back to article Tesla in 'Ethernet port carries data' SCANDAL

A Tesla enthusiast has sparked a thousand variations on headlines saying “Tesla hacked” by working out that in-car network traffic is visible on a port designed for service access to the network. The thread on the Tesla Motors Club forum begins in March, and reveals various traffic types that are visible on the network segment …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. McHack

    NIC finds Ethernet port

    Film at 11

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Probably not PoE, though ..

      Nah, meh.

      As long as that network is isolated it's not an issue. Practically every car has an internal bus these days, it only becomes an issue if that can be accessed without your control, and by parties unknown.

      What WOULD be news is if they'd found a way to power the motors over PoE :)

  2. Wzrd1 Silver badge

    So, let me see if I have this straight.

    Tesla vehicles can be hacked via the ethernet port.

    So, I now have to worry, if I were to get one of these vehicles, about someone driving alongside me, opening the car door, opening a blind dash compartment and inserting a custom cable and accessing my navigation and indication system.

    Because ethernet and wireless are the same.

    Or something.

    1. McHack

      "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

      Actually, since they already make small USB wireless adapters and small Ethernet to USB adapters, you can go Ethernet to wireless with off the shelf components that could hide under a blind panel, with a done-up short adapter cable for the "non-RJ45 port".

      Oh look, there are Ethernet to wireless adapters available, one less piece.

      That port "...only provides access to the benign functions of the centre console and navigation screen – nothing to do with drive control."

      So as happens with GPS nav units, the Tesla driver will unthinkingly follow the nav screen "accidentally" into oncoming traffic, up a short driveway, or over a cliff...

      1. stucs201

        Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

        Well yes, someone could plug a wireless widget into the port. But if they've got sufficient access to the car to do that then they've also got sufficient access to interfere with a car with no electronics (e.g. cut brake pipes).

      2. phuzz Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

        You're right, now all they have to do is break into the car, find their way behind the dash and install a ethernet-wireless adaptor, and then stay close enough to the car to pick up the signal and then hack your navigation screen so that, um, why would you do all that rather than just stealing the car?

        1. Shaha Alam

          Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

          if they're willing to go through all that, maybe it's not the car they're interested in.

      3. Jamie Jones Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

        someone could plug in an ethernet wireless adaptor in and mess up my sat-nav?

        How on earth can we survive this, when all we had to worry about before was brakes lines being cut, sugar in the petrol, a banana up the exhaust pipe etc..

        Sigh, if someone drives into oncoming traffic or off a cliff due to satnav issues, they shouldn't be on the road!

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

        > will unthinkingly follow the nav screen "accidentally" into oncoming traffic, up a short driveway, or over a cliff...

        I do look at the monitor when backing up (back-up camera) but otherwise I tend to stick to old habits, such as using the windscreen.

      5. Trygve Henriksen

        Re: "Because ethernet and wireless are the same."

        As if you need to hack their GPS for people to drive into rivers, onto and along railway tracks, narrow foot-trails along cliffs and so on...

    2. BlartVersenwaldIII

      @Wzrd1

      This is obviously the key tie-in to product placement in the next Bond film. Skyfall already had Q being insta-pwned by plugging in an ethernet cable, now with the Tesla you get the opportunity to combine this with an ecologically-friendly car chase.

      Now if only there was a way to run a fuel cell on martinis... I mean Heineken... I mean, $highest_bidder!

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Devil

    "showing a Firefox install running on the console."

    Blacklist that car immediately.

    1. McHack

      Re: "showing a Firefox install running on the console."

      "Blacklist that car immediately."

      Oh noes! It's a homophobic Tesla!

      Keep the gays away, or the car could burst into flames!

      1. Elmer Phud
        Coat

        Re: "showing a Firefox install running on the console."

        "Keep the gays away, or the car could burst into flames!"

        It's a good job it's electric then, otherwise the engine would get flooded

        1. Ben Rose

          Re: "showing a Firefox install running on the console."

          Clearly AC/DC then?

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

  4. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    I'd guess none

    "More interesting is the question just how much source code Tesla should be releasing under various open source licenses, but isn't. ®"

    I'd guess none, honestly. If these devices are running Intel Ubuntu there'll be nothing they've customized, just an install with (I assume?) a bunch of unnecessary packages removed Whatever UI these are running is probably custom and not required to be open source. If it's ARM, if it's not one of the ARM setups Ubuntu supports, you can get the BSP (board support package) from the vendor -- these companies do all have source for their BSPs up -- you can likely copy the ubuntu for ARM userland right into that, make sure ubuntu doesn't try to update your kernel, remove excess packages and you're done.

    Do they have GPL disclaimers in the manual? The LG and Samsung TV manuals I saw had a whole list of what kernel, nanox, ffmpeg, etc. they used, but they were bone stock.

    1. John Riddoch

      Re: I'd guess none

      Not entirely - they're "shipping" GPL'd code which means a customer has the right to request the source code for everything. Now, it's entirely plausible the entire code stack is stock Ubuntu etc and they can just supply that, but they still have to pass it on if requested.

    2. Vic

      Re: I'd guess none

      > I'd guess none, honestly.

      You'd guess wrong.

      If Tesla is shipping GPL code, it must *either* accompany every binary with the corresponding source *or* it must make a binding promise, valid for at least 3 years, to ship that source to any third party on request.

      Given that the car is capable of OTA updates, it is incredibly unlikely that they are shipping source with every binary.

      > there'll be nothing they've customized

      This is irrelevant. The GPL requires you to ship the complete source for all GPL items within your distribution, not just your own patches.

      > Whatever UI these are running is probably custom and not required to be open source

      But if it *derives* from GPL code, it becomes covered in totop by the GPL. It remains to be seen whether or not it does...

      > Do they have GPL disclaimers in the manual?

      Back in 2012, they had no mention of the GPL in the manual at all. This is actually a violation, but the sort of thing that gets sorted out quite easily. But Tesla doesn't currently seem to be trying to sort it out, and that way lies a big problem.

      Oh - and it's not a "disclaimer"...

      Vic.

      1. Nigel 11

        Re: I'd guess none

        Don't forget the "mere aggregation" and library linking exception clauses.

        As long as they're shipping stock Ubuntu plus ordinary user-mode binaries, they aren't shipping any derived GPL code at all. The OS is Ubuntu's distribution, get yours through the usual channels. The proprietary user-mode binaries are merely aggregated.

        Yes, if they have made changes to the kernel or to any of the GPL'ed programs in Ubuntu, they have to make source of those changes available. Even then, they can still keep their proprietary user-mode executables secret, just as long as they aren't derived from GPL code.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: I'd guess none

          You still have to, according to the FSF (it hasn't been tested in court) offer to ship the customer the source for all the packages in the Ubuntu distribution you are using.

          They claim that pointing to the ubuntu repo isn't enough, but worst case you would just have to mirror ir.

          1. Vic

            Re: I'd guess none

            > (it hasn't been tested in court)

            It has been tested in Court. Westinghouse Digital thought they could tough it out. They lost a whole warehouse full of big TVs, which ended up being sold for charity.

            See Groklaw, amongst other places, for more detail.

            Vic.

        2. Vic

          Re: I'd guess none

          As long as they're shipping stock Ubuntu plus ordinary user-mode binaries, they aren't shipping any derived GPL code at al

          Bullshit. If they're shipping stock Ubuntu, they're shipping *loads* of GPL code. A significant amount of all GNU/Linux distributions is GPL, and Ubuntu is no exception.

          The OS is Ubuntu's distribution, get yours through the usual channels

          You appear to misunderstand the GPL. If Tesla is redistributing Ubuntu code, it needs to supply source. That's it. It doesn't matter that it's the same source as Ubuntu ships - Tesla still needs to supply that source on demand or with the binaries to remain GPL-compliant.

          The proprietary user-mode binaries are merely aggregated.

          Nobody's worried about any putative proprietary binaries. Tesla is shipping GPL code, so they need to ship source.

          Yes, if they have made changes to the kernel or to any of the GPL'ed programs in Ubuntu, they have to make source of those changes available.

          NO!

          If they are shipping GPL binaries they need to ship source, regardless of whether or not they have changed them. Please *read* the GPL before making such erroneous statements.

          Vic.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I'd guess none

            I understand now why almost nobody ships PCs with Linux pre-installed... not everybody wants to be forced to supply all the GPL stuff also.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Thank god I have an old car

    It has some electronics to run the engine and ABS and thats about it. It doesn't have some silly infotainment screen or iPad wannabe information display - it has an AM/FM radio and dials. End.

    Am I the only person who's sick of seeing manufacturers shove ever more silly toys and complex systems into cars for no benefit other than a tick in the Flash Features part of the sales brochure? Perhaps someone should tell these companies that generally its NOT 15 year old boys who buy new cars - its mostly people in their 30s and older. And by the time most people have got to that age they've grown out of wanting the silly flashing lights and gimcrack features and don't need or want the hassle that all these systems come with whether its in operating them or paying to maintain them.

    Electric cars are even simpler than internal combustion - some electronics to charge the battery and run the motor. Done. Dump all the other crap and save weight and space. I can't really see why it needs an internal network running over ethernet other than it being some geeks wet dream.

    1. bigtimehustler

      Re: Thank god I have an old car

      Again, this is your requirements, not everyone elses. You make a number of sweeping statements based on your own views of the world.

      1) a lot of people in their 20's buy new cars

      2) you assume everyone in the world in their 30's is the same as you and the people that age you know. Forgetting of course, you are likely to know people similar to yourself, otherwise they wouldn't be very good friends.

      3) there are a lot of people who work in technology these days and like all this stuff, they don't stop working in the industry when they turn 30

      4) they are selling these cars no problem, so clearly the features attract some people.

      There are many other issues with what you said, which could all have been avoided if you had stated this was your opinion and what you want from a car, not everyone in their 30's and above.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Thank god I have an old car

        >1) a lot of people in their 20's buy new cars

        Not many, at least not in europe. Most buy 2nd or 3rd hand or even older unless their parents have coughed up for one.

        >2) you assume everyone in the world in their 30's is the same as you and the people that

        >age you know. Forgetting of course, you are likely to know people similar to yourself,

        >otherwise they wouldn't be very good friends.

        Where did I mention anything about friends? I deal with plenty of clients and colleagues from all over europe. When I have chatted about these sorts of things down the pub or cafe the general consensus is they're just gimmicks.

        >3) there are a lot of people who work in technology these days and like all this stuff,

        >they don't stop working in the industry when they turn 30

        I work in a tech industry. I've never met anyone yet who wanted a home cinema system in their car or for that matter a bloody touch screen that makes simple operations like changing the radio or switching on the air con almost impossible on the move. Plenty - including myself - once wanted a flash ICE system but most people grow out of that - and go faster strips and silly spoilers - by their 30s.

        >4) they are selling these cars no problem, so clearly the features attract some people.

        If they're in all the cars by default then people don't have much choice. And TBH I doubt many people buy a tesla because of the toys in the cabin.

        >There are many other issues with what you said, which could all have been avoided if

        >you had stated this was your opinion and what you want from a car, not everyone in

        >their 30's and above.

        Perhaps you just haven't met enough people and think the people YOU mix with are representative.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Thank god I have an old car

          > a bloody touch screen that makes simple operations like changing the radio or switching on the air con almost impossible on the move

          I'll give you that. I'm hoping they'll go for haptic feedback soon (I'll be buying one once they improve a bit on a few points, ergonomics being one of them). At least, they could go for the joystick-wheel control as in Audis and Mercedes which is pretty safe and convenient to use, for the most part not requiring eyes on the screen once you learn your way around the system.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Thank god I have an old car

        BTH "You make a number of sweeping statements based on your own views of the world."

        It wouldn't make much sense to make sweeping statements based on others' views of the world. That's their job. Right?

        Sweeping statements are, like, the whole point of comment boards.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Thank god I have an old car

          > Sweeping statements are, like, the whole point of comment boards.

          That's a bit of a sweepi...

          Never mind.

    2. Nick Ryan Silver badge

      Re: Thank god I have an old car

      Electric cars are even simpler than internal combustion - some electronics to charge the battery and run the motor. Done. Dump all the other crap and save weight and space. I can't really see why it needs an internal network running over ethernet other than it being some geeks wet dream.

      A hell of an over-simplification there. In a conventional car there are many systems that communicate and are managed through the ECU - both monitoring and control systems or just a convenient way to integrate everything (often the monitoring is separate to the control systems). In the majority of vehicles these operate over a variety of the CAN Bus, as it's a simple bus and very resilient to the hostile environment of a motor vehicle. However an electric vehicle will be a considerably less hostile environment than a combustion engine system therefore there is scope for different systems. For example there is also a variety of the CAN protocol that can run over IP although this scheme is generally more used in an industrial environment than motor.

      So why shouldn't there be an internal network running ethernet / IP? It's a good opportunity to take advantage of standard interfaces between components which is always a good thing compared to proprietary connectors and interfaces. A modern electric vehicle consists of a lot more than just a charger, battery and motor - there's all the battery management, battery level management and notification (e.g. "you have 12 miles remaining - charge soon"), recharge braking, ABS, tyre and other pressure monitors, audio system, navigation system, suspension management, air conditioning, windows and mirrors to control, seat positioning, lighting, dash board notifications and so on.

      1. James Hughes 1

        Re: Thank god I have an old car

        Actually, the Tesla S has very few buttons to play with. It's all done on the central screen. So in a way, it's a lot less complicated than the majority of cars on the market. It also means adding new 'features' is just a software upgrade....and weighs nothing....so no extra weight involved at all. There's a real advantage to etherneting everything. Wiring looms are quite heavy, heavier than an ethernet cable.

        So for the OP, just ignore the central console if you don't want the features.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Thank god I have an old car

        @ Nick Ryan

        No offence mate, but you really need to go on an engineering course if you think ANY of the things you've listed require a networked system in the first place, never mind one running IP over ethernet.

        Yes , CAN bus already exists and its already overkill. As for "air conditioning, windows and mirrors to control, seat positioning, lighting" needing networking - sorry, were you trying to be funny or have you really drunk so much of the kool aid that you just can't see a simple way of doing these utterly simple tasks?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Thank god I have an old car

          No offence mate, but you can't be a very good engineer if you do not realise that the most efficient solution will depend on the specifics of the problem at hand.

          > As for "air conditioning, windows and mirrors to control, seat positioning, lighting" needing networking

          Boltar, you may not believe this, but all systems on any modern cars are pretty tightly integrated.

          E.g., on mine if you're about to crash (as determined by the radars), it closes all windows, takes up any slack from the seatbelts (before the explosive stuff fires), moves the driver seat back, away from the steering wheel, and switches on the hazard lights, as well as taking over the braking.

          Or, if the driver hasn't put his seatbelt on, the parking brake does not release automatically (it can still be released by hand). Conversely, if you're stopped and unclip your seatbelt, the parking brake engages.

          Or, unless you are holding the brake, you cannot start the car or put it into gear.

          Or, if the rain sensor detects rain, the proper speed limits and road restrictions, if applicable, are displayed on the console and the navigation screen.

          Or, if the steering wheel angle does not match with the expected lateral acceleration coming from the accelerometers, indicating over- or understeering, it will brake the corresponding wheels so as to compensate. Likewise, in the event of a constant side wind the steering wheel is re-centred.

          Or, if you're in a turn, cruise control will act accordingly and inhibit any acceleration so as not try to centrifuge you off the road.

          I think you will appreciate that most of the above examples are directly related to preserving the safety of the car occupants as well as other road users, and that tight integration between all sorts of components is required.

          You could achieve much of this by mechanical linkage, but Airbus already knew better in the 70s and replaced all that with light and inexpensive wire and servos, saving in both manufacturing and operating costs.

          Equally, you could say that you do not like sophisticated cars and that's fine, but some of us see it as the responsible thing to do to buy the safest machine that we can afford in order to match our safe (on public roads only!) driving habits.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Thank god I have an old car

            "Or, if the driver hasn't put his seatbelt on, the parking brake does not release automatically (it can still be released by hand). Conversely, if you're stopped and unclip your seatbelt, the parking brake engages."

            ... etc

            Every single thing you mentioned is a completely and utterly pointless gimmick IMO and frankly if you need any of that to drive you shouldn't be behind the wheel and I do know something about driving since I have an HGV license as well as a car one. If you were trying to prove they were useful I'm afraid all you did was do the complete opposite. As for a parking brake that releases as soon as you put on your seatbelt - yeah, great idea on a steep hill.

            "You could achieve much of this by mechanical linkage, but Airbus already knew better in the 70s and replaced all that with light and inexpensive wire and servos, saving in both manufacturing and operating costs."

            Right , because cars and airliners are really at the same level of sophistication arn't they? After all, if its simpler to run wires instead of hydraulic pipes the 30 metres from the cockpit to the wings and have an electric instead of hydraulic control unit then OBVIOUSLY that means its simpler to run wires to an electronic control unit instead of a cable and ... nothing else ... the 2 metres from the centre console to the drum brakes! Or maybe not. Perhaps you should check out how small light aircraft are controlled before making stupid analogies..

            "some of us see it as the responsible thing to do to buy the safest machine that we can afford in order to match our safe (on public roads only!) driving habits"

            I suspect your driving is pretty poor which is why you feel you need all these gimmicks.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Thank god I have an old car

              Hi. Not to brag too much, but...

              > and I do know something about driving since I have an HGV license as well as a car one

              I see your HGV licence and raise you another HGV (C+E), a PCV, advanced driver training with emergency vehicle driving experience, *and* a CPL with a medium jet type rating (now expired). Oh, and I can also ride a bicycle.

              You were saying? :-)

        2. Nick Ryan Silver badge

          Re: Thank god I have an old car

          No offence mate, but you really need to go on an engineering course if you think ANY of the things you've listed require a networked system in the first place, never mind one running IP over ethernet.

          Yes , CAN bus already exists and its already overkill. As for "air conditioning, windows and mirrors to control, seat positioning, lighting" needing networking - sorry, were you trying to be funny or have you really drunk so much of the kool aid that you just can't see a simple way of doing these utterly simple tasks?

          While at a fundamental level, it's true that nothing I listed requires a networked system in the first place, the same could be said of your phone, your computer and your printer. After all, you could just retype all of your contacts again in your phone, or use a hand held phone book and a pen. You could just write your reports rather than typing them on your computer and printing them out. However it's about progress... and progress in the device engineering front is steadily heading towards more and smarter control of devices. This allows much more efficient and accurate operation and much better diagnostics... and this requires a lot more sensors and a result is a lot more and better communication. In a car, a CAN connected ABS system can report traction problems to a central system, it can report back for each individual wheel if necessary and this can be fed back into all manner of systems, cross referenced with other sensors and devices (e.g. temperature sensors) and the operating parameters adjusted appropriately (ABS in the wet, dry and cold, potentially icy, conditions really does need different operation profiles). This is just one small example of ABS and systems where command and response is vital.

          Why wouldn't lighting, air conditioning, mirrors, seat positioning and lighting need networking? If you've ever driven a vehicle with multiple driver profiles it's an enormous benefit having your own driving preferences compared to a partners and being able to switch between them quickly and safely.

          I'm all for simple, however simple doesn't always equate to efficient, optimal or useful.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Thank god I have an old car

            "the same could be said of your phone, your computer and your printer"

            A phone or printer without some sort of connection is just a plastic brick. A computer is still useful but not so much. A car OTOH will still get you from A to B quite safely.

            "However it's about progress"

            No it isn't, 90% of it is about marketing. A touchscreen in a car is not progress by any definition for example. And networking all the systems together to provide functionality thats not required isn't progress either.

            "n a car, a CAN connected ABS system can report traction problems to a central system, it can report back for each individual wheel if necessary and this can be fed back"

            In poor conditions like mud or snow switching the traction control off invariably gets you going faster especially if you have appropriate tyres. The only successful use of this technology outside of racing is in Land Rovers hill decent but thats an exception to the rule. Its certainly not required in a Ford Focus.

            "If you've ever driven a vehicle with multiple driver profiles it's an enormous benefit having your own driving preferences compared to a partners and being able to switch between them quickly and safely."

            Oh puh-lease! How long does it take to adjust the seat and mirror , 5 seconds tops? You're going to have to do better than that.

            1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

              Re: Thank god I have an old car

              No it isn't, 90% of it is about marketing. A touchscreen in a car is not progress by any definition for example. And networking all the systems together to provide functionality thats not required isn't progress either.

              I agree that a touchscreen in a car isn't exactly progress. The "user interface" of a car works through not putting too much burden on the user (the driver). Physical knobs and buttons are good as they can be operated without the driver having to focus on a non-tactile touchscreen to check that the function that they hope is there is in being displayed and that their finger is in the right place.

              Why is the functionality not required? You're making a broad statement based on your preferences. Better control of the car and its performance helps fuel economy and safety. A suitably experienced driver familiar with their car may be arguably safer than a less experienced driver however driving isn't about just these "super drivers", it's about all the more normal drivers. A smartly controlled system will most likely save fuel compared to even the most experienced "fuel saving" drivers.

    3. Nigel 11

      Re: Thank god I have an old car

      The important thing is that safety-critical systems are appropriately firewalled from infotainment systems. The last thing one wants is malware or a hacker getting in to the standard networked OS running the infotainments, and then accidentally or deliberately crashing your car. (I.e. crashing the safety-critical systems, followed shortly afterwards by a mechanical impact).

      IMO appropriately firewalled means something like a serial interface with a very limited set of readonly diagnostic commands. Ideally, air-gapped until a service cable is attached. Re-flashing or re-parametrising the safety-critical stuff should require removal of the control unit from the innards of the car and breaking the seal covered in dire warnings about why you shouldn't break it.

      The other important thing is that the safety-critical systems are engineered to an approriately high standard, and engineered to fail safe. There have been some worrying reports of late suggesting auto manufacturers are cutting corners that would never be allowed in aviation.

      BTW Electric cars simpler than internal combustion? I doubt it. You need precision control of battery charging and discharging, monitoring of motor temperatures so you can't drive hard enough to burn them out, monitoring of the battery for dangerous excursions (leading to thermal runaway and fire if not stamped on), plus the same antilock braking systems and ESP as a fuel-driven car (and don't forget, the engine is also a regenerative braking system). I don't see this as simple. Fuel tanks are less capable of spontaneous combustion than big Lithium batteries. There aren't two competing braking systems one of which interacts with the fuelling system on a fuel-driven car.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Thank god I have an old car

      > I can't really see why it needs an internal network running over ethernet other than it being some geeks wet dream.

      Because it makes development and maintenance cheaper? Because you can use off-the-shelf, replaceable components instead of having to roll your own, otherwise known as not reinventing the wheel? Because the whole thing reduces costs while relying on proven technology?

      Just saying.

  6. bigtimehustler

    What I also find slightly odd is that they chose to ship Ubuntu, running on a car!? Shouldn't they have chosen something a little more lightweight to begin with rather than an OS designed for desktop/server? After all, this is just a car, its not expecting multiple requests from many different sources as per a server installation and its not got any requirements of a desktop Ubuntu either.

    But anyway, they chose Ubuntu, so presumably they should just link you to the Ubuntu source if you ask for it. Displaying the license somewhere is an interesting one...but then, it might be included somewhere in/on the car or a piece of paper that comes with car.

    1. Vic

      they chose Ubuntu, so presumably they should just link you to the Ubuntu source if you ask for it

      No.

      That would only constitute compliance under a Section 3(c) distribution - but 3(c) is specifically only permitted for non-commercial redistribution. Tesla is not entitled to this.

      Vic.

  7. Justin Stringfellow
    Joke

    presumably...

    ... any crashes will still be blamed on flaky drivers?

  8. Robert Fahey

    Cheat codes: www.teslamondo.com

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Which Distro?

    Erascible Elon?

    (yeah, I know)

    Quite surprised it's not running OSX though

  10. sisk

    More interesting is the question just how much source code Tesla should be releasing under various open source licenses, but isn't

    Legally speaking quite possibly none. All the services mentioned could very well be used out of the box to build a backbone on which they could run their own proprietary code without modifying any copyleft licensed code at all, thereby avoiding the legal need to contribute code back to the community.

    1. Vic

      Legally speaking quite possibly none. All the services mentioned could very well be used out of the box to build a backbone on which they could run their own proprietary code without modifying any copyleft licensed code at all, thereby avoiding the legal need to contribute code back to the community.

      Please stop repeating this nonsense. It is as false on the tenth reading as it was opn the first.

      The GPL is available at http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html . Section 3 states :-

      You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following

      a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

      b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

      c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

      You will note that this doesn't say "only if you modified it" or anything like that; for a commercial redistribution of GPL code - as is the case with Tesla - the source is required either to be shipped with the binary or to be made available to any third party on request. And the written offer must accompany the code.

      Vic.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like