Thread

Automatic Transmission – a data-privacy study of connected vehicles

262 points · 233 comments · rafaelc

Loading the complete thread in the background. This saved snapshot is available now. Refresh

prasadvara · 1790886388 · focus · HN ↗
The ongoing theme of all these responses was shifting the blame to the consumer.
As expected. I think consumers also need to push back on these practices, but the problem is, majority of consumers are tech savy but not privacy savy.
1. slowin · 1790887238 · focus · HN ↗
  I'd love to push back, I'm not sure what that looks like though. I can't even get an open source/open hardware phone that's decent, let alone a car.
  1. ad_fontes · 1790888139 · focus · HN ↗
    You might want to check out Slate. It's about the closest thing to an open vehicle platform I can imagine.
    slowin · 1790888436 · focus · HN ↗
    Interesting and thank you! Just like I'd like a "dumb" tv that I could just plug a Linux machine running Kodi into, I'd like a car that was 100% free from smart features, yet gave me the hooks to power any of the systems with my own software/hardware.
    asdff · 1790891484 · focus · HN ↗
    The closest thing is just any old basic obdii and that's it ICE car, where you rip out the oem radio and now have your power taps to do all sorts of fun hacker projects within that new found standard sized void in the dash.
    wiml · 1790889192 · focus · HN ↗
    Does Slate actually make any statements about the level of telematics/surveillance in their vehicles?
    goda90 · 1790889479 · focus · HN ↗
    They say their vehicles have no modem by default, only leaving it as an option for fleet users. They also have no infotainment system to contain any sort of camera or microphone.
    CarVac · 1790889577 · focus · HN ↗
    They do have a backup camera.
    themaninthedark · 1790956315 · focus · HN ↗
    It's required by law...
    ad_fontes · 1790889570 · focus · HN ↗
    IIRC, they don't have a cellular radio in the vehicle (or even a FM radio). All the connectivity is done via Bluetooth with a mobile app.
    It's been a while since I read up on them and things might have changed, but I have a lot respect for what they're doing. Full embracing right to repair and customer privacy when the entire industry is moving at lightning speed in the opposite direction.
    goodmythical · 1790890121 · focus · HN ↗
    Aren't their companies that are doing their telemetry over bluetooth bridge to phone' internet? Not saying slate necessarily does, but it's certainly an available exfil surface, especially if there's a 'manage your slate vehicle' app.
    SoftTalker · 1790895661 · focus · HN ↗
    You can always just not connect the bluetooth.
    goodmythical · 1791078911 · focus · HN ↗
    Well, sure, but if memory serves, there are car platforms where you connect for say playing music and the cars app on your phone uses the bluetooth connection to exfil data to the car company via the phone's internet.
    I'm just saying that "disable car's telemetry" is not necessarily 100% for preventing exfil of car telemetry if you then connect your phone while having the car app running.
    Like, I'm not sure of the company, but I know there was some "I modded my car so it couldn't phone home but I'm still getting reports from the manufacturer about excessive acceleration" and it ended up being because the owner had disabled the car's telemetry but was using the app on the phone for remote start and music or whatever.
    sippingabonedry · 1790895981 · focus · HN ↗
    > or even a FM radio
    Which is incredibly stupid.
    Would it have killed them to include a standard DIN-sized hole in the dash, with +12V behind it and prewired speakers in the doors? You know, like how every car used to be so I can go buy my own radio and install it myself?
    That would fit into the spirit of "Slate", but no, their idea was a clip-on bluetooth speaker or something equally dumb.
    holycrapwhodat · 1790893585 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes.
    If you buy a completely option-free $24,950 truck, there is no telematics/surveillance in their vehicle.
    Which also means there's no remote app features that people enjoy.
    The spirit of the vehicle is you can option out just about anything and DIY-it; very, very few "from the factory" options, but dozens upon dozens of DIY accessories from the factory.
    Including a $275 telematics module - <a href="https://www.slate.auto/en/store/ACCIT010" rel="nofollow">https://www.slate.auto/en/store/ACCIT010 - Which enables remote app features.
    The current description for the module on their website: > A plug-and-play solution that acts as a cellular bridge between your smartphone and your Slate vehicle, enabling features like remote access and battery pre-conditioning.
    It's not clear to anyone exactly what features the module has to enable the above, or if it does more than all that.
    Once the thing actually ships, there'll be manuals, and there'll be people hacking it to find out exactly what it both does and doesn't do.
    And since it's a DIY addition, if you later become uncomfortable with what you added to your vehicle, you can remove it!
    snypher · 1790895737 · focus · HN ↗
    >no remote app features that people enjoy.
    I do enjoy watching my friend remote start his Colorado through the app, it only takes 30 seconds for the app to load and sign in, and then he presses a button that used to be on the key itself.
    kotaKat · 1790937338 · focus · HN ↗
    Preorder customer and heavy info-digger here on Slate:
    There's no actual wireless on the vehicle out of the box. There's a "secure gateway" module that has a USB Ethernet adapter hanging off it, then that hangs off a USB-C port just inside the dash panels. Job listings basically detail that it's going to be DTLS over USB to the truck to do all the CANbus magic and stuff.
    The telematics module also just hooks to a second USB port on the secure gateway that also has access to that same DTLS link.
    So far in the truck's development they don't even really have an app yet before launch but the truck's driving along very happy without it.
    <a href="https://www.cybercogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/cybercogs_sgi_rev0d.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.cybercogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/cyberco...
    M95D · 1790930963 · focus · HN ↗
    No standard DIN slot to install my own radio/CD/mp3.
    emdash · 1790947651 · focus · HN ↗
    Now if only they'd actually deliver a vehicle
    iririririr · 1790953180 · focus · HN ↗
    isn't that owned/invested by bezos?
  2. 0c3ca83 · 1790888493 · focus · HN ↗
    It looks like lobbying for increased consumer protection laws. Either you put on a suit and talk to politicians, or you work with and donate to groups that do.
  3. AlexandrB · 1790888571 · focus · HN ↗
    DMCA needs to be repealed or at least radically changed. Currently it's used as a cudgel by manufacturers to prevent customers from modifying the software in the stuff they buy. Legislation that requires vendors to provide documentation and stuff like "right to repair" would also go a long way.
    yearolinuxdsktp · 1790904692 · focus · HN ↗
    Manufacturers laugh in the face of right to repair laws. They have no teeth.
  4. devin · 1790888881 · focus · HN ↗
    For my part, I will not be purchasing a new car until they bring back physical controls and dump the spyware.
    dublin · 1790896520 · focus · HN ↗
    Mee, too. And that's why I've made my peace with the idea of never again buying a new car. They're all garbage quality, outrageously expensive, and effectively unrepairable, anyway, so it's not a big loss. Probably most cars and trucks older than about 2018 are safe, I figure...
    verisimi · 1790917639 · focus · HN ↗
    In many places in Europe, older cars are not viable on account of emissions legislation. So, if you want to drive with an older car, you will have to pay a pretty large daily fee to do so. This is done in the name of pollution.
    I would expect this legislative approach will be rolled everywhere.
    I hate it, fwiw.
    bluGill · 1790940674 · focus · HN ↗
    Not to mention, in most worlds, an electric car is going to be much cheaper to drive in the long run.
    verisimi · 1790961692 · focus · HN ↗
    You just need to splash 20-whatever thousands to upgrade first. Its only money!
    devin · 1790953927 · focus · HN ↗
    I will pay the fee instead of purchase a new car.
    verisimi · 1790961647 · focus · HN ↗
    Its about 16.54 dollars every day you use your car in London.
    <a href="https://government.london/services/ulez/" rel="nofollow">https://government.london/services/ulez/
    > Drive a non-compliant vehicle anywhere in London and you pay £12.50 for the day. Check your vehicle first — most newer cars pay nothing — then pay for the day or set up Auto Pay with TfL.
    devin · 1790962979 · focus · HN ↗
    Sometimes it costs money to stick to your principles.
    verisimi · 1790983456 · focus · HN ↗
    I get it - I'm just telling you what the cost in London is. Most people can't stick paying that amount just to drive their old car. Most people upgrade.
    For me, this is another example of how corporations + governments work together to artificially create new markets with the consumer picking up the tab. In this case, car maker sales are boosted by legislation that punishes ownership of perfectly viable cars.
  5. gib444 · 1790888888 · focus · HN ↗
    > I'm not sure what that looks like though
    Two wheels and some impressive leg muscles !
    fragmede · 1790894388 · focus · HN ↗
    You say that in jest, but ebikes are really changing the world.
    gib444 · 1790952027 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
  6. asdff · 1790891282 · focus · HN ↗
    Look at the options on the table for you: Either do nothing and buy new cars, or buy an older car and maintain it for the rest of your life. There is no option C, as you note.
2. olyjohn · 1790890684 · focus · HN ↗
  Using a smart phone doesn't make someone tech savvy.
3. ASalazarMX · 1790898659 · focus · HN ↗
  In this case, vote with your wallet = buy an old car, or none at all.
  The market is kind of free, but some parts have more freedom than others.
4. jojobas · 1790901012 · focus · HN ↗
  The consumer and the voter are the same guy. Yes it's definitely that guy's fault.
5. Terr_ · 1790913220 · focus · HN ↗
  [delayed]
6. izacus · 1790933626 · focus · HN ↗
  Even the HackerNewsers are quite happy to blame the consumer ("just don't buy it!", "just don't use useful features!", "just drive an old car!") instead of pushing back.
  The victim blaming when it comes to enshittification is now so deeply ingrained into culture of Americans that it's pretty much impossible to expect any kind of coordinated pushback for more consumer rights.
7. TheSkyHasEyes · 1790969427 · focus · HN ↗
  > majority of consumers are tech savy
  No, not at all. Most consumers wouldn't know or care if it's present let alone how it all works...or why they should be aware of it. Not a slight to the non-IT literate either.
8. mahboi · 1790974214 · focus · HN ↗
  They could also be privacy savvy but not care
deepsun · 1790887545 · focus · HN ↗
> As one notable exception, Honda improved its data collection practices to prevent sending precise geolocation to a third party associated with user tracking.
I know what my next car will be.
1. rdtsc · 1790888599 · focus · HN ↗
  I already like Honda and own models before they were connected to the cell network. But they are still not 100% there for current models:
  > Amplitude received from HondaLink: VIN, Location. Cross-context tracking: Amplitude received the VIN plus Location from HondaLink — an unresettable identifier tied directly to other personal data.
  They are so close they should say "fuck it, we're going to be different, we'll disable all the crap" and then market the heck out of it.
  1. Barbing · 1790893225 · focus · HN ↗
    I like it.
    A “disable spying in just a few taps” approach (“your data, your choice” it’s just opt-out) would catch my attention and they could still sell 90% of everyone’s data since people don’t touch defaults.
    newAccount2025 · 1790894961 · focus · HN ↗
    My nissan has a one-click opt-out… but like… every… single… trip. :(
    onedognight · 1790931881 · focus · HN ↗
    Same wth Mazda. Every single time you start the car it nags you.
    emdash · 1790945982 · focus · HN ↗
    Don't worry, the car won't last long enough for it to be all that bad in the long run
  2. codazoda · 1790902093 · focus · HN ↗
    Mine got an update with service recently. It now nags me about my opt out every time I start it. Luckily, I don’t have to dismiss it manually, it goes away on its own. Before the update, however, I was never reminded it was disabled.
    redwall_hp · 1791050877 · focus · HN ↗
    My Civic reminds me that it's on on every startup. The "don't do dumb things with the screen when you should be paying attention while driving" message (which goes away after a little bit) has a note that data sharing is on, which I have enabled because I have a HondaLink subscription.
    Anti-theft location reporting is a feature I pay for, as well as the ability to remote start out of range of the key fob. (Setting temperature before leaving the office is preferable to getting into a 130F car.)
    I did briefly see what it does with the data sharing off, and it's basically the same message, but iirc there's an additional button to visit the settings.
theowaway · 1790888002 · focus · HN ↗
sucks to be a merkin
steelframe · 1790888110 · focus · HN ↗
Still driving my GR Corolla with the data communications module fuse pulled.
1. jmdeon · 1790889369 · focus · HN ↗
  Such a fun car! It's my first fun car and oh man what a toy.
  1. eckelhesten · 1790889737 · focus · HN ↗
    Really? I’ve never heard a Corolla be considered a fun car. It’s a point a to b car afaik.
    Not to hate on your experience! They surely are reliable though.
    mahboi · 1790890008 · focus · HN ↗
    "GR" is the important detail. That means it's AWD with a stickshift and 300hp engine. Not my favorite anyway but yeah, it's not a regular Corolla.
    ok_dad · 1790890089 · focus · HN ↗
    GR is gazoo racing, the Toyota performance line. From what I know it’s not just a badge.
    sudokatsu · 1790915471 · focus · HN ↗
    Unfortunately, they just started diluting that moniker with the GR Rav4.
    mahboi · 1790964203 · focus · HN ↗
    Oh my goodness lol
    ok_dad · 1791183186 · focus · HN ↗
    Yea, that is sad, just read up on it. Next thing you know it'll just be badges. If they were going to add electricity they should have gone for a full EV performance car, IMO. A PHEV is worse than either EV or ICE alone.
    mysterydip · 1790890150 · focus · HN ↗
    Corolla: 170hp GR Corolla: 300hp
    hillacious · 1790890763 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    swozey · 1790943193 · focus · HN ↗
    Just about every cheap 4cyl has had some "fun" turbo version made in the last 20 years, if it has a weird model name like "GR" you can probably assume its one of thsoe.
    steelframe · 1790962465 · focus · HN ↗
    It's 3cyl, 1.6L, turbocharged. Trust me, you just have to try it to understand what kind of vehicle we're talking about.
    redwall_hp · 1791051953 · focus · HN ↗
    The most legendary drift car of all time was a Corolla: the AE86, which people still fix up and have meets at tracks with. It was a sport model. The modern spiritual successor is the GR 86, which attempts to retain the same weight balance and rear wheel drive.
    The modern GR Corolla has a 300hp 3-cyl engine. It's a $40K+ hot hatch. There is, similarly, a GR Yaris that was released for homologation purposes, as it's Toyota's WRC rally platform.
    People say similar things about Civics, because their only experience is with the base models, but higher trim levels add a lot of power (over 300hp on the Type R), and Honda understands weight and handling well. My Civic Sport Touring is a hybrid with 200hp, instantaneous torque from the electric motor, and only about 3200lb curb weight. (And it gets a solid 45mpg no matter what mix of highway or city driving I do.)
iamronaldo · 1790888212 · focus · HN ↗
Not to take away from the point but wow absolute ai slop of a website
1. trickypr · 1790889358 · focus · HN ↗
  I think it does take away from the point. I could not be bothered trying to filter the information out of whatever this llm layout is.
2. esafak · 1790890998 · focus · HN ↗
  Just read the paper instead: <a href="https://automatictransmission.khoury.northeastern.edu/paper.html" rel="nofollow">https://automatictransmission.khoury.northeastern.edu/paper....
3. Marsymars · 1790893046 · focus · HN ↗
  Yeah, my AI-slop detector isn't very good, but this one really jumped out at me.
  I'd just look at the Consumer Reports page: <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/personal-information/your-car-is-sharing-data-with-big-tech-companies-study-finds-a4474820962/" rel="nofollow">https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/personal-informa...
newspaper1 · 1790888273 · focus · HN ↗
I don't trust any of my devices anymore (including/especially my car). At the very least I figure that they're spying on me. In the most extreme cases, such as Israel's terrorist pager attack, they may even kill you.
I wonder if this is going to create a market for older tech/vehicles that were made prior to ease-of-malware integration? I imagine some sort of cyberpunk future where people are scouring landfills for old 16-bit video game console chips that haven't been backdoored.
1. Ccecil · 1790889597 · focus · HN ↗
  I was kinda wondering the same. Only issue will be when insurance companies refuse to insure you because they can't get the "commonly available" data.
  1. newspaper1 · 1790889981 · focus · HN ↗
    Good point, the best bet is probably to move to a walkable city and get an e-bike that you put together yourself.
2. matltc · 1790890473 · focus · HN ↗
  I feel seen. I used to think rms was just a crank, but maybe he was right all along: I increasingly treat any closed-source software (and even some open-source--vscode for instance) as hostile and untrusted.
3. asdff · 1790891756 · focus · HN ↗
  Wouldn't be surprised if in a few decades you see the ultra elite start favoring older maybe early 2010s at most cars. The risk surface of a modern car is astounding. I mean cellular connection and drive by wire, screw planting a car bomb, you just steer it off a cliff from your arm chair halfway across the world and it looks like an honest accident to boot. The old cars on the other hand are airgapped. You actually need physical access to sabotage them. Risk surface is so much lower.
  1. mahboi · 1790893926 · focus · HN ↗
    I like to think of myself as ultra-elite driving my Crown Vic PI
  2. rootusrootus · 1790894631 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    asdff · 1791129547 · focus · HN ↗
    They go low tech in other ways as it is. Tech ceos banning their children from their own products for example, because they know the efforts being spent making these products psychologically harmful of course. But still, their solution is not some alternative, but abstention.
4. antonvs · 1790895089 · focus · HN ↗
  > Israel's terrorist pager attack
  Terrorist Israel’s pager attack.
  1. newspaper1 · 1790898404 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah, bad phrasing on my part. This is what I meant.
5. userbinator · 1790910108 · focus · HN ↗
  I wonder if this is going to create a market for older tech/vehicles that were made prior to ease-of-malware integration?
  The classic car (after)market is as big as ever.
6. illiac786 · 1791192088 · focus · HN ↗
  Maybe, but the emissions of older vehicles are, on average, very high when compared to newer ones. I expect it will be difficult/expensive to continue driving one.
hattar · 1790888358 · focus · HN ↗
I currently drive a mid 2000s Ford truck, which runs great and meets my needs, but lately I got interested in minivans/people carriers. I pretty quickly realized that newer vehicles seem to not just record, but export a lot of driving data.
The minivan market is small. There are really only 4-5 available and every single one sends telemetry data from the car and makes it hard/impossible to opt out of selling your data. Additionally, without pretty extensive work there is no means of physically disabling the telemetry, which forces you to trust they'll honor your opt out request (vs re-enabling it with some update).
I'm clearly in the vast minority on this, but it's so frustrating that there are no options beyond buying and installing a third-party bypass to disable this type of tracking. Worse, I'm aware that the absence of data is data itself. Is my insurance going raise my rates because my vehicle won't provide telemetry for them to buy?
1. mistrial9 · 1790888986 · focus · HN ↗
  > absence of data is data itself
  oh that is endless.. if you are aware enough to do something about telemetry IMHO do that and don't obsess about loose ends.
  1. helterskelter2 · 1790889971 · focus · HN ↗
    I wonder how easy it would be to spoof the data sent back. Either with SQL injections, LLM prompt modification, or just thousands of goatse images.
    Iolaum · 1790890678 · focus · HN ↗
    And risk having lawyers after you?
    tejtm · 1790892931 · focus · HN ↗
    I am pretty sure goatse does not have lawers and the RIAA disavows their collection
    antonvs · 1790894824 · focus · HN ↗
    What exactly are lawyers going to do?
    It’s foolish to be afraid of nonexistent threats.
    MrDrMcCoy · 1790916464 · focus · HN ↗
    Spoofing is all well and fine, but you can do more. Put as much bandwidth through that modem as possible. Those connections are meant for light data telemetry and their carrier agreement probably has caps. All the better and more expensive for them if they don't.
2. sippingabonedry · 1790889053 · focus · HN ↗
  Ford until recently sold a minivan that was ugly as sin (looked like an '87 Vanagon) because it was a panel van with seats added. They are popular with the campervan community.
  As it was essentially a commercial vehicle meant for upfitters turning them into work vans for electricians and plumbers, it would probably be easiest of all to disable telemetry.
  From what I can find, permanently disabling FordPass at the hardware level is as simple as unplugging the cell modem or pulling its fuse.
  1. renjimen · 1790890582 · focus · HN ↗
    I have the Ford Transit Connect "Wagon". It's a 2016 model with no internet connectivity. It can fit a double mattress in the back and is tall enough to sit up on the bed, unlike nearly every SUV. I cannot recommend it enough for an everyday vehicle that doubles as a camper.
    Of course, Ford discontinued this model in North America because their margins are better on trucks and SUVs.
    As for the aesthetics, we really like it. It's certainly a darn sight better looking than a truck or SUV, which are all aggressive-looking pedestrian killers.
    sippingabonedry · 1790891811 · focus · HN ↗
    That's the one.
    It's reminiscent of the time when vans were vans — but it shares most of its parts with the Focus so should be relatively easy to maintain and repair.
    rootusrootus · 1790893751 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    sippingabonedry · 1790894845 · focus · HN ↗
    The dual-clutch disaster?
    It does not.
    fingerlocks · 1790931080 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes, the transmission too. Never buy a used connect from a person that used it in the trades.
    aduty · 1790939873 · focus · HN ↗
    Fix or recall daily cares not for how it was abused.
    [deleted] · 1790959795 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
  2. duskdozer · 1790921312 · focus · HN ↗
    What I hate about this is that there is a minimal amount of connectivity that I would actually want. If there was a bad crash and I'm incapacitated, I would want emergency services to be called. But I want basically nothing else. Well unless you count an FM radio 'connectivity' I guess. I hate the coercive tactics so many modern tech devices use.
3. helterskelter2 · 1790889825 · focus · HN ↗
  I know some models of Ford allow you to pull the modem out. It doesn't even nag you about a connection problem.
4. detourdog · 1790890007 · focus · HN ↗
  By a slightly used one that has a 3g modem. My 2018 car no longer can phone home.
  1. asdff · 1790890949 · focus · HN ↗
    That is interesting that they fail safe and don't just brick the car though. Maybe you can still go with a newer car but just wrap the antennae in foil or maybe just unplug it.
    sippingabonedry · 1790892067 · focus · HN ↗
    Seems you can unplug it and it won't complain or anything:
    <a href="https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/disabling-fordpass-telematics.340381/" rel="nofollow">https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/disabling-fordpass...
    Rebelgecko · 1790892174 · focus · HN ↗
    IIRC, some brand (maybe Subaru?) had a problem where the car would drain its 12v after a few hours retrying its search for 3g towers
    sippingabonedry · 1790892473 · focus · HN ↗
    Subarus would do that if you left the dome light on.
    slices · 1790946691 · focus · HN ↗
    yep. my mom's subaru ate several batteries due to this problem. She traded it in.
    MrDrMcCoy · 1790916175 · focus · HN ↗
    There are 50ohm antenna pigtails for just such a purpose.
    intrasight · 1790942785 · focus · HN ↗
    > just brick the car
    Consumer protections are strong enough to prevent that from happening.
    My vehicle of choice for the last 16 years has been the Volvo XC70 which, since it was last manufactured in 2016, only ever had 3G modems, which no longer work. It's luxurious, a great form-factor, safe and reliable, and can be had for less than $10K. The one I'm driving now was the proverbial old lady vehicle. It had only 30,000 miles on it when I bought it three years ago. It could be the last vehicle I ever owned since they're good for 200k miles.
    Funny story on my previous XC70. I sell my cars through a classic car restorer that also does consignment sales. The manager there wanted another vehicle, so he made me an offer directly which I accepted. I let them have the vehicle for a few days before the transaction. He called me and asked when the last time I changed the oil was. I said that I have no idea. He said it appears that there's no oil in the engine. That's how robust those old Volvo engines are. He went through with the transaction and is still driving it.
    Apologies for the long sales pitch on old vehicles and specifically Volvos, LOL.
    detourdog · 1790949446 · focus · HN ↗
    I started with 850 wagon and progressed to xc70. I loved those car but wanted an electric.
    intrasight · 1790959216 · focus · HN ↗
    I want an electric too, but between also wanting a cheap car and one that doesn't spy on me, I just feel I have no choice but to stick to these older vehicles
    ls612 · 1791132828 · focus · HN ↗
    State level consumer protections don’t protect you from federal “this software is licensed not sold”
    detourdog · 1790949558 · focus · HN ↗
    It’s scary that in this day and age we are surprised when the big corps don’t brick products that impede advertising.
    kortilla · 1791046582 · focus · HN ↗
    You do know that places don’t have cell phone coverage at all still, right?
    detourdog · 1791142771 · focus · HN ↗
    I live in place that coverage frequently disappears.
  2. ThinkingGuy · 1790893680 · focus · HN ↗
    This is the way.
5. renjimen · 1790890864 · focus · HN ↗
  If you don't mind used, the Ford Transit Connect Wagon is an excellent option for an everyday vehicle that doubles as a camper. We have one and love it. It fits a double mattress with plenty of headroom room to sit up in bed. Ford discontinued it in 2023, hence the used requirement, but I believe you can turn off the internet connectivity on that model. We have a 2016 model (still going strong after 150,000km!) which has no internet connectivity, thankfully.
6. chimpanzee · 1790891749 · focus · HN ↗
  > Is my insurance going raise my rates because my vehicle won't provide telemetry for them to buy?
  Next step...synthetic but plausible data poisoning crafted to reduce your rates
7. Barbing · 1790892965 · focus · HN ↗
  > Is my insurance going raise my rates because my vehicle won't provide telemetry for them to buy?
  Thanks, I hate it.
  1. kulahan · 1790893512 · focus · HN ↗
    Already happening. To get the lowest rates from some companies, you have to install monitoring software in your car. We missed the boat on this one.
    One example: if you don’t get it from State Farm, you can pay 30% more in insurance costs.
    <a href="https://www.statefarm.com/insurance/auto/discounts/drive-safe-save" rel="nofollow">https://www.statefarm.com/insurance/auto/discounts/drive-saf...
    SoftTalker · 1790895019 · focus · HN ↗
    A bargain.
    hansvm · 1790895482 · focus · HN ↗
    I tried using an older version of that program, and it was especially annoying because it only worked if you let it monitor and phone home continuously, not just while driving. If the app couldn't steal your information often enough, you were disqualified from the program, stating that it assumed you were hiding some driving activity.
  2. m463 · 1790895457 · focus · HN ↗
    You can get tesla insurance and it monitors your driving.
    If you do not agree to this monitoring, they will not insure you.
    kridsdale1 · 1790908550 · focus · HN ↗
    Tape over it.
    MrDrMcCoy · 1790916594 · focus · HN ↗
    Replace the camera feed with a looping video stream.
    techdmn · 1790951378 · focus · HN ↗
    I taped over all my Tesla cameras (except the backup camera). The real issue was that the person I'm teaching to drive kept checking the screen for things like where to stop at a stop sign, or to see if the car thought they were too close to the curb. Couldn't have that.
    Responses are typical: "That's so unsafe!" Imagine the response if they ever learned I routinely ride a motorcycle that doesn't even have ABS!
    Then we get to the security aspect. I'm supposed to trust cameras, connected to the internet, on closed-source hardware, run by a vendor that has a history of misusing the data? No thanks.
    Barbing · 1791072524 · focus · HN ↗
    Losing the cruise control you’d’ve’d [some form of] in a ten+ year old car? Big respect (serious!).
    Rohansi · 1791135852 · focus · HN ↗
    > Responses are typical: "That's so unsafe!" Imagine the response if they ever learned I routinely ride a motorcycle that doesn't even have ABS!
    I'll repeat that. Depending on the model+year of your car you lose out on a lot of safety features, possibly even automatic emergency braking because they had no radar for a while. If you were ever in an accident the fact that the safety features were deliberately disabled may be used against you.
    It makes more sense just removing the SIM so they can't get anything. They even have instructions on how to do that in the manual.
8. kulahan · 1790893588 · focus · HN ↗
  > Worse, I'm aware that the absence of data is data itself.
  The Burrow, Franz Kafka
9. cucumber3732842 · 1790896201 · focus · HN ↗
  > Is my insurance going raise my rates because my vehicle won't provide telemetry for them to buy?
  They will do it and some sneering POS in the comments will defend the practice.
  1. sounds · 1791138070 · focus · HN ↗
    It's already happening. Nationwide offers a discount if you agree they get to use the data feed that is already wired to them - they specifically name Toyota as the brand that delivers your driving information automatically. On other manufacturers you get the discount if you enable their app while driving (ironic, since cell phone use is strongly tied to worse driving outcomes)
10. sjducb · 1790949604 · focus · HN ↗
  > Additionally, without pretty extensive work there is no means of physically disabling the telemetry
  My car has a fuse for the antenna module. You can remove this fuse to block all data transfer. Have a look at the fuse box diagrams for the minivans you are interested in.
11. sounds · 1791137966 · focus · HN ↗
  The connectivity may not be fully disabled in a 2025 Acura Integra, but there is a way to disable data sharing. You then have a permanent yellow "nag icon" top right on your infotainment screen, but the spying is "disabled."
  I posted this originally in the other discussion: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49956395">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49956395
bnc319 · 1790888407 · focus · HN ↗
While the researchers noted Tesla as having privacy options that can be enabled in the car’s settings, they didn’t seem to test how this changes the # of ATA results. Would have been interesting to see how enabling privacy features changes things.
1. slowin · 1790888516 · focus · HN ↗
  I wouldn't trust anything Tesla says:
  <a href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
  1. filoleg · 1790888815 · focus · HN ↗
    The grandparent comment doesn't talk about anything Tesla (the company) says. They are sharing findings from independent researchers.
  2. judge2020 · 1790888890 · focus · HN ↗
    This was taken while the data privacy option was enabled. An employee going against policy and sharing it in slack for non-work related reasons does not change whether or not the toggle actually stops x camera from sending data back to the mothership.
gwbas1c · 1790888540 · focus · HN ↗
This seems like something that needs legislation to address.
1. attila-lendvai · 1790889364 · focus · HN ↗
  good luck!
  sadly, politicians are very happy about the centralization of power... they are the same team with the corporations.
2. goodmythical · 1790889633 · focus · HN ↗
  I'm sure that will go about as well as protecting the privacy of individuals in the face of "but the CHILDREN!" age verification.
  In-vehicle monitoring allows car manufacturers to remind the user to buckle up, keep their eyes on the road, stay off their phones, remind them to take breaks, turn the radio down in tense traffic, remind the driver to take a breath based on increased heart rate to minimize road rage, etc.
  Heck, we could really reduce lack of seatbelt related injuries and deaths if we could eliminate the 'drive' function while seatbelts are not properly worn (which we can now check with our AI cameras )
  What are you some kind of anti-safe-driving nut?
  1. mahboi · 1790893132 · focus · HN ↗
    All new cars in the EU really have in-vehicle monitoring reminding you to keep your eyes on the road
    rootusrootus · 1790894167 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
  2. lotsofpulp · 1790894626 · focus · HN ↗
    >What are you some kind of anti-safe-driving nut?
    What are you some kind of anti-kids-being-able-to-roam nut?
    Huge and tall vehicles and distracted and drunk drivers have made prisoners of anyone not in a car in much of the USA. Loss of freedom for people in cars is an acceptable price to regain freedom for people outside of cars.
    Maybe drivers will stop distracted driving and be responsible with their freedom when the camera shows them looking at their phone while they mow down a pedestrian or bicyclist and they can be charged with manslaughter.
    broadside1296 · 1790949790 · focus · HN ↗
    I think it's supposed to be sarcasm, judging by the first line.
    goodmythical · 1791079241 · focus · HN ↗
    Thank you for your reading comprehension.
    goodmythical · 1791080819 · focus · HN ↗
    >Loss of freedom for people in cars is an acceptable price to regain freedom for people outside of cars.
    I am an active cyclist who rides at least five times a week.
    I'll take the bait. Why is the freedom of the cyclist more valuable than the freedom of the driver?
    Restricting the freedom of the cyclist such that they cannot expose themselves to the danger of the driver would have the same result, in terms of incident safety, as restricting the freedom of the driver such that they cannot pose a threat to the cyclist.
    In fact, given that there are so many more drivers than cyclists, restricting freedoms of cyclists is the correct move given that you are then creating less loss of freedom.
    Where is the camera requirement for the cyclist? Why shouldn't the cyclist be required to have always on cameras to prove that they checked before swerving out of the bike lane to avoid a door rather than braking? Does the cyclist who decided to enter an underused right-on-red cross walk at speed not bare some of the responsibility? Shouldn't they have looked over to see if anyone was in the turning lane and brake accordingly? A law that says they have the right of way will do them no good in their grave.
    I, as a cyclist, do not need the government to keep me safe. I understand that I am sharing a space with multiple objects that could kill me at any moment for almost any reason. There is no law that will protect me in my privileged lane if the vehicle I am casually riding beside has a blowout. There is no law that will save my life if I decide to rush out in to a crosswalk the moment it's green if an oncoming driver is having a stroke/heart attack. I behave according to the full knowledge and understanding that I am choosing to be in a dangerous space that I can mitigate the danger of through my actions. Knowing that the driver has cameras watching them and may face some extra future liability would change nothing. The threat posed by a camera of them going to jail or paying a fine will only marginally improve their behavior and will do literally nothing for my broken bones or dead body.
    lotsofpulp · 1791120857 · focus · HN ↗
    >I'll take the bait. Why is the freedom of the cyclist more valuable than the freedom of the driver?
    It isn’t.
    goodmythical · 1791143800 · focus · HN ↗
    How'd the life in jail thing pan out for the war on drugs?
    People are already risking their actual life with distracted driving. Many and perhaps all of us know someone who died, killed someone, was injured, or injured someone else because of distracted driving. There is already a threat associated with the event. They could literally die. There is no greater threat. Adding fines or jail does not increase the threat and so provides no further disincentive against the behavior. I've already agreed that there may be some reduction in the behavior, but at what cost?
    I do not want companies and governments to watch every moment of every driver either passively or actively using either machines or humans in the name of potentially protecting me from a distracted driver due to the increased likelihood that they go to jail. I do not want companies recording personal conversations of all drivers always just in case they happen to not check their blind spot. It would make me as a cyclist feel bad knowing that I've subjected millions to continual surveillance for my safety. The camera would have to be on at all times in order to detect the distracted driving in order to alert the driver. It could, I suppose, take pictures instead of recording video but then the detection would not function as well. It could all be done locally to the vehicle and never uploaded. If uploaded, there could be a deletion policy with strict access controls, but there is so much money to be made with recording and saving the data to sell to insurers and ad companies and machine learning companies and...
    In the US alone you're asking that consumers be forced to spend millions of dollars between the added cost of the R&D, cameras, and storage (and more if you want it local to the vehicle) in order to be subjected to hundreds of billions of hours of surveillance annually (assuming all cars have cameras on all the time). I do not want to live in a world in which we speed-run having our every thought and action recorded in the off-chance we do something wrong. I do not believe that common citizens should exist under constant scrutiny. If there is life after death and I die by the hands of another I will not ever once think "gee, I wish there'd been a camera to save me"
    While we're adding continual video monitoring, why don't we add a few other just-in-case protections? Why shouldn't every vehicle have breath alcohol ignition interlock devices? Who could object other than precisely those we wish to prevent from driving? And we've already got cameras on the outside, why shouldn't we make drivers perform a safety inspection to make sure their lights, blinkers, and hazards are working? Surely it's no burden to ensure the safety of your fellow drivers? And of course there's no legitimate reason for a civilian vehicle to travel over the speed limit, and we've already got on-board GPS, so why shouldn't all vehicles have GPS speed governors? Sure, we all like speeding, but that's not fair to all victims so we'll just go ahead and eliminate that as a possibility.
    While we're doing the cameras, why stop at the inside of a vehicle? Why stop on the outside of your door? We could have a nice gentle dinging noise to remind people that the domestic violence they are committing is currently being recorded. Millions of crimes are committed inside homes, and many murders happen in homes. People are wrongly convicted of crimes that didn't happen (where the 'victim' really did just fall down the stairs), after all. A single camera could save those wrongfully accused from wrongful imprisonment! What a deal!
    We have the ability to drastically reduce all sorts of crimes. All it costs is treating everyone like a criminal at all times et voilà!
  3. hansvm · 1790896001 · focus · HN ↗
    There's a certain irony in a touchscreen modal popping up to tell you to keep your eyes on the road.
    goodmythical · 1791078985 · focus · HN ↗
    I love the billboards reminding me to keep my eyes on the road that are excessively loud and eye-catching.
    Like, mate, who's side are you on?
  4. gwbas1c · 1790947464 · focus · HN ↗
    What does that have to do with sending telematics to 3rd parties? All that stuff runs on the car.
    Our (US) legislation might be dysfunctional, but they aren't that stupid and gullible.
    chaps · 1790953098 · focus · HN ↗
    Sadly, yes they kinda are. Government agencies regularly buy feeds of this data for traffic/safety analysis. In the eyes of a lot of people working on these systems, it's often very much life or death because not doing analysis on it means more vehicle deaths. When I've talked to the folk who've worked on these systems, they entirely believe that the data is anonymous, so they don't see it as a privacy infringement.
3. milkytron · 1790889743 · focus · HN ↗
  Until people care about this, there is no reason for our representatives to limit it.
  1. hellon3wheels · 1790890234 · focus · HN ↗
    Just like video store rental history, I bet they'll start caring about privacy if/when it begins affecting them personally
4. mahboi · 1790974995 · focus · HN ↗
  I wonder if automakers could get behind this. There's pressure to monetize driving habits to stay competitive, but do they really want to put in that effort, or would they prefer everyone agree not to?
ourmandave · 1790888668 · focus · HN ↗
Ha ha, you fools! No one is collecting my data from my 22-year-old Scion while I drive past Flock cameras every day.
Wait...
1. eckelhesten · 1790889602 · focus · HN ↗
  There’s “oh he’s at the grocery store” data,
  and then there’s “he’s driving in a way we don’t like, let’s make him pay more for his insurance” data.
  1. asdff · 1790891176 · focus · HN ↗
    Don't forget the banal in comparison "we've locked him out of hardware already installed in the car with a perpetual software license check"
    Barbing · 1790893606 · focus · HN ↗
    Mm, I don’t really care about that, at least assuming it can partially-counterintuitively lower the manufacturing cost of a car by a penny or two.
    Computer chips [used to?] end up getting nerfed and it saves resources/saves us all money. I can get over it, even though normally “the principle of the thing“ is a really big deal for me.
    OK it does stink for the used car market actually.
  2. SoftTalker · 1790895447 · focus · HN ↗
    Well if you're driving dangerously why shouldn't you pay more?
    hansvm · 1790895849 · focus · HN ↗
    Part of the problem is it just gets shoved into a model without enough data support. So I hit the gas hard merging onto the freeway? Of course; your brakes are much more powerful than your throttle if you need to take evasive action, and merging onto the freeway at 50mph is dangerous. The model just sees that you like keeping your foot on the gas from time to time. To keep your rates low you have to drive more dangerously, and that's not the sort of incentive structure I like to participate in.
    SoftTalker · 1790899660 · focus · HN ↗
    You generally don't need to hit the gas hard to merge onto a freeway, you need to accelerate evenly on the ramp and be at 65-70 by the time you get to the merge point, being aware of traffic and where the gap is that you're going to merge into, and hitting it.
    And occasionally having to hit the gas or brake hard is not going to raise your rate. They look for more of a pattern than that. If you're always braking hard and then accellerating hard, surging and changing lanes, consistently speeding, etc. that's going to be the trigger and what do you know, that's also the kind of driving that causes crashes.
    themaninthedark · 1790957333 · focus · HN ↗
    Depends, ever merge from a cloverleaf?
    gessha · 1790961701 · focus · HN ↗
    Do you think car manufacturers hire people who can program or even care to program this stuff into the tracking? Knowing some of the people who those tasks get outsourced to, the answer is no.
    User drives through grass which the sensors detect as hard collision. Gettem, NexusLexus!
    Do you think insurers care to differentiate between those things? Looking at the equivalent behavior from UnitedHealth and their auto claim rejection behavior, my guess is also no.
    Any data collected about you can be and will be used against you.
    mahboi · 1790970641 · focus · HN ↗
    South Bay Area onramps are notoriously short. My amount of "aggressive" acceleration decreased a lot simply from moving somewhere with a different freeway onramp on my way to work. A lot of drivers there also stop on onramps, which is why I started leaving huge gaps.
    The general issue with these ML models is they will more accurately predict outcomes than not using them, but not in a fair way.
    mahboi · 1790975502 · focus · HN ↗
    South Bay Area freeway onramps are notoriously short. My amount of "aggressive" acceleration decreased a lot just from moving. I used to also have to maintain huge gaps in case the driver in front stops on the onramp, which happened every other day.
    The thing about these models is they do increase accuracy, just not in a fair way.
    iamnothere · 1790896259 · focus · HN ↗
    You already do if crashes or tickets show that you’re a bad driver.
    Insurance company profits are not a valid reason to implement pervasive surveillance, especially given all the potential for abuse of this data.
    mahboi · 1790971161 · focus · HN ↗
    They even assume dangerous driving based on purchasing certain car models or being a young male
    mahboi · 1790974459 · focus · HN ↗
    Also not even sure if insurance companies want this. Car insurance is a pretty competitive market. If surveillance is allowed, all of them have to do it to stay competitive.
    somehnguy · 1790912420 · focus · HN ↗
    There is a massive difference between "driving in a way they don't like" and "driving dangerously". The former does not imply the latter.
  3. cucumber3732842 · 1790896351 · focus · HN ↗
    More like "we can't prove he's driving in a way we like so we'll make him pay more for insurance"
  4. pyaamb · 1790896600 · focus · HN ↗
    Meanwhile Grocery chains: "lets buy that data so we know whats inconvenient for him at any moment and price accordingly"
  5. mahboi · 1790975566 · focus · HN ↗
    I feel like people are talking about this as a hypothetical. Driving monitoring for insurance is already legal and practiced in every(?) US state besides California. Glad my state is holding out.
2. unethical_ban · 1790893098 · focus · HN ↗
  The fight is on multiple fronts.
3. doctorpangloss · 1790956435 · focus · HN ↗
  people put a 24h mass surveillance device into their pockets, put it next to them while they sleep, and put all their most personal correspondence online anyway.
stego-tech · 1790889036 · focus · HN ↗
When I buy an EV, one of the first things I intend to do is disable or block the chips using Wi-Fi and/or cellular from broadcasting further. If that means a faraday shield around the computers in question, so be it.
Everything I need can be handled via CarPlay or physical dials/buttons in the vehicle. All this surveillance - on post-COVID priced vehicles no less, averaging ~$50k - is absurd, and I refuse to engage with it.
1. xelaboi · 1790890301 · focus · HN ↗
  Some cars you can just pull the fuse on the ECU with the modem.
2. drnick1 · 1790892319 · focus · HN ↗
  This is the right way to deal with the problem. I would simply pull the fuse or unplug the cellular modem though.
3. waz0wski · 1790913289 · focus · HN ↗
  This doesn't stop the vehicle from recording telemetry, just transmitting it
  Take your car to a dealership for service and one of the first things their software does is download all of the data and phone it home
  1. kotaKat · 1790963728 · focus · HN ↗
    The second thing they do is punch all of your information into their computers anyways to be slurped up by Carfax and company, so everyone knows you got an oil change and tire rotation anyways, as a bonus.
    (Third thing is filling out an online form to re-activate your dead SiriusXM system in your vehicle as a "3 month free trial" as a "gift" for coming in today...)
kazinator · 1790889336 · focus · HN ↗
[delayed]
tartoran · 1790889489 · focus · HN ↗
Hope to see a new market for disabling telemetry and phonehome features from cars. It should be legal to do so, if you own the car I suppose. I'm thinking that rigth now few pople even know how much spying their new car does to them but this will change and as awareness grows more and more people will want to do it.
1. hellon3wheels · 1790890090 · focus · HN ↗
  I'd rather see it as a standard feature than as a new market.
  1. tartoran · 1790949550 · focus · HN ↗
    Sure, that goes without saying. But the current direction of anticonsumer surveillance seems to be going in a different direction. While waiting for the pendullum to hit back we can take it into our own hands and protect ourselves.
mahboi · 1790889739 · focus · HN ↗
```
  if an owner decides they are uncomfortable with the data sharing described within them, they are faced with (arguably) unfair choices:
  - 01 accept the agreements regardless of their concerns
  - 02 stop using their car&#x27;s connected-vehicle features - which includes remote start, the app, and other very useful features
  - 03 stop using the vehicle entirely
```
Easy, I take #2. Is that it? This whole time I thought the article was talking about telemetry the car sends regardless.
1. hollow-moe · 1790889939 · focus · HN ↗
  Like #2 prevents the spying. Let's ask some smart TV brands executives their opinion on the matter.
  1. mahboi · 1790890208 · focus · HN ↗
    Smart TVs need wifi to be smart though. The cars have cell modems.
    bluGill · 1790940597 · focus · HN ↗
    For now, a cell modem is very cheap. I would not be surprised if they started including them in the near future. Of course data on a cell modem is going to be expensive, so you're not going to get any of the smart features, but that is still enough that they can get all the tracking they want back and send ads back to you.
  2. TheBozzCL · 1790891403 · focus · HN ↗
    "We own the infotainment system"
    I've thought about what I can possibly do if I ever need to buy a modern car. Bring my own cell phone tower spoofer? Threaten to not buy the car if they don't disconnect the antennas first?
    It's good that these things are starting to catch the public's interest. Gamers' Nexus' exposé on LG TVs. The lawsuits against car manufacturers for selling driving data (indirectly) to insurance companies. The pushback against Flock. I wonder what else is needed to actually move the needle globally.
    I see a good sign in that Gen Alpha seems to find using disconnected devices to be trendy. I hope it's a trend that stays long term.
    rpcope1 · 1790926254 · focus · HN ↗
    I mean I would suspect (and suggest) rebuilding older stuff, as honestly the cars from 10+ years ago are in many, many ways better built and more reliable, but don't ask me why I know this, but with certain LLM assistance, an absolute boatload of modification and RE on newer cars has become much more tractable, including reworking the telemetry. I'm not a lawyer all stunts were performed by a professional on a closed course.
    bluGill · 1790940518 · focus · HN ↗
    If you don't mind a rusted out car, you can certainly keep them running for a long time. However, you want a nice car? Well, that's a different story. An assembly line is so much more efficient than manual labor that a brand new car is cheaper than rebuilding an old car. When you talk to car collectors you discover that either they have done a huge amount of labor themselves and they have no clue how much that would cost if they would pay someone or yeah they're paying someone and you discover that they they are paying more than new cars to keep this show only car in a perfect condition.
    TheBozzCL · 1790981694 · focus · HN ↗
    Ohoho that actually sounds like a cool weekend (multiple?) project. Almost makes me want to go buy a new car.
  3. sexeriy237 · 1790900515 · focus · HN ↗
    they still steal the data
2. technothrasher · 1790889964 · focus · HN ↗
  I have essentially gone with option 2 in my Audi A3. Every time I turn the car on, it puts up a dialog that warns me that I've made the terrible, terrible decision to not allow remote data and forces me to say, "no, do not turn it on for me now," before I can do anything else on the screen. Every, single, time.
  1. mahboi · 1790890890 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah I'd probably RPG the car at that point
  2. mahboi · 1790891196 · focus · HN ↗
    Disappointing but not surprising. Those touchscreen interfaces are usually terrible. Every time I rent a car, I try to get the cheapest thing because I know it'll have the fewest barriers to letting me listen to FM radio. So far my favorite is the Nissan Versa.
    dublin · 1790896229 · focus · HN ↗
    I long for a future in which we can do what we did 20 years ago, when we just had double-DIN radio sockets in the dash so we could just choose, buy, and upgrade the car's stereo and touchscreen/phone interface at will.
    mahboi · 1790896943 · focus · HN ↗
    Is that not a thing anymore? I'm out of the loop. My 2010 Vic has a 1.5-DIN socket and I did replace the radio, it's super nice.
    yearolinuxdsktp · 1790904504 · focus · HN ↗
    Not really, not even “you need a dash kit” situation, because HVAC controls and other essentials are now integrated with the radio.
    mahboi · 1790911741 · focus · HN ↗
    Makes sense. Even cars that don't have those nasty touchscreen HVAC controls will have other car settings in the onscreen system.
  3. eitally · 1790891535 · focus · HN ↗
    This, but worse, happened with my inlaws when they purchased a new Lexus (IIRC, a 2025 RX350). It has whatever kind of built in navigation & traffic feature but they wanted to use Android Auto. You can do that, but not until after you go through Lexus' vehicle/driver registration process to enable their built in system. If you don't, not only will neither AA nor CarPlay work, but if you try to use the built in nav it will fail with a superimposed modal after a couple of minutes to nag you into creating an account.
    SoftTalker · 1790895251 · focus · HN ↗
    I'd return the car if it were me.
    mahboi · 1790896005 · focus · HN ↗
    This is what RPGs are for
    jacquesm · 1790930206 · focus · HN ↗
    I think that makes it qualify as defective if this wasn't disclosed prior to purchase.
    bradknowles · 1791076421 · focus · HN ↗
    Rip out the factory display and put in a third party one that doesn’t have the telemetry.
  4. MrDrMcCoy · 1790916669 · focus · HN ↗
    You trust that they aren't sending data anyway?
    HPsquared · 1790936552 · focus · HN ↗
    Corporations don't usually expose themselves to lawsuits like that.
    Xirdus · 1790945781 · focus · HN ↗
    See: LG.
    voakbasda · 1790951784 · focus · HN ↗
    Well, that’s just patently false. Corporations make risk calculations, and they are perfectly willing to expose themselves to lawsuits when their calculus shows that it will be profitable for them to do so. This is why so many companies appear completely unphased when being fined millions of dollars; they can make billions of dollars in profit while the court cases drag on. Heck, I’m pretty sure that’s a central part of the business model for some SV startups (Uber, Airbnb, etc). Disruption, baby!
    unrented7977 · 1791034353 · focus · HN ↗
    You're right, which is why they include forced arbitration clauses to prevent you from exercising your legal rights to sue them into following the law.
    Since you won't go through forced arbitration and the arbiter will always agree with the company, they are not exposed to your petty legal action and are free to do whatever the hell they want, regardless of whether it's legal.
    coin · 1791159997 · focus · HN ↗
    See <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
3. pluc · 1790892361 · focus · HN ↗
  On top of that you must never take it for servicing at a dealership since that's another point they can do a data export if your car isn't always-on.
4. chakintosh · 1790938947 · focus · HN ↗
  Not to mention, to get access to many of these apps, you have to pay for them. So basically you're paying an exorbitant yearly amount and your data is still going to be exfiltrated.
jamesforestwest · 1790889907 · focus · HN ↗
It's so annoying, actually. I’d rather not switch to a newer car because of it.
1. mahboi · 1790890100 · focus · HN ↗
  I hate everything about newer cars except for the power/efficiency. Willing to burn some more gas (er actually E85 :D) to not deal with it.
YuccaGloriosa · 1790890041 · focus · HN ↗
And this is without even looking at any Chinese manufactured vehicles...
hn937758 · 1790890625 · focus · HN ↗
I was gifted a 90's ford pickup from a family member and plan to get caught up on maintenance and keep it forever. It runs fine and has been a good project. No telemetry and easy to work on.
1. unethical_ban · 1790893170 · focus · HN ↗
  Try replacing the power steering pump or the thermostat...
  Probably easier than any new car, but dang they made some odd design choices when they laid out that engine. Or try pulling the oil filter from a 302 with 4WD.
  1. carefree-bob · 1790893426 · focus · HN ↗
    I gotta take the intake manifold off to replace my thermostat :(
    cucumber3732842 · 1790896556 · focus · HN ↗
    Half of it. And the easy half not the hard half.
    carefree-bob · 1790994534 · focus · HN ↗
    What do you mean half of it? I have a straight six, the intake manifold is one big (plastic) piece. The exhaust manifold is in two parts, though.
  2. rootusrootus · 1790894374 · focus · HN ↗
    There are some other fun ones, too. I had an F150 in 2014 with the ecoboost 3.5, and the oil filter was directly above the control arm. So they put in a deflector over that to keep it from just running onto the arm itself. Still really messy and inconvenient.
    Traded that truck for a Lightning, now I haven't really thought about the inconvenient design decisions around oil filters in a while.
sb057 · 1790891463 · focus · HN ↗
...Adobe? What interest do they have in data harvesting so much from vehicles?
1. warkdarrior · 1790899480 · focus · HN ↗
  They have an ad network. See <a href="https://business.adobe.com/products/advertising.html" rel="nofollow">https://business.adobe.com/products/advertising.html
delta_p_delta_x · 1790892350 · focus · HN ↗
[delayed]
1. SoftTalker · 1790895895 · focus · HN ↗
  The Germans are familiar with how personal data can be misused.
zhyder · 1790892409 · focus · HN ↗
So except for Tesla, which sends lots of telemetry regardless, other manufacturers send little if you don't use their companion apps. The companion apps already seemed excessive to me; even more reason to kick them to the curb.
blakeashleyjr · 1790892506 · focus · HN ↗
I've been on GrapheneOS for over 3 years and won't look back.
1. caymanjim · 1790914803 · focus · HN ↗
  Has your car been on GrapheneOS? If not, I'm not sure what your point is.
drnick1 · 1790892507 · focus · HN ↗
It's sad that the paper does not mention even once a straightforward solution, which is to pull the cellular modem's fuse or to outright unplug it.
AstralSerenity · 1790894799 · focus · HN ↗
Interesting to see how this has evolved. Mozilla had conducted a detailed investigation on this topic by carmaker a few years ago: <a href="https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare-on-wheels-every-car-brand-reviewed-by-mozilla-including-ford-volkswagen-and-toyota-flunks-privacy-test/" rel="nofollow">https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare-...
1. jacquesm · 1790930763 · focus · HN ↗
  Maybe they should have maintained the high ground then.
  <a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&channel=entpr&q=mozilla+privacy+scandal" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&channel=ent...
mdp2021 · 1790894864 · focus · HN ↗
May be relevant: noticed a new car dealer today, entered to inquire. Full "gadgety" monsters, pointless bothersome tech just for any-tech thirsty customers.
Salesman told me that it does not work without a smartphone.
And that it requires the dealer - the vehicle is a still statue without a whole infrastructure behind it to let it work (must be network connected and exchanging with some servers in China, he said - I do not know to which extent; the company greenlights the links to your other gear, and without that the car will not work... Things like that).
iamnothere · 1790895490 · focus · HN ↗
See also the warning from Dutch intelligence about connected vehicles: <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/oct/01/cars-smart-features-spy-gps-chinese-imports" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/oct/01/cars-smar...
The article focuses on Chinese vehicles, but caution should be exercised with all vehicles.
1vuio0pswjnm7 · 1790897467 · focus · HN ↗
If cars are "smartphones on wheels" then who pays for the cellular subscriptions
Smartphones generally allow the user to disable cellular data ("mobile data")
If cars are "smartphones on wheels" then why not turn cellular data off
If that's not possible then perhaps cars are not "smartphones on wheels"
1. ASalazarMX · 1790898457 · focus · HN ↗
  They are like smartphones on wheels because they have a cellular modem, not because you can control them. And it's likely the user paid for the subscription when they bought the car, and with every scheduled maintenance.
  It doesn't make business sense for any company to pay for the hardware they use to spy if they can avoid it.
2. kube-system · 1790899151 · focus · HN ↗
  1. it's a metaphor
  2. there are in fact smartphones where you cannot disable cellular data
3. 1vuio0pswjnm7 · 1790954620 · focus · HN ↗
  "Smartphones", i.e., the corporate OS that run on them, generally have a "network settings" interface and allow the user to set the gateway and DNS, for example
  What about "connected vehicles"
  Perhaps these are not "smartphones on wheels"
m463 · 1790899027 · focus · HN ↗
It is unclear what "vehicle-only ATA companies" means.
what is ATA? what do they collect?
EDIT: Advertiser/Tracker/Analytics
jojobas · 1790900937 · focus · HN ↗
>Our findings underscore the need for continued measurement and scrutiny of the connected vehicle ecosystem.
The need is for people to have at least half a brain, and it's not happening. Almost all privacy conversations I've ever had with people ended with "so what".
-Companies with interests contrary to your own will know X, Y and Z about you.
-So what?
drewlanenga · 1790902959 · focus · HN ↗
the title of the study is :chef-kiss:
yearolinuxdsktp · 1790904377 · focus · HN ↗
Thankfully for some, Subaru refused to comply with right to repair laws in some American states without disabling its Starlink/MySubaru system. So you get auto-opted out in those states.
ImL1s · 1790907146 · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
caymanjim · 1790914876 · focus · HN ↗
This kind of automatic telemetry pisses me off, but disabling it is pointless since I'm driving around with my cellphone literally 100% of the time, and it collects and sells all the same data.
zkmon · 1790923737 · focus · HN ↗
"Always, keep your subjects dumb. Not smart."
"But they are my tools and helpers. More smarter they are, more help I get from them"
"They may not remain as your tools and helpers forever. Smarter tools and helpers turn into your masters and enemies."
"But my tool seller tells me that smarter tools give me more benefits"
"Your benefit is not exactly the goal of a seller. Their sales are their goal. They add smartness to the tools only to beat competition. Seller is not a sage with a mission of telling what's good for you."
"So, what's good for me?"
"As I said, always keep your subjects dumb. History tells you that fall of every empire is primarily due to the ruler's inability to keep their subjects in line, as the subject got smarter and autonomous. As someone said - it's not about food, it's about keeping those ants in line."
"But dumber tools would mean I need to work harder to beat my own competition."
"That's exactly the weak point of yours, which is exploited by the seller. They flare up fights and sell you the smart arrows. They put you in a gladiator fight and make stock bets. They normalize your working as a slave for your home loan. They won't even let you have time to think about what you are supposed to do with your life."
"What am I supposed to do?"
"You need to reclaim your thinking time. You need to realize how many ways things were 'normalized' for you. You need to break that normalization."
"Should I buy a smart car or not?"
"You shouldn't need a car at all. Live in a city that has good enough public transport and walkable distances to things you need. Car driving is normalized and forced by the city planners who only cared for the sprawl of the city, not the ease of living."
"But changing jobs is not an option in these times"
"Not if you are ready to break your normalized ways"
"..."
imdoor · 1790924638 · focus · HN ↗
I'm wondering what's the situation like in EU. Seems like, under GDPR, I should be able to not consent to tracking and still have the connected functionality remain working. I haven't had the experience of setting up any new cars in EU, does anyone know whether you're provided with an explicit choice regarding data collection? Whether it's then honored might be a different question though.
1. jacquesm · 1790930916 · focus · HN ↗
  I decided I had enough of all the software in my car (after the very modern Mercedes C class I had tried killing me, twice) and got an oldie instead, had it rebuilt at a total price of ~1/2 of what a new one would have been. It's almost 30 years old but a great daily driver and besides the ECU there isn't really anything that is connected. Behind the factory bezel there was a double DIN frame so replacing the head unit with something more modern was pretty easy (though some of the wiring was pretty hard).
2. rmnclmnt · 1790941548 · focus · HN ↗
  You don’t: either you accept the tracking and can use the feature you are paying for (e.g. Updated gps maps) or you don’t all together.
  Put on top of that freakin bugs and non optimized performance for all screens in the vehicule, and you get a wonderful experience…
dmantis · 1790924953 · focus · HN ↗
Would be nice to have a single website with models without spyware.
I'm pretty sure some high-risk customers around the world with money would be happy to have no-brain "choose a proper car without a snitch inside" button.
Maybe a quick way to drop snitch options would slightly improve the situation.
1. gessha · 1790961829 · focus · HN ↗
  You can contribute to the consumer rights wiki: <a href="https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Main_Page" rel="nofollow">https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Main_Page
aiXis · 1790928414 · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
stymaar · 1790932321 · focus · HN ↗
I currently work at a company using this data (only on company-owned vehicle for fleet monitoring purpose) and I can confirm that this is some scary shit. Many brand collect your GPS position every 10 to 30 seconds, they know where you shop, how fast you drive, how often you go out for a drink or to the gym.
And IMHO this kind of ubiquitous data collection is even a national security threat, as an adversary can easily track your servicemen to find sensitive personal to either assassinate them on the eve of a conflict, or at least to collect Kompromat to be used to gain intelligence.
wkjagt · 1790933448 · focus · HN ↗
I recently (as in: this week) changed my EV for a 2010 Toyota Yaris. It's a wonderful feeling.
haritha-j · 1790942580 · focus · HN ↗
Content aside, I love the title.
iririririr · 1790953313 · focus · HN ↗
the report is not that bad. all American brands had trackers in the cars. lexus and European brands had zero trackers.
then using the app (which if you do, you deserve) added 20+ trackers.
only Tesla have full trackers and pii leak on the car itself. which again, you deserve.
aiXis · 1791118948 · focus · HN ↗
[dead]

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.