Automakers Say You Don’t Really Own Your Car

Electronic Frontier Foundation ^ | 4/3/15 | Kit Walsh

[Boogieman]

“We haven’t owned our kids since the Cuban kid was forcefully removed from his house.”

Well, technically you haven’t owned them since the 14th amendment was ratified.

[Boogieman]

The real thing the deed allows you to sell, essentially, is your tax liability.

[Mad Dawgg]

This is fallout from the DRM and Software agreements that came out of the digital revolution. BIG Media and Big Computing figured out early on that digital means you can make a perfect copy. Thus once one is made anyone can copy it with a bit of knowhow. So the obvious deal is to create products you don't really own. All those lawyer words on those agreements you click boil down to you don't actually own the digital items because you aren't really allowed to sell them or alter them or make a safety copy for yourself etc.

Now this business meme is spilling over to physical items. Apple and Android etc. don't want you to alter the phone so as to use it on another carrier or use unapproved apps and software and will cancel the warranty if you do so. Right now as it stands you can have thousands of dollars invested in media from the Apple iTunes store and when you die your heirs are not allowed to own the rights to those media files.

So naturally cars and other consumer goods manufacturers think this is grand and they start with you not being able to alter the vehicle or geegaw and will try and work their way to the point that when you die the item must be taken to the recycle center because the law sez so.

[ExSoldier]

And probably having all vehicles not already containing a black box, like my Jeep 4x4 Wrangler to be retrofitted. And I'll bet there will be a component that mimics the sky version of the Black Box: One to record the position and disposition of the vehicle (location, speed, fuel consumption, etc) as well as to record the conversations inside the vehicle.

[SoothingDave]

29 posts for someone to cut through the hysteria and point out that this isn’t really an issue of allowing people to “wrench” on cars as much as it is a software copyright issue.

Yep.

And a warranty issue as well. If I'm the manufacturer and you monkey with the engine code and blow the engine up, then you'll expect me to pay for the repair?

[lacrew]

“Then don’t buy a car like that.”

I’m predicting a situation where all cars sold in the US will be mandated to have the same fault codes (just like today), only its encrypted. All cars. No other place to buy a car.

“You don’t have the right to “hack” copyrighted software.”

Reading fault codes is not a ‘hack’. The fault codes are there to assist the mechanic in diagnosing the car’s problems. It is output only....I can’t modify the software with a code reader. Its really not a lot different that the “oil pressure too low” light - there just isn’t enough space on the dash for a light for every code. So one light, the Malfunction Indicator Light (check engine soon) comes on, and invites you to check for the fault.

[Boogieman]

“I’m predicting a situation...”

Well, you can predict all you like I guess. I don’t see any reason to get worked up about someone’s prediction.

“Reading fault codes is not a ‘hack’. The fault codes are there to assist the mechanic in diagnosing the car’s problems. It is output only....I can’t modify the software with a code reader.”

Then this case is not really about anything you are talking about. This case is about people who want the courts to declare that they have a right to hack into the software and modify it, not about people who want to read the fault codes.

[nascarnation]

Remember "bow legs"?

Then they'd come in with bad wheel bearings and want warranty coverage. This is the same thing with software.

[lacrew]

I read one line in the article which gave me great pause...it was some nonsense from the automakers indicating that allowing somebody to even see their code could open the door to hackers taking over somebody else’s vehicle.

This is the part that worries me the most. Its no longer a copyright issue...it’s allegedly a safety issue. And just like all the things we do ‘for the children’, my prediction is that automakers will use this argument to make all of their code encrypted, even fault codes.

Let me ask you this. Now that ‘safety’ has been interjected, when all the dust settles, do you think the government would even allow me to make an ‘open source’ car? One where all the code could be seen, and yes hot rodders could make faster and climate denialists could make run dirtier, and innovators could make better. Would I even be able to build such cars? I doubt it - after all, that would be too dangerous.

Thus my original comment - Camel’s nose under the tent.

[Boogieman]

“And just like all the things we do ‘for the children’, my prediction is that automakers will use this argument to make all of their code encrypted, even fault codes.”

I don’t even see the sense in this argument. The “code” they are talking about is source code, not fault codes. Fault codes are just output, there isn’t any argument to be made that reading output can help someone compromise a vehicle’s systems. Even if they did encrypt fault codes, every certified mechanic and dealer would have access to decrypt them, so they would not be secure to anyone who really wanted to see them anyway.

“Let me ask you this. Now that ‘safety’ has been interjected, when all the dust settles, do you think the government would even allow me to make an ‘open source’ car?”

Of course, why wouldn’t you be able to?

Now, if you wanted to sell that car you built, you would have to meet whatever safety regulations are in place for vehicles to be sold on the market, just like everyone else. However, open source software is not necessarily inherently less secure than other software. In fact, because of the nature of open source, it is often more secure, because there are a lot more eyes looking at the source code and testing the software to spot vulnerabilities. Open source essentially crowdsources the testing and debugging in ways that proprietary software can’t usually match.

Just look at Linux versus Windows, or Firefox versus Internet Explorer. Which are more secure? The proprietary software with source codes nobody can legally peek at, or the open source software that anyone can delve into?

[SkyPilot]

And probably having all vehicles not already containing a black box, like my Jeep 4x4 Wrangler to be retrofitted. And I'll bet there will be a component that mimics the sky version of the Black Box: One to record the position and disposition of the vehicle (location, speed, fuel consumption, etc) as well as to record the conversations inside the vehicle.

Yup. Pretty soon, I think we will see "laws" that will dictate that any car produced before xxxx year cannot be driven on the roads. Also, think of it this way. As we approach the AntiChrist system that dictates everything we do, say, worship, and spend, it also must track our every movement.

[Neidermeyer]

The software/firmware is the intellectual property of the software supplier. They don’t want people making derivative works.
********************
The case in point is that this company making diagnostic readers also makes machines that can write data , the data files are often part of recalls (anti-lock brake software updates for instance) and are bought by mechanics on a subscription basis ... Cars aren’t like your windows PC ... maybe you’re using your truck offroad and the DEF system needs to be disabled for fire safety reasons (tall grass etc.) , I have no problem with the manufacturer setting a flag that lets them know if changes have been made but they cannot make a car unusable ... and by forcing people to ONLY get their cars serviced , if it’s a software fix , at the dealership , that is against federal laws already.. unless they intend to do the repairs for free.

[ExSoldier]

As we approach the AntiChrist system that dictates everything we do, say, worship, and spend, it also must track our every movement.

RAPTURE READY?

I'm soooo can't wait for this to happen...

[SkyPilot]

And I as well.

[Cowman]

[0bama will simply have DHS buy up all the replacement parts.]

And 3d Printers?

Actually old vehicles with the traditional points and condenser ignition pose a real problem to the gubmint boys.

They won't get fried by an EMP even if you don't park in a Faraday box

[Still Thinking]

They warn that owners with the freedom to inspect and modify code will be capable of violating a wide range of laws and harming themselves and others.

Better round everyone up and remove the penii from all those rapists-to-be and vaginas from all those potential hookers! [facepalm]