‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Automatic Transmission – a data-privacy study of connected vehicles

262 points · 235 comments · rafaelc

  1. mahboi · · 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'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 · · focus · HN ↗
      Like #2 prevents the spying. Let's ask some smart TV brands executives their opinion on the matter.
      1. mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
        Smart TVs need wifi to be smart though. The cars have cell modems.
        1. bluGill · · 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 · · 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.

        1. rpcope1 · · 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.
          1. bluGill · · 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.
          2. TheBozzCL · · focus · HN ↗
            Ohoho that actually sounds like a cool weekend (multiple?) project. Almost makes me want to go buy a new car.
      3. sexeriy237 · · focus · HN ↗
        they still steal the data
    2. technothrasher · · 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. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

        [deleted]

      2. mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
        Disappointing but not surprising. Those touchscreen interfaces are usually full of nags. I liked the Versa I rented recently cause its "low-end" radio system was the only thing that let me listen to the damn radio without jumping through hoops. Toyota's is an L even though their cars are better otherwise.
        1. dublin · · 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.
          1. mahboi · · 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.
            1. yearolinuxdsktp · · focus · HN ↗
              Not really, not even “you need a dash kit” situation, because HVAC controls and other essentials are now integrated with the radio.
              1. mahboi · · 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 · · 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.
        1. SoftTalker · · focus · HN ↗
          I'd return the car if it were me.
        2. mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
          This is what RPGs are for
        3. jacquesm · · focus · HN ↗
          I think that makes it qualify as defective if this wasn't disclosed prior to purchase.
        4. bradknowles · · focus · HN ↗
          Rip out the factory display and put in a third party one that doesn’t have the telemetry.
      4. MrDrMcCoy · · focus · HN ↗
        You trust that they aren't sending data anyway?
        1. HPsquared · · focus · HN ↗
          Corporations don't usually expose themselves to lawsuits like that.
          1. Xirdus · · focus · HN ↗
            See: LG.
          2. voakbasda · · 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!
          3. unrented7977 · · 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.

          4. coin · · focus · HN ↗
            See <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Volkswagen_emissions_scandal" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
    3. pluc · · focus · HN ↗
      On top of that you must never take it for servicing at a dealership since that&#x27;s another point they can do a data export if your car isn&#x27;t always-on.
    4. chakintosh · · focus · HN ↗
      Not to mention, to get access to many of these apps, you have to pay for them. So basically you&#x27;re paying an exorbitant yearly amount and your data is still going to be exfiltrated.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.