EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
General => General Technical Chat => Topic started by: Avacee on February 24, 2020, 05:20:14 pm
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-51466273 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-51466273)
TL:DR - A murderer's wife's Land Rover Discovery sent back to Land Rover detailed information about its usage and put the vehicle in the vicinity of the murder at the time along with the times the engine was on+off, door opening+closing, boot(trunk) opening+closing, etc.
Even though the car was later burnt out Land Rover was able to provide all this information to the police from their servers.
The times tied in with the victim Sky's set top box also recording a loss of signal - the victim was shot while adjusting the satellite dish which the murderer had tampered with to get the victim outside.
Bet the murderer hadn't read the small print that paraphrasically said, "We record way more than you think we do."
-
Great they caught a murderer, but why on Earth would you want your whereabouts and even when you open the trunk shared with the Landrover mothership? Apparently the location and events of every vehicle fitted with this technology are logged, not just that of vehicles of interest.
-
Ahah, this is such a violation of privacy that it's almost funny. :-DD
Another question beyond why people would want this (assuming they actually know about it, which I'm not sure, this is likely written in ultra small characters on the 20th page of the sales contract ;D ), is how the hell can it even be legal in countries supposed to still protect privacy as a basic right? :palm:
-
Great they caught a murderer, but why on Earth would you want your whereabouts and even when you open the trunk shared with the Landrover mothership?
Theft recovery?
The door/window/trunk details are most likely just because it can be done at next to no extra cost. There already are sensors all around the car, why not use the data available. :-//
-
Theft recovery?
The door/window/trunk details are most likely just because it can be done at next to no extra cost. There already are sensors all around the car, why not use the data available. :-//
Why is that recording and transmitting data when the vehicle hasn't been reported stolen? Theft recovery isn't synonymous to having your life in your car recorded.
-
Because by the time the car is reported stolen, it has already been disassembled and the manufacturer can't pull the data from the car. By sending the data live, you are maximizing the amount of available information.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not comfortable with it either, I'm just offering a possible explanation for the practice.
-
So that would probably mean you can write to the “Data Controller” at JLR and demand to see a copy of ALL the data they hold on you (your vehicle).
-
Because by the time the car is reported stolen, it has already been disassembled and the manufacturer can't pull the data from the car. By sending the data live, you are maximizing the amount of available information.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not comfortable with it either, I'm just offering a possible explanation for the practice.
It still doesn't check out. You'd record data for one or maybe three days so someone has chance to notify the company. You'd keep what you have and start recording from there. There's no apparent reason to have weeks of detailed history of the owner on record other than that they can.
-
Because by the time the car is reported stolen, it has already been disassembled and the manufacturer can't pull the data from the car. By sending the data live, you are maximizing the amount of available information.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not comfortable with it either, I'm just offering a possible explanation for the practice.
It still doesn't check out. You'd record data for one or maybe three days so someone has chance to notify the company. You'd keep what you have and start recording from there. There's no apparent reason to have weeks of detailed history of the owner on record other than that they can.
come home after week or two of vacation and car is gone, sorry data was deleted a few days ago ...
-
If you think this is a new thing, this has been happening for years now. Many new cars have factory-installed SIM cards (or eSIMs) which allow vehicle manufacturers to view vehicle data including in some cases the vehicle location (BMW is another of several examples). Many have agreements with law enforcement and security agencies (however I can't name which ones or the nature of the agreements).
Even cars without cellular connectivity will record a huge cache of information on an in-built flash storage device or hard disk drive installed somewhere in the vehicle (usually not anywhere the user can easily get to it without pulling the entire dash apart). There is a specialist market for vehicle forensics products out there and they are owned by some of the biggest players in the field.
I've worked on several "jobs for clients" which involve recovering data from vehicles. There is a very popular brand of vehicle, for example, that provides a treasure trove of information, including frequent GPS locations, harsh braking/acceleration events, loss of traction or when the driver disables ESC etc... all of that is logged and in some cases go as far back as when the vehicle is first delivered to the dealer.
It's an interesting field of cyber security, that's for sure.
-
come home after week or two of vacation and car is gone, sorry data was deleted a few days ago ...
We can go round and round coming up with more exotic situations to justify the situation. Maybe someone takes a sabbatical and comes back three months later. Maybe someone goes to jail and comes back after 3 years to find his car stolen. It's a matter of diminishing returns and I'm not sure keeping data for two months is really justified outside of a murder inquiry.
Not to mention this whole things smells like the typical IoT shitfest. You need to disable the tracking when transporting the car by ferry or train to prevent it from thinking it's being stolen. When you buy a car you need the previous owner to release the car or he can track and even control the car from a distance. "Unbound" cars can be bound by people who have temporary access to the cars like valets have. There is zero mention how long the data is stored or who has access to this data which probably means they store it indefinitely.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/27/jaguar_land_rover_connected_car_privacy/ (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/27/jaguar_land_rover_connected_car_privacy/)
-
If you think this is a new thing, this has been happening for years now. Many new cars have factory-installed SIM cards (or eSIMs) which allow vehicle manufacturers to view vehicle data including in some cases the vehicle location (BMW is another of several examples). Many have agreements with law enforcement and security agencies (however I can't name which ones or the nature of the agreements).
Even cars without cellular connectivity will record a huge cache of information on an in-built flash storage device or hard disk drive installed somewhere in the vehicle (usually not anywhere the user can easily get to it without pulling the entire dash apart). There is a specialist market for vehicle forensics products out there and they are owned by some of the biggest players in the field.
I've worked on several "jobs for clients" which involve recovering data from vehicles. There is a very popular brand of vehicle, for example, that provides a treasure trove of information, including frequent GPS locations, harsh braking/acceleration events, loss of traction or when the driver disables ESC etc... all of that is logged and in some cases go as far back as when the vehicle is first delivered to the dealer.
It's an interesting field of cyber security, that's for sure.
It seems the world is still quite oblivious. It doesn't really help that despite all this connectivity car security really hasn't been a field until recently. When some well-known researchers found worrying and basic flaws in the software just a few years ago most brands didn't even have responsible disclosure contacts. Only publishing about the issues got a response. It's worrying car makers are fitting vehicles with all kinds of gizmos well outside of their area of expertise.
-
come home after week or two of vacation and car is gone, sorry data was deleted a few days ago ...
We can go round and round coming up with more exotic situations to justify the situation. Maybe someone takes a sabbatical and comes back three months later. Maybe someone goes to jail and comes back after 3 years to find his car stolen. It's a matter of diminishing returns and I'm not sure keeping data for two months is really justified outside of a murder inquiry.
...
probably means they store it indefinitely.
Regarding diminishing returns, sure, why not indefinitely? That kind of data volume is dirt cheap to store. One instance where it proves useful to have the data justifies years worth of storage for thousands of individuals.
Regarding justification of keeping the data for months inside or outside of murder investigation, the thing is that you don't know if data you have is relevant for murder investigation, and the law enforcement could make the relevant connection months or years after the murder took place.
Apparently this feature is not actively advertised and obviously not well known, so public isn't in an uproar over privacy concerns, but law enforcement knows about this and uses the system. The potential benefit for keeping the data is evident, so we could only discuss if it's justified to infringe on privacy of thousands in order to protect a handful of individuals, and perhaps if there is some nefarious usage of that data. I don't know answers to these issues, but I sure would be happy if data collected on me eventually turned out to be instrumental in righting a wrong done to me.
That's why I'm not as much concerned about data collection itself, only about potential misuse of it. I am fully aware that I can not expect to be invisible to the Big Brother, but I can expect that there is a system to keep Big Brother in check to prevent it from abusing the data, and making sure that storage is secure. Sure you can argue that if there is data to be used, it's going to be misused, but that is not the problem of data collecting itself.
-
Great they caught a murderer, but why on Earth would you want your whereabouts and even when you open the trunk shared with the Landrover mothership? Apparently the location and events of every vehicle fitted with this technology are logged, not just that of vehicles of interest.
This is just what modern cars do, they all have apps now. My car lets me pre-heat remotely, and start charging and other things like that. I have no doubt that it logs the data, though given the reliability of the app in general usage (it constantly tells me doors are open when they're not, etc.) I would REALLY hope it wouldn't be used for a criminal prosecution.
-
Regarding diminishing returns, sure, why not indefinitely? That kind of data volume is dirt cheap to store. One instance where it proves useful to have the data justifies years worth of storage for thousands of individuals.
Regarding justification of keeping the data for months inside or outside of murder investigation, the thing is that you don't know if data you have is relevant for murder investigation, and the law enforcement could make the relevant connection months or years after the murder took place.
Apparently this feature is not actively advertised and obviously not well known, so public isn't in an uproar over privacy concerns, but law enforcement knows about this and uses the system. The potential benefit for keeping the data is evident, so we could only discuss if it's justified to infringe on privacy of thousands in order to protect a handful of individuals, and perhaps if there is some nefarious usage of that data. I don't know answers to these issues, but I sure would be happy if data collected on me eventually turned out to be instrumental in righting a wrong done to me.
That's why I'm not as much concerned about data collection itself, only about potential misuse of it. I am fully aware that I can not expect to be invisible to the Big Brother, but I can expect that there is a system to keep Big Brother in check to prevent it from abusing the data, and making sure that storage is secure. Sure you can argue that if there is data to be used, it's going to be misused, but that is not the problem of data collecting itself.
Your reasoning could be used to store almost anything indefinitely. If there's just a chance some of the data may be useful one day it could and should be stored. That's obviously flawed reasoning. Infringing on the privacy of thousands of innocents to maybe catch one perpetrator essentially means eliminating any and all protections the system provides. It opens the door for endless and gratuitous data collection. Stating the inevitable abuse isn't intrinsicly linked to data collection also seems naive as that very much seems to be the case. The best way of preventing abuse is to not have the data exist.
Why you don't want endless amounts of data on you exist is essentially the same reason you don't want to talk to the police whether you're innocent or not. Lawyers and investigators will tell you this. You're much more likely to be ensnared in something innocuous they think feel they can hold against you than to exonerate you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE)
-
Your reasoning could be used to store almost anything indefinitely.
Sure.
If there's just a chance some of the data may be useful one day it could and should be stored. That's obviously flawed reasoning. Infringing on the privacy of thousands of innocents to maybe catch one perpetrator essentially means eliminating any and all protections the system provides.
No. Proper data analysis (both in scope and fairness) is the protection the system should provide.
Why you don't want endless amounts of data on you exist is essentially the same reason you don't want to talk to the police whether you're innocent or not. Lawyers and investigators will tell you this. You're much more likely to be ensnared in something innocuous they think feel they can hold against you than to exonerate you.
Your example of why you shouldn't talk to police is valid in a world where there is no such data collection and police are motivated to "solve" crimes and close cases, even at the cost of prosecuting the innocent, however, in a scenario where there is global, all encompassing data collection, assuming you are innocent, data collection will more likely help to prove your innocence, or even stop that line of investigation before the law enforcement approaches you, and if they do come for you, just tell them you were asleep in your bed, and your IoT, iBed 3000 will happily print out your sleep schedule, hearth beat and blood pressure charts for the night in question, corroborated by the TurboChill smart fridge that logged you opening the door for 67 seconds and picking up the slightly expired orange juice, prompting you to buy new juice, which you agreed to by scanning your fingerprint, just as the murder was happening 20 city blocks away. Also, you were filmed drinking the juice straight from the carton, by your toaster.
It would also help finding the real perpetrator before innocent people are accused of the crime.
-
If you had a real option, I would risk losing my car if I don't use it every day, considering that 99% of thefts of that model car would be solved.
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
-
Let's just put everyone in prison the moment they're born, lest they possibly do something illegal... :palm:
This article is just a propaganda-piece for conditioning people to become used to constant surveillance...
"Those who give up freedom for security deserve neither."
-
Who is John Galt
-
Because by the time the car is reported stolen, it has already been disassembled and the manufacturer can't pull the data from the car. By sending the data live, you are maximizing the amount of available information.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not comfortable with it either, I'm just offering a possible explanation for the practice.
It still doesn't check out. You'd record data for one or maybe three days so someone has chance to notify the company. You'd keep what you have and start recording from there. There's no apparent reason to have weeks of detailed history of the owner on record other than that they can.
The real world explanation could be rather mundane - and typical of management, especially in systems development .........
After the capture, transmission and recording of data was operational, stage 2 - the long term storage policy - got caught up in "discussion". Once it was determined that a couple of hundred dollars spent on storage could hold years of data, the whole exercise got shelved, "for later".
-
I don't see how the car companies or insurance companies or anyone else has a right to this kind of information by default. Surely the owner of the vehicle has to authorize it first, otherwise how could it even be legal?
-
It's called: "small print".
-
It's funny though, i didn't receive a GDPR consent form :P (from the mfg. However i did give consent, to the insurance company for the black box i installed)
-
I don't see how the car companies or insurance companies or anyone else has a right to this kind of information by default. Surely the owner of the vehicle has to authorize it first, otherwise how could it even be legal?
Yep, you do. If you don't read contracts before you sign, you can only blame yourself.
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
How does the data get uploaded to the mother ship?
-
Regarding diminishing returns, sure, why not indefinitely? That kind of data volume is dirt cheap to store. One instance where it proves useful to have the data justifies years worth of storage for thousands of individuals.
The "cost" to store the data is most properly measured in terms of the owner's and driver's privacy, not in the AWS S3/Glacier bill.
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
Via the integrated LTE/GSM module
How does the data get uploaded to the mother ship?
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
How does the data get uploaded to the mother ship?
Via the integrated LTE/GSM module
OK so there is a way to silence it...
-
Sure.
No. Proper data analysis (both in scope and fairness) is the protection the system should provide.
Your example of why you shouldn't talk to police is valid in a world where there is no such data collection and police are motivated to "solve" crimes and close cases, even at the cost of prosecuting the innocent, however, in a scenario where there is global, all encompassing data collection, assuming you are innocent, data collection will more likely help to prove your innocence, or even stop that line of investigation before the law enforcement approaches you, and if they do come for you, just tell them you were asleep in your bed, and your IoT, iBed 3000 will happily print out your sleep schedule, hearth beat and blood pressure charts for the night in question, corroborated by the TurboChill smart fridge that logged you opening the door for 67 seconds and picking up the slightly expired orange juice, prompting you to buy new juice, which you agreed to by scanning your fingerprint, just as the murder was happening 20 city blocks away. Also, you were filmed drinking the juice straight from the carton, by your toaster.
It would also help finding the real perpetrator before innocent people are accused of the crime.
Thinking collected data will set you free is a rather optimistic approach even when assuming a developed nation with properly functioning authorities. Reality shows us that it's much more likely to implicate you than that it sets you free for the same reason statements to the police are unlikely to set you free. The more data there is, the bigger the chance there's something to tie you to whatever is being looked at. You have to remember that like in the video posted the police isn't working to exonerate you. You also presume you have access to the data that will show you're innocent. There's large incentive to dig deep and get warrants for data that implicates people but there's much less of an incentive to dig as deep to prove you're innocent when they think they already have something on you. If you were dependent on tracking data from your car you may have gotten it had you know about it, but a lot of the time companies are under no obligation to provide data to you and you won't even have a clue it exists in the first place. That's before we even take into account that the justice system isn't perfect and sometimes just flat out broken.
Another mistake is to presume you're innocent. None of us is. Research shows the average citizen commits multiple felonies a day. Many jurisdictions can't even tell you how many laws exist within their borders so there's no hope of knowing and adhering to them all even if you tried. This didn't use to be a problem as most of these aren't causing real issues and there wasn't any evidence of it anyway. Rampant data collection means you can be prosecuted at will. This unfortunately has been proven to not just be a theoretical issue either, see the following link.
https://mises.org/library/decriminalize-average-man
-
OK so there is a way to silence it...
As far as I know it's so intertwined with the other electronics that's very hard to do.
-
Another mistake is to presume you're innocent. None of us is. Research shows the average citizen commits multiple felonies a day. Many jurisdictions can't even tell you how many laws exist within their borders so there's no hope of knowing and adhering to them all even if you tried. This didn't use to be a problem as most of these aren't causing real issues and there wasn't any evidence of it anyway. Rampant data collection means you can be prosecuted at will. This unfortunately has been proven to not just be a theoretical issue either, see the following link.
https://mises.org/library/decriminalize-average-man
Yup.
Anyway. Any sane and free society shouldn't even think of that. Again, that's a patent violation of privacy which should be a guaranteed basic right. It doesn't matter whether this is all made for the greater good: this kind of approach is exactly that of all totalitarian regimes.
It's funny how almost everyone screams when they hear about mass surveillance in China, yet most of us just ignore it when we do the exact same, just because, you know, we are different right?
At least China's government is not hiding it.
One good thing at least in the EU (there must be one ;D ) is that privacy is still relatively protected. And I doubt this kind of systematic data collection from cars' vendors is allowed in the EU. Does anyone know more about this?
Edit: sorry I seem to have forgotten that the UK once was in the EU. ;D
So I wonder how all this can be compliant with the EU directives. I'm curious.
-
Not taking the time to dig into it, but I think some sort of agreement must be signed before it's legal. Now, maybe if the vehicle is being leased they can hide this in the fine print, but seems that if you were buying the vehicle outright it would have to be separate, and therefore much more obvious.
-
Another mistake is to presume you're innocent. None of us is. Research shows the average citizen commits multiple felonies a day. Many jurisdictions can't even tell you how many laws exist within their borders so there's no hope of knowing and adhering to them all even if you tried. This didn't use to be a problem as most of these aren't causing real issues and there wasn't any evidence of it anyway. Rampant data collection means you can be prosecuted at will. This unfortunately has been proven to not just be a theoretical issue either, see the following link.
https://mises.org/library/decriminalize-average-man
Yup.
Anyway. Any sane and free society shouldn't even think of that. Again, that's a patent violation of privacy which should be a guaranteed basic right. It doesn't matter whether this is all made for the greater good: this kind of approach is exactly that of all totalitarian regimes.
It's funny how almost everyone screams when they hear about mass surveillance in China, yet most of us just ignore it when we do the exact same, just because, you know, we are different right?
At least China's government is not hiding it.
One good thing at least in the EU (there must be one ;D ) is that privacy is still relatively protected. And I doubt this kind of systematic data collection from cars' vendors is allowed in the EU. Does anyone know more about this?
Edit: sorry I seem to have forgotten that the UK once was in the EU. ;D
So I wonder how all this can be compliant with the EU directives. I'm curious.
cell phone companies store the same info all the time and give it to law enforcement when (properly) requested.
cell phone data has been used as evidence in many cases, and so has a suspects phone conveniently being off the
time of a crime
-
Which doesn't answer my question really.
I invite people to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
(and of course the directive itself)
and see how compliant those companies possibly are point by point. My guess is: probably not very. Not that people seem to care apparently anyway.
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
How does the data get uploaded to the mother ship?
Via the integrated LTE/GSM module
OK so there is a way to silence it...
For now, with architectures up to 2020-ish, I believe there still is, however you will likely "void" your warranty (or at least disqualify yourself from warranty-covered dealer service calls until you allow the updates) as the vehicles now depend on this network connection for software updates to various systems. No one writes good software anymore and the OEM's aren't immune from this phenomena. The "we can fix it later as long as it's not a big safety issue" mentality is strengthened by this ability to push updates to the vehicle later.
-
Ford, GM, Chrysler, and other OEM's are working and have been actively working on selling this information for more than a decade. Ford has been selling this data from all of their SYNC enabled cars all over the place, State Farm is a big buyer. They are currently engaged in a large scale project to further parse and monetize this information.
IMHO, this site needs a section dedicated specifically to this type of hack. I've been through my SYNC system out of some boredom. It's collecting... Everything... Including pictures from the front mounted camera.
FYI to connect to it you need to connect a rather generic USB-to-ethernet adapter to the USB port. From there... You can figure it out ;-)
How does the data get uploaded to the mother ship?
Via the integrated LTE/GSM module
OK so there is a way to silence it...
Also every time you go to the dealer or any other "authorized" mechanic
-
Not taking the time to dig into it, but I think some sort of agreement must be signed before it's legal. Now, maybe if the vehicle is being leased they can hide this in the fine print, but seems that if you were buying the vehicle outright it would have to be separate, and therefore much more obvious.
Trust me when I tell you that car manufacturers have been selling this data without your direct consent since the inception of these systems, they get around rules because the data is "anonymized".... Companies ARE using this data, as an example State Farm IS setting some drivers' insurance rates based on some of this information and no one is supposed to know this. I have independently proven this on multiple SYNC capable vehicles manufactured in 2012-2014 model year. I believe American manufacturers are the most guilty of this. At this very moment, Ford is making a large effort right to further process and package this data in an attempt to generate more revenue from it (as they are in a sort of panic mode due to their financial situation).
We live in a world where the companies known as "data brokers" are allowed to vacuum up all of our information from utility companies, cellullar phone companies, internet providers, car manufacturers, credit card companies, and this list goes on forever. The data is more or less "anonymized" but with a bit of creative software, you can link all of a person's data together, package it as "person X" and sell it, with the understanding of "psssst... everything is here to figure out exactly who this person is and target them with ads, set their insurance rates, sell it to someone else, etc".
It's a crime against humanity, and everyone ignores it because they would rather be entertained than care, and they won't care until it is too late (IMHO it already is).
-
I don't see how the car companies or insurance companies or anyone else has a right to this kind of information by default. Surely the owner of the vehicle has to authorize it first, otherwise how could it even be legal?
Yep, you do. If you don't read contracts before you sign, you can only blame yourself.
It's funny, though. I never ever remember signing anything other than the papers for ownership when i bought my (second hand) car.
Then i did read and sign the contract for my insurance and didn't find anything about data collection from the vehichle.
I did, howeve,r for when i installed the black box (different contract form), but that's the whole point
-
To do list:
Buy a new car.
Buy an old car.
-
Trust me when I tell you that car manufacturers have been selling this data without your direct consent since the inception of these systems, they get around rules because the data is "anonymized".... Companies ARE using this data, as an example State Farm IS setting some drivers' insurance rates based on some of this information and no one is supposed to know this. I have independently proven this on multiple SYNC capable vehicles manufactured in 2012-2014 model year.
I would be interested to see your research on this.
-
[/quote]
OK so there is a way to silence it...
[/quote]
Wrap the cars antennae in tin foil bonded to the rest of the car might stop it, would not be surprised if it also stopped the car when it failed to report back to the manufacturers.
-
OK so there is a way to silence it...
Wrap the cars antennae in tin foil bonded to the rest of the car might stop it, would not be surprised if it also stopped the car when it failed to report back to the manufacturers.
I don't think these are conveniently placed antennas which are accessible to wrap.
-
OK so there is a way to silence it...
Wrap the cars antennae in tin foil bonded to the rest of the car might stop it, would not be surprised if it also stopped the car when it failed to report back to the manufacturers.
I don't think these are conveniently placed antennas which are accessible to wrap.
Where there's a will, there's a way...
I don't foresee ever wanting to own a car that would "squeal" on my sometimes very enthusiastic driving on empty roads! :-DD
-
Your phone is already doing it. With GPSDO in every cell tower, continuous multilateration is performed and your phone's geographical location logged in perpetuity every time it pings the tower. This has been going on for nearly 20 years and based on police radio traffic I hear, and while it was not very accurate in the 2000's, they are now able to locate to under 50m radius without GPS due to the density of cell towers and increased accuracy from the new trimble GPSDO they use. 911 dispatchers in the USA hand this information out to officers constantly upon request, over the radio, no warrant required.
-
OK so there is a way to silence it...
Wrap the cars antennae in tin foil bonded to the rest of the car might stop it, would not be surprised if it also stopped the car when it failed to report back to the manufacturers.
I don't think these are conveniently placed antennas which are accessible to wrap.
Certainly on some cars they use the one antenna point very often they look a bit like a sharks fin on the roof. Would not be much point burying it under the hood.
-
The antennas generally are multi-purpose, also serving your navigation and sattelite radio, so covering the antenna may not be idea. However, there are usually multiple coax coming away from there, and they route to the appropriate modules, and can likely be disconnected there. It varies widely between manufacturers and generation. The antennas are powered and there is usually an antenna protector device in the module which supplies power to the antenna (bias T). These use a part which is current limited and also can have open and short circuit detection so disconnecting the antenna can give you more than just a "no signal" error.
In current architectures we are reaching the point where it is so thoroughly integrated with the vehicle that it's not possible to disable it without significant inconvenience, or worse. For the last 10-15 years, the telematics/infotainment module has been the home for the most powerful microprocessor in the vehicle, and this caused more and more functionality to be pulled into this module.
I'm surprised that there is not more hacking done of these modules. On many of the newer vehicles there are options you can unlock - Such as bluetooth - That the OEM wants you to pay for much like the scope options people are hacking on here.
It would be great to see some people put their passion into thoroughly analyzing and publicly documenting these architectures. Most people "in the know" are under perpetual NDA (or worse) and really can't talk about specifics at all and can only make general statements.
Every infotainment system has various test modes/systemaccess method present, either used for diagnosis when a module is sent back to the factory, or remaining from the development phase. A majority are running some flavor of linux. Access is generally via a USB port on the module (that is not connected to a harness like the other USB port(s) in the vehicle), or through one of the USB ports in the vehicle (if there are multiple, generally only one can be used to access the system), or through a USB to Ethernet adaptor. Or any/all of the above. Some have secret keypress combinations to open up a port or boot the infotainment system in a way that enables access but I'm sure people can figure it out. Would love to see it.
-
To do list:
Buy a new car.
Buy an old car.
If you were ever surprised how much people will pay for restored or even "good condition" vintage cars... I predict there will be even more interest in them in the future.
-
To do list:
Buy a new car.
Buy an old car.
If you were ever surprised how much people will pay for restored or even "good condition" vintage cars... I predict there will be even more interest in them in the future.
This is certainly true, and for more reasons than just this tracking stuff. Anything made after the late 2000's is subject to the incrementally higher EPA restrictions and due to engineering, labor, etc cost combined with this restriction, the only way to make vehicles profitable was to make them disposable. So, we get slightly better fuel economy, but now the car is filled with more plastic, very thin steel that rapidly rusts, significant reduction in durability of every component including critical suspension and drivetrain components and it all ends up in the landfill much sooner than those terrible old cars that got slightly lower overall fuel economy for comparable size and load capacity. People are becoming wise to this and buying older cars. The time to buy is now, I plan to fill a barn I have in the states with a good number of similar cars which can be driven and/or cannibalized for parts for the car being driven. A personal junkyard, if you will.
-
To do list:
Buy a new car.
Buy an old car.
If you were ever surprised how much people will pay for restored or even "good condition" vintage cars... I predict there will be even more interest in them in the future.
A ten year old Land Rover now costs more than a brand new Suzuki jimny here in the UK.
-
cell phone companies store the same info all the time and give it to law enforcement when (properly) requested.
cell phone data has been used as evidence in many cases, and so has a suspects phone conveniently being off the
time of a crime
Now that's the way to death sentence criminals easily.
Not too far off: "You weren't watching soap opera or Armageddon news on TV after work, so you must have been murdering somebody."
-
It's funny though, i didn't receive a GDPR consent form :P (from the mfg. However i did give consent, to the insurance company for the black box i installed)
since not you as person get tracked just the Car who can used by anyone you give the Key to. So maybe there is no GDPR required (yet).
Any sane and free society shouldn't even think of that.
Since a Company and not the Gov is colleting this Data you might life in a "free" society.
Beside of them every Country who make a Business with Saudi Arabia who someone get executed for Witchcraft isnt better. :clap:
we are different right?
The US spy on Merkels Phone just for there own Safety to know that not the Russian spy on her. :-DD
And I doubt this kind of systematic data collection from cars' vendors is allowed in the EU. Does anyone know more about this?
There is a law that all new Produced Cars since this Year or new Year MUST have a (e)Simcard inside!
Buy an old car.
Well in Europe you can get screwed with that idea.
Why? For example in Germany Cards requierd an Inspection and when the Car emit to much Particls, Co2 or what ever the get a Yellow or Red Sticker and are not permit to enter many City's any more. :=\
Wrap the cars antennae in tin foil
Sure when you are ready to disassembly your Car.
Hopefully the Antenna not got potted!
and sattelite radio
We dont have in Europe.
I'm surprised that there is not more hacking done of these modules.
Well do you want brick your 60.000€ Car?
-
There is a law that all new Produced Cars since this Year or new Year MUST have a (e)Simcard inside!
source? i hadn't heard about this yet
-
source? i hadn't heard about this yet
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/security-and-emergencies/emergency-assistance-vehicles-ecall/index_en.htm
-
source? i hadn't heard about this yet
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/security-and-emergencies/emergency-assistance-vehicles-ecall/index_en.htm
I had a new vauxhall last year with the ecall system bloody thing I only kept it six months it was so bad. The steering would pull to the right all the time it went back to the dealer for alignment and pulled hard to the left so back it went and it pulled to the right again there was obviously a warp in body. Anyway went out one night and reached up to turn the cabin light on guess which button I hit, the emergency call one of course as they were side by side and close together. The Mitsubishi truck I have also has the system but no manual button to hit by mistake it only works if the air bags deploy which is far more sensible.
-
source? i hadn't heard about this yet
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/security-and-emergencies/emergency-assistance-vehicles-ecall/index_en.htm
112 calls can be made without a SIM card.
-
112 calls can be made without a SIM card.
Not in Germany.
-
112 calls can be made without a SIM card.
Not in Germany.
Are you quite sure about that, it has bin the law ever since the first mobile phone.
-
Yes the did it because the had so much Fake, Prank calls. :palm:
-
Calling 000/112 without a SIM was also disabled in Australia
about a decade ago for a few months in 2008 (https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/980700). Stated reasons included people wasting the call centre's time by calling it to test if a second hand phone they wanted to buy was working!
-
Calling 000/112 without a SIM was also disabled in Australia about a decade ago (https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/980700). Stated reasons included people wasting the call centre's time by calling it to test if a second hand phone they wanted to buy was working!
Really? Not sure the states can make that sort of decision:
https://www.triplezero.gov.au/Pages/Usingotheremergencynumbers.aspx (https://www.triplezero.gov.au/Pages/Usingotheremergencynumbers.aspx)
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2019L01509 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2019L01509) (Telecommunications (Emergency Call Service) Determination 2019)
-
It wasn't the states calling the shots, it was ACMA ... as it should be. However:
> In late April 2008, mobile phone carriers advised ACMA that their testing had identified a scenario where a genuine emergency call from a phone with a working SIM could be blocked.
So they first delayed its implementation (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2008L01646/Explanatory%20Statement/Text), then revoked it.
I didn't get that memo till now, so thanks for pointing this out. It does indeed seem that phones without SIMs can call emergency services in Australia.
-
E000 calls from SIM-less mobiles has been a thing here for a while. In relation to testing 000/112 services, there is a test procedure which service providers follow (it basically involves calling the actual 000 number and repeating a specific "test message" to the operator).
If the volume of test calls is expected to be high, there is a specific person/department within Telstra who you will need approval from prior to conducting those tests on a larger scale. They will advise the appropriate time for the test to occur and notify the various emergency call centres ahead of time.
Also to keep in mind, when you call 000/112 in Australia, you are connected to a Telstra operator first, not an emergency service. Then depending on the state, suburb and service requested, they will divert you to the appropriate agency to handle the call. That can be anyone from state Police, Fire Brigade or Ambulance to volunteer organisations such as the Rural Fire Service, Volunteer Rescue Association etc...
If there is no verbal response from the caller, it is forwarded to the Police as what is known as a "Five five call". The reason for the raised dimple on the "5" key on almost every phone with actual buttons is that you can press that twice (or if requested by the operator, respond to questions using only that key) and you don't need to see or look at the keypad to do it. Examples for this might be someone who partially incapacitated, cannot speak (either due to the nature of emergency, a medical condition or if they are under duress), visually impaired or some other reason which prevents someone from answering questions verbally but still requires an emergency response. Your location is determined by the subscriber details and/or for mobile phones, this is done via "Push MoLI" or even using the GPS in your handset in some cases.
SIM-less emergency calls are more important than ever these days since a large majority of the population is using VoIP services as their landlines (and this number is only increasing with the adoption of NBN connections). VoIP services aren't guaranteed to connect you to emergency services as even a mis-configuration would prevent you from doing so. Back in the day of POTS services, even if you had no dial-tone (due to a suspended service), you could still call 000.
-
Back in the day of POTS services, even if you had no dial-tone (due to a suspended service), you could still call 000.
Didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. Taking emergency calls seriously is a constant in the telephony industry. The lengths that the GSM designers went to, such as actively kicking off non-emergency calls if the cell was full, are astonishing.
Also, apparently 911 now works in Australia (at least from mobiles ... can't see how it'd work from a land line unless the exchange uses a timeout). Must try that next time I have a less urgent emergency. ;D
-
The lengths that the GSM designers went to, such as actively kicking off non-emergency calls if the cell was full, are astonishing.
Yep, not just for emergency calls though but every SIM card has a "service class" value assigned to it. In times of congestion or during major events or incidents, Telco's can prioritise traffic to certain service classes (or even disallow entire classes completely).
We use "higher class" SIMs in Government so when a cell is congested, we can still use voice and data. Likewise if there is a major incident (like a terrorist attack for example), cell services can be reserved only for emergency services (although I'm yet to see that happen in Australia, we got close one time).
-
Back in the day of POTS services, even if you had no dial-tone (due to a suspended service), you could still call 000.
Didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. Taking emergency calls seriously is a constant in the telephony industry. The lengths that the GSM designers went to, such as actively kicking off non-emergency calls if the cell was full, are astonishing.
Also, apparently 911 now works in Australia (at least from mobiles ... can't see how it'd work from a land line unless the exchange uses a timeout). Must try that next time I have a less urgent emergency. ;D
I was told at some point modern standards/phones don't actually 'dial' 911 or 112 or 100 or 999 or whatever. They simply recognize it as 'emergency', and then use a channel/identifier as defined in the standard (so independent of where you are) to connect to emergency services.
If there is no verbal response from the caller, it is forwarded to the Police as what is known as a "Five five call". The reason for the raised dimple on the "5" key on almost every phone with actual buttons is that you can press that twice (or if requested by the operator, respond to questions using only that key) and you don't need to see or look at the keypad to do it.
I though the reason for the dimple is simply as home key (similar to F and J on most computer keyboard layouts) so you can orient yourself on the keyboard in the dark. I imagine the 5 being used for emergency is a result of that, and not the reason for it.