everyone around you, your argument can just be "I was just going as fast as everyone around me". There would be no way to prove either side of this 100% without data from all the cars around you. Eyewitnesses don't count as most people under/over estimate speed by quite a bit..
Just my thoughts
K Man
We have the right to travel freely. Driving is a form of transportation. Is it realistic to say that someone does not need to drive in society today in general? For a large percentage of us, driving is something we need to be able to do.
Not being able to drive is a pretty serious limit on ones freedom to travel.
If driving is indeed a right, by nature, why then do we license it? Safety. Those that do drive have a reasonable expectation of safe roads and qualified drivers. Driving is a right that can be lost if exercised irresponsibly just as many other rights can be.
Let me put it this way. If someone demonstrates they are qualified to drive, is there a reason why they should not get a license? Do they have any expectation such denial will occur? Of course not because everyone has a right to drive provided they do not abuse other people rights while exercising theirs. (Hitting someone with your car infringes on their right to live and prosper for example.)
We deny someone their ability to drive as punishment for poor execution, not because we can. Same for other rights. You might lose your right to move freely if you use that right to kill someone for example. 'nuff said about that, either we agree or not, but I wanted to have the other view present on this thread.
I agree with you regarding driving being a public act, however that does not, in itself, support your idea that law enforcement should be able to access this device at a distance. I think it does support the traffic accident reporting particularly when people are killed. The survivors or other interested parties need to know what happened so the correct decisions can be made. Nothing but good there.
The main problem I have with your distance query is the same problem I have with automated speed detectors; namely, that we should be judged by our peers. That is how the law is written and it is one of the founding principles of this country.
Getting a ticket for doing 5 miles over by an automated machine is simply a tax, nothing more. Think about it. What is punishment without explanation. It's cruel and pointless.
Getting that same ticket because a warm body thought you might deserve it (or not) for some reason is being judged by your peers. That peer who chooses, or not, to write you that ticket will, in the case of writing it, let you know why it is being done and what you should do to avoid having it happen again. That action is what justice and law enforcement are all about. Those same actions can be shown to benefit society in a measurable way.
Those tickets from the automated machine, justifed or not, are simply a tax because no justice was done, no peer involvment took place; thus no corrective action and benefit to society will happen as a result.
So, a cop might download the last 20 minutes of driving. Lets say they do it right after people have traveled down an incline. Every last one of them will be speeding somewhat because that is what the vehicle naturally wants to do in that case. Our law enforcement could then write a ticket, or heck mail a bunch of them without having seen or judged the act.
A possible result: Navigating in traffic down an incline gets more dangerous as everyone concentrates on over control of their vehicle fearing an unwarranted ticket instead of the task at hand; namely, getting down that incline along with everyone else in an orderly manner.
This is exactly why I choose older cars. I can know completly the technologies used and how they will affect me. You don't want too old of a car because you lose the benefit of ongoing engineering however.
Good for California, they want people to know they might be judged in an automated fashion. Knowing the device is there makes a difference in how people react to it. This goes to another right we should have:
We all should have the right of full disclosure on any technology we make use of. If it does something without telling us, it is doing something wrong and potentially harmful that we should know about.
Blogging because I can...
Davis took a big hit with motorists when he jacked up license fees. He's trying to mitigate that damage. You have the recall to thank for that, and anything other pro-motorist acts that mysteriously get signed during the next two weeks. Feel free to fall for it.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
I'm still convinced that we're headed toward having these things in all of cars.
We'll probably have our speeds monitored (and our insurance companies notified or even worse, our bank accounts debited) in real time.
Nothing we can do about it. The roads will still have posted speed limits of 55, even though the practical speed of traffic flow is closer to 70. Care to complain? Hey - you were speeding, we have the black box to prove it. Great source of revenue for the states and insurance companies for whom state legislatures have been creating traffic penalties to enrich them.
Downloading content on a public network is an eminently public act, and those who do it shall have no more expectations of privacy than someone picking his nose in front of Sack's Fifth Avenue on the morning rush-hour.
The subpenaing of personally identifying information is a crucial step in the investigation of copyright violations. Sheltering that information from the RIAA has only one purpose, to shield delinquent downloaders from retribution for their unlawful acts.
Even moreso, all online activities should be associated with personal identifying information, and be downloadable at distance by law enforcement.
Shall we also say again that using the internet is a mere PRIVILEGE and far from being a right????
Like bascially all laws (such as copyright laws), traffic laws are designed with a certain amount of assumed flexibility in enforcement: flexibility that is destroyed by complete and mandatory disclosing of all data.
My parallel is slightly tongue in cheek... but only slightly. And I can adapt your argument the same way for almost anything. For example, the existance of cash in our economy allows a great deal of crime to take place, because it grants a certain anonymity. Do you really espouse the complete desctruction of the idea of anonymity in our society, in place of a big-brotheresque system that enforces total accountability of everything?
The "Black Box" system that everyone is crying about is part of the OBDII standard, or On Board Diagnostics that all cars produced since the early 90's are required to support. This is a set of standards that includes what data is to be accessible via diagnostics. There are several modes of retrieving data, and they are all intended for aiding in diagnosing the emissions welness of the vehicle as well as other faults your vehilce may encounter. The feature that has everyone up in arms is the "Freeze frame data" feature of OBD-II. What this does is, whenever there is a sensor fault (Ie: front of your car gets blown up in a collision, or something simple like your Oxygen sensor goes bad), the previous 5-30 seconds of data (varies depending on the car) is logged to *aid the technitian* in diagnosing the fault. Unfortunately, someone figured out that when you get in a wreck, there's usually some sort of sensor fault, and the car's computer conviently records a lot of variables relevent to the collision.
It is impossible to remove this "black box" because on any car that supports OBD, *EVERY* computer in the car logs some sort of data. The important stuff is logged in the same computer that controls how your engine runs. It IS possible to clear the data using a diagnostic tool designed to do so. See the SAE J1979 standard if you're interested learning how to do this.
Check out some of the portable GPS units. Some can easly be stashed under the dash and will record a track with speed & elevation info. Tuck it up behind the glove box just under the plastic dash. Set it to record .1 mile intervals. Speed can be calculated from the time between points. Retrieve it later and find out how long they were stopped beside the road instead of being at the movies.. It's great for the for the paranoid parent. A set of batteries are good for up to 12-16 hours for many portable units. A DC adaptor can be used to save batteries. Download it later.
If you go this route, there must already be a trust problem that needs confirmed.
The truth shall set you free!