Slashdot Mirror
Hackers Remotely Cut a Corvette's Brakes
An anonymous reader writes: Security researchers presented work at the USENIX conference today showing an easy way to hack into a car's electronics using a small gadget that plugs into modern dashboards. The port they're taking advantage of is commonly used to monitor the location and speeds of these vehicles. Once the researchers' dongle is attached, they can use SMS messages to transmit commands to the car's internal network. They demonstrated this by remotely cutting a Corvette's brakes. "Though the researchers say their Corvette brake tricks only worked at low speeds due to limitations in the automated computer functions of the vehicle, they say they could have easily adapted their attack for practically any other modern vehicle and hijacked other critical components like locks, steering or transmission, too."
The NSA demonstrated a clever hack where they attached a small device to the underside of a Pontiac Grand Prix, remotely pushed a button, and the car blew up! General Motors says this is not a serious security breach and the vulnerability is not limited to their vehicles. They will not issue a recall.
... unethical to be releasing detailed information on an exploit.
It doesn't matter that the argument is that "Without exposure, car companies won't fix it!"... At the moment, no one is actively *doing* this or using this exploit. Simply being told that it's possible should be the limits of what an ethical hacker should release.
The cost-benefit analysis going into the value judgement of a release of more details for hacks is VERY different from the analysis of some HTTP flaw or kernel bug. Actual lives are at risk, and the ability of your work to be used to cause accidents and kill people by remote control changes things.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
Let's keep this in perspective. If the hack requires you to physically attach dongles to the vehicle, the hacker could just as easily attach a remote controlled bomb.
haha
Once the researchers' dongle is attached
Can we have a bit less sensationalism around this articles about "This hack can happen once you get access to the physical sytem!!!!1111!!!!!"?
It's can still be an interesting tech read but I can also cut breaks with a set of 99 cent snips from Radio Shack.
If it requires physical access to put in the magical dongle then I'm less impressed with this hack compared to the truly remote hacks we've seen on other vehicles.
I could also cut the breaklines with a $5 tool with physical access to the vehicle. Not to mention the number of car bombs I could get from the mob!
This is silly. The brake pedal on every car that currently leaves a production line is still physically connected to the master cylinder and wheel callipers. What they likely meant by 'disabled the brakes' is that they disabled the ABS or brake assist module. While troubling, these components are all designed with mechanical overrides for if the electronics goes hey-wire, so this is really scare mongering.
We have known for years about CAN bus insecurity and how you can control indicators and wipers once you get physical access. There was even a model of car where you could just snap a wing mirror off and plug directly into the CAN system through the exposed mirror connector. These people haven't done anything new and are just being intentionally sensationalist to get attention.
. . . when you "plug a gadget into the car".
Some cars have been hacked with a special crafted music CD. You can perhaps trick someone to insert a CD, but nobody plugs a strange contraption into a hard-to-find plug under the dashboard.
Once you get into the car's wiring, you can always disable stuff. Even old computerless cars could be disabled by short circuiting the starter cables.
...which basically consists of "drive a '92 Jeep where the only major electronics in the car are my cell phone".
It doesn't even have power windows.
Hack that wirelessly, bitches.
Would you like to have the brakes go out as we round this steep hill, or after we get to the bottom near the lake?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It's not a "hack"....it's a "break-in" if they need physical access to the car. A malicious person could easily just cut the brake lines and accomplish the same thing.
and cut them for sure even if only a little, maybe make it look like crappy road damage.
Yes, this requires an additional hardware dongle to be attached to the car.
However, the attackers did not create these dongles. These dongles are ALREADY THERE in many cars. These are devices that driver fleet managers use to track how their drivers are performing. Think FedEx vans and delivery trucks. They're also already in use by some insurance companies, who offer discounts for safe driving or infrequent use. Nobody's talking about breaking into cars and physically attaching a device that wasn't there before.
It's not remote. They had to first install a radio into the car to receive their commands, and interface it with the car's computer.
What's surprising about that?
Here, I can remotely cut the breaks of ANY car using a pair of industrial-grade cutters connected to a solenoid, which is operated by a raspberry pi connected to a cell phone. I simply shell in and power the solenoid which causes the cutters to sever the break cable.
Is this really that advanced? It would have been interesting if the car could have been hacked remotely, but that isn't what they did.
...which basically consists of "drive a '92 Jeep where the only major electronics in the car are my cell phone".
It doesn't even have power windows.
Hack that wirelessly,
Well, to improve things, get yourself an older diesel powered vehicle and then not even the spark ignition stuff is necessary....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Considered, but the 4.0L inline 6 is way more durable than the diesels that came in that model.
For true EMP scenarios, I have a Siberian Husky dogsled team.
Maybe it SHOULD get more attention if these problems have existed for years and we've done absolutely nothing about it.
We are now plugging in IoT devices to the CAN bus. Insurance companies are doing it. Automakers are doing it. The CAN bus is now vulnerable to attacks from the cloud, and just because your car doesn't do it yet, doesn't mean it's not coming.
What should be sensational is that we've known about these problems for the better part of a decade and nobody has done anything about it.
In the spirit of this "hack", a rocket launcher could be used to blow up the car wirelessly.
It seems that some devices like this are provided by the insurance industry to their clients.... and the Charlie Miller write up confirms that there are CAN-BUS commands to lock and unlock the doors. Wonder if these would make an 'interesting" insurance claim?
If you plug anything in to the canbus you deserve everything you get. it gives direct unfiltered access to most of the cars subsystems.
And by the description of what they are saying they are just activating the test routines on the ABS ECU. For fucks sake. I can do that with a laptop and my knocked off copy of Peugeot planet. It specifically says in the ABS test functions that this will only work below 10mph. Its a function designed to test the cars ABS system. Go over 10mph and the ECU automatically disconnects the test routines. So they have just accessed these ABS test routines via a dongle instead of the manufactures diagnostic software.
This is barely a hack. This is using a diagnostic connector and activating diagnostic functions and calling it a hack on the cars systems.
Ironically, the BSG "hacking" seem to involve -- somehow -- any networked computer system, not just wireless ones. Somehow, the Cylons could easily remotely hack any two computers connected by a cable, even remotely, but could not remotely hack individual computers...
Still trying to figure that one out.
Dumbass - you won't have any fuel when they hack the oil companies.
I've got a horse.
If you drive a Corvette you don't really use the brakes much anyway, so who cares?
Hackers Remotely Cut a Corvette's Brakes
Yes, I know, it's a metaphor, but it not a particularly good one in the context. They remotely disabled the brakes. Nothing was physically cut.
Not that it's entirely inconceivable that someone will one day find a way to cause physical internal damage to a car remotely...
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
This is yet another fear based article while it carries merit to it the wording and general presence indicates that there is a vulnerability that can cause you to loose control of your vehicle. It wasn't triggered by the car driving next to you without first getting access to the vehicle physically, and it could possibly be exploited by a another vendors third party plugin.
Yet this is the same type of article that helps to fuel the auto industry in it's goal WRT the DMCA. They maintain that allowing anyone access to the ECU and the on-board networks of the vehicle creates a major security risk. This is all true but but this form of "MASS" presentation "Remotely cut the brakes!" helps to stifle the claims that the automakers are only trying to protect a future revenue stream. But gives them even more ammunition to lock odb-II and begin making it so you can access nothing in the vehicle.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
have ABS kill switches to disable ABS when going off road/mud/slippery roads besides that even if ABS fails the brakes still will work fine, who in their right mind would design it so the brakes fail if the ABS module/pump fails?
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Most vehicals had computers by the early 80's. You want to trade that '92 Chrysler in on an actual Jeep, 70's vintage if you want "new."
LOL... Hope it happens in the winter then....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Can we stop with these fake "researchers" that make claims that are stupid as hell?
They did not hack anything, they compromised the car by having physical access and sent service code activation commands.
Basically if there is a smelly guy wearing a trenchcoat under your dash, you might be hacked.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
A college girl in the least amount of clothing necessary to not be arrested would do the trick.
They didn't disable the ABS. They activate the ABS. They cause the ABS to think that it is skidding as it would on gravel. The ABS then does its job and reduces braking to allow the wheels to regain traction. But, by continuing to feed the ABS with skid type input the car is slow to stop. Rather than braking hard when they slam on the brakes, the ABS kicks in and they keep coasting along.
None the less, this hack is no feat as they had physical access to the CAN bus. The guys with the Chrysler cars on Sprint cellular networks, those guys perfomed a feat. A scary and highly effective feat.
Sorry, ISIS already has a patent on that.
The fact someone uses a computer to kill doesn't nullify any existing murder laws. How about you quit jumping to extremes? Acting like kids can do this even provided precompiled attack tools is stupid considering they probably don't know how to identify a vulnerable target anyways.
This particular attack is bogus by the way. It requires you to install an ODB remote control unit with shit security in your car. And then you'd have to advertise you have that unit or else nobody would know.
And no we will never be at a point where disclosure of bugs will be unethical. It's unethical to sell us something and claim it's secure when it is not. So talking about it could never be unethical. In fact, since it puts people in danger, it would be unethical to not talk about it.
You, quit playing devil's advocate. This is not a game. It's not funny, cute or insightful in any way Mr. Thought Police.
Someone mod parent up. Thank you.
So if I read this right, the black hat really only needs to find a car that has the insecure dongle provided by a company and installed by the user.
...which basically consists of "drive a '92 Jeep where the only major electronics in the car are my cell phone".
It doesn't even have power windows.
Hack that wirelessly, bitches.
The brakes on a Jeep will fail on their own, no need to hack them.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
How on earth is "...using a small gadget that plugs into modern dashboards." even considered remote?
Apparently if you have physical access to a car you can do stuff to it... More news at 11.
timberland Homme NIKE 2010 National Youth (U12/U14/U16) Jiangmen Grand Prix tennis tournaments was February 22 to April 4 to start, has successfully concluded more than two hundred from all over young players After qualifying, Zheng Xuansai the gradual flame, 32 players come to the fore in the points rankings, won the race in September to participate in the final qualification. NIKE 2010 National Youth (U12/U14/U16) Wuhan Grand Prix tennis tournaments was March 22 to May 4 to start, is currently in full swing, and the brightest young players active Wholesale Nike Shoes flame, in the constantly improve the technical and tactical combat, and fully stimulate their own potential. It is understood that China NIKE National Youth (U12/U14/U16) tennis tournaments is NJT-Nike Junior Tour (the NIKE International Youth Tour) part. Development so far in 1997, NJT events in 24 countries have carried out a great influence. Federer, Nadal, Moya, Maria Sharapova and other top tennis players have also participated in the youth, NJT, shining in their NJT tournaments, including the performance has attracted a lot of attention, including Nikeyes ? and gradually to the world, and become the top tennis star. Since 2004, the event was introduced into China since the Chinese nike tn pas cher Tennis Association strong support of the reserve in the junior tennis talents played a big role. Promote the domestic Discount Nike Shoes development of the overall level of youth tennis, so we see more stars of the future.
Once again, there is no reason for these systems to be accepting any kind of input from anything other than the drive controls. Any car that does is broken and needs to be recalled. I suppose that means every car currently being manufactured, but that is not my fault or my problem.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
I just plugged a tech II scan tool into my OBD port and now have full control over all the systems in my vehicle.
so.. basically, they just sent the right commands and got a reaction without paying a few grand to do it right.
The greatest right given is the right to be wrong...
A 1992 Jeep certainly has a PCM, I don't know if it's got any diagnostic link but I suspect it does. However, the link is probably very limited, it might be able to do stuff like adjust fuel delivery or timing but that's probably about it. So even if someone could interface to it remotely, all they could do is ruin your catalyst.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I drive a steam engine. The local municipal complains about the congestion and road damage I cause, but, hack that, Cylons.
I'm saving for a '44 Willys. You know... an actual ACTUAL GP.
You know they train them in the summer, right? They even sometimes just use the sled in the dirt or on leaves and whatnot. I have seen a neighbor that has them pulling an old WWII era Jeep. They have wheeled sleds that they pull. In the case of the Jeep I assume he has it running and they only pull partially. I do not imagine they are pulling the whole vehicle's weight. Dog sled teams are not all that uncommon up my way. Hell, one of my other "neighbors" (a loosely applied term here) is an Iditerode (spelling?) racer. I believe she has won it a couple of times.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
For this, and many other reasons, I drive a 1994 Volvo 240DL sedan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I didn't know Corvettes had brakes.
They hacked devices that many fleets and some individuals install at the request of insurance companies. They don't need physical access to the car, the victim willingly fits the hackable device.
What they do need is the phone number to send malicious text messages to. Getting that could be tricky... The operators of these devices will have databases that could be stolen. They could war-dial by sending "ping" messages in bulk to sequential numbers, perhaps, but there are a lot of numbers. If they find one there might be a few adjacent numbers that are also exploitable, but IME the types of SIMs used in these devices don't end up with sequential blocks of numbers very often.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
TFS is basically saying that having physical access to a machine makes it hackable.
Duh. Thank you, Captain Obvious.
...which basically consists of "drive a '92 Jeep where the only major electronics in the car are my cell phone".
It doesn't even have power windows.
Hack that wirelessly, bitches.
Uh, you might want to go easy on those bitches who are busy now whipping out a linear amp to start fucking with your fuel injectors.
It's hilarious that people think car hacking was a concept born out of Y2K or some shit.
Now I need to file a claim!
From an email to a friend of mine around 1996,
"Failure in brakes.dll" - John Carmack
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
You don't need a hacker to disable a Jeep's transmission, it does that on its own every few thousand miles.
ah, the rare and elusive better idea