Slashdot Mirror
Senator Goes After 'Brazen' OnStar Privacy Shift
coondoggie writes "U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) sent a letter to the Federal Trade Commission to get the agency to investigate recent changes navigation and emergency services company OnStar made to its privacy practices. Schumer said, 'By tracking drivers even after they’ve cancelled their service, OnStar is attempting one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory. I urge OnStar to abandon this policy and for FTC to immediately launch a full investigation to determine whether the company’s actions constitute an unfair trade practice.'"
I wonder if this is one of those "Oh, shit, not in my backyard!" type of reflex actions. Perhaps the Senator actually has one of those disabled services?
Whatever the cause for the Senator's huff and puff, at least it is good huffing and puffing.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
There is a booming industry in removing the GPS and other OnStar components fro GM vehicles. Sure, most of it is for less than legal reasons, but still... More jobs!
I know it's stating the obvious, but is it more brazen than planting a device without your knowledge and NOT calling it an invasion of privacy?
Nonsense. The Left has been complaining about roads being built for decades.
Yes, because one AC == The Left, roads are useful == roads are the best at everything, reducing car use == forcing people out of cars, Climate Change == scam for scientists to line their pocket with money.
Did I miss any wild exaggerations, strawmen and other fabrications that you managed to sneak in your single sentence?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Because two North American governments are major share holders of this company, I am sure that tracking operations will immediately cease, because we all know governments hate doing shit like that.
I love the outraged reactions of senators out for a cheap shot against a non-campaign-contributor, after having been so silent on so many more egregious cases.
RICO should apply ^^
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Only where half = 27%. Also, OnStar predates the government owning a large share of GM.
On the other hand maybe they can sell the data to the GPS companies and we can finally get some updated maps. There are roads around my area that had major routing changes three years ago that are still wrong on my Garmin.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
find a fleet vehicle and it won't have OnStar installed, but at least in my case, all the other features you might want.
Like 60,000 miles driven by someone who knew it wasn't their car?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Not really, we've been complaining about the over reliance upon cars. You do realize that buses and bikes can and are used on roads, right? And that it's mostly when people decide to live many miles away from their work and drive by themselves that we start having problem.
But, then again, I bet it's easier to just bash a fictitious view than to actually deal with reality. I'm sure that there are a few oddballs that believe it, but they're hardly the majority of liberals.
On-star has no more rights to the location of ex-customers than Texaco does.
Citizens should not be required to rip out the electronics to prevent a previous business partner from illegally spying on them.
In fact a good case can be made to legally require all corporations you cease doing business with to destroy all OLD records about you, with exceptions for records of transactions you engaged in. (see my blog entree from June for more information
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
I own a 2003 GM vehicle and I know f that the previous owner upgraded the OnStar system when they changed over from analog to digital. I've often wondered about how this works and if they can still track the car. Even knowing they are, I'm not sure I really care. I guess on a theoretical level it's annoying, But I have too many other things to worry about to get worked up over this. Actually, I've wondered if there is some kind of liability for them if they are still tracking my car w/o their service. If I get in a wreck and even though I don't have their service, can they be held accountable if they are still tracking me and choose withhold assistance? Honestly I assumed that they wouldn't want to have this kind of liability.
OnStar is attempting one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory.
Coming from someone who voted for the PATRIOT act...
-jcr
Only a subset of them. I had a professor that argued that if we increase traffic (which hurts the environment) it will encourage more people to take public transport. So he's green by way of causing traffic jams. I tried to get him to explain when the payoff would come from making traffic worse and more people taking public transport, but he could never defend the idea any more than "It'll make them take public transport." I've been to southern CA, the traffic is bad, and public transport is still underused. Most people would consider me a radical environmentalist, and I'm all for roads (and traffic efficiency).
Learn to love Alaska
The car I drive has OnStar built in. After the first free year I simply unplugged the antenna for the GPS and the transmitter. Problem solved.
60K miles is low. :) Last time I bought a cop car, I got one with 154K miles - and the lowest at the auction was like 85K miles. But cop cars are awesome because of the scheduled maintenance; there's no way I'd get any other fleet car.
The "January 2011 announcement to change their policy and continue to track customers" doesn't seem to predate the government investment, though. You know, just in case your tin foil hat fell off. ;)
Right and for better or for worse, those are non-voting shares so the US Government has about as much say in what goes on at GM as I do as a random member of the public.
HA HA HA HA HO HE HA HO HE HA HO HA HA HA HA!!!!
As much say? I don't remember having the power to fire the CEO
And I don't think that having the head of GM assigned to lead the government as an economic advisor on creating jobs(!) is exactly the kind of hands-off model you are proposing.
Not to mention that as part of getting that money, GM had to move all creditors to the back of the line behind unions who lost not a cent of money.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Learn to do research first before opening your mouth.
Maybe you'll land a job making $12K *DAILY* like me once you learn how to do that.
Too bad money can't buy tact, eh? If it could though, you'd need to spend your $12K DAILY!OMFG on it.
Off topic, but...why is 2005 your cutoff? (Electronic throttle?) Just curious...my cutoff seems to be 1996...
How many realize that EDRs are installed in nearly all vehicles: "As of 2003, there were at least 40 million vehicles equipped with the devices."[wikipedia] That has more than risen since. I don't say they are the same, but essentially, every new vehicle carries a blackbox which can potentially be accessed by "others" without necessarily enduring a collision. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Event_data_recorder
Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made. - Otto von Bismarck
find a fleet vehicle and it won't have OnStar installed, but at least in my case, all the other features you might want.
Like 60,000 miles driven by someone who knew it wasn't their car?
Hah...so true...but to tell you the truth, people aren't -that- reckless. As long as the maintenance is kept up-to-date, mid- and full-sized GMs usually last quite a while (I've owned 5, 3 of which easily went over 310,000km)
When funny is the obvious choice.
60K miles is low. :) Last time I bought a cop car, I got one with 154K miles - and the lowest at the auction was like 85K miles. But cop cars are awesome because of the scheduled maintenance; there's no way I'd get any other fleet car.
+1...acutally, +2 (I've owned 2 cop cars). Both purchased at 200,000km. Cop cars have so many important longevity upgrades (thick suspension, aircraft hoses (green!), and are very well maintained. I sent one to pasture at 320,000km due to nasty rust in the trunk, and a VERY intermittent brake issue (happened twice)...the other is still going strong at 313,000km...almost no rust...solid car. I will scour the earth for another once this one is done.
If you cancel the OnStar service and later sell your car, they are tracking a vehicle you no longer own or drive and are gathering data that is not applicable to you.
Nice.
Now that is useless data.
So you think that any interested party won't have access to a VIN/Owner Name and address database?
Go back to sleep.
Nice service youse got there... It'd be a shame if anything bad should happen to it. It's a dangerous place, Detroit. Now, if I were you, and I'm just sayin' mind you, that a nice contribution to the folks that helped bail youse guys out might go a long way towards protectin' your service there.
And, don't think I'm showing bias or false equivalency because I'm picking on the Democrat here - the Republicans would do the same thing, but end up with twice as big a payoff, because they're "better" politicians.
In the final analysis, I hate being so cynical, but these bastards (even the ones most aligned with my political views) won't police themselves, so what choice do I have? (Well, other than voting, which I do, but...)
That is all.
The solution here is simple: Send OnStar a contract saying that you charge a fee of $10.00 per day for the information that they collect. Make the contract come into force after 30 days, if they do not respond to negotiate. Make sure the contract is sent registered mail to their registered agent in your state. Wait 30 days and send them a bill, again via registered mail. Wait a while longer and then file a claim in small claims court. I bet that would get their attention. My misses has OnStar on her car, which we do not use, so I will be doing this. Although IANAL, I am just a bastard!
People's cowardness, or their stupidity...
Wow, they are tracking people after they cancel they cancel the service. I couldn't be more furious. This is an outrage! Say... I wonder if people are even aware they everything they do is being tracked by somebody else, uploaded through the air freely with an encryption that may or may not yet have been broken and if if not, is being stored "securely" until another party wants to buy the harmless "sanitized" data. Damn guppies, cell phones are bad enough but now people are driving in a machine that is constantly spewing everything you do and see for the whole world to know, that is if they haven't already uploaded it themselves to Facebook or tweeted it to a bunch or people who really don't care about what they are doing except that one lone friend who isn't a real friend at all, or a person for that matter. Just another machine aggregating data for whomever has the money for these harmless bits of ones and zeros.
011000110110110001100101011101100110010101110010 01100111011010010111001001101100 anyways?
An ex that wants to know what you've been up to, your grocery mega-mart so they can sell you want you don't know you need yet, that fellow on the phone with a funny accent (anyone smell vodka) who says he's from your credit card company and know's you're on vacation pumping gas in your pretty, new GM vehicle so he must be for real but is now asking your pin number so he can prove he's speaking to the right person, your dear old uncle Sam who just wants to check up on you, or your boss who swears that he saw you at the club but can't say anything because he shouldn't have been there either and while he now has proof of where you were, is driving the '12 model with newly activated service.
But hey, I'm outraged that they are going to track me only when I discontinue service. They shouldn't have told me this because now it's gonna take a senator or three, several committees, and many hours of CSPAN to make me feel better that they are only tracking me always, and only with my knowledge and permission. Poor poor guppies.
IMPLICIT permission. guppies.
Climate Change == scam for scientists to line their pocket with money.
It's not that for some scientists but there is a lot of money being made from what truly is a scam in every sense of the word.
The sad thing is you can only see scams on one side, not the other too...
Wake Up.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
a camera.
And amusing to see him trying to scuttle what is likely the sole thing Government Motors is doing that is profitable. Throw in the UAW getting a big fat handout and CAFE standards, and Bailout 2.0 can't be far away.
Oh well, at least they might stop tracking me in my new Corvette...
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
Assertion 1: Elections are won by the candidate who spends the most money
I can't prove this logically, only empirically. A PEW study of large number of elections found that over 90% were won by the candidate who spent the most money. Of the remaining 10%, the majority self-destructed by political scandal. The general rule holds very well: the candidate who spends the most money (and doesn't get caught in a scandal) will win the election. Lots of corroboration on the net, such as:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/11/money-wins-white-house-and.html
Assertion 2: A candidate who acts in his own interest rather than the interest of the general public is corrupt.
By definition. (Note that sometimes an action is in both the general interest *and* the self-interest of a politician.)
Now calculate the % likelihood that a politician is corrupt in our system.
Any politician with a sense of ethics will be out-competed by one with a lower sense of ethics. The ideal candidate will be the one who can sell his integrity the fastest and to the most people. This is why politicians always seem to be in the pocket of large corporations.
I say this not because I'm lazy, destructive and incorrect, but to shed light on the problem. With a model whose outcome we don't like, we can try to get a different outcome by changing the parameters or moving to a different model. We can work to make a system that doesn't have quite so much corruption.
But it starts by admitting that "government is populated exclusively by immoral criminal scum", which is no secret and is independently arrived at by just about everyone.
It's predicted by the math. It's real - get over it.
In terms of the Caprice 9C1 (since you mention the green silicone hoses), Goodyear makes a hose set for the essentially identical Impala SS under the name "Super Hi-Miler" which have a similar lifetime. The silicone hoses will last forever, but do not like any kind of contact with anything. The blue Goodyears will still outlast the car, but are more resistant to abrasion, and you can use regular hose clamps (but I still prefer to use the lined stainless clamps which don't cut into the hose).
On the newer Crown Vics, watch for frame rust-through in the bends behind the front tires. A huge chunk of those stupid things will look fine with under 100K miles, but are taken out of service because of rust on the frame. :)
I just shot an email over to Toyota, to see what, if any, policies they have in place similar to that of OnStar. Their service, Entune, is available in almost all of their vehicles, from Toyota to Lexus, so I figured it may be applicable/helpful.
Will post a followup for anyone interested.
Something witty.
I NEVER thought I'd cheer at something Chiuckie Schumer was proposing, but here it is.. OnStar has jumped the shark on b.s. corporate policies with this one.. They need to be slapped silly for this kind of crap. I'd never be directly affected by OnStar as they seem to only be on Government Motors vehicles, and I'd NEVER buy a GM vehicle. In fact, I just did buy a new car, and it was from the one US automaker who *didn't* have its hand out to BigBrother for a bailout, namely Ford... Go Ford!!!
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
Doesn't OnStar use the cellular network to communicate information back to the "mother-ship"?
I find it hard to believe GM is actually footing the bill for all of these cars when the end-user isn't paying the on-star fee.
Can anyone explain how this is working?
I don't think the Goodyear hoses are the same quality...but I could be mistaken...I believe they are the infamous blue colour, right? Anyway, the green hoses have never caused me any issues, which is actually nice to experience considering that almost every consumer product is designed to fail. And about the clamps...yeah, they tend to make the hoses squish their their slits.
I'm not into Crown Vics at all, though I give them a bit of respect. It's too bad they rust so quickly...but I suppose it doesn't really matter, there's a bazillion of them around...
I've had the Goodyears on my Caprice wagon (the wagons got all the good stuff from the cop cars except for the coolers) for almost 10 years now - they still look brand new inside and out (I flushed the system last year, which is why I looked inside the hoses). I loved my 9C1 as well, but it experienced a major drivetrain failure which was my fault. That "Restore" junk should not be put into an engine which works. :/
For other cars... I also currently have an '04 Grand Marquis (the wife's car). I have no idea why people compare the Caprice and the Marquis. They're about the same size, and I like the Marquis in its own way -but there's no comparison between it and the Caprices. Parked next to the Caprice and Marquis is a '95 BMW 740i (my daily driver - oddly, it's got the lowest current trade-in value, despite having a new price in 1995 which exceeds what I paid for my house). In terms of performance, the BMW and Caprice are extremely similar, but the German car has a way nicer interior. :) The Marquis, well, is just a big car. It's a turd off the line, it doesn't corner all that well (even with the new 18s and Michelins), it gets ok mileage, and it's fairly cheap to maintain. I'm really looking forward to a few years down the road when the new Chevy 9C1 starts getting rotated out of fleets again; the Fords just don't do it for me, but I'd be ok with a cop car running an LS-based V8. :)
I've had the Goodyears on my Caprice wagon (the wagons got all the good stuff from the cop cars except for the coolers) for almost 10 years now - they still look brand new inside and out (I flushed the system last year, which is why I looked inside the hoses). I loved my 9C1 as well, but it experienced a major drivetrain failure which was my fault. That "Restore" junk should not be put into an engine which works. :/
For other cars... I also currently have an '04 Grand Marquis (the wife's car). I have no idea why people compare the Caprice and the Marquis. They're about the same size, and I like the Marquis in its own way -but there's no comparison between it and the Caprices. Parked next to the Caprice and Marquis is a '95 BMW 740i (my daily driver - oddly, it's got the lowest current trade-in value, despite having a new price in 1995 which exceeds what I paid for my house). In terms of performance, the BMW and Caprice are extremely similar, but the German car has a way nicer interior. :) The Marquis, well, is just a big car. It's a turd off the line, it doesn't corner all that well (even with the new 18s and Michelins), it gets ok mileage, and it's fairly cheap to maintain. I'm really looking forward to a few years down the road when the new Chevy 9C1 starts getting rotated out of fleets again; the Fords just don't do it for me, but I'd be ok with a cop car running an LS-based V8. :)
Hmmmm, alright...maybe the GoodYear hoses are pretty decent. 10 years without cracking is pretty nice. That's a LOT of heat cycles. I've never used "restore" before...that sorta stuff seems too gimmicky for me. If your compression is too low, it's time to rebuild or replace...there's no easy fix for things like that, as far as I'm concerned. There's always a decent motor somewhere...
I too have quite the affinity towards my 9C1s. I keep trying to convince myself to get something new...or at least something else...but I just can't. I'm not surprised your saying that the Caprice performs like a BMW...these Chevys are stout.
I don't know that the new 9C1s are going to make you as happy. They just aren't a full-sized car. I think the new new ones are going to be RWD...but it's still not the same...they are a mid-sized car with a weird trunk, and less than no room in the engine compartment. LS engines are decent...the computers are fast, and compensate quickly to current conditions...the engines put out a lotta horsies...but they just aren't the same. Sensors and servos for everything...including your "gas" pedal". The interior in low and mid range cars are too hard (I don't know about high-end cars, haven't been in any in a while). Way too much to go wrong. In fact, I say we're going the wrong way in automotive technology. We need less stuff. Ask anyone with a new car how much it costs to service, and how much replacement parts go for. It's not funny. Stick with your older vehicles...you'll SAVE as much as you paid for your first house over the course of your life if you do.
Well, in my defense, I had just used some Restore on my '80 Caprice (running the oil-burning 307 which originally came in my wife's Chevelle). It shockingly actually made an improvement, so I sold the car right away. :) Then I thought "well, if it helped that POS, maybe it'll do something for this car too"... It did "something". :/
I might be willing to trade off a little bit of interior space for the insane power potential those LS engines have. I'm putting 523HP out at the flywheel in my simple carb'd truck, while people are putting that and more to the street with LS engines that sound stock and get decent mileage. Those things are neat. But yeah, the parts aren't cheap. Not that my 16 year old BMW is cheap to maintain, either. New catalytic converters? $1300 *per side* just for the parts. Ooof.
It occurs to me that if they continue to track your car .. that somehow they could be held accountable if something bad happens to you even if you're no longer paying for their services. If they continue to have any involvement with you after the fact, then if something happens and they don't help you out which results in damage or death, then they could potentially be held somehow liable for that if they fail to intervene in a timely fashion that could save you from such damage or death.
I think the engineering of a 70's motor is a bit different than that of a 90's, 2000's motor. Clearances and tolerances are going to be pushing envelopes to get every possible mile out of a gallon, right...so it's more difficult to limp along, or pour in a quick fix.
Maybe the brand new LS motors out of a Camaro or Truck can put out 500+...but there's no way I can see that out of any other vehicle...not without a cam, intake, headers, and of course a proper tune. Mind you, I think they have variable valve timing as it is...something I haven't been into at all...so I know that has a huge effect on low end efficiency with high end performance. I look at that stuff as one more thing to eff up. I can handle putting a few extra bucks in the tank (I get 25mpg on the highway out of my performer -- 440 at the wheel...I -may- have had 28mpg with the old engine -- 275 at the wheel, so that's not a monstrous difference)
Well, the power in the LT1 is mostly due to the reverse-flow cooling which allowed higher compression ratios because the heads stay cooler, and the roller cam allowing more aggressive lobe profiles. The actual components vary only slightly from the Gen I small block introduced in 1957; the external accessory holes and mounts are actually identical, and the pistons+ rings are identical (well, ignoring that the piston grooves in an LT1 are some crazy metric dimension; the ring gap, piston pin, and piston skirt treatments are identical).
The LS, OTOH, is a ground-up redesign. The variable valve timing thing is new within the last year on a couple of models, but those are not the higher power variants - any you find in a junkyard or crate would be the same cam hooked to a timing chain as in every Chevy V8. The LSx actually has fewer things to break than the GenI and GenII, as there's no distributor drive (it uses a toothed wheel to provide a timing signal to an external controller) and no mechanical fuel pump provisions. And the main caps are all 6-bolts / the blocks are stronger (an aluminum LS block is actually as strong as an iron Gen I/II). There's a lot of guys running carb'd intakes on those things, and then just an ignition box (which just about everyone serious runs anyway). The big deal in these things is the heads. They went to 4 bolts per cylinder instead of 5, but they're arranged better. The shape of the intake runner is way improved (where most of the power's coming from). And most are using beehive springs now, which taper at the top to reduce the amount of weight being thrown around at the end of the pushrod. Technology is cool.
All that said, I think I'll be doing another LT1 in the Chevelle, controlled with Megasquirt this time so I can do variable turbocharged boost and flex fuel capability. The LS motors just need too many tweaks to bolt into older cars. :/