Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

65,000+ Land Rovers Recalled Due To Software Bug

Posted by timothy on from the at-least-they're-not-in-space dept.

An anonymous reader writes with word that owners of Range Rover and Range Rover Sport SUVs (model year 2013 and newer) will need to get their cars' software updated, which means a visit to a dealer. The update will fix a bug in the cars' locking system, which occasionally resulted in car doors randomly unlocking and opening themselves (in one instance, when the car was moving). This is not the first time that a car manufacturer asked customers to contact dealers for a security update. In July, Ford has recalled over 430,000 cars in North America because of a bug that prevented the engine from shutting down even after the ignition key was put into the "off" position and removed.

6 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Is this the new incarnation of... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is this the new incarnation of Lucas electrical systems?

    http://www3.telus.net/bc_trium...

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  2. Emdedded = Low Salary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well, given that companies in the UK seem to think they can get a degree qualified senior embedded software engineer for GBP 35-40k, I'm not surprised they have a bunch of incompetents working on this stuff. If you are a good embedded dev you can easily move into mobile or enterprise but engineering companies seem oblivious to this connection.

    1. Re:Emdedded = Low Salary by Kester1964 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am not sure how many software engineers are employed by Range Rover, but I expect that the subsystem providing the central locking features will have been outsourced just like all the major components to companies like Bosch, Visteon, Wipro, Yazaki etc.

      In order to reduce costs the software engineers will have been outsourced to Eastern Europe and India, and although just like everywhere else the software teams will be a mixture of the competent/incompetent, it will likely be the management who will have screwed up trying to do things cheaply and quickly*

      * Jaguar/Land Rover, made in Britain owned by Tata (Indian company)

  3. Re:Engineering standards? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does the software in cars fall under any particular standard for quality? Like actual engineering standards?

    No.

    Or do we really have auto makers doing little better than people making apps for phones?

    Well, it's quite a bit better than that, which is still terrible.

    It just seems like if it controls any part of a car it should really be required to be subjected to much more rigorous verification.

    They're nowhere near that. The complexity has gone way up, but the quality hasn't...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. Bad design by DriveDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doors unlocking, that's one thing. Doors opening and engine not halting when ignition switched off, that's horrible design. Always, always keep physical means that override any other possible means to do things like opening doors and disabling engine. Person approving those designs should be shot and then sent to the Russian front. Stuff can go wrong mechanically, but why would you ever add yet another possible point of failure?

  5. Analog for the win. Again. by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    because of a bug that prevented the engine from shutting down even after the ignition key was put into the "off" position and removed.

    I guess it's too difficult to leave the physical connections in place. They had to be replaced by shiny, just because.

    There's a reason light switches work every single time. Physical connections are superior to digital connections.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower