News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by scribu on Monday January 29, 2018 @05:14PM (#16261124)
The difference is in how easy it is to scale an attack.

Once an attacker can remotely hack a single car, they can hack all cars that have an identical configuration, with little additional cost.

What happens then? Even if insurance companies could replace all affected cars simultaneously (very unlikely), they’d have to replace them with a model that isn’t affected.

Re:Self-Crashing Cars by aetherson on Monday January 29, 2018 @05:20PM (#16261159)
Passive keyless entry is not remotely hackable, it's locally hackable, that's not scalable and besides which cars sold today (with very few exceptions) can not self drive, so even if you could remotely unlock it you'd still need someone local to drive away with it.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by scribu on Monday January 29, 2018 @05:42PM (#16261287)
You’re of course right about passive keyless entry and perhaps the GP has that confused with other features that do require an internet connection.

Anyway, even if it isn’t autonomous, suppose a car has a smartphone app that allows you to turn on the heating before getting in. And then someone exploits that and gains control over the heating. They could then proceed to drain the batteries or the fuel tank by leaving it on over night, let’s say.

Not exactly a threat to national security, but still a major inconvenience.

Re:Self-Crashing Cars by newman8r on Monday January 29, 2018 @07:59PM (#16262060)
if you did it on the day of an election and only targeted your opposition, it could have an impact. It's far-fetched, but just another scenario.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by socialist_coder on Monday January 29, 2018 @11:23PM (#16262871)
Genius!
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by currymj on Tuesday January 30, 2018 @01:58AM (#16263396)
Not sure it was confusion, but rather intended as an example of how "high end" features spread to the bottom of the market quickly, such that in a few years nearly all new cars may be internet-connected.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by Slansitartop on Tuesday January 30, 2018 @11:06AM (#16266344)
> You’re of course right about passive keyless entry and perhaps the GP has that confused with other features that do require an internet connection.

I did not confuse anything. I only mentioned passive keyless entry in a footnote, as an example of an insecure technology that you can't really avoid anymore. You still have a chance to avoid "connected car" features, but in my estimation the days are numbered for that.

Re:Self-Crashing Cars by LinuxBender on Monday January 29, 2018 @05:35PM (#16261246)
Numerous internet connected cars are remotely hackable and you can take over engine controls, steering, breaking. This was performed on live highways multiple times. DOT investigated at least one of the incidents involving some SUV's.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by jonknee on Monday January 29, 2018 @07:42PM (#16261978)
> Once an attacker can remotely hack a single car, they can hack all cars that have an identical configuration, with little additional cost.

And do what with them? It's decently difficult to fence a single car, it's impossible to make millions of cars disappear.

Re:Self-Crashing Cars by trsse on Monday January 29, 2018 @09:06PM (#16262350)
If you'd read the article you'd see several examples. Drive them at 120mph into gas stations, for starters.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars by dovdovdov on Tuesday January 30, 2018 @01:57AM (#16263394)
Let's get rid of gas stations, for starters!

Btw, the truck attack in the German market would've been a much larger scale if the truck's safety mechanism didn't trigger the emergency break.

Regardless, that Jeep hack sure proved a clusterf*ck of system design, and should be a cautionary tale.

Re:Self-Crashing Cars by WillReplyfFood on Tuesday January 30, 2018 @02:54AM (#16263630)
The system design clusterfuck is what you always get, when you cram as much software as possible on as few ecus as possible.

You wouldnt buy a car that is safe- because bad security does not smell.