Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'New Way of Stealing Cars': Hacking Them With A Laptop (marketwatch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the there's-an-app-for-that dept.

retroworks writes: The Wall Street Journal (Warning: source may be paywalled), CBS and Marketwatch all lead the morning with stories about the newest method of stealing (late model) cars. No need for hacking off the ignition switch and touching the wires to create a spark (controversial during broadcasts in 1970s television crime criticized for "teaching people to steal cars"). Thieves now use the laptop to access the automobile's computer system, and voila. "Police and car insurers say thieves are using laptop computers to hack into late-model cars' electronic ignitions to steal the vehicles, raising alarms about the auto industry's greater use of computer controls. The discovery follows a recent incident in Houston in which a pair of car thieves were caught on camera using a laptop to start a 2010 Jeep Wrangler and steal it from the owner's driveway. Police say the same method may have been used in the theft of four other late-model Wranglers and Cherokees in the city. None of the vehicles have been recovered." The article concludes with the example filmed of a break-in in Houston. The thief, says the NICB's Mr. Morris, likely used the laptop to manipulate the car's computer to recognize a signal sent from an electronic key the thief then used to turn on the ignition. The computer reads the signal and allows the key to turn. "We have no idea how many cars have been broken into using this method," Mr. Morris said. "We think it is minuscule in the overall car thefts but it does show these hackers will do anything to stay one step ahead." No details on modifying the program to run on Android or iPhone -- there's not yet "an app for that."

113 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. there's not yet "an app for that." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That you know of.

  2. Making it easy... by SirAstral · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mr. Morris said. "We think it is minuscule in the overall car thefts but it does show these hackers will do anything to stay one step ahead."

    Well Mr. Morris... it's not like the auto industry is even making a serious attempt at vehicle security to begin with. It really is not hard to stay "one step ahead"... in fact the industry is really just refusing to step ahead themselves. A toddler will get farther down the road as long as they refuse to move.

    1. Re:Making it easy... by Ravaldy · · Score: 2

      Well Mr. Morris... it's not like the auto industry is even making a serious attempt at vehicle security to begin with. It really is not hard to stay "one step ahead"... in fact the industry is really just refusing to step ahead themselves. A toddler will get farther down the road as long as they refuse to move.

      If you know anything about the automotive manufacturing you know how much precision goes into making cars safe and reliable. You could even argue that the processes used to manage engineering, purchasing and manufacturing are as tough as the ones used by the plane manufacturers. The difference being that the quality / safety standards are obviously different but the precision in parts management is just as good as highly engineered planes.

      At the moment only a hand full of vehicles have shown weaknesses in remote hacks. For the most part special software had to be installed prior to the hack working, which in itself makes it a man in the middle attack no different than cutting ones brake lines.

      In this particular case, the theft is not carelessness from the manufacturers. Instead it's a calculated risk. Lets be honest, the credit cards tap system are even weaker than this tech and provide direct access to funds whereas a vehicle on the black market needs to be sold and the payout for the average vehicle is less than $2000. The manufacturers have accepted that although this system was prone to theft, the other deterrents were enough to diminish the risk. Proof is that only few are doing it and they are risking getting caught every time.

      For me, as long as the manufacturers continue to improve the tech (and they are), I'm not concerned with the immediate minor issues that stems from these holes.

    2. Re:Making it easy... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The main difference is the car makers put the effort in to make sure none of the parts are too good and last too long. Precision scheduled wear out.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Making it easy... by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      The main difference is the car makers put the effort in to make sure none of the parts are too good and last too long. Precision scheduled wear out.

      You're basically using your perception of the situation instead of looking at the facts. Unfortunately for your argument, the numbers speak otherwise. The reliability and safety of vehicles has increased significantly since the beginning of the automotive industry. The data comes from one of the more reputable sources of data of this kind: Consumer Reports. Here's the last 10 years.
      http://www.consumerreports.org...

      In case you didn't notice here are some major maintenance price reductions brought to you by the car industry (in some cases motivated by regulations)
      - Spark plugs are now good for 250 000KM, in the 80s you were lucky to keep them in there for more than 80 000KM.
      - Coolant is now changed every 250 000KM or 5 years. Used to be 80 000KM or 2 years
      - Brake parts generally last 30% longer than the 80's AND they are better. The rear brake replacements are more expensive (drums to discs) but are also much safer
      - In the 70's you needed to tune your carb and do service. There is no such thing anymore
      - Oil was changed every 5000KM or 3 months. Now the regular oils are changed every 8000KM or 6month, with synthetic you can go 12000KM and a 1 year

      I can keep going like this for a long time. So all this to say you perception just happens to be wrong.

  3. What took so long? by xnok · · Score: 1

    Seriously, given how easy it is to get to the car's ECM, the lack of security, availability of information, and the technology, it is not surprising. A half-decent coder could probably put together the software that runs adequately on a raspberry pi, let alone a laptop -- and it would be much less conspicuous.

  4. Physical access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can see in the video that the thief triggers the vehicle alarm, and then proceeds to work on it as the alarm is going off. That means that even old-school hot wiring would have worked. Once the thief has access to the car and plenty of time, there's nothing to prevent him from taking the car.

    1. Re:Physical access by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

      The "old school" of hotwiring where you simply connect the right wires in the cab and spark away does not work on any modern vehicle, no matter how much time you have. In fact, hot wiring at all pretty much doesn't work on those vehicles. The reason is that modern engines don't really work unless they have a computer giving them all kinds of information about fuel flow, air mixtures, valve timing, etc. They just need an ECU working in order for them to work. Getting the ECU to work involves convincing it that there actually is an ignition key present, which is not just a matter of connecting some wires. Hence the need for a more complex hack here (note, that doesn't mean the hack was actually complex, just more complex than connecting some wires). You do actually need to convince the ECU firmware that a key is present.

    2. Re:Physical access by Aaden42 · · Score: 2

      Old school hot wiring wouldn't get around a computer-enforced starter or ignition inhibitor. That's the bit that's supposed to be super ultra secure on newer cars.

      There's a challenge/response between the ECM in the car and the fob or a chip in the metal key itself. Without successfully completing that authentication, even the real metal key won't start keyed cars, and the Start button does nothing in keyless cars. You can't hot wire your way around that.

      The laptop tricks the ECM in skipping the challenge/response or accepting a different key ID. It also most likely tricks the car into shutting off the alarm, so two for one.

    3. Re:Physical access by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Old school hot wiring wouldn't get around a computer-enforced starter or ignition inhibitor. That's the bit that's supposed to be super ultra secure on newer cars.

      On the newest cars, it usually is pretty secure. Not always, but usually. On the older cars, it's usually been busted wide open. If someone broke into my A8 (why?) they could just plug a MPPS cable into the OBD-II port, maybe jump one connection in the box under the hood (a bit more hassle) and then simply reflash the immobilizer away. You can also plug a VCDS cable into the same port (or the other OBD-II port... it's got two, and they're both in the legally mandated area in my region) and pull a ROM dump from the cluster, which is enough to get you the immo code if you have the right tool to decode the bin file.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Physical access by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      You can see in the video that the thief triggers the vehicle alarm, and then proceeds to work on it as the alarm is going off. That means that even old-school hot wiring would have worked. Once the thief has access to the car and plenty of time, there's nothing to prevent him from taking the car.

      Once you have access to the vehicle and a tow truck, you can tow the vehicle away to a shop where you can spend however long is required to either reprogram the ECM, or part it out as required.

      Key immobilizers just keep away casual thieves (people looking for a quick getaway car for a crime, or kids looking for a joyride). Forget hotwiring. Some (many?) older pre-immobilizer cars could be stolen with little more than a hammer and a screw driver. Break the lock cylinder, turn it with a screw driver, and away you go. Or possibly a bump-key. 90's Hondas and Chryslers were very easy to steal in this manner, and a popular target for thieves just looking for a ride (and not to part out, or ship away a car).

      The ability to wipe immobilizer codes are usually a built in feature. If you want a key programmed and you only have one, or if the ECM is replaced it needs a method to programming keys. The OBD tools dealers would use to perform this are built on a simple CAN protocol, and usually provide a timed lockout (10 minutes?) to keep the method from being used to easily boost cars, but not impossible.

  5. Sometimes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Sometimes I actually miss the old days.

    I've spent a lot of time lately thinking about how cars are over-engineered.

    I've spent a lot of time pining for the days when you could fix them with a screwdriver. Hell, when you could fix them at all.

    Although I don't miss dicking around with points.

    1. Re:Sometimes... by plover · · Score: 1, Troll

      Yeah, I miss the old days when cars used to break down completely before they reached 80,000 miles, and when they poured out lead-contaminated exhaust and enough sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide to create acid rain, and when they got 8 miles per gallon, and when they would fly off the corners in improperly banked turns, and fly into a spin when braking on a wet road, and would impale drivers on steering wheel shafts in head-on collisions. Not only could you fix them with a screwdriver, but you could steal them with a screwdriver, too, just by hammering it into the key slot and twisting it with a wrench.

      Or were you implying that "over"-engineering was a bad thing?

      --
      John
    2. Re:Sometimes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I miss the old days when cars used to break down completely before they reached 80,000 miles, and when they poured out lead-contaminated exhaust and enough sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide to create acid rain, and when they got 8 miles per gallon, and when they would fly off the corners in improperly banked turns, and fly into a spin when braking on a wet road, and would impale drivers on steering wheel shafts in head-on collisions.

      Ah, you must be talking about American cars.

    3. Re:Sometimes... by qwijibo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They're becoming increasingly rare, and therefore expensive, but you can still get all of those features in used cars. The lead additive for gas is very hard to find in first world countries, but there are still places you can get that to complete the primitive automobile experience.

      Don't forget, older cars are also easier to fix after a crash because they don't have those stupid crumple zones that newer cars have. Instead of trying to minimize impact to the owner, who is obviously the most expendable part of an old car during a crash, older cars maximize their own well being, knowing that there will always be a new owner. Older cars have the strongest anti-hacker technology available and many are immune to the effects of an EMP.

      However, don't forget that modern cars have some benefits also. Older cars rarely have appropriate surfaces to affix your iPad so all of your music, movies and games are right in front of you during your boring commute. While the obvious solution of attaching them to the windshield with velcro is simple, most older cars have non-vertical windshields making it harder to reach controls at the bottom of the screen.

      Many high end newer cars are susceptible to hacking, in the near future making it possible to steal and deliver the car to a chop shop or international shipper all from the comfort of mom's basement. Compare that with the intrinsic security of the '74 Ford Pinto - entirely immune to theft, even if left in the worst part of town with the doors unlocked and keys in the ignition.

      This tangent brought to you by the Coalition for Reductio Ad Absurdum.

    4. Re:Sometimes... by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      Huh? I mean, are you trying to claim that old, screwdriver fixable cars would not be vulnerable to this attack? I mean sure, they didn't even have an ECU to trick... on the other hand, that meant that just futzing with a few wires would start them.

      I'd much rather someone needed complex software to steal my car than just being able to fiddle with some wires, and be done.

    5. Re:Sometimes... by operagost · · Score: 2

      Wow, I didn't know it was only American cars that had tires with poor wet traction, polluted the air, got poor gas mileage, and had no collapsing steering columns or seat belts. Please tell me more about this magical land where cars could be imported into the USA without major modifications despite their lack of safety features or pollution controls. I'd also like to see this land where the tires had 21st century rubber compounds, radial steel belts, low profiles, and advanced water siping in 1970.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:Sometimes... by mlts · · Score: 1

      I wish there were a balance somewhere between modern ECU and reliability of engines, versus repairability. It would be nice if there were an "open" engine design with the ECU firmware open sourced, but it would have to always keep up to EPA standards. However, engine design takes a long time, and there just wouldn't be that much of a market for something that would lag 5-10 years behind what every other vehicle maker would offer.

      It would be nice, though. Having the ability to keep an engine going indefinitely with parts that are able to be created from relative scratch, would be useful, especially for farm equipment.

    7. Re:Sometimes... by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      There are DIY ECUs look at systems like Mega Squirt. As far as EPA goes the law says you have to leave emission control equipment in place, so they cat stays, vaper recover, and gas re-circulation stays but you can tune however you like.

      Many places test emissions etc, technically yes you have to always comply with emissions requirements for the model year, practically you only have to do that if you live some where that has testing.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    8. Re:Sometimes... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I've mentioned this before, but you can buy a diesel Mercedes from the 70s or 80s which has none of those problems. Granted, you're not getting traction control or ESP, but you can have ABS. If you combine that with sensible driving, they're really quite safe. And if the electrical system fails completely, the vehicle can still drive home without any problems other than that you can't operate the blower, windows, turn signals, lights and so on. They stopped putting wing windows on cars in the 80s, so in very hot weather that can be a problem.

      There was a time when you could get a good car which was also a simple car. But it was pretty much between 1980 and 1990, and the cars were German or Japanese.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Sometimes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What? 80s cars were plumbers nightmares. Emissions controls added onto old designs. Computer controlled carbs (granting the Honda version was better than the quadrajunk). Bad early turbos with 50k mile lives. End of the 80s was better, but 80 - 84 in particular was a lowpoint.

      Engines got simpler again with EFI and oxygen sensors. But the cars themselves got over complicated shortly after.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    10. Re:Sometimes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Cats last much longer when stored in the garage between tests.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Sometimes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      By the time the cars are out of warranty and free from the stealership most of the needed computer tricks (codes etc) have been figured out.

      You often can't work on a one year old car, but why would you?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re:Sometimes... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There was a time when you could get a good car which was also a simple car. But it was pretty much between 1980 and 1990, and the cars were German or Japanese.

      What? 80s cars were plumbers nightmares.

      American cars, yes. Japanese cars? Only those with more than one turbocharger.

      Emissions controls added onto old designs.

      German cars from the 1980s barely have emissions controls. Japanese cars from the 1990s are fantastic in pretty much every way except their universally boring interiors.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Sometimes... by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      They're becoming increasingly rare, and therefore expensive, but you can still get all of those features in used cars. The lead additive for gas is very hard to find in first world countries, but there are still places you can get that to complete the primitive automobile experience.

      Go to your local general aviation airport. So called "100 Low Lead" is still the primary fuel in GA. It contains more lead than normal auto fuel ever did.

    14. Re:Sometimes... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      My car's a 2015. It's very easy to work on (though all I've had to do so far is change the oil and rotate the tires). The factory service manual is available online if you know where to look.

      Of course, it helps that it's Japanese. American and European carmakers seem to make their cars intentionally hard to work on.

    15. Re:Sometimes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It's very easy to work on

      How would you know? You haven't done anything to it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:Sometimes... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I've done enough to see that regular maintenance is easy and doesn't require special tools.

      Are you one of those wackos that things changing spark plugs requires special equipment or something?

    17. Re:Sometimes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      No I'm one of those wackos that knows a modern car's spark plugs are good for 50,000 miles. Same as the cables.

      I also recognize that 'regular maintenance' has little to do with 'working on the car'. Install a big stick roller cam, intake and headers then get back to us. Hell, install a cold air intake, then get back to us. Do _something_.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    18. Re:Sometimes... by rjstegbauer · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing AC's talking about computerized everything or modules where a simple switch is broken, but costs $500.00 to replace the entire module. Dual AC zones. Touch screens instead of simple radio controls. Heck, I'd add power windows and door locks to this list too.

      Randy - iguessimanoldguynowgetoffmylawn

    19. Re:Sometimes... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You're a fucking clueless moron if you think any modern car has spark plug cables.

      I've rebuilt engines before, so go fuck yourself.

  6. A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    "We think it is minuscule in the overall car thefts but it does show these hackers will do anything to stay one step ahead."

    And as long as you continue to identify this as a "minuscule" problem, it will earn a "minuscule" amount of attention to fix and secure.

    By comparison, assault rifles account for a "minuscule" fraction of lives taken every year, and yet we have lawmakers staging sit-ins and demanding assault weapons bans in order to "make an impact". It's weird how we prioritize problems in society these days.

    1. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      By comparison, assault rifles account for a "minuscule" fraction of lives taken every year

      That's the difference between property and the value of a human life. Even a "miniscule" number of lives being taken in violence is considered not acceptable. The number has to be gotten down to Zero, that's their goal, and that is what the public demands.

      Until their demands are met, they are going to ask for more countermeasures and stricter and stricter laws in (possibly vain) effort to get that number down to zeor.

    2. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by geekmux · · Score: 2

      By comparison, assault rifles account for a "minuscule" fraction of lives taken every year

      That's the difference between property and the value of a human life. Even a "miniscule" number of lives being taken in violence is considered not acceptable. The number has to be gotten down to Zero, that's their goal, and that is what the public demands.

      Until their demands are met, they are going to ask for more countermeasures and stricter and stricter laws in (possibly vain) effort to get that number down to zeor.

      In the meantime, tobacco companies are legally allowed to sell a product that kills hundreds of thousands of humans every year.

      Yeah, tell me again how "they" give a shit about saving lives...

    3. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By comparison, assault rifles account for a "minuscule" fraction of lives taken every year

      In the USA, at least, "assault rifles" (selective fire weapons like the M4) aren't even a blip.

      Now, if you're talking "assault weapons" (scary looking semi-automatic rifles), then it's true that they account for a "miniscule" fraction of lives taken every year. And it's also true that stupid lawmakers stage sit-ins, etc....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by Holi · · Score: 2

      Since assault rifles are an actual classification of weapon with a select fire switch and automatic capability and are highly regulated to the point it would cost over $10000 to purchase one (as long as you can get an FFL) and assault weapon is a media created term describing a hunting rifle that is shaped like a military weapon, then I would say that the civilian deaths by assault rifles in America are statistically close to 0.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    5. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by kimvette · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah yes, don't let facts get in the way of your empty argument composed entirely of hand-waving.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    6. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by geekmux · · Score: 2

      legally allowed to sell a product that kills hundreds of thousands of humans every year.

      They'll generally blame lack of healthcare and limitations of medicine for those early deaths.

      The reaction is not "Ban Tobacco"; But: Pass Obamacare, which prohibits insurance companies from raising your rates because you are a smoker (Beyond a specified level), to reduce Health insurance costs for smokers (And lay make all the 20-year-old non-smokers take equal responsibility for your extra healthcare costs from smoking).

      There's no proof that tobacco resulted in deaths of thousands. Many of those are not untimely early demise. It's quite different with mass shooting deaths, where the dead often include young people. Nobody died of Tobacco. People died of health conditions which Tobacco might have had a role in. Also, this is viewed as 'free choice' by those who died; We have a culture that is currently in generally permissive of self-destructive behaviors, such as smoking, alcohol, and casual drug usage.

      While I can understand your last statement here regarding our culture, the rest of your "no proof" rhetoric makes you sound like you work for a tobacco company. Give me a break. This isn't 1940 anymore. We have definitive proof backed by decades of studies to validate that cigarettes are bad for the human body and DO cause deaths that are directly related to tobacco use. There is nothing that could be deemed "good" for you from smoking, regardless of what tobacco lobbyists are claiming. We are smarter than that today. The fact that cigarettes are by design one of the most addictive products on the planet tends to blind the masses from the facts, to include the fact that secondhand smoke also takes lives from those who were not given 'free choice'.

      Also, the Freedom to control your body is prioritized over the risk that you might kill yourself by abusing a product.

      Ah, let's not forget about the Freedom to defend yourself against a criminal act that might take your life. Unlike tobacco, there are beneficial reasons firearms are in the hands of millions of Free law-abiding citizens today.

    7. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by operagost · · Score: 1

      Possibly vain? You're asking for humanity to stop doing evil.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    8. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Nobody died of Tobacco. People died of health conditions which Tobacco might have had a role in.

      Nobody died of cars. People died of health conditions which cars might have had a role in.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    9. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Nobody died of cars. People died of health conditions which cars might have had a role in.

      If you die of blood loss or being crushed into a pancake, then there is an irrefutable causal chain that a 2-year-old can follow.

      If a 70-year-old-smoker dies of cancer..... there is nothing that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that smoking killed that person.

      Also, he/she was pretty close to the normal lifespan, so perhaps it is not that serious in the first place. Maybe just old age also.

      Healthy people who never smoked get the same kinds of cancers. There's only statistical data, not absolute proof.

    10. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      If you die of blood loss or being crushed into a pancake, then there is an irrefutable causal chain that a 2-year-old can follow.

      If a 70-year-old-smoker dies of cancer..... there is nothing that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that smoking killed that person.

      Don't get all "facty" on me, this is slashdot.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    11. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      And are there beneficial reasons why firearms are in the hands of lunatics and terrorists?

      Are there beneficial reasons that a scapel is in the hands of a surgeon with a god complex?

      Are there beneficial reasons that an HR department may be run by a racist individual?

      Point here is I don't disagree with stronger background checks to help mitigate risk, but you're sure as hell not going to be able to eliminate it all, which ironically seems to be the goal of lawmakers as we hear more talks of weapons bans and other countries putting pressure to take all arms from law-abiding civilians. It's not a crime to want to stop a criminal. It's a crime to treat everyone like one.

      The irony is that some of those that are mentally unstable are fervent ammosexuals, but try and tell them that they are too crazy to have firearms and all hell breaks loose.

      I would agree, some are a bit unstable to have firearms, but drawing that line becomes rather difficult. As an example, consider the Federal No-Fly list. Even if you are wrongfully accused and added to that particular list, you might as well kiss your chances of getting it corrected goodbye. You're pretty much fucked due to the overall secrecy of the "methods" they use to determine who gets added and who doesn't, thereby eliminating almost all paths for appeal. I can easily see the same kind of overreach with firearms as lawmakers attempt to strike while the emotional irons are hot. Didn't pay your Federal taxes? Oh, you must be "unsuited for citizenship" and therefore prohibited from having firearms.

      I don't have a problem trying to curb violence caused by unstable individuals. I have a major problem when Rights are destroyed and millions of innocent law-abiding citizens are treated like criminals as the "answer" to solving that problem.

    12. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by DogDude · · Score: 1

      If you want to look at facts, you shouldn't even have ANY firearms outside of a "well-regulated militia".

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    13. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you want to look at facts, you shouldn't even have ANY firearms outside of a "well-regulated militia".

      If you want to look at facts, you should try reading what the authors and supporters of the second amendment wrote on the subject. Hint: It's exactly the opposite of what you think it is.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by sjames · · Score: 1

      The militia is anyone who owns a gun and is willing/able to fire it at an enemy. If they are in practice, they are well regulated.

      So the people can keep arms because we need a militia and they can bear them so they can stay well regulated.

    15. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Did "well-regulated militia" have a different meaning 200 years ago? This is *exactly* what the authors of the Second Amendment wrote, because it IS the Second Amendment. Are you suggesting that you went back in time, read the minds of the authors, and determined that they wrote the exact opposite of what they thought?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    16. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by DogDude · · Score: 1

      No, an individual person is not a militia.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    17. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There are actually some potential advantages to smoking, although not very impressive ones Smoking can make an asthmatic feel better temporarily (I've got some family members that report this), and there's speculation that some schizophrenics can use cigarettes to self-medicate. Cigarettes are highly addictive and expensive ways to inflict potentially lethal damage on your body in various ways, dull some of your senses, and inflict foul-smelling toxins and carcinogens on others (let's not forget that the smell lingers a long time), provided by an industry that has corrupted government regulations to its benefit. Oh, and they're fire hazards. Let's not get too carried away criticizing them.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    18. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Did "well-regulated militia" have a different meaning 200 years ago?

      Yes, yes it did. Today, well-regulated conjures up the idea of many rules and regulations. At the time, well-regulated meant in proper working order. Now, let us move on to the next stupid thing you've said:

      Are you suggesting that you went back in time, read the minds of the authors, and determined that they wrote the exact opposite of what they thought?

      No, I'm suggesting that you take advantage of modern technology, read the writings of the authors on the subject of the amendment which they wrote at the time, and find out what they thought about what they wrote. The idea of the second amendment was to avoid the need to have a standing military, on the basis that such things are abused. You could find this out by starting at Wikipedia on the second amendment, reading its citations, dreaming up some good keywords, and then using Google. What year is it? Instead, you've chosen to be ignorant, and then mouth off loudly about your ignorant opinions.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Of course not, but each and everyone I described above is a member of the militia. That was the understanding and definition when the document was written, so that is the meaning that must be used to follow it properly today.

    20. Re:A "miniscule" problem will not get resolved. by kimvette · · Score: 1

      > At the time, well-regulated meant in proper working order.

      Their writings also indicate that they meant not only that the weapons are in good working order, but that The People knew how to use their firearms effectively and responsibly, and knew how to use their arms to kill tyrants and enemies. Our founding fathers were progressive liberals, not pussies like today's moonbats.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  7. Wrong line of work by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

    If someone is that good at deciphering automotive electronic systems and codes they should be selling software to allow independent shops to do that, as well as rekey keys so people don't have to spend $400 at the dealer for a new key...

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:Wrong line of work by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If someone is that good at deciphering automotive electronic systems and codes they should be selling software to allow independent shops to do that, as well as rekey keys so people don't have to spend $400 at the dealer for a new key...

      Actually, a number of people do create solutions for doing this sort of thing. I don't have access to that set of bookmarks right now, but I bookmarked some of the guys who sell immo code retrieval tools for VWs newer than mine, where it becomes complicated. Some of them work over and over again, and some of them require an internet connection and involve their servers... I wanted the information for a discussion just like this one, but that machine is down until my video card RMA is complete, or thereabouts

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Wrong line of work by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      If someone is that good at deciphering automotive electronic systems and codes they should be selling software to allow independent shops to do that, as well as rekey keys so people don't have to spend $400 at the dealer for a new key...

      Actually, a number of people do create solutions for doing this sort of thing. I don't have access to that set of bookmarks right now, but I bookmarked some of the guys who sell immo code retrieval tools for VWs newer than mine, where it becomes complicated. Some of them work over and over again, and some of them require an internet connection and involve their servers... I wanted the information for a discussion just like this one, but that machine is down until my video card RMA is complete, or thereabouts

      You are correct. There are a number of companies that sell there own versions of the manufacturer's diagnostic tools as well, so there is definitely a market. Most of them start around 200$ and go up from there.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    3. Re:Wrong line of work by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You are correct. There are a number of companies that sell there own versions of the manufacturer's diagnostic tools as well, so there is definitely a market. Most of them start around 200$ and go up from there.

      Yes, I have the Ross-Tech VAG-KKL cable for older OBD-II VW/Audi products with the dual K line. Without it, or a similar tool, there's no maintaining these vehicles.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Wrong line of work by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      You're making the assumption that they didn't steal the software from a dealership or some such though.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:Wrong line of work by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      You're making the assumption that they didn't steal the software from a dealership or some such though.

      True.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  8. Dumb question RE: car hacking v. TPP by mnemotronic · · Score: 2

    Will TPP restrict my ability as a vehicle owner to research my car's security systems and possibly prevent someone from wifi-jacking my car?

    As I understand it, TPP makes it illegal for me to futz with the electronic ignition system.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    1. Re:Dumb question RE: car hacking v. TPP by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      No the TPP will lockout 3rd party repairs / DIY oil changes (you can do it but the change oil light will stick on and some cars may enter limp home mode)

  9. Dude where's my car? by pr0nbot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long before a car can be remotely hacked and told to self-drive itself to the chop-shop? By someone in another country?

    1. Re:Dude where's my car? by Calydor · · Score: 2

      That's Uber.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:Dude where's my car? by jasper160 · · Score: 1

      I see Uber or some other ride for hire company jumping on the automatic cars. Ends those pesky employee problems.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished.
    3. Re:Dude where's my car? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Isn't the civil system how libertarians feel disputes like that should be solved?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  10. Unless you have a BC (before computers) vehicle by pageauc · · Score: 1

    So I drive a 1996 Dodge Ram 2500 Diesel Truck with 450,000+ km that runs reliably and gets good mileage without a computer. If I park it in an area that does not seem safe I attach a club to the steering wheel. This is old school but no one is going to hack it with a laptop. Maybe get in with a bar along the window to unlock the door but not much to take. or steal.

  11. How is this new? by Alt-Ctrl-Freak · · Score: 1

    What did I miss? How is this 'a new way'?

  12. I suggest passcode lock and physical security by mysidia · · Score: 1

    When the owner sets up their vehicle.... have them define a passcode; much like you do for a phone. The vehicle should have sensors to detect unauthorized entry and unauthorized attempts to access diagnostic ports to plug-in a laptop.

    If an unauthorized access attempt is detected when the vehicle is in secure mode, Or the user is ultra-paranoid and pushes a special "Lock" button before turning off their engine..... it should put all the vehicle computers in a "Passcode" lock status which can only be released by entering the password; Each intelligent component in the vehicle locking itself and not allowing an unlock without the correct passcode-derived hash being broadcast.

    The passcode lock status should take actions to make sure the power systems cannot be taken out of Park/Neutral, Engine control and motors or fuel injection systems set themself into limp mode and not allow high speed operation.

    There should be regular phone-home messages for tracking purposes.

    Put security covers on each diagnostic access point with a lock which require a traditional physical key that the car owner has to access to; either to open the port or to enable the port.....

    1. Re:I suggest passcode lock and physical security by swb · · Score: 1

      30 years ago my dad's business had something like this in a few of the company vehicles. It was an electronic keypad where you had to enter a digit code to get the car to start.

      These were older cars (early 80's vintage pickups and two Diesel VW Rabbits) so they didn't have extensive (or any?) computers to lock down subsystems, but nothing electrical would work in the car unless the code was entered.

      I don't know how it was wired up, my guess is some kind of relay in front of the fusebox.

    2. Re:I suggest passcode lock and physical security by caseih · · Score: 1

      Israeli vehicles are all equipped with a numeric keypad that enables the ignition and fuel systems. You have to enter in the code before starting the vehicle. Otherwise you can crank and crank and it won't ever run. Now I'm sure this is just as hackable as hot-wiring. But passcode systems for ignition do exist in parts of the world and are heavily used. I'm not really sure if they prevent vehicle theft or not, though.

      As for a lock on the diagnostic port, that's a good idea, but a physical key to block access to that seems a bit funny and circular. Physical locks can be compromised, so we'll protect them with digital locks which can be compromised by hackers, so we'll protect that with another physical lock. And so on and so forth! I guess it's all about layers.

    3. Re:I suggest passcode lock and physical security by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Physical locks can be compromised, so we'll protect them with digital locks

      No..... this is not really the reason cars are getting digital locks. Physical locks can be made more secure too. Take a look at the Abloy disk locks.

      (1) They are nicer for the customers. They look fancy, appealing. They have an appearance of technical sophistication
      (2) The digital locks often provide additional convenience features, for example, opening your door with your keys in your pocket. Automatic opening of the trunk. Auto starting for you.

      (3) Digital locks generate additional revenue. Do you have any idea how much a replacement digital key costs? I've seen dealers charging more than $500 to replace one, and they're easily lost.

      (4) More complexity provides an APPEARANCE of more security, more peace of mind

  13. Proof of Concept by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    Motherboard's "How to hack a car" from a couple years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  14. NOT raising alarms by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Police and car insurers say thieves are using laptop computers to hack into late-model cars' electronic ignitions to steal the vehicles, raising alarms

    If they were raising alarms they wouldn't be getting away with it so much.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  15. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by Holi · · Score: 2

    Once you save that one, is it really a suicide bombing anymore?

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  16. Stealing cars can be dangerous. by lazlo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah they're stealing all these Jeeps, but jokes on them when they think they're in park and get run over by the car they just stole.

    --
    Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
  17. Annie Oakley by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I want to see you try to hack my '95 Escort Wagon.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Annie Oakley by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

      Youngster. I still drive my 1986 4Runner. And no, I don't want to sell it.

    2. Re:Annie Oakley by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this.

      I wish my car couldn't be remotely unlocked. But at least you still need the physical key in the physical lock and physically turn it around to start the engine.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Annie Oakley by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Youngster. I still drive my 1986 4Runner.

      Show-off.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Annie Oakley by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I want to see you try to hack my '95 Escort Wagon.

      Poser.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Annie Oakley by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Naw man, for real. I got the '95 in that Aqua blue/green color. Bought it from the family of a WWII vet who passed away. It's got 43k miles on it. The radio just crapped out though. Drove it from Chicago to Hartford, CT last August, and I'm planning on taking it to Houston in a few weeks.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:Annie Oakley by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Sometimes it seems like that's the only color they come in! It's the same as mine, in any case - and the only other one I've seen around here is also that color.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  18. Re:Ford cars by JohnFen · · Score: 2

    That means if you try to steal the car, you will need to tear out the ECU and replace it with a completely brand new factory fresh one, or a used one that comes with the original keys. Rather more complicated and quite expensive.

    This implies that losing your existing keys would also be complicated and quite expensive to recover from as well. If that's the case, I would actively avoid such a system. I've never had my car stolen, but I've had to replace keys a few times in my life.

  19. Chrysler missed the mark, there by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    They started with a vehicle that is often mocked for changing only the very least allowed by the law (the Jeep Wrangler) and then they added all these electronics to it? Yeah, we all knew they were in trouble but this seems like an odd course for them to follow to try to right their own ship.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Chrysler missed the mark, there by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Many manufacturers use the same frame which includes electronics support for pretty much all their car models. That way you only make one base model, just put a different chassis over it. Additionally, electronics are much cheaper and easier to repair that running wiring everywhere. I once replaced the wiring in a 1940's VW (you know, the original beetle) - there is a bundle of wires about 2 inches thick going through the chassis for that simple of a car (nothing electronic, just lights, ignition etc). Imagine all our current bells and whistles (electronic brakes, 3rd brake lights, interior lights, door sensors, powered seats, heated mirrors etc) done by relays and straight up wiring.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  20. Re:CAN bus issues by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

    In the case of new cars, especially electric, allowing maintainable by anyone other than the manufacturer is a mistake.

    Go fuck yourself. Making it possible for the owner of the vehicle to maintain and/or modify it himself is never a mistake, and indeed should be made mandatory!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  21. At least its not an app by jader3rd · · Score: 1

    It's good to know that general purpose computers are good for something, and that there's something new beyond appy smartphone appy app apps.

  22. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Technically, yes, since you don't need a driver anymore to get the car full of C4 to the target area, so it's not a SUICIDE bombing anymore...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  23. Re:Because public/private key pair security is har by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    What public/private key security? If you think car manufacturers bothered to implement asynchronous security, you're deluding yourself. Replay attacks work on virtually any kind of car.

    Seriously, what they tout as the "new kind of electronic lock" is the electronic equivalent of the lock on your sister's diary.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  24. That's a lot of blunders coming together by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    At first, there was CAN bus. Those that know it know well that this bus know that "security" was not even an afterthought in its design. It came into existence when "board computers" were something that was carefully hidden from the car's user. Chips that controlled injection, traction, braking behaviour that needed no input from the driver. And of course security was a non-issue back then. Because, hey, anyone who could get access to those areas, hidden deeply within the car's heart and soul, could much easier fuck it up or steal it. Seriously, getting access to those early "board computer" parts meant you literally ripped the whole car apart just to gain a GLIMPSE at it.

    Time went on and that "board computer" stuff got more and more pervasive. First with displays that were disconnected from the physical things they displayed, with speedometers that didn't just passively count revolutions on a wheel but a LCD that got the speed information from various sensors, same for the RPM gauge of your engine and various other tidbits, and it didn't take long until buttons on your steering wheel were added that let you control radio, air condition and mirrors.

    Still not a security issue, because so far you could not affect the car from the outside. You still had to gain access to the inside of the car first before you could mess with it electronically.

    Now, though, security IS an issue because the car accepts input from the outside. And that will become an even greater headache than we know now. The buses are in most implementations not separated between "mission critical" and "user leisure", or if, at a logical level only. Meaning that yes, that bus that takes your steering-wheel-button input and even handles your bluetooth is physically the same that deals with your ABS, your injection and your traction control.

    I guess I'm not the only one who thinks that this MIGHT become an issue, given time. Especially considering that security that can't be tested in a crash test has not been any kind of issue with car manufacturers so far, not at all.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  25. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

    Why even bother with a bomb, if you can take remote control of thousands of already occupied vehicles anyway?

    I wish this was just some sort of distasteful joke, but unfortunately the combination of increasing reliance on computers and horrific lack of awareness of (and/or caring about) security by auto manufacturers is starting to make that kind of attack look like a credible threat.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  26. RollJam Variant? by ZyntaxJack · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a RollJam variant. https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...

  27. This story by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    Should be filed under the category "DUH!"

  28. That Maintenance port ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... you see under my dash isn't really the maintenance port. The real one was unscrewed and stuffed up into the wiring harness. The one you are plugging your laptop into is a modified USB killer.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  29. Fine we will lock them down and lock in dealer onl by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Fine we will lock them down and lock in dealer only repairs and maintenance

  30. Re:Ford cars by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Some newer cars (and even some older cars dating back to 2003) require that the ECU and ICM be replaced if you lose all keys for the vehicle - so you're looking at $150 per key, plus about $1900 to $1500 worth of computers to replace plus the labor to tear down the dashboard when those modules are installed behind the dash rather than under the hood.

    Now, I appreciate a LOT of advancements in auto technology. Performance and economy have both improved (hell, some sedans can spank the hell out of my mildly-tuned ZR-1 off the line - and they are totally stock without any aftermarket tunes), safety has improved, as has pretty much everything else - except serviceability. Lots of thought has gone into cramming lots of stuff into tiny spaces, and very little regard is given to level of effort involved in replacing any of it when servicing is required. Hell, lamp replacement in some vehicles requires removal of the front bumper cover, which in turn requires removal of spoilers, inner fenders, belly pans, and so on. Replacement of heater/AC blower requires removal of about 1/4 of the dashboard, and the ECU, BCM/BCU, and other modules sometimes require total removal of the dashboard and center console. Wtf?

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  31. Re:Unless you have a BC (before computers) vehicle by kimvette · · Score: 1

    > If I park it in an area that does not seem safe I attach a club to the steering wheel. This is old school but no one is going to hack it with a laptop.

    http://www.makitatools.com/en-...

    Even the hardest steels might take a minute to get through. A hacksaw will also eat through it, although more slowly.
    From what I've read, the hardened steel used in The Club takes a max of 15 seconds for a cordless angle grinder to take out.
    No laptop required.

    Then, your "old school" Dodge Ram likely requires simple manipulation of the switches on the column, which avoids the need to cut wires. The "ignition switch" key in many modern vehicles isn't a switch but operates levers which in turn manipulate the switches mounted lower on the steering column. This makes hotwiring easier as there is no guessing as to which wires turn on the pump and ECU, which turns on the starter relay, etc. - just break or remove the dashboard cover, pry up the levers the keyswitch drive, and play with the switch positions.

    Having multi-factor authentication in the chain (chip in key, ICM, ECU/ECM all having the correct tokens, key code knowledge, etc.) is far better security. As this article points out it isn't perfect, but it a good deal better than your old school truck's shitty idea of security.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  32. What is old is new again by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    This is not so new as a few years ago a Russian syndicate had been found to be using notebooks with a radio card installed to blast BMWs and presumably other cars with remote start to get the car unlocked and started long enough to load them onto a truck.

  33. Re:Unless you have a BC (before computers) vehicle by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    So I drive a 1996 Dodge Ram 2500 Diesel Truck with 450,000+ km that runs reliably and gets good mileage without a computer.

    So your Cummins requires 1 wire for run and 1 wire for start... It's not rocket surgery.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  34. In teh 90's you just needed a key by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Three of my buddies had Dodge Lasers in the 90's. Two of them could open each others locks and start the car with their own keys. It also worked on other peopel Dodge Lasers. Dodge trucks and cars were easy to steal. Pup the night glow ring, punch the tumbler as a certain spot to pop it out and use the same screwdrive to turn the ignition on. Took about a minute.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:In teh 90's you just needed a key by dargaud · · Score: 1

      I had a VW golf in the late 80s. Once in a parking lot I unlocked it, sat in, started it and went... he, this is not my car !

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  35. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Combine this with always-on (Tesla?) self-driving cars, and I could just summon one to my mom's basement!

    The stairs might be a tad problematic.

    On related news, this'd help reduce the number of victims in suicide bombings (by one, each time).

    I expect it's cheaper and easier for Daesh to find gullible young Muslim men tormented by their homosexuality or addiction to porn than it'd cost to buy a fleet of self-driving Teslas.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  36. Re:Ford cars by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Replacement of heater/AC blower requires removal of about 1/4 of the dashboard, and the ECU, BCM/BCU, and other modules sometimes require total removal of the dashboard and center console. Wtf?

    These things don't happen that often and they don't care about owners after the first one very much, and owners after the second one not at all. I've never seen a vehicle where you had to remove the bumper cover to replace a lamp.

    I've got an A8 which is a rolling PITA, but it's interesting what is and what isn't easy to work on. The blower motor is trivial to replace as it's done from beneath the hood. I believe the heater cores require dash removal... it's either that or engine removal, I'd have to look it up. You can officially get at almost all of the climate control servos without dash removal, and unofficially get at all of them. But the heater core control valve is in a horrible location and you're supposed to remove the brake servo. If you are crafty, you don't have to do that, but the alternative is not fun either. All of the major hidden modules are trivial to access; the ABS is behind the driver's kick panel, and the PCM, TCM, and CCM are in an "e-Box" under the hood. The stereo comes out easily with fairly typical removal tools, but in order to get out the climate control module which lives right next to it out, you need to take out the floor mats and center console trim panels from both sides, remove the center vent, remove the stereo, and pull the whole center stack out of the dash including all of the big switches.

    Anyway, everything continues in this vein... the intake manifold is trivial to remove but the oil cooler is a nightmare. I think the truth is that you're just running into basic limitations of what people expect and what it is reasonable to produce and assemble in the factory. There's only so much space in the car to make convenient maintenance access. On the other hand, some of it really is just bad design. I can get right at the blower motor in my F250, in my 300SD, and in my A8...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    I would be hard for them to find any that _aren't_. It's baked into muslim culture. Only the bottoms are gay, the tops are just normal muslims.

    Maybe 10% of muslims are purely straight, about the same % that are gay in western culture. The ones where nature outweighs nurture...

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  38. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    good luck cracking Tesla. With some 100,000 Tesla on the road, only 6 have been stolen and in every case, it required that our fobs be stolen. And if you steal one, it is not worth that much on the black market. Only tesla does the parts and they do not buy stolen parts.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  39. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    You know, just thinking about it, you bring up an interesting point.
    Right now, AP is actually semi-autonomous, and you have to have a certain speed to turn it on. In addition, you have to have hands on the wheel. So no, not a problem, AT THIS TIME.
    BUT, the goal is level 4 autonomy. That means that get in (or put in a weight), and then order it to where you want to go, which could be as little as 1-2 miles away and it goes.
    BUT, what stops them from loading explosives in the back (or even in that front seat weight)?
    Nothing that I can think of.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  40. Re:This isn't something new, and it is rare... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    If someone wants your car they get a key, a lock cylinder and an ECU from a junkyard and bring it all with them.

    Of course the '2004' part makes your car immune from professional car thieves.

    Real professional car thieves just use flatbed tow trucks anyhow. Nothing can stop that.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  41. Re:Ford cars by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    On newer VWs the first thing you have to do to service anything near the firewall, is move the accessory tray to the 'service position'. To do that you have to remove the front bumper cover, then pull the tray forward.

    VW/Porsche/Audi seems to have settled on VW performance, Audi parts availability and Porsche cost. Reminiscent of European heaven/hell jokes.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  42. Re:Ford cars by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    On newer VWs the first thing you have to do to service anything near the firewall, is move the accessory tray to the 'service position'. To do that you have to remove the front bumper cover, then pull the tray forward.

    On my D2 A8 there is a similar thing called putting it in the service position. Because it has an unboltable core support and sliders for the bumper cover, when you do anything to the front of the engine it's by far easiest to remove everything (all the lines which aren't radiator hoses are on one side) so that you can work right on it, especially if you're doing a major job like the timing belt. It's technically possible to do without doing this, but it's frankly trivial and so it's the way it's done.

    VW/Porsche/Audi seems to have settled on VW performance, Audi parts availability and Porsche cost. Reminiscent of European heaven/hell jokes.

    At least it's not Mercedes-Benz parts and service. That really would be hell. I can actually get most of the parts for my car. Big stuff I have to get used, but all the fiddly special fasteners and seals I can get from VAG.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  43. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    I expect it's cheaper and easier for Daesh to find gullible young Muslim men tormented by their homosexuality or addiction to porn than it'd cost to buy a fleet of self-driving Teslas.

    Even if somebody gave them the self-driving cars, they would probably still include some suicide bombers for social reasons, and just in case the targets figure out some trick to reset it them to manual mode.

  44. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    You don't consider a vastly reduced chance of being seen at the sight of the bombing by either witness or camera to be a positive for the bomber?

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  45. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by Neuromaniac · · Score: 1

    .. or summon twenty to block someone else's basement accessway.

  46. Re:Yay! This plus autonomous cars! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    You don't consider a vastly reduced chance of being seen at the sight of the bombing by either witness or camera to be a positive for the bomber?

    Other bombers would see it as a serious disadvantage. If your aim is to be SEEN to be performing a mass killing, than this would not be desirable.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  47. Re:Ford cars by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    In fact it is a complicated and expensive thing if you lose all your keys to the car.

    That's a serious problem. Those keys with embedded transponders already make it difficult and expensive to even make a copy of your key for storage. It seems crazy to make that situation even worse.

    I like to think of it as a good value in that if it costs me that much, it costs the criminals that much as well.

    Fair enough. Obviously, I take the opposite point of view. It dramatically reduces the value of the vehicle to me, and is a strong reason to avoid purchasing such vehicles.