Oh dear lord, more fecking idiots writing laws on stuff they have no clue. Can we make them go sit in the "Stupid Corner" with Feinstein and her ilk? Luckily that law would only apply in Michigan. But monkey see, monkey do, other states will be right behind them.
Daft draft anti-car-hack law could put innocent drivers away for life
Two state senators in Michigan, US, have proposed a set of laws that promise life imprisonment for anyone fiddling with a car's software. Security researchers are crying foul because the rules as they stand effectively outlaw not just hacker hijackers but also legitimate tinkering with engine and dashboard electronics. The …
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 05:48 GMT Updraft102
Politicians write laws on things of which they have no clue all the time. Nearly all of the laws they make on any topic are like this!
It's been said that when all you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail, and the legislator's hammer is the making of laws. No matter what the issue, they just know that the world will be better if they make some laws about it, whether they truly understand it or not (and it's almost always not). Does anyone really think politicians have better understanding of things they make policy about other than tech? The only skill that we know most politicians have is the ability to manipulate people, as that's how they were elected in the first place. Anything else? They seldom understand any of it-- and they don't know (or care) that they don't understand it, which is what makes them even more dangerous.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 06:48 GMT John H Woods
"They seldom understand any of it-- and they don't know (or care) that they don't understand it, which is what makes them even more dangerous." -- Updraft102 [my emph]
This is the key point. Nobody expects legislators to be experts in everything. The truly worrying this is that they have so many resources at their disposal to learn the things they need to know, and so much facility to consult, and so many of them still behave like this.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 07:16 GMT billse10
"Nobody expects legislators to be experts in everything. The truly worrying this is that they have so many resources at their disposal to learn the things they need to know, and so much facility to consult"
and yet they choose not to listen to those they could, listening only to focus groups & journalists .. and its so daft it could only be either a deliberate choice or the sort of incompetence that should see them in court ... and as far as expertise in anything goes, it's clearly lacking ....but these two are hardly the only politicians to be like ghats, are they. ... idiots .....
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 12:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
Doh
Ignoring the absurdly wide scope of the law for the moment, wouldn't it be more sensible to make the law prevent manufacturers from selling cars with glaring security holes in them in the first place.
It would be somewhat easier to enforce, since there are far fewer manufacturers than hackers, and they know who they all are and where they live.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 04:21 GMT raving angry loony
Car lobby?
Wondering how strong the car lobby is in that state? Wonder if this is just the latest tactic in the claim by some nitwits that since the car has software, you don't actually own it but are only licensing it, and they can therefore tell you what to do with it, when, and how?
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150421/23581430744/gm-says-that-while-you-may-own-your-car-it-owns-software-it-thanks-to-copyright.shtml
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 07:24 GMT billse10
Re: Car lobby?
"there's probably just a wee bit of lobbying going on.."
Of course: you can almost here the conversation among the Car execs?
"if any potential competition is going to rely on self-driving or just "clever" cars, let's cripple the scope for creativity & innovation in the automotive software sector ..... go find me a politician who is gullible enough to fall for it ..."
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 14:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Car lobby?
let's cripple the scope for creativity & innovation in the automotive software sector ....
The driver for this is (as you'd expect) money. Even now, there's optional extras that are enabled through software (such as those rather pointless "steering" foglights. My VW group car has foglights, all the necessary sensors and switching, but because I didn't pay for that option, the configuration file has something along the lines of "steeringfoglighten=nicht". Some enthusiasts have hacked the software and it can be made to turn on this facility, and other things that VW want people to pay for. My favourite absurdity is that the rear foglights are in the clusters on eacdh side. But even though the wiring is there, the reflector is there, even a bulb is fitted, the nearside foglight is disabled through software on the cheaper variants.
And the car makers are worried that in future more and more capability will be standard on the car (to reduce component count and production complexity) and enabled or disabled through software configuration. But even though the buyers will have paid for all the parts, if they haven't "paid" for the right to have the capability turned on, the makers want to make sure they can't enable it.
-
-
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 00:03 GMT JeffyPoooh
Re: Car lobby?
Thank you for the attempted explanation.
I've a Mercedes E-class; the single rear fog lamp is immediately adjacent to the left (Canada) brake light. If I had dual rear fog lights, there's no 'placement' distinction at all from the brake lites. The *only* distinction would be the middle 3rd Brake light, but that's not trustworthy due to older cars not having it. Keep in mind the fog.
The Child-driven Owner-modified (often-BuMWipes) that I've seen with dual rear brake lights similarly had no distinctive placement. The dual rear fog lights were indistinguishable from brake lights. The symmetry was pleasing, but the overall effect was negative.
Please keep in mind that I'm referring to owner-installed symmetry-enhancing additional bulb hacks.
They're immediately adjacent to the brake lights. There's no 'placement'.
YMMV.
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 18:12 GMT MachDiamond
Re: Car lobby?
Some options can be disallowed by statute and will be locked out for vehicles sold into those regions. I find it handy that the wiring, connectors and other fittings are in place even if an option isn't installed. A quick trip to the junk yard and I can buy the missing components for a pittance compared to what I would have been charged for the "package" of options I would have had to get for the one thing that I might find useful. It makes a lot of sense for auto manufacturers to have all of the wiring and connections in place since the added cost is very low, it decreases parts counts and dealers can fit many of the options to suit a buyer.
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 06:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Car lobby?
A quick trip to the junk yard and I can buy the missing components for a pittance....
For a car using yesterday's technology yes. But modern cars increasingly use Canbus electrical systems. This controls how things work, and it does stop retrofit of certain parts. So I can buy the car new with LED lights as an expensive option, or Xenon headlights, but if I retrofit the parts (junkyard or brand new from the dealer) the system will as a minimum persistently nag me that I have a failed bulb, or simply refuse to operate the "unknown" piece of kit.
To be fair, there's some considerable upside in the overall package of the best modern cars (safer, faster, more economical, more reliable, more comfortable, less maintenance), but the price of that does appear to be that the owner has less opportunity to tinker. And coming back to the original point, you pay for something, but there's an extra charge to use it.
Another example is the ECU mapping. More than a few vehicles use ECU mapping to offer different performance from the same engine. The buyer of the cheap variants aren't allowed to access the higher performance. On older models you could have the car "chipped" to remap the ECU, but now that's far more difficult as the electronics are more complex and more integrated. You might say that chipping was a bad thing (insurance, emissions, safety) but that's not the issue - I'm just pointing up another example where you pay for something, but you only get to use it if you've paid extra for it to be configured as "on".
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 20:15 GMT Awil Onmearse
Re: Car lobby?
"This controls how things work, and it does stop retrofit of certain parts. So I can buy the car new with LED lights as an expensive option, or Xenon headlights, but if I retrofit the parts (junkyard or brand new from the dealer) the system will as a minimum persistently nag me that I have a failed bulb, or simply refuse to operate the "unknown" piece of kit."
That's what "recoding" software is for *ahem* "allegedly".
Also, VW/Audi for example use QNX RTOS Getting into the guts of that is a piece of piss with a disk image, VirtualBox and a disassembler.
My A4 onboard computer is running quite happily (and faster!) with an IDE->mSata conversion that I can replace for pennies instead of a 2nd mortgage to VAG in the case of failure.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 04:39 GMT 404
Precedent
Need to have legal precedent set before self-driving cars can be sold publicly - can't have terrorists disabling critical safety features such as remote control for the 'Safe Emergency Vehicle Brake and Lock' software for Public Safety Officers...
If you wear a full set of medieval armor on a daily basis, does it qualify for tin foil hat membership?
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 18:35 GMT Charles 9
Re: Precedent
No, if it's made of aluminum, it's aluminum foil. Tin foil MUST be made of tin or it's false advertising (and that's why you never see the term in America--aluminum was basically perfected here in the late 19th century so tin foil never really took root). Besides, like I said, you MUST go tin or bust. ONLY tin blocks the brainwaves according to them.
-
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 04:44 GMT Bill Stewart
They appear to be mixing up using electronics to disable the car dangerously when somebody else is driving (which might count as attempted or actual murder, things that are already illegal and very serious)
with using the electronics to vandalize or steal a car (which are also already illegal, but are much less serious crimes.) Maybe life in prison is justified for wrecking a moving car; hot-wiring a car to steal it doesn't have any justification for more serious penalties than any other method of stealing a car.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 11:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Steal/knick/hot-wire 3 cars
go to jail for life, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
How long will it be before prosecutors (who delight is proclaiming to the press that they will press for the maximum life sentence even for jaywalking) cotton on to the fact that stealing a car is in violation of this law. Any law that has a possible life term is subject to the 3-strikes rule and an automatic life sentence is passed. IANAL etc but these idiots who get elected need to be humanely put down ASAP.
-
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 14:33 GMT Eddy Ito
Re: Steal/knick/hot-wire 3 cars
That's an easy one. They hire it out. Contract prisons are a big thing these days since they aren't subject to the red tape that a municipality would be required to go through and they could likely get tax breaks for bringing jobs into an area. It's one of the reasons that minimum sentencing guidelines are always on the increase as the lobbyists know the "tough on crime" package sells well with voters and if a congress critter isn't going to play ball his opponent in the next election will. The Incarceration Industrial Complex has become a huge problem in the U.S.
Here's just one example.
-
-
-
Thursday 19th May 2016 13:53 GMT kiwimuso
@ Bill Stewart
"which might count as attempted or actual murder,....."
That raises the point of why do we need yet another pointless law? In most jurisdictions, if you made ANY modification to a vehicle which differed from standard, and the result caused death or injury, do you think that the lack of a specific law outlawing said modification would prevent you from being charged with murder/manslaughter etc?
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 04:53 GMT a_yank_lurker
Serious stupidity
These two yahoos are well beyond Congress critter levels of stupidity. The problem that everyone is concerned about is the insecure wifi/bluetooth/etc. rf connections in many cars not owners modifying the code. The correct solution is for the automakers to fix the security issues not to pass an idiot law that even the dimmest Congress critter would run from.
To extend Mark Twain - God created idiots for practice, then He created school boards - still for practice, then perfection of stupidity God create the Michigan legislature. I think Mark would approve.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 07:29 GMT King Jack
Future Global Laws
Seeing as US laws apply to everyone on the planet (their thinking), what happens when somebody torrents a method of car control (10 years in UK) and hacks a car in 'merica? Is that instant death penalty? This is the new global punishment escalator. Looking forward to the brave new frontier.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 07:36 GMT Sgt_Oddball
what of the home mechanic and the professional garage?
So any one that uses a tool to diagnose issues using an odm port would be illegal? What of aftermarket alarm systems and immobilisers?
They're really thinking on going there? Do they not understand how these tools work for the benefit of the free market economy? (just talking the language they might understand).
-
-
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 14:22 GMT DavCrav
Re: Summary Execution
"In Star Trek the next generation there was a planet where the death penalty was used for everything. Wesley Crusher tasted that justice first hand for falling on some flowers. Maybe these law makers are fans?"
In Wesley Crusher's case, it was the right punishment, but for the wrong reasons.
I mean, seriously, what a dick.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 10:18 GMT BurnT'offering
Read the PDF
The addition to the bill says, "ACCESS ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS OF MOTOR VEHICLE TO OBTAIN DATA OR CONTROL OF VEHICLE".
Nothing about illegally, unlawfully, etc. IANAL but wouldn't that cover just driving the flipping thing? I believe they are proposing to make it illegal to drive your own car (unless of course it has no electronics, so your Stanley Steamer is safe).
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 11:12 GMT EveryTime
Imprisonment culture?
Today I propose lifetime imprisonment for jaywalking.
"I hope that we never have to use it," said Kowall. "That's why the penalties are what they are. The potential for severe injury and death are pretty high."
Millions of people that parked on the other side of roads without marked crosswalks will thank me for my legislative foresight.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 13:26 GMT MR J
IANAL either, but....
shooting a gun
TO
cause death or injury to random people
intentionally access or cause access to be made to an electronic system of a motor vehicle
TO
willfully destroy, damage, impair, alter or gain unauthorized control of the motor vehicle
Shooting a gun is not illegal (in most of the US). So it looks to me like they are stating that the owner needs to grant permission and that makes it legal? I guess part of it depends on how you read English, as the Impair, Damage, or Willfully Destroy bit doesn't say authorized or unauthorized. Perhaps it should be written clearer, but to me this looks like a storm in a teapot.
The big problem here is that firmware updates couldn't be done without express written permission, and any other modifications that might accidentally open up the BUS could fall foul of this law. Think a Bluetooth OBDII connector.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 14:34 GMT Primus Secundus Tertius
Popular Revolt
It is all very well for us experts (some real, some self-proclaimed) here to criticise outsiders efforts to regulate, but there are real and general problems which concern everybody, not just us. If we do not listen to public concerns, our work will eventually be overthrown.
The world has changed immensely since I was born about seventy years ago. In particular, many problems are world-wide and cannot be solved by a single nation. What is a minimum standard of decency in one country is an outrageous imposition in another, yet the Internet brings it to us all (unless you are behind a Great Firewall).
What has not changed is the difficulty of getting politicians, democratic or otherwise, to listen to good advice. If you can't beat them, join them!
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 18:41 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Popular Revolt
"It is all very well for us experts (some real, some self-proclaimed) here to criticise outsiders efforts to regulate, but there are real and general problems which concern everybody, not just us. If we do not listen to public concerns, our work will eventually be overthrown."
Or the 1% in the walled garden will just call out their tools of genocide and wipe the plebs out like it was Tuesday. "One dies, get another."
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 15:38 GMT JeffyPoooh
Well (badly-written bills aside)...
There's going to come a time when the vehicles will have enough full-authority self-driving command of the controls (steering wheel, brakes, accelerator), combined with the general immaturity of the software architectures, that perhaps aftermarket tinkering with the software could eventually (possibly, maybe, someday) lead to some sort of nightmare scenario.This time is probably about now.
It's far from unimaginable. It's inevitable.
Problem is, technical solutions get into Computer Security. Which is itself perfectly hopeless.
This isn't 'End of the World' bad. But it will get on the evening news within the next 5 or 10 years.
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 18:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Bah
Guaranteed that'll kill the car AND void the warranty. Now you're stuck with a $25,000 junk heap and no way to recoup the cost. Uh unn, not worth the risk. And shielding will probably only work for so long. Bet you it does a periodic phone home over an encrypted connection (so it'll be nigh impossible to fake) with signature checking and the whole nine yards, and if it doesn't get a reply after a while, it'll probably go into "less useful than a golf cart" mode.
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 19:11 GMT Ogi
Re: Bah
I foresee a thriving future industry of ripping out all the stock electrics/computers in a car, and replacing them with open source alternatives that give full control over the car back to the owners, as it should be.
Which of course, is why they are trying to make such modifications illegal.
-
-
-
Saturday 30th April 2016 18:19 GMT MachDiamond
Preparation for the new laws
Maybe at some point in the future, all of these new laws that come with life imprisonment or a death penalty will be changed to participation in the organ bank system. As soon as medical science evolves to the point where transplanting digits or entire limbs is possible, it won't be very hard to get public support to change the laws.
Maybe I read too much Heinlein and Niven.
-
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 09:07 GMT Anonymous Coward
"heh suppose my raising my 2010 marquis limiter from 110mph to 155mph"
This reminds me of the story of the Alvis Scorpion that was being taken to an exhibition in Belgium when it become clear it was going to be late arriving due to the limited speed of the tank transporter. So the crew unloaded it, removed the governor, and proceeded down the autoroute at 120kph. The Scorpion was road legal, nothing to stop it.
Life imprisonment would be a bit harsh for showing a bit of initiative. Alvis were reportedly very pleased with the publicity.
-
-
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 07:27 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: "heh suppose my raising my 2010 marquis limiter from 110mph to 155mph"
And how much space does it need to stop at 120kph? What happened to to road pavement? Tanks (and others) are not common vehicle, even if "road enabled", and usually have special rules when used on public roads.Hope it was escorted....
-
Tuesday 3rd May 2016 00:07 GMT JeffyPoooh
Re: "heh suppose my raising my 2010 marquis limiter from 110mph to 155mph"
AC asked "And how much space does [an Alvis Scorpion tank] need to stop at 120kph?"
Less than you'd assume.
Have you seen the 'contact patch'? Square feet, not square inches.
One of the 'How it's made' sort of TV shows included a demo of a huge British tank stopping on tarmac. Better than a sports car.
-
-
-
Tuesday 3rd May 2016 00:00 GMT JeffyPoooh
"...UK is at 70mph..."
"...UK is at 70mph..."
A few years ago, I drove from Heathrow to Portsmouth and back. Six lane motorway, M3 I guess. The slow lane was at least 70, the middle lane was 80-90 The fast lane was 90-100 mph. It was *very* relaxing.
PS. The 25% mix of 'comedy cars' (abnormal and unusual) were very entertaining.
-
Tuesday 3rd May 2016 00:12 GMT Vic
Re: "...UK is at 70mph..."
Six lane motorway, M3 I guess. The slow lane was at least 70, the middle lane was 80-90 The fast lane was 90-100 mph. It was *very* relaxing.
I drove that motorway on Saturday afternoon. All six lanes came to a complete stop - because there was an accident on the hard shoulder, well off the carriageway. Three of those lanes are in the opposite direction...
I have no idea why people need to stop and look at an accident. But it really pisses me off...
Vic.
-
-
-
-
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 11:04 GMT chris 17
Consequences, repercussions, liability and hail time.
The law makers don't face any sanctions or retribution if the laws they pass have dreadful repercussions. Maybe if they where made liable, backed with jail time (in nasty jails not state hotels) they would think harder before proposing such slippy rules.
-
Sunday 1st May 2016 15:08 GMT Slx
These populist, reactionary mandatory sentencing regimes in the US are taking power away from courts to make subtle and sensible decisions based on the facts and they're massively increasing the US prison population.
The United States prison population is something they should be ashamed of not trying to increase.
A whopping 689 / 100,000 people is in prison in the United States
445 in Russia
301 in Brazil
199 in Poland
148 in England/Wales
145 in Scotland
140 in Spain and Portugal.
132 in Jersey
100 in France
82 in Ireland
78 in Germany
71 in Norway
45 in Iceland.
This is not a table you want to be shouting "We're number 1" on...
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 08:09 GMT Charles 9
"The United States prison population is something they should be ashamed of not trying to increase."
Nope. America is damn PROUD of being tough on crime. As a native Texas comedian even used as one of his bits, "We have the Death Penalty and we USE it!" As far as they're concerned, this is population control and the price of living in an orderly society.
-
-
Tuesday 3rd May 2016 09:45 GMT Anonymous Coward
"They don't live in a particularly orderly society though. They've one of the highest levels of murders, shooting and violent crime in the developed world. So, it clearly doesn't work."
Or rather they're in a unique position where nothing CAN really work. The US has a combination of large geography, high population count with considerable diversity that results in culture clashes, and an unacknowledged caste system where the have-everythings are trying to strip everything from the have-nothings and then wall themselves off so they can nuke the rest of the country and then only have to deal with themselves. In this kind of setting, crime is not only inevitable, it's the only way ahead for most people who are otherwise dead-ended and are expected to just go somewhere and DIE. And it's not just America. India and China (the only two countries with MORE people) have problems of their own: just not to the same degree because they're not as diverse.
Basically, the US's problem is the intractable problem of having 12 starving stranded islanders and only 3 coconuts. No matter how much you slice it, the results WILL get ugly.
-
-
Tuesday 3rd May 2016 00:17 GMT Anonymous Coward
America is damn PROUD...
@Charles 9
"We're #1." (<- YouTube) Yay!!!
I'm sure y'all can do better. But I don't know how either... Good luck.
-
-
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 05:47 GMT jake
I've been re-programing my vehicles for decades ...
I've been hacking car and motorcycle systems (analog and digital) for over 40 years, from cam timing, lift & duration to carb jetting and exhaust tuning to reprogramming EEPROMs for better performance (the sports cars) or economy (the tow rigs).
All are street legal, passed applicable smog rules, and properly insured.
Mike Kowall (R-White Lake) and Ken Horn (R-Frankenmuth) can kiss my pasty white butt.
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 07:39 GMT Anonymous Coward
Modification should be legal...
... but vehicles should be re-certified after modification altering driving characteristics. Researchers should be allowed on a "prototype" exception - but those vehicles should be managed as such and properly insured.
After all, if an original system is vulnerable, nobody ensures a modified one is not (or becomes) as well - while modification can also be used to deceive customers of used vehicles.
Penalties should be applied to whoever alters a vehicle in a dangerous way, or to deceive - depending on the actual danger or actual consequences.
There's a reason if in aeronautics everything that flies needs a proper certification and usually you're not allowed to mess with systems.
-
Monday 2nd May 2016 13:00 GMT Vic
Re: Modification should be legal...
Your other authoritarian claptrap aside,
There's a reason if in aeronautics everything that flies needs a proper certification and usually you're not allowed to mess with systems.
CAP 733 details how the permit-to-fly system works in the UK[1]. You most certainly are allowed to build, repair and modify such systems.
Vic.
[1] Other countries have similar rules.
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
