NTSB wants ignition interlock technology in all new vehicles.

[BugI02]

On more and more cars the steering and throttle inputs have to be coming through the control processors if the cars/trucks have parking assist/lane assist/braking assist/back up assist/trailer assist/hill descent control or some other form of processor controlled driving. Hacking into the control processor with complete control and inserting your own controlling code would allow you to do whatever.

So one could specialize in hacking only those model cars. Others will be joining that group shortly.

To a certain extent you are correct, but those systems would all have built in limitations

Parking assist would likely be limited to a restricted speed range and commence from a standing start. Lane assist would be limited in terms of maximum amount of steering input
change. Braking assist is only triggered by inputs indicative of a panic stop already underway (unless you mean AEB)

None of these systems would have full authority, and their limitations would be unlikely to be overridable by the main controller

An example would be the many vehicles with push button on demand 4 wheel drive. Most systems kick off automatically around 22 to 23 mph because of directional control issues as well as component damage issues. A hack might enable someone to command entry into 4 wheel drive mode at highway speeds but the command would not be executed by the controller because of built in parameters that cannot be overridden. Same thing with a command to downshift a paddle shift car at a speed which would overrev the engine. The command would simply not be executed because the primary controller does not have full authority

With full autopilot driving capability, as we have seen, many of those bets are off - but IMO the primary controller making wrong/bad decisions from its input is far more dangerous than the possibility of a hacker taking control

 

[BugI02]

The smart people are the ones designing all this stuff, and then adapting it to the chip shortage. I initially had some of the same concerns about remote control of the vehicle so I looked in to it. What I quickly learned is it's completely overblown with one possible exception, and that's the 'no start tune' being disguised as an over the air update. A ransomware attack like that is highly unlikely to be successful, but not a 0% chance and would be a way to both make a lot o' cash and bring the Eye of Sauron upon you. Remember the ransomware dudes not too long ago who gave the money back and apologized? Because they didn't want to die in prison or during their cafe experience? Right. So there's solid incentive to not do it and there's a very high tech barrier to get it done...but still not 0%. I won't lose sleep over it, but I'd still prefer to not have a connected car because I don't value the things a connected car gets me.

 

[nonobaddog]

To a certain extent you are correct, but those systems would all have built in limitations

Parking assist would likely be limited to a restricted speed range and commence from a standing start. Lane assist would be limited in terms of maximum amount of steering input
change. Braking assist is only triggered by inputs indicative of a panic stop already underway (unless you mean AEB)

None of these systems would have full authority, and their limitations would be unlikely to be overridable by the main controller

An example would be the many vehicles with push button on demand 4 wheel drive. Most systems kick off automatically around 22 to 23 mph because of directional control issues as well as component damage issues. A hack might enable someone to command entry into 4 wheel drive mode at highway speeds but the command would not be executed by the controller because of built in parameters that cannot be overridden. Same thing with a command to downshift a paddle shift car at a speed which would overrun the engine. The command would simply not be executed because the primary controller does not have full authority

With full autopilot driving capability, as we have seen, many of those bets are off - but IMO the primary controller making wrong/bad decisions from its input is far more dangerous than the possibility of a hacker taking control

I was not saying absolute full authority (yet), in every case I have heard about the driver can override and take control except for the panic braking for objects case. It would not do anything to stick your foot underneath the brake pedal and try to lift it so you could crash into something.
My main point is that these systems can control critical automotive functions - that is - the processor, software and hardware is already in place for a digital processor to control steering as well as throttle as well as braking. The days when they just monitored stuff have been passed by. They are now controlling major functions. Many commercials verify this.
When you engage parking assist the processor controls steering, throttle and brakes all at the same time in a coordinated manner using input from sensors and cameras around the vehicle. If you think that does not involve the central processing unit we might as well stop discussing it.
The trend used to be to have many, many many little processors in cars. The trend now is to centralize the processing because more and more this is required to perform what the manufacturers want, more sophisticated and coordinated control.
When a hypothetical hacker takes control of the processor and inserts his own code he would be able to control all the above critical systems and probably bypass any limits imposed in the original code which is no longer in control.

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-TriCore_Family_BR-ProductBrochure-v01_00-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d4625d5945ed015dc81f47b436c7

"Thanks to its special feature set, AURIX™ is the perfect
match for powertrain applications (including hybrid and
electrical vehicles) as well as safety applications (such as
steering, braking, airbag and advanced driver assistance
systems)."

https://www.renesas.com/us/en/products/automotive-products/automotive-system-chips-socs/r-car-v4h-best-class-deep-learning-very-low-power-system-chip-automated-driving-level-2-level-3#overview

"Thanks to a high level of integration, the R-Car V4H allows manufacturers to develop cost-competitive, single-chip, ADAS electric control units (ECUs). These control units may support driving systems appropriate for automated driving Levels 2+ and Level 3, including full NCAP 2025 features. A dual V4H configuration enables seamless system performance improvements and fail-degraded operational support which is required for Level 3 systems. The R-Car V4H also supports surround view and automatic parking functions with impressive 3D visualization effects such as very realistic views."

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I was not saying absolute full authority (yet), in every case I have heard about the driver can override and take control except for the panic braking for objects case. It would not do anything to stick your foot underneath the brake pedal and try to lift it so you could crash into something.

Ford's AEB pre-collision can be overriden by applying the gas pedal more, unless there is a very recent change. That was one I was very concerned about. Cardboard box in the road, semi up your ass, I'd rather hit the box. I don't know about other makers.

 

[nonobaddog]

Ford's AEB pre-collision can be overriden by applying the gas pedal more, unless there is a very recent change. That was one I was very concerned about. Cardboard box in the road, semi up your ass, I'd rather hit the box. I don't know about other makers.

Thanks, I did not know about that one.

We have some self-driving shuttles in town here that have designated stops around a loop downtown and when they decide to stop in some random place because of some sensor input, they just stop right there in the street. There is a company representative on board but he does not drive anything. When the thing stops he tries to tell it to go again on his tablet and I am not sure if he helps or not but eventually it goes again.

 

[dsears2]

NTSB Calls for Alcohol Detection Systems in All New Vehicles

www.ntsb.gov

More examples of being lumped in to a big pile because of the actions of a few.

As long as the NTSB pays for that piece of tech, no problem. You know someone will figure out how to bypass that gadget anyway.

 

[KLB]

As long as the NTSB pays for that piece of tech, no problem.

 

[Leadeye]

Ford's AEB pre-collision can be overriden by applying the gas pedal more, unless there is a very recent change. That was one I was very concerned about. Cardboard box in the road, semi up your ass, I'd rather hit the box. I don't know about other makers.

Be interesting to see how a legal case of this problem gets sorted out. Can you fault the semi driver if the car in front of him makes an automatic stop?

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

As long as the NTSB pays for that piece of tech, no problem. You know someone will figure out how to bypass that gadget anyway.

Yeah, no. I shouldn't be punished for other peoples' bad behavior. You know, something gun owners know all about.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Be interesting to see how a legal case of this problem gets sorted out. Can you fault the semi driver if the car in front of him makes an automatic stop?

Well, yes, in the regard that he's following too closely if he can't stop if I panic brake. The fact the computer panic braked doesn't change that part of the equation. What changes is your ability to decide to hit the box and avoid the more dangerous impact.

I've heard of some Fords braking for rays of light, but not full on panic braking. I don't know if that's been programmed out. Note that, again at least for Ford, you can turn it off entirely. If turned on, you can give it a little more gas and it'll recognize that you have decided it doesn't need to stop. My recent research on the matter has been largely focused on Ford F-150s because its the only truck I'm considering equipped with the technology.

 

[Leadeye]

At some point I figure personal injury law firms will start lawsuits against the car companies themselves if the car is making some of the decisions, after all they have deep pockets. Maybe there is some fine print in a statute somewhere that excludes them from liability.

 

[nonobaddog]

At some point I figure personal injury law firms will start lawsuits against the car companies themselves if the car is making some of the decisions, after all they have deep pockets. Maybe there is some fine print in a statute somewhere that excludes them from liability.

I'm thinking we will get better cars that make better decisions if the companies are not excluded from liability.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I'm thinking we will get better cars that make better decisions if the companies are not excluded from liability.

We were promised flying cars by now. I want my flying car, dammit!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

We were promised flying cars by now. I want my flying car, dammit!

View attachment 227160

Here’s your real life Jetson.

 

[nonobaddog]

Here’s your real life Jetson.

That is just a big drone... and would probably end up just like all the little drones I have tried to fly.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

That is just a big drone... and would probably end up just like all the little drones I have tried to fly.

Probably. I still would like to have one.

 

[nonobaddog]

Probably. I still would like to have one.

Oh YES!!

 

[actaeon277]

most drivers can't handle 2 dimensions, and you want to add another?

 

[smokingman]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

This is along the same lines of BMW shutting of features unless you pay to subscribe to them,but a bit more invasive.

Late on your Ford payment? No radio,window controls,ect.

That is what they are shooting for. Making many parts of your vehicle controllable remotely by the manufacturer.

 

[radar8756]

That is just a big drone... and would probably end up just like all the little drones I have tried to fly.

Would be ok point-to-point as a Taxi --- but hard to Park ( unless it folds into a Briefcase like George's )