Not that I'm a fan of EULAs.
The difference I think is that if someone modifies their jeep and ends up killing themself, it is rather easy for Jeep to prove their innocence; no matter how wrecked the car is the modified suspension or whatever will still be rather apparent. Imagine the nightmare that would be for a software company though.
Of course proving innocence is not how things are supposed to work, but...
Second, you do have licensing agreements with your car. You have warranties that become void if you do X or Y, if you fail to properly maintain Q or R, etc. And those various OSes in the car are not sold to you any more than Windows is. They are licensed, under what specific terms I don't really know.
Sure, but the "attack surface" of the engine management firmware itself isn't enlarged by the presence of an insecure GPS system, is it?
I don't know if the people developing engine management firmware think about fire-walling themselves off from the rest of the in-car network. Certainly, they should. If they do, then the size of the code in the rest of the car doesn't seem relevant in terms of securing the really important stuff.
On one project, a burner controller, he used a PIC microcontroller. I think the capacity of onboard storage was 48k. He didn't add any extra storage.
I could be slightly wrong about the exact specs. I do arduino mainly.
Why does an OS need to have an EULA while a car does not?