Slashdot Mirror
UK Police Want An Automotive Tractor Beam
Barryke writes "According to The Observer, England is working on a remote control for cars to be used by the police. England's police force is lobbying to get a remote-control to stop other cars; this could also be used to limit speeds. Since needed technology is already available in modern cars, modification is very easy and cheap. But what if I just escape by hitting the clutch and use my speed to go downhill? Bet I'm in the hospital before they are!" Orwellian, or ... Californian?
we feed the machine that will eventually enslave us.
Forget labelling capitalism, communism or socialism as "evil". It's time for a new eco-political model, one that learns from the mistakes of past systems and is designed to prevent this sort of tipping of the power scales.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Am I the only one wondering how long before there's an O'Reilly book on how to hack this? What animal would they put on the cover?
I can think of a couple of hacks to do:
1) Disable it
2) Stop other people's cars
Any other thoughts?
Something else to add to my ebay shopping list! Along with my Traffic Light Changer, I'm gonna be all set.
Ok, ignoring all of the privacy issues that I know other people are going to address... It seems to me like giving any more control other than allowing the police to severely limit the speed of the target vehicle is just asking for all kinds of accidents from another person suddenly taking over control of the car. I think it would also possibly open the police up to civil suits were they to accidentally crash the car or harm any other people or property.
Harden your car against that system... and if the police are on your tail - hack some of the civilian cars behind you to cause a mass carambolage - instant getaway. Hackers heaven! I for one welcome our new remote controlling overlords!
This comment does not exist.
England's police force is lobbying to get a remote-control to stop other cars; this could also be used to limit speeds
...
Yes, everybody knows UK thieves have enough morals to play nice with the cops and leave the speed limiter/engine killer module in their getaway cars. I mean, it's only fair that the police have a fighting chance
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Don't they realise that this is THE THING to hack if you were a car-jacker! Anything that is supposed to be secure and in the public domain WILL be hacked. It will be the innocent public that have to suffer the newer types of criminality that will undoubtably occur with the introduction of this new technology.
- If these devices get put in use, sooner or later "everyone" will have one. Or at least relatively easy access to one. Just like police radios. Just like those dingies to control traffic lights. Let the fun begin!
- When "everyone" has this device, thieves could easily use them to stop a cool car and take it.
- The potential for abuse by police officers is high. It's already bad enough that some police officers go around hassling and abusing people just because they don't like their face. Bad cops can stop cars/drivers they suddenly, arbitrarily decided to hate. Another real but underreported problem is police officers stopping women just to rape them; this device would make it a lot easier for them to do it. At the same time, anyone else (people who buy these devices on eBay) could do the same thing.
- Because of the potential for abuse, car owners will carry weapons (guns, pepperspray, whatever) "just in case." You can never be too careful or trusting. Take the rape example above. Before, it would be enough to kick the bastard in the nuts and drive away. Now you have to do him some more serious damage. Things could get messy.
- And just how will police officers avoid ever stopping the wrong car? And will citizens have the right to take action if they are wrongfully stopped?
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
ok, it is bad style to reply to your own posts, but i have something to add on a more serious note. This may cause problems. In Germany, the police are known to cause artificial traffic jams on highways to stop people trying to get away in their cars. Several police cars occupy all lanes of the highway and start slowing down until a jam occurs. Nice thought... But up to now there were several deaths due to people crashing into the end of the so created traffic jam. And, note, the people affected were not the perps, but totally innocent ones who happend to notice the jam to late. I wonder if the proposed system might lead to similar occurences, which, in my humble opinion, are totally intolerable.
This comment does not exist.
Why is it that people always cling on to the worst ideas? First remote controls to change signal-lights, now this.
$50 of electronics and everyone going down that 5 mile stretch of freeway will be going 2MPH for no apparent reason.
I'm sure people like the idea for resolving car chases, but better solutions have been around forever. Hooks on the front bumber of a cop-car could easily grip-on and stop a car. Maybe a decent-sized spear on a cable could be shot into the back of a car. Better yet, rig a medium-calibur gun onto police helicopters and watch a chase quickly end as your engine block turns to swiss cheese in seconds.
Portable barricades (fences) could be in all cop cars, and put just ahead of the chase, where it can't be avoided. Spike strips would be nearly as good, but it seems terribly few cops are actually carrying them.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Probably will be easy to hack, Then you could just block the frequency the car uses for remote control.. Boom Police don't control you... If you ask me it sounds like something from that scene in Terminator 3...
...the Finnish police has had this for ages.
This is absurd on so many levels.
I don't drive. Infact, I don't even have a drivers license.
Still I find this very disturbing. They don't even give examples where this would be usefull.
They simply want control.
There is no way in hell they could implement it so that it wouldn't be by-passable. How long it takes for someone to hack the fuel injection system of a new controller chip?
Then, the more dangerous area. How long does it takes someone to hack the signal to stop anyone they like?
Govermental (not saying which goverment mind you) projects are notoriously craptaliciously implemented at best. They take the cheapest bidder to desing the system.
Whee. Look ma, no hands.
*presses the button to transmit the cloned signal captured from a cop stopping a car*
They just want to herd the cattle, as they see people. Why not simply regulate driving alltogether and improve on public transportation instead?
Yes, Yes, I know public transportation isn't feasible everywhere. I live in Finland. We absolutely need cars to get around outside of the few cities.
Then the annoying stupid joke someone has already probably made: In Russia, Car drives YOU
HAAA-FUCKING-HAA... Very funny.
And now that I got all worked up, I'll conclude with: No, it ain't gonna fly. There ought to be some smart people who will point out flaws in whatever desing they come up and send it back to board untill time stops. It's just too dangerous.
Bot Assisted Blogging
but then someone will create the car buster buster, then they will create the car buster buster buster... it is a viscious cycle ;)
the guy with the extra buster will win this recursive battle
|/________
|\A|ALYS|
What a dangerous idea.
Any loss of (driver controlled) power is just as dangerous as, say, shooting out tires or using those tire bursting devices.
The questions that should be asked are WHY do the police think they need this control over other peoples cars? Instead of going after motorists, maybe the Sussex Police should be concentrating on Robbery (up by a third)
What gives for these non-elected morons think they are trying to limit the liberties of normal citizens?
This country is going mad. Not quite so mad as the USA, but does anyone know of a non-idiotic state that we all could goto ?
The uk.gov has been making noises for some time about using this sort of technology to enforce road pricing and speed limits. Whilst they'd lose revenue from speed cameras, they'd gain it from road pricing.
However, I can foresee this technology being *very* unpopular, and I can't help but think the uk.gov don't really understand what they could be setting themselves up for here.
Mr and Mrs Middle England are strange beasts: they'll happily put up with their every move being tracked by more CCTV cameras than just about anywhere else on Earth, and I have no doubt most of them will happily carry Gauleiter Blunkett's "entitlement" cards ("if you've nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear"), but stop them from exercising their God-given right to drive like lunatics at whatever speed they want, and it'll make the Poll Tax protests look like a minor grumble.
Ideally, I'd like to see the Revolution come to England for a more noble reason, but if does make the Revolution come to England at last, I'll be happy enough.
I thought about it this morning when I came across an article which described Almanac's as terrorist paraphernalia. And it got me wondering ...
Could the National Security need some day be so great (threat is at Red ! for example) that it might be necessary to peep into millions of cars to identify the thousands of them carrying Almanacs, being stopped by tens of thousands of cops trying to figure out which one is "inappropriately" marked and highlighted.
Just a crazy parting thought for a very crazy year ... Happy New Year everyone ....
Here is the article paraphrased from Yahoo ...
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
This pales in comparison to the less visible controls that have been introduced recently (e-mail snooping, database consolidation, increasing investigative powers) but it's still not nice.
I'd be surprised if the government monolith is quick enough to keep ahead of the hackers and criminals on this one. Result - false expectations of safety and only the innocent being subject to this. Though less common, I expect non-police officers will get access and be able to use this system on people from time to time. Nice.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Minority Report? They've seen the film and now want remote control over everones car! Bwahahaha
But what if they just disable your clutch? :)
Seriously, if they can stop the car remotely, they can probably do it by taking complete control and just forcing the brakes on.
Except that braking systems are either hydraulic (cars and light trucks) or air (heavy trucks) actuated and clutches are either cable or hydraulic. The article talked about electronically controlled governers while the PD's in the states have been using nail strips or EMP devices (I think) to end chases.
At the bottom of the endless pile of paper work which characterizes all regulation lies a gun.
Alan Greenspan
The system can only control cars that have 'fly by wire' systems to control the engine. So if like my car there is a cable running from the back of the accelerator pedel to the top of the engine which controls the engine power, they are going to have a very hard time stopping me. They really haven't thought this through, speed doesn't kill people, admittedly it doesn't help, its driver awareness that kills people, I see people everyday who are blissfully unaware that they can see behind their car using a shiny bit of metal bolted on the outside (mirrors), te same group who travel everywhere without using indicators (turn signals)
Hey Ste,
I doubt this could happen *easily* (but it's certainly possible). The brake pedal in any car on the roads in the UK is mandated by law to have a direct physical (either hydraulic or pneumatic) connection to the brake system.
Likewise, the clutch on all cars I've seen is a physical connection (i.e. there's no electronics involved in making it work).
"Oh my god! They are getting away by bicycles! Now what do we do?"
love slashdot. populate it. use it. abuse it. hate it. kill it. miss it. stop following links, they only kill servers.
The computer which controls the engine of a car is not rocket science. There a projects in existence to build Do-It-Yourself Electronic Fuel Injection computers. In addition, a standard piece of auto electrician kit is a small box which provides a set of fixed strobes to drive the fuel injectors, allowing a car with broken (or disabled) EFI to drive away (with potentially reduced performance). The circuit is not much more than a 555 timer driving a few flip-flops. Ultimately, any criminal can easily find a substitute for the 'standard' EFI controller in a car, thus bypassing any disabling features.
This leaves honest people as the only ones susceptible to a 'remote control for cars'. Consequently the only real use for such a feature would be to simplify life for car-jackers.
Why don't you just slow down, keep within the speed limit, and save yourself a lot of silly bother?
why do you say it's government 'control'?
after all, the alternative, which is commonly used across the world, is to give the police guns, require them to give a warning, and then have them shoot you dead. But I guess Orwell didn't write about that, so it's not a problem then?
it isn't government control anyway, it's at worst excessive police powers. but anything that keeps police from using deadly force is worth discussing without getting hysterical.
Besides all the aforementioned problems (most notably hacking), people dislike having their control and sovreignity taken away from them. It doesn't sit well with most to know that any second they could no longer be in control of something that is theirs. In addition to this, imagine a system like this malfunctioning for some reason. No good can come of that. Then there's also the problem of corruption, and economics and business politics. Who's going to pay the automakers to install these devices in their vehicles? What do the automakers get out of doing this? How do you standardize something like this? Is everyone in the UK going to have their car taken into the shop and have one of these devices installed? What sort of system of regulated checks will exist to oversee the functionality of this tractor beam system? The list goes on. Hold it to a plebiscite, I doubt it will stand.
It would have been trivial to design a monitor and for digitally controlled cars to control speed with little more than basic cell and pager technology. You install reciever stations, preferably as often as trafic lights or every few miles on highway, then install a black box in every car. Guess what, no more speeding as it would be inposable to go over the speed limit. You also instantly know when vehicles make illegal turn. No illegal parking. No getaway cars. And you can find cars with disabled systems. All of this using 1985 technology. Sure it would be expencive to install the infrastructure at first but you theoretically save money by not having to pay trafic cops and meter maids.
The real reason it did not happen is not because trafic cops would be out of work, they would be actually be transfered and start dealing with real crime which the public I think would gladly fund this system in exchange for. The real reason is that local cities would lose a large portion of their budgets. You see trafic tickets are a big fund raiser for many local cities. With a system as I discribed 99% of people would be incapable of speeding due to modern electronicly control cars, and the other 1% would knew when they are speeding and so would trafic computer that would instantly send you a ticket. There would be no speeding. There would be no illegal parking. There would be no money for many local projects and or saleries for public servents.
They do not exist, it not technically possible.
I am a UK Traffic Signals Engineer. The nearest thing you can have is a Bus Beacon, so the traffic signals see think you are a Bus and try to give you priority (a green signal) as soon as possible,
The bus beacons are becoming more sophisticated , so you have to know what Bus route number to emulate and how to emulate a empty Bus.
Even when you know the MIB its not practical, by the times you have reconfigured your Bus Beacon it will be a green signal anyway.
What it will prevent, or at least reduce, are road blocks, spike strips and high speed chases. And yes, high speed pursuit is absolutely important as the any car involved is much more likely to kill participates or bystanders then a car at rest. But I guarantee, it will cause at situation where a desperate person who viewed their only option as evading, who is now sitting in an otherwise dead vehicle, to open fire and cause a deadly force situation from the police.
But what if I just escape by hitting the clutch and use my speed to go downhill?
Um, this is in England, right? I don't think you'll get too far, then. It's not like driving on a highway through the mountains...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Look I'm all for finding ways of policing that don't end in needless death. But this is what we all feared would happen as Non-Lethal weapons started croping up.
There is no fear of using this!
Mass intrusion into your rights as an individual bassed soley because it "can be done" and because it "makes the job of law enforecment easier".
This is going to get more and more common as computers come to control everything. If those computers are mandated to obey master systems then imagine the kind of problems that could arise. Not only from hackers or common crooks that come to take advantage of the standardized technology, but how EASY it becomes to implement gov't controls into our lives. See: Patriot Act If this tech was in the public consiousness before 911 how long do you think it would take to make it a law?
I'm not advocating moving to the hills and shunning technology. What I am saying is that as the computer becomes the network, and the network finds it's way into everything, we have to start asking serious ethical questions like: What will this add to my life, and what will it take away? Is it worth it?
I would rather be ashes than dust!
according to The Guardian is the 1986 Vauxhall Belmont.
I can see the owners of those lining up to get one of these remote controllers fitted (not).
Newer vehicles are much less frequently stolen, presumably because it's getting much harder, what with improved central locking, engine management systems that mean you can't hot-wire the thing, and other anti-theft features. A spokesperson in the linked Guardian article is quoted as saying "it is virtually impossible to steal a new car without access to the correct keys."
I don't buy the argument that this remote control idea has much if anything to do with wanting to make it easier for police to stop joyriders. It won't help for the reasons above - joyriders don't, or simply can't steal the kinds of cars that have this technology on board.
It sounds to me like just another attempt to turn us all into good docile law-abiding consumers.
In my town the police routinely leave cars lying around stolen and crashed and take no action until they're torched.
They don't lock up the buggers who do it.
For any Rush fans out there, the future sounds all too familiar.
More mainstream than what? Automotive "hacking" has become so widespread that almost anyone who has a need and a few thousand dollars to spend on parts can "hack" their car's computer in every way imaginable.
I had to get a programmable (vs burning and soldering a new rom each time I changed the fuel or ign maps) ECU back when I added a turbo to my car.
Many of the best oem replacements are formerly what were known as "race computers" but are now often cheaper and much less complex than the stock computers they replace.
The "tractor beam" wont be stopping my car anytime soon, nor will it stop most of the cars out there capable of actually outrunning the police and their radios. And this doesnt even touch on cars that dont have extensive computerization like pre-efi Camaros. Daddy's camaro is probably carbeurated and uses a mechanical system for adjusting ignition timing. The cops would be better off just waiting for it to run out of gas.
So cars would get this mod added to allow remote control of the vehicle. In that case, the criminals either 1) learn how to remove the mode, or 2) drive cars that don't have the mod in the first place. What this might prevent is certain cars being stolen as often (there will still be uneducated or risk taking criminals that will steal those cars). In reality, all that happens is what gun control advocates are pushing (if you make guns illegal, then only criminals will have them). Laws don't prevent crime, and there will be those that get around it.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
Let me correct you, in that nothing has anywhere near a 100% chance of getting caught. While in the short term all a car jacker has to do is avoid the few spots with sensors, someone will devise a way to send a signal showing the system is still active. All you'd need to know is the proper ACK response.
On top of that, it might induce more violence. If the cops are threatening to stop me after stealing this car, maybe if I keep the passenger and threaten to kill them, the police will reconsider.
It's a nice thought to give the police officers another tool to prevent crime/accidents/unnecessary deaths, but it's a short sighted implementation, and one that I think would easily be thwarted by the criminals.
No law has ever deterred crime, nor any punishment, nor has any technological implementation. OnStar has been around for a few years in the States, and vehicles with it are still stolen quite often. Chance of getting caught, extremely high, but that doesn't stop the crooks.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
You mean you are foolish enough to not drive around with some form of personal protection now?
Not a smart move in todays society.
The police are not there to "protect" you, they are there as a deterrantant, and to help clean up the mess afterwards..
Its your duty to protect yourself.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The founding fathers had it right over 200 years ago. They created a system of government based upon the rule of law where the power of the state was both limited and widely distributed between the local, state, and federal levels. The powers that would arise and attempt to subvert the system and take power for themselves were forced to fight with one another, thereby neutralizing them.
This system depends upon one thing more than any other, and that is an informed citizenry made up of individuals that make the preservation of freedom and individual sovereignty their personal responsibility. If the US were made up of people like this then what a glorious nation we would make.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
so how long until some enterprising thief figures out how it works, and makes their own. or, along the same lines, steals on from the police.
now you've got a crook who can disable any car at a whim. talk about your easy robbery. now just wait until that RX8 pulls around the corner, shut it off, throw the driver out and turn off your "tractor beam".
i wonder if the police have their liability war chest paid up. first time this happens they're going to get sued into oblivion, as well they should.
morons.
Glock Model 36 $500
7 rounds of 45 ACP pumped into career criminal $1.05
$30,000 saved a year for the next ten years by taking out the human garbage. Priceless.
The flow of traffic is pretty neat. With "psychopathic tail-gaiting rigs, pickups, and SUVs" I just brake slam them until they go around. If they don't wish to drive properly behind me and give proper following distance (3 seconds), I don't want them behind me. If they haven't learned the lesson after 2 flashes + 1 really good slam (which usually has them swerving out of the way), I will stop the car until they pass me.
You don't have to play by their rules. Make your own up, as long as they match the posted speed limits (providing there aren't any extenuating circumstances). Keep your gates open, and you'll have about 4 choices of direction to go with your car should there be an emergency driving situation.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
But I guarantee, it will cause at situation where a desperate person who viewed their only option as evading, who is now sitting in an otherwise dead vehicle, to open fire and cause a deadly force situation from the police.
...because it sounded like it was the police's fault that they're not allowing him to evade. The choice was always to surrender. If an idiot is stupid enough to open fire on the police, that's his fault, noone else's. If he's pinned down in a dead car, it'd be even more stupid than normal. If they already decided it was necessary to cut the car's engine, I imagine the cops' approach would be extremely cautious.
What's next, it's ok to knock a cop out, because he didn't let you run away on foot? Also, it wouldn't make much sense to kill a cop and then take off, in order to avoid it getting shut down. Unless you take out all the cops (usually at least in pairs), you'll quickly find your car dead anyway, and you won't see much mercy from those converging on you then...
Now let's say that he could try to evade. Either he succeeds, which is a big bummer for the police - getting away with it only inspires him to do it again, and more to do the same. Never mind that he'd never be punished for whatever crime caused him to evade. Or he fails, at which point you're no better off than before. After a car chase he could still open fire.
I'm not so worried about the proper legal uses for such a device. What I'm worried about would be all the possibilities for abuse, both by the government, car-jackers and other various idiots.
Btw, even if you don't know the signal, this would require your vechicle to listen for some sort of signal. Wouldn't something like an EMP blast fry this system, even if you don't know the code? You can easily find the resonance frequency of the antenna, and up close, like at the roadside and directed at the road, it really shouldn't take much power to do. Then what? Will your car stop? Or does nothing happen? I'd like to know...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The thing is, anyone who takes a step back and looks can see the problems with the UK government's transport policies, both nationally and in many places locally. It mostly comes down to one thing: the roads are overcrowded and cars are polluting beasts, so we'd like to reduce car use as much as possible, but no-one has yet come up with a genuinely plausible alternative. Our public transport infrastructure has suffered decades of underinvestment by successive governments, and can only carry perhaps 10% of what the road network handles daily, so any ideas about "getting people onto buses" or "more commuting by train" are bound to fail.
My own local area just had 65mil given to it for a guided bus scheme that has massive local opposition. A campaign group has shown that the models used (featuring buses accelerating faster than sports cars!) were... ahem... slightly unrealistic. And it won't have anything like enough capacity to make a useful difference anyway; as with other public transport systems, we're talking an order of magnitude here. The only problem is that certain senior local councillors have set their hearts on this, and will probably have retired by the time it comes in anyway, so will never be held accountable for their actions. They dismiss the detailed counter-proposal by the campaign group as unviable, though I've yet to see any hard evidence of why. It is curious, though, that they feel the need to do this every time the media runs a story on the scheme that's going ahead; they must feel very secure in their decision...
I rather doubt that any sort of popular revolution is going to be forthcoming, unless you're counting things like the petrol protests as revolutionary. It could easily cost people like seats in Parliament/on the councils, though, as long as someone steps up and names names right before the next elections.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.