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).
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
> As one notable exception, Honda improved its data collection practices to prevent sending precise geolocation to a third party associated with user tracking.
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.
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.
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.
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-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 are charged with manslaughter.
I don't know if it's required yet by law, but some cars in the US do as well. My F150 will nag me if it thinks I'm not looking at the road for too long.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
Interesting to see how this has evolved. Mozilla had conducted a detailed investigation on this topic by carmaker a few years ago: https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare-...
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?
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.
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.
That's the one.
It's reminiscent of a time when vans were vans — but it shares most of its parts with the Focus so should be relatively easy to maintain and repair.
> shares most of its parts with the Focus
Hopefully not the transmission.
The dual-clutch disaster?
It does not.
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.
> Worse, I'm aware that the absence of data is data itself.
The Burrow, Franz Kafka
By a slightly used one that has a 3g modem. My 2018 car no longer can phone home.
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.
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
This is the way.
I know some models of Ford allow you to pull the modem out. It doesn't even nag you about a connection problem.
> 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.
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.
And risk having lawyers after you?
What exactly are lawyers going to do?
It’s foolish to be afraid of nonexistent threats.
I am pretty sure goatse does not have lawers and the RIAA disavows their collection
> Is my insurance going raise my rates because my vehicle won't provide telemetry for them to buy?
Thanks, I hate it.
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.
https://www.statefarm.com/insurance/auto/discounts/drive-saf...
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.
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.
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.
Like #2 prevents the spying. Let's ask some smart TV brands executives their opinion on the matter.
"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.
Smart TVs need wifi to be smart though. The cars have cell modems.
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.
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.
I'd rather see it as a standard feature than as a new market.
> 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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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"
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.
The fight is on multiple fronts.
This seems like something that needs legislation to address.
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?
>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 are charged with manslaughter.
All new cars in the EU really have in-vehicle monitoring reminding you to keep your eyes on the road
I don't know if it's required yet by law, but some cars in the US do as well. My F150 will nag me if it thinks I'm not looking at the road for too long.
Until people care about this, there is no reason for our representatives to limit it.
Just like video store rental history, I bet they'll start caring about privacy if/when it begins affecting them personally
good luck!
sadly, politicians are very happy about the centralization of power... they are the same team with the corporations.
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.
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.
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.
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.
For my part, I will not be purchasing a new car until they bring back physical controls and dump the spyware.
You might want to check out Slate. It's about the closest thing to an open vehicle platform I can imagine.
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.
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.
Does Slate actually make any statements about the level of telematics/surveillance in their vehicles?
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 - 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!
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.
They do have a backup camera.
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.
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.
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.
> I'm not sure what that looks like though
Two wheels and some impressive leg muscles !
You say that in jest, but ebikes are really changing the world.
Using a smart phone doesn't make someone tech savvy.
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.
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.
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.
I gotta take the intake manifold off to replace my thermostat :(
Still driving my GR Corolla with the data communications module fuse pulled.
Such a fun car! It's my first fun car and oh man what a toy.
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.
"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.
GR is gazoo racing, the Toyota performance line. From what I know it’s not just a badge.
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.
I wouldn't trust anything Tesla says:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
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.
The grandparent comment doesn't talk about anything Tesla (the company) says. They are sharing findings from independent researchers.
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.
I'm not surprised the Mercedes has the best privacy...
I've been on GrapheneOS for over 3 years and won't look back.
What is the situation like for people who rip out the entertainment system out of older cars and install Android Auto? How "bad" is that?
And this is without even looking at any Chinese manufactured vehicles...
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.
This is the right way to deal with the problem. I would simply pull the fuse or unplug the cellular modem though.
Some cars you can just pull the fuse on the ECU with the modem.
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.
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.
The ultra elite will figure out how to have their cake and eat it too. This is why they are ultra elite.
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.
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.
Good point, the best bet is probably to move to a walkable city and get an e-bike that you put together yourself.
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.
It's so annoying, actually. I’d rather not switch to a newer car because of it.
I hate everything about newer cars except for the power/efficiency. And luckily I don't drive enough to care about that.
...Adobe? What interest do they have in data harvesting so much from vehicles?
Not to take away from the point but wow absolute ai slop of a website
Yeah, my AI-slop-detector isn't very good, but this one really jumped out at me.
I'd look at the Consumer Reports page if you don't want to read the paper linked in a sibling comment: https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/personal-informa...
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.
Just read the paper instead: https://automatictransmission.khoury.northeastern.edu/paper....