Slashdot Mirror
How the Car Industry Has Hidden Its Software Behind the DMCA
Lucas123 writes: The DCMA has allowed carmakers to keep third parties from looking at the code in their electronic control modules. The effect has been that independent researchers are wary of probing vehicle code, which may have lead companies like Volkswagen to get away with cheating emissions tests far longer than necessary. In a July letter to the U.S. Copyright Office, the Environmental Protection Agency expressed its own concern of the protection provided by the DMCA to carmakers, saying it's "difficult for anyone other than the vehicle manufacturer to obtain access to the software." Kit Walsh, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the legal uncertainly created by the DMCA "makes it easier for manufacturers to conceal intentional wrongdoing. The EFF has petitioned the U.S. Copyright Office for an exemption to the DMCA for embedded vehicle code so that independent research can be performed on electronic control modules (ECMs), which run a myriad of systems, including emissions.
Eben Moglen was right.
Eben Moglen is always right. Now take some time and watch some of his lectures on internet freedom, privacy and open source software
It may push even Congress to allow us access to our own cars' ECM and diagnostic systems.
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make your own ecm with a arduino or raspberry pi? Last one I had to replace was $700.
That kind of money will buy a lot of add on boards.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Why should "researchers" get to view the code? Here in Silicon Valley I cannot think of any instances where any outsiders routinely get access to a company's code.
may have lead companies
The past tense of "lead" is "led".
Captcha: mislead
Professional engineers, not self proclaimed ones. Ones that sign on the dotted line taking personal responsibility for the code they write. With self driving cars, robots, drones, etc. we need to be able to hold coders responsible, the same way we hold held civil and mechanical engineers responsible.
A myriad of consumer goods now depend on code. And if that code has problems there may be safety, environmental or cost consequences. I'm talking about all kinds of computer and networking devices of course, but also phones, industrial control systems, medical devices, smart meters, aircraft, ships and household appliances.
If the code cannot be scrutinized, there is no way to check its quality. Plus, as others have noted, no way to maintain or improve it. The only exceptions I can think of offhand are some routers (FCC is trying to plug that), and PCs (Microsoft is trying to plug that). But these exceptions entail a complete replacement, as the original code is secret.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
Actually, in some countries/states/provinces, there are laws that protect AND also can prosecute engineers who are guilty of such offenses. For example, here in Canada, to use the term engineer, means a professional engineer (a P. Eng). It's a protected professional designation bound by various laws and regulations. A large portion of the profession is ethics and the legal requirement to whistle-blow, REGARDLESS of who pays your salary. If you want proof of this, and why this is a good thing, here is an example:
In Ontario, Canada, there was a mechanical or structural engineer (can't remember which) who signed off that a mall parking garage (was built on the roof of the mall, oddly), was in fact structurally safe. Even though there was numerous concerns by tenants and visitors about the safety of the structure, weeks after the engineers last 'pass' inspection, the roof collapsed killing two people. (see story: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...).
The gist is, the engineer knew there was deficiencies and signed off on it anyway. Needless to say, he is facing criminal charges, and likely has had his licence revoked, and his career is over! If you are an engineer in Canada, you can't pull the 'my boss told me to' excuse. I know this because my father worked 35+ years as a licensed electrical engineer in Canada. You tend to pick up on things like this growing up. However, I can't speak about engineering in other countries but I would hope this is the case in the US.
Whenever the topic of allowing government or public access to review source code comes up (like with, oh, say, voting machines) I always think of these guys:
http://gaming.nv.gov/index.asp...
and I realize that not of this is as important as gambling (and the collection of taxes thereon).
At least if you judge by how seriously we take access to the code. Just try to deploy a slot machine in Reno without letting someone at the Nevada State Gaming Control Board review your code. Won't happen.
Protecting e.g. the code of the motor management system is a good first step. Leaving it at that however is sloppy work, as evidenced by the Volkswagen affair.
A more comprehensive protection would entail protecting the actual data with copyright safeguards too. Especially emission data. This data is, after all, proprietary and commercially sensitive data. Such data merits a high level of protection.
With adequate legal protection on the data itself, irresponsible and needlessly alarmist publication of unconfirmed, undigested and potentially misleading data can be prevented.
Of course there would be adequate means of raising questions and concerns with the manufacturer, on a full disclosure basis of course.
Let this be a warning for all of us: with the coming "Internet of Things" we must have DMCA protection for the data produced by devices too or risk a deluge of unauthorised, unconfirmed, and possibly alarmist data publication. We need legislative action today! Vote pro-business!
In the EU, the controls you are saying will ruin cars/drivers are already in place.
Although things are being looked at in light of the VW scandal, the tests here are much stricter and all this will do is make them stricter still. The problem is not that the manufacturers NEED to break emission levels in order to achieve what the driver wants, it's that drivers are all expecting unnecessary road performance that wasn't present even 30-40 years ago. We're ALL driving cars that could bear Formula-One cars from certain eras. Do we need to be? No.
That emission control also gives fuel economy for the sacrifice of raw speed is not a bad thing. Every car in your country can do the speed limit - and more. They can all do 0-60 in under 12-15 seconds - and more. They don't need to be able to do that.
Suggesting that VW can't sell a car just because it doesn't go much faster than the speed limit misses out entire sections of the population (those that don't want that, those that have kids, etc.) in an era when people are voluntarily speed-limiting their vehicles (e.g. company cars), having the insurance companies track them, and the most road surveillance there's ever been (I contest that if you're learning to drive today, you're a prick to think that getting into the habit of speeding as a matter of course will serve you well in the future).
In the EU the limits are stricter, the testing more rigorous and - well, who cares? My 15-year-old car can still do 0-60 in under 10, can provably do 130-140 mph without any special preparation, etc. We don't need that. We need fuel economy and to stop them churning out crap.
"Being found out" will lead to the same speeds of cars, the same looks of cars, the same desirability of cars, but without all the crap in the air. The ENTIRE PURPOSE of car ECUs is to conform to emissions controls. They now - and always have - only slow the potential of the engine to stop it getting into bad burning that pollutes unnecessarily. Eliminating that does not destroy the market, the EU prove that - but being found to cheat the tests and maybe having all your customers cars recalled? That fucks you up big-time.
Nobody will care. The stricter standards already in the EU will come in. Old polluters will die out almost entirely within 10 years or so. And nobody will know any different because ALL the cars will have to pass the same tests. Diesel won't go away, cars will still be able to speed, pricks will still burn off at the lights, but we won't be giving kids asthma for the next 60 years either.