If even 30% of what that guy is claiming is true, the Model S has a huge attack surface. Hopefully things have improved since those claims were made.

> as "fast development" and "secure development" are hard to get together

This is just not true. Software that often goes unupdated is the most insecure software of all. If Teslas are more insecure than other vehicles it will simply be because their software is more complex than the competition.

> This is just not true. Software that often goes unupdated is the most insecure software of all.

You'll note that I never made comparisons on how secure Tesla software is in comparison to other vehicles, or that Tesla's software would be the "most insecure software of all".

What I said is that Tesla's development is fast-paced, and this is difficult to do whilst maintaining software security. I agree with you that outdated software is a huge security risk, but I don't see how that contradicts with my statement on Tesla's software.

You're both right in a way. Not having stuff up to date will definitely leave you vulnerable, but if the stories about Tesla's internals are valid, they are not expending the time necessary to ensure they don't write a boatload of security bugs in the first place.

yeah, except that in practice, alot of "fast development" happens on platforms where engineers ignore updates that aren't explicitly flagged as security because the want a stable environment, then when the security bug hits, they push back on deploying the security fix because of breaking functional and API changes in the dependency. I have worked in a broad range of orgs from start-ups with 4 people to government, fin-tech, and bay area tech companies and every single one has had the same stumbling block that has been a pain in my ass as a person responsible for assessing and helping engineers ship secure software.