[jpnh]

Originally Posted by raleedy

It puts things in perspective: a risk of property loss is less serious than death.

the point however is that neither should exist and both are easily/cheaply avoided

Do you put the shittiest lockset on your house, leave it unlocked while not home or worse yet leave a key IN the front door as a matter of practice?

Of course not

What care manufacturers have done is to make it possible for folks to purchase a 30 dollar electronic tool kit that gives them a master lock to all BMW, VW's etc etc etc

[Deutsche-Broke]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

I used to be a journalist at one of the country's 10 largest newspapers. These kinds of stories are part of what drove me out of the business. It's borderline fear-mongering -- half of the time written by someone who needs to fill a copy hole, and the most intriguing 'study' or PR release that morning is the topic that gets chosen by editors. Do yourself a favor: don't drink too much of the kool-aid that the mainstream media pours, and sip it with a grain of salt (as it were).

I couldn't agree with this more.. *Grumble grumble grumble*..

It's every other week I see a story about this kind of thing and it's no different than it was twenty years ago when account hacking became mainstream with dial up companies. It's all fear mongering and a great way to sell Bud Light.

Don't leave stuff in your car and use some common sense when parking in, "sketchy" areas..

There will always be the "odd" person that is committed to stealing your car. But they are not usually tech savvy and out for quick money for drugs. It takes some serious homework to pull that off and your average meth head hasn't quite figured out the switch to 433 from 315Mhz in the newer remotes because they traditionally don't know where they are sleeping once the sun goes down.

On the other hand, the manufacturers are responding to consumers and the insurance industry quicker than ever to respond to new threats. If it was a real, pressing issue, you most likely wouldn't even own the car because the insurance would be prohibitive due to high claims numbers..

This is just another example of, "guerilla marketing", and the justification that in a post 9/11 world, it's more effective than ever.

*Grumble grumble grumble*

[jpnh]

Is it "Fear Mongering" if its actually happening and the people doing it dont have to be tech savvy?

[Deutsche-Broke]

Originally Posted by jpnh

Is it "Fear Mongering" if its actually happening and the people doing it dont have to be tech savvy?

Are "over medium" eggs really killing people due to Salmonella because someone posted it on Facebook and 12,000 people re-posted it?

It's no different.. You are caught up in clickbait theory.

Go enjoy your car and don't forget to lock it.

[BEM-S4]

I'd be more concerned about the threat to your home. Just using your thermostat (which is on your network) someone can access everything else including PC, door locks, etc.

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by BEM-S4

I'd be more concerned about the threat to your home. Just using your thermostat (which is on your network) someone can access everything else including PC, door locks, etc.

... Then don't have all those systems hooked up together? That's a lot simpler than the car issue.

I agree that it's a non-issue for most people, because it won't happen to most people - yet. But home defense is a lot easier than car defense.

Manufacturers would only take notice if it started to become a big deal - not a couple of cars stolen via these means each year - but instead, if a bunch of hackers were taking control of people's cars while they were driving and crashing them into poles. Then they'd take notice.

[raleedy]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

... Then don't have all those systems hooked up together? That's a lot simpler than the car issue.

Pretty much anything that's on your wi-fi network is "hooked up".

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by raleedy

Pretty much anything that's on your wi-fi network is "hooked up".

Then dont put it on wifi.......

Simple problem
Simple solution

[raleedy]

Originally Posted by jpnh

Then dont put it on wifi.......

Simple problem
Simple solution

You say that as if there were no advantage to being on a wi-fi network.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by raleedy

You say that as if there were no advantage to being on a wi-fi network.

The disadvantages due to crap security built into these systems combined with crap security that most home users utilize via a 70 dollar linksys router that is still set to the default manufacturers password far outweigh any possible advantage or convenience

People arent just stupid they are full blown retarded

http://www.networkworld.com/article/...passwords.html

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by raleedy

Pretty much anything that's on your wi-fi network is "hooked up".

Yeah, but I said hooked up together. It's possible to have multiple wifi networks in the same home.

Look, this has digressed into a really stupid argument, but I've been working in tech for a very short period of time and I can already tell you that the number one point of failure for any computer system is the user. If you have all your systems, door locks, thermostat, computers, and TVs hooked up to the same wifi and that wifi's password is "password123" then yeah, you have something to worry about. If, on the other hand, you follow the (pretty simple) recommendations that tech experts give - have long, complex passwords, update software regularly, don't hook everything up to the same network, you'll probably be fine. OR, you don't need to have any of that hooked up to wifi at all. I find it truly horrifying that ANYONE would have their DOOR LOCKS hooked up to a wifi network. Seriously?

This is a forum for hardcore driving enthusiasts who want naturally aspirated engines, manual transmissions, and no moonroof - yet you're telling me you have something against the trusty ol' manual door lock?

Bottom line - get a sturdy door, a camera system, a thermostat, and DON'T HOOK ANY OF IT UP TO YOUR WIFI. Lock and unlock your door with your own fingers. Hard-wire your cameras. Turn the thermostat dial with your hands, that's the reason you have opposable thumbs. Problem = solved.

Now, back to the issue of the car being crackable.... More difficult to solve.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

This is a forum for hardcore driving enthusiasts who want naturally aspirated engines, manual transmissions, and no moonroof - yet you're telling me you have something against the trusty ol' manual door lock?

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

Now, back to the issue of the car being crackable.... More difficult to solve.

Its quite simple to solve.....really no different than the connected home issue.....dont connect it.

The SMART thing to do in my opinion is to give customer the option to disable the connected car options.

You want to assume the risk thats your perogative

If you want a traditional keyed door locks and ingition cylinder then go for it

Simple, inexpensive solution that makes everyone happy

[djarchow]

Originally Posted by Tpeterson

I agree. Theft isn't the major problem with hacking into a car's electronics. Interfering with operating functions -braking,steering, ignition,-though remote, would be a big problem. It's something that better be solved before autonomous cars are loosed on the public!

I am involved in embedded security (heavy duty vehicles) and regularly attend the automotive embedded security conferences. At the one in May a number of the presentations were about how easy it is to mess with the variety of cameras and sensors on automated vehicles. A number of the them could be easily blinded or even tricked into braking or swerving the car from another vehicle or the roadside.

The long term vision for autonomous vehicles are all of the vehicles and even the road talking to one another as you drive. No need to have a camera or lidar to tell you when the car in front of you is braking; that car would just tell your car via wifi it was braking, changing lanes etc.

Right now, one of the more looming concerns for the manufacturers isn't theft, though they do worry about it, it is someone hacking into the cellular telematics systems like OnStar and sending malicious code to hundreds or thousands of cars, in essence shutting them all down and holding them for ransom. This same basic method is how they were able to hack into the Jeep Cherokee and take control while being driven.

One interesting fact a speaker from the FBI cyber crime group shared last year, is that 10 years ago the percentage of people hacking for fun was 90% and for criminal reasons, 10%. Those numbers are now reversed.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by djarchow

I am involved in embedded security (heavy duty vehicles) and regularly attend the automotive embedded security conferences. At the one in May a number of the presentations were about how easy it is to mess with the variety of cameras and sensors on automated vehicles. A number of the them could be easily blinded or even tricked into braking or swerving the car from another vehicle or the roadside.

The long term vision for autonomous vehicles are all of the vehicles and even the road talking to one another as you drive. No need to have a camera or lidar to tell you when the car in front of you is braking; that car would just tell your car via wifi it was braking, changing lanes etc.

Right now, one of the more looming concerns for the manufacturers isn't theft, though they do worry about it, it is someone hacking into the cellular telematics systems like OnStar and sending malicious code to hundreds or thousands of cars, in essence shutting them all down and holding them for ransom. This same basic method is how they were able to hack into the Jeep Cherokee and take control while being driven.

One interesting fact a speaker from the FBI cyber crime group shared last year, is that 10 years ago the percentage of people hacking for fun was 90% and for criminal reasons, 10%. Those numbers are now reversed.

There's a similar issue with certain commercial aircraft where wifi systems avail to customers isnt sufficiently separated from control systems for the aircraft.

FAA knows about it and there are even documents published wrt warnings

UFB

[Viffermike]

OK, this is getting just stupid.

In addition to the techies who've posted, watch Mr. Robot. Is hacking an issue? Yes. Is information security an issue? Yes, on every single level, from governments to individuals.

Is this news? No, no, no, no, NO. To the 'hell' power.

Every time something 'connected' is introduced to the market, it becomes a larger issue. We've had 'connected' devices ever since the advent of the dial-up modem, for crying out loud. The web of such interconnectivity gets bigger with every passing day.

But here's the thing: if these devices weren't reasonably secure, they would not sell. Let the market determine the necessary security. Do your due diligence to protect what's yours (whatever you feel that is), because wtfbrah is right about the biggest security flaw being the user -- use thumb drives with encryption, scan your computers every night, stay off social media sites, don't buy anything online with a credit card, don't use a Wi-Fi thermostat, drive only cars with a manual lock, join the "Save the Manuals" movement (had to include that, LOL), whatever -- but stop worrying so damn much.

Anyone who makes a connected device is just as aware as any of us are that security is an issue, if not more so. Why? Because if it doesn't work, it will not sell. I repeat: It. Will. Not. Sell.

Please, someone shoot this thread now.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

OK, this is getting just stupid.

In addition to the techies who've posted, watch Mr. Robot. Is hacking an issue? Yes. Is information security an issue? Yes, on every single level, from governments to individuals.

Is this news? No, no, no, no, NO. To the 'hell' power.

Every time something 'connected' is introduced to the market, it becomes a larger issue. We've had 'connected' devices ever since the advent of the dial-up modem, for crying out loud. The web of such interconnectivity gets bigger with every passing day.

But here's the thing: if these devices weren't reasonably secure, they would not sell. Let the market determine the necessary security. Do your due diligence to protect what's yours (whatever you feel that is), because wtfbrah is right about the biggest security flaw being the user -- use thumb drives with encryption, scan your computers every night, stay off social media sites, don't buy anything online with a credit card, don't use a Wi-Fi thermostat, drive only cars with a manual lock, join the "Save the Manuals" movement (had to include that, LOL), whatever -- but stop worrying so damn much.

Anyone who makes a connected device is just as aware as any of us are that security is an issue, if not more so. Why? Because if it doesn't work, it will not sell. I repeat: It. Will. Not. Sell.

Please, someone shoot this thread now.

Connected devices sell because being "Connected" is sold as being cool/sexy/intelligent/etc

It also sells because the vast majority of people are dumb sheep that cannot be bothered to consider the down side of convenience until it personally impacts them in a very real way.

the overwhelming majority of people are incapable of learning anything the easy way.......they are like an amoeba that only respond to painful external stimuli

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by jpnh

Connected devices sell because being "Connected" is sold as being cool/sexy/intelligent/etc

So is everything else. Flavors of the month/year/decade/century/millennium/era/epoch are everywhere. Welcome to marketing (a field in which I work at a high level ... after a career as a journalist. Do the math in terms of my attitude toward all of this.)

Originally Posted by jpnh

It also sells because the vast majority of people are dumb sheep that cannot be bothered to consider the down side of convenience until it personally impacts them in a very real way.

the overwhelming majority of people are incapable of learning anything the easy way.......they are like an amoeba that only respond to painful external stimuli

Welcome to natural selection, crowd science, and chaos theory. Guess what? All animals act this way, as individuals and as a collective -- of cells, of a herd, of people, of workers, of whatever. However, those collectives always fail when the greater good is ignored in favor of individual needs. So it's in the interest of a company -- a collective -- to produce a product for individuals that, when used as a collective (customers of that product), works. If it doesn't, the company collective fails at the expense of the customer collective. That's how collectives evolve, dude.

So: Why concern yourself about that proverbial cattle prod beyond making personal choices that balance the preventative and the convenient? 'Cause as an individual, that's really all you can do.

Question: are you young? You worry way, way, way too much about things you can't control.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

So is everything else. Flavors of the month/year/decade/century/millennium/era/epoch are everywhere. Welcome to marketing (a field in which I work at a high level ... after a career as a journalist. Do the math in terms of my attitude toward all of this.)



Welcome to natural selection, crowd science, and chaos theory. Guess what? All animals act this way, as individuals and as a collective -- of cells, of a herd, of people, of workers, of whatever. However, those collectives always fail when the greater good is ignored in favor of individual needs. So it's in the interest of a company -- a collective -- to produce a product for individuals that, when used as a collective (customers of that product), works. If it doesn't, the company collective fails at the expense of the customer collective. That's how collectives evolve, dude.

So: Why concern yourself about that proverbial cattle prod beyond making personal choices that balance the preventative and the convenient? 'Cause as an individual, that's really all you can do.

Question: are you young? You worry way, way, way too much about things you can't control.

There's where I think you're wrong

We are in control......if <insert company> recieves enough bad press or complaints about some issue they will change what they are doing in order to avoid bad press, loss of relevance, decrease in market share, profit losses etc etc

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by jpnh

There's where I think you're wrong

We are in control......if <insert company> recieves enough bad press or complaints about some issue they will change what they are doing in order to avoid bad press, loss of relevance, decrease in market share, profit losses etc etc

No: you're agreeing with me. Catch your use of 'we' up above. You're talking about a collective effect and you don't even realize it!

And I know I'm dead-on right because my statement's backed up by 4 billion years of evolution and ream upon ream of scientific study about everything from sociology and archaeology to political science and engineering. Really, at this point it's common sense - emphasis on 'common'.

Abstract thought, backed up by facts and logic, is a glorious thing.

[jpnh]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

No: you're agreeing with me. Catch your use of 'we' up above. You're talking about a collective effect and you don't even realize it!

And I know I'm dead-on right because my statement's backed up by 4 billion years of evolution and ream upon ream of scientific study about everything from sociology and archaeology to political science and engineering. Really, at this point it's common sense - emphasis on 'common'.

Abstract thought, backed up by facts and logic, is a glorious thing.

Its not collective

Its individuals making decisions that in the aggregate influence others

And there are soooooo very many problems with sociology, archeology, poly sci and engineering today all being polluted by politics instead of facts

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by jpnh

Its not collective

Its individuals making decisions that in the aggregate influence others

So I guess you could say that these individuals influence a collection of other people?

[Dylan86]

Should I still buy an iPhone 7? My privacy, though...

We were probably all doomed from the first time we ever "agreed" to the terms and conditions from Apple, of which most never read or took the time to understand. I am one of those people who always press "agree" and never look back. If you don't, you can't play.

#victimsofourowncircumstances