A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT - Remote control of car



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 6th 18, 08:46 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
pjp[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,183
Default OT - Remote control of car



I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?
Ads
  #2  
Old March 6th 18, 09:53 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Zaidy036[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default OT - Remote control of car

pjp wrote:


I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?


It is stolen so you can immobilize it. It is also locatable on a map to
tell police where it is.

Offered in GM cars, Buick anyways.

--
Zaidy036
  #4  
Old March 7th 18, 08:33 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Zaidy036[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default OT - Remote control of car

Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-03-06 21:15, pjp wrote:
In article , says...

pjp wrote:


I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?


It is stolen so you can immobilize it. It is also locatable on a map to
tell police where it is.

Offered in GM cars, Buick anyways.


I know what it is and what it does. Just for me I can't imagine ever
buying a car with this feature. Anyone can start or stop my vehicle is
almost surely to happen. I can easily imagine assholes stopping car,
locking doors and windows and watch while someone panics etc.

In fact I don't want any car that can be "upgraded" or for that matter
controlled in any way "over the air".

When I push a button and wait for a self driving vehicle to come into my
driveway I won't care about how it communicates with the outside world
but while it's "mine" I won't allow any 3rd party control over it.


+1



It is interesting to read in these newsgroups about people’s worries but
consider that there are millions of GM cars out there and I have never
heard of one being hijacked in that way. The GM On-Star system works as
advertised and gives me an insurance deduction and help is available at the
push of a button. In fact if I have an accident and do not reply to a voice
message from them they will automatically send help to my location.

Have you ever heard of any car being hijacked remotely? And I am not
talking about the man-in-the-middle key fob lock/unlock problem.

--
Zaidy036
  #5  
Old March 7th 18, 09:27 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
PeterC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default OT - Remote control of car

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:46:38 -0400, pjp wrote:

I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?


Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it's a good thing to
do.
I saw a headline (didn't look at the article) that said just one
'malignant', so-called 'smart' car could be used to cause a lot of those
around it to do naughty things - try that with a 60 yo Land Rover!
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway
  #6  
Old March 7th 18, 03:54 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default OT - Remote control of car

In message , Zaidy036
writes:
Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-03-06 21:15, pjp wrote:
In article , says...

pjp wrote:


I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?


It is stolen so you can immobilize it. It is also locatable on a map to
tell police where it is.

Offered in GM cars, Buick anyways.

I know what it is and what it does. Just for me I can't imagine ever
buying a car with this feature. Anyone can start or stop my vehicle is
almost surely to happen. I can easily imagine assholes stopping car,
locking doors and windows and watch while someone panics etc.

In fact I don't want any car that can be "upgraded" or for that matter
controlled in any way "over the air".

When I push a button and wait for a self driving vehicle to come into my
driveway I won't care about how it communicates with the outside world
but while it's "mine" I won't allow any 3rd party control over it.


+1



It is interesting to read in these newsgroups about people’s worries but
consider that there are millions of GM cars out there and I have never
heard of one being hijacked in that way. The GM On-Star system works as


Has the remote stop-start facility reached the millions mark yet though?

advertised and gives me an insurance deduction and help is available at the
push of a button. In fact if I have an accident and do not reply to a voice
message from them they will automatically send help to my location.


AIUI, though, the only thing that can be remotely done with OnStar - if
that - is to turn on the OnStar box, so that the vehicle can be
tracked/found; I don't think it can be stopped, can it?

Have you ever heard of any car being hijacked remotely? And I am not
talking about the man-in-the-middle key fob lock/unlock problem.

Can keyfob remote unlocking be disabled? I suppose disconnecting the
aerial of the in-car part, or removing power from the receiver
altogether (if a separate entity), would do it, but that would also
disable the "find car in car park" function, which is useful.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"You _are_ Zaphod Beeblebrox? _The_ Zaphod Beeblebrox?"
"No, just _a_ Zaphod Beeblebrox. I come in six-packs." (from the link episode)
  #7  
Old March 10th 18, 05:01 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Doug Chadduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default OT - Remote control of car

On 3/6/2018 11:46 AM, pjp wrote:


I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible to start
and stop your engine using your smart phone from anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?

When it's 20 below outside, starting your car and having the heater
running for 5 or 10 minutes before you have to go out and jump in it, is
a lot more civilized and comfortable than is the alternative.
Same story when it's 105 degrees outside. Start the car and let the AC
run for a few before you even go out. Very handy feature.

  #10  
Old May 18th 18, 06:01 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Diesel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 937
Default OT - Remote control of car

Zaidy036 news Wed, 07 Mar 2018 07:33:10 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-03-06 21:15, pjp wrote:
In article ,
says...

pjp wrote:


I can't help but notice the new car ad stating it's possible
to start and stop your engine using your smart phone from
anywhere.

Now who in their right mind thinks this is a good thing?


It is stolen so you can immobilize it. It is also locatable on
a map to tell police where it is.

Offered in GM cars, Buick anyways.

I know what it is and what it does. Just for me I can't imagine
ever buying a car with this feature. Anyone can start or stop my
vehicle is almost surely to happen. I can easily imagine
assholes stopping car, locking doors and windows and watch while
someone panics etc.

In fact I don't want any car that can be "upgraded" or for that
matter controlled in any way "over the air".

When I push a button and wait for a self driving vehicle to come
into my driveway I won't care about how it communicates with the
outside world but while it's "mine" I won't allow any 3rd party
control over it.


+1



It is interesting to read in these newsgroups about people’s
worries but consider that there are millions of GM cars out there
and I have never heard of one being hijacked in that way. The GM
On-Star system works as advertised and gives me an insurance
deduction and help is available at the push of a button. In fact
if I have an accident and do not reply to a voice message from
them they will automatically send help to my location.

Have you ever heard of any car being hijacked remotely? And I am
not talking about the man-in-the-middle key fob lock/unlock
problem.


Not only have I heard of it, I've participated in a ride along under
controlled conditions. We remotely hax0red (wireless no less) the
jeep's engine and driving control systems, and ordered it to the
side of the road, without the drivers consent. The jeep complied.
Not only were we able to control it's driving, braking and engine,
we were able to override any commands the driver of the vehicle was
sending it via the steering wheel and the pedals. We weren't the
only ones able to do this either, another group brought along
reporters and filmed their experiment.

And this is one of the pitfalls of drive by wire systems being
implemented on your cars and trucks. You aren't in control, the
computer is. You're *asking* it to turn the wheel, apply the brakes,
increase fuel, etc. But you have no actual physical control over any
of those processes as you do on older vehicles. It's all controlled
by servo's now; which is under the control of the main computer
system; which can be exploited so that while your the driver, you
aren't the one driving.


https://www.wired.com/2016/08/jeep-h...eration-hacks/

https://it.slashdot.org/story/18/04/...remote-hacking



--
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
================================================== =
Tubby or not tubby, fat is the question!
  #11  
Old May 18th 18, 03:21 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default OT - Remote control of car

On 05/18/2018 12:01 AM, Diesel wrote:

[snip]

And this is one of the pitfalls of drive by wire systems being
implemented on your cars and trucks. You aren't in control, the
computer is. You're *asking* it to turn the wheel, apply the brakes,
increase fuel, etc. But you have no actual physical control over any
of those processes as you do on older vehicles. It's all controlled
by servo's now; which is under the control of the main computer
system; which can be exploited so that while your the driver, you
aren't the one driving.


[snip]

The same with computer GUIs. YOU aren't doing something, but informing
the computer of what you want.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"We created god in our own image and likeness!" -- George Carlin
  #12  
Old May 18th 18, 03:49 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 586
Default OT - Remote control of car

"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message
...
On 05/18/2018 12:01 AM, Diesel wrote:

[snip]

And this is one of the pitfalls of drive by wire systems being
implemented on your cars and trucks. You aren't in control, the
computer is. You're *asking* it to turn the wheel, apply the brakes,
increase fuel, etc. But you have no actual physical control over any
of those processes as you do on older vehicles. It's all controlled
by servo's now; which is under the control of the main computer
system; which can be exploited so that while your the driver, you
aren't the one driving.


Also you are at the mercy of the integrity of the sensors. I had an 1993
Golf Mark III - the first car I'd had with fuel injection, drive-by-wire and
an engine management unit. After it was about 6 months old developed an
intermittent fault which caused the engine to die just as I'd started to
accelerate out of a junction into traffic - which was more than a little
terrifying when it happened.

It was in the garage on several occasions while they tried to reproduce the
problem and then fix it. Each time it came back "cannot reproduce". One day
I got a phone call from an ecstatic technician - "I've found it and I've
fixed it". It turned out to be a worn throttle potentiometer which sensed
the position of the pedal so the ECU could ask for the required amount of
fuel from the injectors: the track was dirty and cracked. The part cost
about tuppence and the labour for all the hours of searching was horrendous.
Luckily I could produce an invoice from a couple of thousand miles earlier
which described a fruitless search for the cause, and this was invaluable in
claiming off the warranty, because after first reporting the fault, the car
had exceeded its manufacturer's warranty. With rather bad grace, the garage
and VW head office decided that faced with incontrovertible evidence that
the car had been in warranty when the fault was first reported, they had to
pay up.

  #13  
Old May 18th 18, 04:04 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default OT - Remote control of car

"Mark Lloyd" wrote

| The same with computer GUIs. YOU aren't doing something, but informing
| the computer of what you want.
|

I don't get the point or the connection there.
In an older car, when you steer or press the brake,
it's a physical operation. When you step on the
accelerator it physically pumps gas into a carburetor.
You have physical control over the operation. With
a newer car you don't. Maybe you're too young to
have ever had to work directly with a carburetor?
There's no software. There's a cable. There's no
fuel injection. The spark is not computer-controlled.
It's sent by a spinning contact inside a distributor
cap, which is driven by the crankshaft. It's all
mechanical.

A computerized car is very different.
Not only is there the risk of remote hacking or
software failure. In the event of something
like a massive solar flare that fries electronics, the
older car will probably keep running. The newer car
will be ruined and unusable.

There are all sorts of issues involved with software
running cars. Bad updates can happen. The software
can be used as an excuse to ban you from fixing your
own car or allowing your mechanic to use 3rd-party
parts....

None of that has much of anything to do with
using a computer, so I wonder what point you were
trying to make. Would you equate modern vs older
car with computer vs pencil? There's no useful
analogy to be found there.


  #14  
Old May 18th 18, 04:56 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Big Al[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,588
Default OT - Remote control of car

On 05/18/2018 10:49 AM, NY wrote:
"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message
...
On 05/18/2018 12:01 AM, Diesel wrote:

[snip]

And this is one of the pitfalls of drive by wire systems being
implemented on your cars and trucks. You aren't in control, the
computer is. You're *asking* it to turn the wheel, apply the brakes,
increase fuel, etc. But you have no actual physical control over any
of those processes as you do on older vehicles. It's all controlled
by servo's now; which is under the control of the main computer
system; which can be exploited so that while your the driver, you
aren't the one driving.


Also you are at the mercy of the integrity of the sensors. I had an 1993
Golf Mark III - the first car I'd had with fuel injection, drive-by-wire
and an engine management unit. After it was about 6 months old developed
an intermittent fault which caused the engine to die just as I'd started
to accelerate out of a junction into traffic - which was more than a
little terrifying when it happened.

It was in the garage on several occasions while they tried to reproduce
the problem and then fix it. Each time it came back "cannot reproduce".
One day I got a phone call from an ecstatic technician - "I've found it
and I've fixed it". It turned out to be a worn throttle potentiometer
which sensed the position of the pedal so the ECU could ask for the
required amount of fuel from the injectors: the track was dirty and
cracked. The part cost about tuppence and the labour for all the hours
of searching was horrendous. Luckily I could produce an invoice from a
couple of thousand miles earlier which described a fruitless search for
the cause, and this was invaluable in claiming off the warranty, because
after first reporting the fault, the car had exceeded its manufacturer's
warranty. With rather bad grace, the garage and VW head office decided
that faced with incontrovertible evidence that the car had been in
warranty when the fault was first reported, they had to pay up.

Aren't you lucky!
  #15  
Old May 18th 18, 05:03 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 586
Default OT - Remote control of car

"Big Al" wrote in message
news
Also you are at the mercy of the integrity of the sensors. I had an 1993
Golf Mark III - the first car I'd had with fuel injection, drive-by-wire
and an engine management unit. After it was about 6 months old developed
an intermittent fault which caused the engine to die just as I'd started
to accelerate out of a junction into traffic - which was more than a
little terrifying when it happened.

It was in the garage on several occasions while they tried to reproduce
the problem and then fix it. Each time it came back "cannot reproduce".
One day I got a phone call from an ecstatic technician - "I've found it
and I've fixed it". It turned out to be a worn throttle potentiometer
which sensed the position of the pedal so the ECU could ask for the
required amount of fuel from the injectors: the track was dirty and
cracked. The part cost about tuppence and the labour for all the hours of
searching was horrendous. Luckily I could produce an invoice from a
couple of thousand miles earlier which described a fruitless search for
the cause, and this was invaluable in claiming off the warranty, because
after first reporting the fault, the car had exceeded its manufacturer's
warranty. With rather bad grace, the garage and VW head office decided
that faced with incontrovertible evidence that the car had been in
warranty when the fault was first reported, they had to pay up.

Aren't you lucky!


I was. I think I was within the mileage limit by something like 50 miles
when I first reported the problem and the garage first investigated it.

I wasn't so lucky when a wiring loom burnt out. Halfords who had fitted an
alarm denied responsibility and VW blamed Halfords. I needed the car so I
just had to pay up. If I was getting an alarm fitted now I'd get a main
dealer to do it, to keep everything "in house" so there's no demarcation
dispute and finding that neither side will accept responsibility.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.