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.

Comments

The Volkswagen scandal is a good thing

[Applehu Akbar]

It may push even Congress to allow us access to our own cars' ECM and diagnostic systems.

Re:The Volkswagen scandal is a good thing

[adolf]

So let me get this straight: Because big batteries are dangerous, they shant be sold to mere mortals.

But a mere mortal can go up to the counter and order a set of brake pads, lines, and calipers. A mere mortal can buy a replacement seatbelt. A mere mortal can buy a set of ball joints, suspension bushings, tie rods, and/or control arms.

A bad installation of any of things things can result in death.

What makes batteries so special?

(And before anyone says something about "potential energy," let me remind you that in most states folks are also allowed to pump their own gasoline into their own cars.)

(And nevermind the fact that big/dangerous batteries are widely available ell over the place. Just not, apparently, at the Honda parts counter.)

We need software engineers

[reg]

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.

Re:Not so

[SirAudioMan]

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.