Slashdot Mirror


One Single Malicious Vehicle Can Block 'Smart' Street Intersections In the US (bleepingcomputer.com)

An anonymous reader shares a BleepingComputer report: Academics from the University of Michigan have shown that one single malicious car could trick US-based smart traffic control systems into believing an intersection is full and force the traffic control algorithm to alter its normal behavior, and indirectly cause traffic slowdowns and even block street intersections. The team's research focused on Connected Vehicle (CV) technology, which is currently being included in all cars manufactured across the globe. More precisely, it targets V2I (vehicle-to-infrastructure) protocols, and more precisely the I-SIG system implemented in the US.

The Michigan research team says the I-SIG system in its current default configuration is vulnerable to basic data spoofing attacks. Researchers say this is "due to a vulnerability at the signal control algorithm level," which they call "the last vehicle advantage." This means that the latest arriving vehicle can determine the traffic system's algorithm output. The research team says I-SIG doesn't come with protection from spoofing attacks, allowing one vehicle to send repeated messages to a traffic intersection, posing as the latest vehicle that arrived at the intersection. According to simulated traffic models, the Michigan team says that around a fifth of all cars that entered a test intersection took seven minutes to traverse the traffic junction that would have normally taken only half a minute. Researchers don't believe this bug could be exploited for actual gains in the real world, but the bugs' existence shows the protocol is poorly coded, even four years after first being proved unsecured.

98 comments

  1. Idiot researchers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They prove that a hostile actor can cause overwhelming congestion at and near an intersection, but still comment:

    It is unclear how a threat actor might use the vulnerabilities discovered by the Michigan research team, as it would take them thousands of malicious cars spread across a city for long periods of time to incur any real economical damages to the local business sector.

    Now, let me think, what is an effective means of causing real damages when you have a lot of people in a small area? Oh, yes, agressive chemistry. Or if you want something a little slower, agressive biology.

    1. Re:Idiot researchers by gnick · · Score: 1

      ...a hostile actor can cause overwhelming congestion...

      ... even without exploiting any "smart" technology.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:Idiot researchers by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The real reason why we are not dead already is the fact that most people are not total jerks who actively just want to make everyone lives miserable, with no real benefit towards them.

      So why are you in jail? Well I thought it would be funny to trick the traffic lights to make them all red. In turn 3 ambulances couldn't make it to the Hospital in time, 1 Firetruck cause a house to burn down. All because some one got tired waiting in traffic, tried to do a U-Turn collide with a gasoline truck hurting 3 people, and causing the fire that spread to the house.

      Yes we have stupid crazy people out there, however there are much easier ways to cause chaos then trying to hack a smart street.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re: Idiot researchers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "1 Firetruck cause a house to burn down."

      You're taking the word "firetruck" too literally. The house was already on fire, it's not the trucks fault.

    4. Re:Idiot researchers by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Gee, I remember when kids just used to steal stop signs

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:Idiot researchers by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Yet we live in a world where there will always be another kid that throws a cinder block or a rock of a bridge. We don't need to be inviting mischief.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    6. Re:Idiot researchers by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      https://xkcd.com/1958/

      Yep, XKCD covered this

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    7. Re:Idiot researchers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets see, there would be much better ways to block up an intersection, but this one is good enough for the suicide bomber to walk into the middle of the intersection and....

  2. Always a problem by rgmoore · · Score: 1

    This kind of thing is always a potential problem. If you allow uncontrolled inputs, you always need to check if somebody is acting maliciously. Technical improvements could obviously help, but it's at least as important to have legal mechanisms to back them up. Spoofing the system needs to be illegal with real penalties for violations and reasonable mechanisms for spotting the spoofers. This is the new equivalent of making it illegal to use emergency lights if you aren't an emergency vehicle.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    1. Re:Always a problem by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This concerns me more:

      Connected Vehicle (CV) technology, which is currently being included in all cars manufactured across the globe.

      Ok...this is a new one on me.

      When did they start this? What do I look for in my car for this?

      More importantly, how can I disable this? I don't want my vehicle connect to any company, entity, or any other vehicle.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Always a problem by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Funny

      More importantly, how can I disable this? I don't want my vehicle connect to any company, entity, or any other vehicle.

      Sorry, just like with the video games, there is no offline single player mode any more.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re: Always a problem by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      You can't disable it. That's the point.

    4. Re:Always a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I drive a car that predates the Internet.

    5. Re:Always a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using a car from the 1960s is not an option available to many.

    6. Re:Always a problem by Dare+nMc · · Score: 2

      > When did they start this? What do I look for in my car for this?

      The article was wrong, clicked their source where they claim it is in every car is this info:

      2016 -- Issue Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
      2018 -- Issue regulation mandating V2V technology
      2019 -- Begin phase-in period for new car production
      2021 -- V2V technology included on 100% of new car production

      Only currently in select 2017 Cadillac models.

    7. Re:Always a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These things almost always end in an antenna. Find that antenna and disconnect it. At the very least you've drastically limited its range. I hope you don't use a no-stop toll system nor Bluetooth in your car if you're worried about being tracked though.

    8. Re:Always a problem by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Whew..ok, thanks.

      Just got a new car last year, and shouldn't be in it.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    9. Re:Always a problem by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Connected vehicle has been around for ages. In fact it will probably become mandatory soon, in order to automatically report accidents. If the airbags deploy the vehicle sends an SoS over the mobile network, with the location of the crash.

      The easiest way to disable it is probably to disconnect the antenna. Then it will just think it is in a bad signal area and not start throwing up error messages.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Always a problem by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      NA Miata is always the answer. Join the cult, we have turbos.

  3. I thought web sites learned this long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never trust user input!

    1. Re:I thought web sites learned this long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor bobby tables.

  4. Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by Ecuador · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Eh, a single malicious vehicle can block "dumb" intersections too if it just stops right there in the middle!

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Right, don't quite get the "eureka" aspect of this.

    2. Re:Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think the big difference is for a malicious vehicle to do it in the traditional sense, you'll have a pretty damned good idea who's doing it. With this, they may just be parked in a parking lot near the intersection, and their "vehicle" may be a backpack.

    3. Re:Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it is already a crime - obstructing traffic. But that doesn't clickbate.

    4. Re:Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every day, hundreds of thousands of people successfully make their own lanes to get through intersections with a disabled vehicle. Granted, the disabled vehicle is usually an asshole who didn't have room to get through the intersection, but it doesn't take 7 minutes to drive around the fuckhead.

    5. Re: Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by houghi · · Score: 1

      Many crossings are big enough to drive around an obstacle as big as a car.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    6. Re:Eh, it can block even "dumb" intersections by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Eh, a single malicious vehicle can block "dumb" intersections too if it just stops right there in the middle!

      Actually that's the worst place to put it to block an intersection... you'll just change it from a junction into a roundabout. If you want to block an intersection, park it in the path of traffic.

      However a quick glance of the summary says that the vehicle does not need to be in the intersection... or even a vehicle at all. Just a radio sending a control signal... and not even a malformed one, just spamming a legit signal.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Crashes do this all the time now. If there's a wreck on the freeway I use to get to work, it clogs the entire freeway so that traffic slows to a snail's pace. The alternative routes also fill up fast. Doesn't take rocket science; just old-fashioned stupidity and inattention.

    It doesn't help that crash inspectors have to "do science" on the wreck to understand it better. Why waste tens of thousands of commuter hours to clear up the insurance of 2 people? Selfish allocation of resources. Take lots of pictures then push the wrecks off the road, and study the pictures back in the office.

    1. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They don't do major investigations unless someone is injured or killed or evidence of a major crime exists, so.. unwarranted rant maybe.

    2. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Often somebody is injured, but why so slow to move them? I realize sometimes you have to be careful about broken backs, but it seems the delays are too common for that: not everybody busts their back. Granted, I don't know all the details, but it seems like unjustified delay due to silly laws or rules.

    3. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      While I hate getting stuck in traffics as much as the next person. I am comforted in the fact that there is an inspector to "Do Science" on the wreck so the justice system has data to work with. Freedom and Justice doesn't and shouldn't be equated with an economic outcome. Because if such thing shows that it was because a fault in the road, that needs to be fixed asap, or the person made a living collecting off of insurance claims by getting into an accident on purpose. Should be punished and jailed, to keep the rest of us safe.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Granted, I don't know all the details, but it seems like unjustified delay due to silly laws or rules.

      Do you know any of the details? Any at all?

      I mean, I've had a dozen people complain to me about a guy uselessly standing around while somebody else is working below ground.

      Only takes one incident for the reason for that to become obvious.

    5. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Why waste tens of thousands of commuter hours to clear up the insurance of 2 people?

      It isn't their fault the freeway stays priced below market equilibrium when crashes occur. If the free market were allowed to work, people would carpool home and back to work again the next day, or take the train or bus, etc. and the crash would not have wasted any commuter hours.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    6. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by geoscodin · · Score: 1

      There are signs up and down the highway in SC telling you to move the vehicles off the road if there are no injuries. Some people do, others do not. But in both cases, the cars passing the accident (or person changing a flat tire, etc.) slow way down to gawk, which causes additional delays and addition crashes, which causes even more slow downs and more crashes, which causes... well, you get the picture. Once you're past the wreck, the speed limit instantly goes from 5 mph to 80. Stop rubbernecking ya lookyloos!
      For good or ill, I'm the guy who gets over on to the shoulder once I'm past it so the car in front of me can longer see the crash in his mirror so we can all move on.

    7. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Often somebody is injured, but why so slow to move them?

      Investigations of fault likely have to follow the same evidentiary rules as criminal investigations.

    8. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Investigations of fault likely have to follow the same evidentiary rules as criminal investigations.

      That's a dumb rule. Tens of thousands of people, perhaps hundreds of thousands sometimes, are inconvenienced for that. The cost trade-off to society is NOT worth it. Let it go so traffic can go. Math gives it the finger.

    9. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The trick that needs to be used is to assess the actual cost of the investigation onto the Insurance company that often is the interested party requiring the investigation. Calculate the cost in the slow-down of 5000 people trying to get to work. Assess that as an additional expense to the interested parties insisting on disrupting traffic for the investigation.

    10. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      Investigations of fault likely have to follow the same evidentiary rules as criminal investigations.

      That's a dumb rule. Tens of thousands of people, perhaps hundreds of thousands sometimes, are inconvenienced for that. The cost trade-off to society is NOT worth it. Let it go so traffic can go. Math gives it the finger.

      Since such an investigation of fault can lead to criminal and even felony charges, how about let's not be so all-in-a-rush to bypass civil rights and protections so you can make it to the Taco Bell drive-thru before closing, hmm? Deal?

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    11. Re:The old-fashioned way VERY effective by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I weighed the tradeoffs and feel differently about this. Your Taco Bell example is cherry-picking. Sample Error. I did the "pain math" and it benefits the aggregate drivers by far. I invite you to also do it.

      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.

      Righties are just as pro-snooping if not more. They just tend to back snooping on different things.

  6. Score:1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spoofing the system needs to be illegal

    Modded up on Slashdot for declaring that security research should be outlawed. I wish this sort of thing surprised me.

    1. Re:Score:1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Security through obscurity. Information wants to be neoliberalized.

  7. Who needs a car? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

    A transponder hooked up to a Raspberry Pi and a battery could be made to have the same effect... fun times...

    BTW - the Trump administration delayed the CV/V2V mandate in the US, and it's not mandated in the EU yet. One of the few Trump administration decisions that I wholeheartedly and completely support.

    1. Re:Who needs a car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the few Trump administration decisions that I wholeheartedly and completely support.

      Even a rabid mongoose bites a poisonous snake now and then.

    2. Re:Who needs a car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Venomous. Only 2 species of poisonous snakes that we know of, and it's only because they eat poison tree frogs or some such.

  8. a cell jammier can do the same thing by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    a cell jammier can do the same thing

  9. Need Way To Cause Cars To Gang Up On Perp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Beat The Shit Out of Said Car. We Are Arkansas. We ArNotKansas.

    1. Re:Need Way To Cause Cars To Gang Up On Perp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does your governor want to make work a requirement for Medicaid? Is he afraid his own example is not good enough? Does he have to use imposition of artificial scarcity to convince people his ideology is correct?

    2. Re:Need Way To Cause Cars To Gang Up On Perp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you really want to know is, why does Clinton fuck interns? Because he can! Because, he, can. It's good to be the governor!

  10. Obligatory xkcd by Daetrin · · Score: 3, Funny

    https://www.xkcd.com/1958/

    Just slightly more complex, a malicious actor with a single vehicle can block a "dumb" intersection by driving doughnuts in the middle of the intersection.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Obligatory xkcd by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the time someone on the college I went to re-arranged all the traffic cones into a smiley face so they could photograph it from the third floor dorm room. The smiley face blocked the whole street but people still tried to navigate through the features of the face to arrive at the other side.

    2. Re:Obligatory xkcd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's bitztream the autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating, Slashdot editors-hating Slashdot troll!

  11. My favorite part by cinghiale · · Score: 1

    "Researchers don't believe this bug could be exploited for actual gains in the real world,"

    1. Re:My favorite part by choprboy · · Score: 2

      "Researchers don't believe this bug could be exploited for actual gains in the real world,"

      The researchers don't seem to have a very active imagination...
        - Large numbers of people with spoofers, say rush hour traffic or a caravan moving in one direction across the city, to have high probability of all vehicles moving in the same direction to always have a green light.
        - The local bum^H^H^H grifter^H^H^H panhandl^H^H^H... errr... apparently disadvantaged contractor seeking private funding for self improvement, sitting on the side of the road causing large backups of people waiting at the light.

    2. Re:My favorite part by BradleyUffner · · Score: 2

      "Researchers don't believe this bug could be exploited for actual gains in the real world,"

      They forget that people are perfectly willing to do things for the "LOLZ", without direct personal gain.

    3. Re:My favorite part by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      Do you remember Italian Job? The thieves hacked the city traffic control to re-route a security transport vehicles to the place of their choice. They could also clear the escape path, block the cops, etc ... Or what about Die Hard with a Vengeance - creating traffic chaos at one side of the city while robbing a bank on another side?

  12. In real cities we use things called bikes/walk by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    In a real city, when this happens, we just ignore the all way stop signal and just walk or bike through the intersection, or use our skateboards.

    Only old people and suburbanites use cars. They deserve to stew.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:In real cities we use things called bikes/walk by PPH · · Score: 1

      we just ignore the all way stop signal

      You and all the homeless bums.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:In real cities we use things called bikes/walk by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      I'll have you know our houses are worth millions. Whereas the car drivers ... aren't.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:In real cities we use things called bikes/walk by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      And you can't go out in the yard.

      I don't live in a city or a suburb.

      This weekend I forgot my laptop out on a table on the back porch.

      I remembered it about a half day later. Obviously it was still there, because nobody steals stuff out here.

      Stay in your crime-ridden shithole, because we don't want you out here.

    4. Re:In real cities we use things called bikes/walk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      our houses are worth millions

      Just because that's what the freeway off-ramp costs. It's still a stretch to call it 'your house' just because you use it for a roof.

  13. They will just make it illegal to disable it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They already did that with airbags. Technically you are legally required to have your airbags in working order during the transfer of title of a car. Practically speaking nobody does. But if there was an accident and the airbags didn't deploy, in theory the new owner of the vehicle could come back and sue you, and the government could come after you on criminal charges (I don't have the specific vehicle code entry for you. This was secondhand information from a professor who also worked for a local vehicle bureau branch.)

    Additionally similiar laws are on the books for seatbelts as well as dozens under the vehicle emission code laws that don't necessarily affect emissions.

    1. Re:They will just make it illegal to disable it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already did that with airbags. Technically you are legally required to have your airbags in working order during the transfer of title of a car.

      It's not "technically" at all. Every country/state in the world has a Code of Conduct for Vehicle Inspections which is used to control how roadworthies are carried out. 99% of them list any indication of SRS failure or malfunction (on SRS-fitted vehicles) as an automatic reason to disqualify a vehicle from getting a roadworthy certificate.

    2. Re:They will just make it illegal to disable it. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      On what basis do you claim "Practically speaking nobody does." I don't think I've ever even heard of someone intentionally disabling the airbag, except one person whose mother weighted less than 80 pounds, and wouldn't legally be able to ride in the front seat if the airbag wasn't disabled. (Not sure how the law currently reads.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:They will just make it illegal to disable it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority of the US doesn't require safety inspections of any kind for cars.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection_in_the_United_States

    4. Re:They will just make it illegal to disable it. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Technically you are legally required to have your airbags in working order during the transfer of title of a car"

      Not if you do it as-is by selling it under a salvage title.

      And the strictest road state - CA, only requires emissions testing and brake/lights inspection. That's it.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  14. Simple solution by quonset · · Score: 1

    Get one of the programmers on here who brag how much they're being paid to produce code which is flawless and fully documented to rewrite the protocol.

    Once you get one of those experts involved, anything is possible.

    1. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's simple, but it isn't cheap. There's a reason that airplane parts (hardware and software) cost orders of magnitude more than similar parts for cars. It's not "a programmer" but an engineering team.

      Tesla, of course, is blowing off the rigor required for safety critical design, but that's okay, because Musk is a hero.

  15. Say it ain't so! by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Next they'll say a stupid truck-driver with slick wheels can jackknife a whole highway shut for almost a day in winter.

    1. Re:Say it ain't so! by PPH · · Score: 1

      UPS deliveries FTW!

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  16. Blocking Traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if I park a car in the middle of an intersection, it blocks traffic? Wow, another failing of so-called "smart-tech", which should be able to identify assholes blocking traffic and honk the horn, yell profanities, and flick them off just like a human driver can.

  17. Damage? by PPH · · Score: 1

    I don't want to cause damage. I just want to hack the system to get all the green lights.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoof what the firetruck or cop car is sending.

    2. Re:Damage? by mcswell · · Score: 1

      "Imagine, then, a situation where, at one given instant every single traffic light on this congested island turns green and STAYS green." From "To Invade New York....", by Irwin Lewis, in Analog SF 1963. Available at https://www.gutenberg.org/file...

  18. What could possibly go wrong by cmaurand · · Score: 1

    With a government system that tracks vehicle location and behavior? It will get perverted. Maybe Google or Facebook will buy or sell the information so they can target russian fake news at you while you're moving. George Orwell is probably spinning like high speed roller in his grave.

    1. Re: What could possibly go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Orwell is suing. They're violating his Idea Property rights.

  19. Re: I will park the car in the intersextion by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    Ivan, Ivan, Ivan - you live in *Moscow* and you're sexually frustrated? You really need to get out more.

  20. How about 'No'. by PPH · · Score: 1

    Just quit with all the automated light crap already. The best traffic flow I've ever seen is in parts of Chicago. Where they still have electromechanical timers* and just sync them for a given speed between lights. Yeah, this won't keep some Aspie from freaking out at 1:00AM if he pulls up to a red light and still has to wait for an empty intersection. But who cares?

    *The only benefit I can see for networked signals is the ability to reset them quickly following a power outage.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:How about 'No'. by krray · · Score: 1

      Just forget about lights all together. Damn *American's. It's called a roundabout. There's a couple in the Chicago area suburbs. Only a couple. 30-50% more traffic through the "intersection" with no stopping. What a concept.

      They were talking about a continuous flow intersection on a busy corner where I used to live. The idea died and the intersection has gone from bad to worse. I moved.

      * I am an American myself. Born and raised. :)

    2. Re:How about 'No'. by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      I am an American myself.

      Yeah, we could tell by the way you use an apostrophe to make a noun plural.

      --

      Enigma

  21. lest we forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    REMEMBER THE MURDER OF IAN MURDOCH, creator of Debian Linux and leading member of the Free Software community, killed Christmas 2015 by the notoriously corrupt San Francisco police department.

    1. Re:lest we forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many women did he harass though?

  22. This is different how ? by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 2

    One idiot can rubberneck, drive slow or attempt to drive whilst playong with their phone and it will bring traffic to a crawl for miles.

    God forbid any flashing lights are visible because everyone and their brother has to stop and gawk at them.

    Malicious can be both intentional or otherwise. The results are the same for 'smart' or standard traffic.

  23. A single malicious driver... by greenwow · · Score: 1

    can already block an intersection. This is nothing new.

  24. more... by Comboman · · Score: 3, Interesting
    - Set up spoofers around your competitor's business. Everything else being equal, customers will avoid a business located in a problem traffic area.

    - Set up spoofers on the streets behind and paralleling your bank heist escape route to maximum police response time.

    - Install a spoofer in your competitor's taxi/uber/delivery van.

    - Install spoofers on the route from the pizza place to your house. 30 minutes or it's free?

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    1. Re:more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Install spoofers on the route from the pizza place to your house. 30 minutes or it's free?

      Careful now. I wouldn't want cold old pizza even if I got it for free everytime. And if you succeed systematically, they stop serving the part of town that don't make them any money.

    2. Re:more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Set up spoofers on the streets behind and paralleling your bank heist escape route to maximum police response time.

      Or just gridlock the city first, and then hit the bank and make your getaway on motor scooters

  25. Also... by Toxiz · · Score: 1

    A single benign police officer, placed in a Boston intersection, can mess up traffic in the entire city.

  26. you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    get rich quick: rob a security van, block the streets with a malicious smart car, escape through the sewer system.

    --
    Nullius in verba
  27. Author went to Sideshow Bob's grammar school by Lanthanide · · Score: 1

    "More precisely, it targets V2I (vehicle-to-infrastructure) protocols, and more precisely the I-SIG system implemented in the US."

    Sideshow Bob: Your children are no more than a pair of ill-bred troublemakers.
    Homer: Lisa too?
    SSB: Especially Lisa... But ESPECIALLY Bart.

  28. Malicious Vehicle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go ahead. I know you're thinking it already.

    Bicycle.

  29. How to fix that? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    How can they fix that? The thing require authenticating vehicles, which probably means loading a digital certificate in it. But soon or later, keys will leak.

    Perhaps the whole thing was a bad idea, after all.

  30. Define malicious by JThundley · · Score: 1

    So the system works as intended? When a vehicle stops and blocks traffic (whether intentional or due to a crash or breaking down), traffic is routed away from it. What's the problem here?

  31. How's life in the hypocrite lane?

  32. "one single malicious vehicle" by beep54 · · Score: 1

    And no one was surprised. Or, at least, they shouldn't have been.

  33. Re:Obligatory news video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did someone say doughnuts in the intersection?

    This happened where I live not long ago.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/corvette-does-doughnuts-on-kenmount-road-scares-drivers-upsets-car-group-1.3085979