Researchers jailbreak a Tesla to get free in-car feature upgrades::A group of researchers found a way to hack a Tesla’s hardware with the goal of getting free in-car upgrades, such as heated rear seats.

  • Jarmer@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m amazed that it’s legal for a car company to sell you something, and then after you own it, remotely disable xyz aspects of the functionality unless you pay them more. How can that be legal? I own the car, it’s MINE now, how can I not use every single thing that’s in it?

      • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean you are correct to some extent. But I’m curious, how does this not happen in a system where the state has full control? The only difference is the consumer has no other choices and the “politics” don’t have to be paid for as they are already fully in control.

        Unless you mean to say that by the good graces of the government they’d never do that in a state run economy because it’s morally wrong. In which case… Lol

        • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          State-run authoritarian economies generally aren’t so money-obsessed that they pull weird shit like this, but generally suffer from drastic inequality, distribution inefficiency, and a general lack of freedom and innovation. The most effective economic models from what I’ve seen are hybrid models, with a regulated market system with some nationalized industries. Morally though, I also believe that a nation’s economic system should be democratic and that people should have a say in how their workplace is run and who their workplace leadership should be.

    • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve seen a bunch of lab equipment do this as well. For some, there are firmware hacks available to enable features only available on models twice the price.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same reason it’s legal for HP to brick your printer if you use third party ink. You violated their shitty TOS that none of us read because it’s 80 pages of legalese, but you agreed to it.

      • Jarmer@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        hmmm yes I suppose that’s true. Okay so let me rephrase: I’m amazed it’s legal for a car manufacturer to even HAVE a TOS like that when you purchase a car. It shouldn’t be legal to write language like “you are purchasing this but agreeing that you can’t use it” … wtf?

  • afa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    of course it was the PSP. I’ll say it again and again; secure computing is like adding a back door that you know about. Fuck intel me, fuck amd psp, fuck apple sep, fuck microsoft tpm, and fuck anyone who wants to have control over a device I own.

  • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can somebody build & sell a dumb electric car? Or at least one not permanently internet-enabled and/or that has no functionality and capabilities locked behind software and subscriptions?

    • madnificent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Dacia Spring fits the bill out of necessity (price). It is not fast, it has low range, uses cheap materials and it is rather small.

      But I don’t think it can spy on you and it’s charming through its simple honesty.

    • Gogo Sempai@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hardware companies trying to copy the software companies with a subscription model really sucks. What’s next? Intel charging a monthly fee to unlock 5 GHz boost? Nvidia charging a monthly fee if you want to do anything AI-related with their GPUs? Samsung and LG charging a monthly fee if you want to use a TV or a monitor for more than 2 hours a day? Greed knows no bounds.

            • redditReallySucks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I agree that unregulated capitalism has its flaws but I personally don’t think that capitalism itself (if properly regulated) is inherently bad.

              • PsychedSy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The definition they use for capitalism is different from how it’s commonly used. They focus on the incestuous relationships between capital and government while a more common use includes each individual’s ideas about what interference is necessary.

                Just trying to make sure nobody’s talking past each other.

              • Cabrio@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Capitalism is inherently bad because every dollar of profit is a dollar exploited from the supplier, producer, worker, and customer all to benefit the owner who only got to their position by having exploited enough people and sequestered enough resources through leveraging this hellish ouroborus.

    • JaymesRS@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why would you want to be behind the heated seats? Seems like it’d be warmer on the seat, not to mention that there’s no 3rd row in a Tesla so you’d be in the trunk…

  • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Technological serfdom. You don’t own anything anymore. You can perpetually rent from your lord or you can suffer the consequences.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    A group of researchers said they have found a way to hack the hardware underpinning Tesla’s infotainment system, allowing them to get what normally would be paid upgrades — such as heated rear seats — for free.

    This may also give owners the ability to enable the self-driving and navigation system in regions where it’s normally not available, the researchers told TechCrunch, though they admitted that they haven’t tested these capabilities yet, as that would require more reverse engineering.

    “We are not the evil outsider, but we’re actually the insider, we own the car,” Werling told TechCrunch in an interview ahead of the conference.

    Werling explained that what they did was “fiddle around” with the supply voltage of the AMD processor that runs the infotainment system.

    With the same technique, the researchers said they were also able to extract the encryption key used to authenticate the car to Tesla’s network.


    I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • mydickismicrosoft@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is great. When you buy the car, you own it. I don’t care what kind of weird licenses and contracts they put together. If I buy the car and there is hardware in the car that allows for heated seats, there is no reason why I shouldn’t be able to enable it myself, tear it out, or do whatever I want with it. It is mine.

    I can understand there being safety concerns for modifying a car. But the owner of the car already accepts liability for the operation of that car. If I do not modify the car and I get into an accident due to Teslas auto pilot feature or another thing baked into their system, does Tesla accept liability? No, they do not. If it is my responsibility for the safe operation of the vehicle, then it is also my responsibility to modify a vehicle in a safe manner. 

  • Noah@lemmy.federated.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s ridiculous how nowadays a lot of hardware car features are locked behind a simple software switch. Feels like both a massive waste of resources for people that don’t buy the upgrades, and like having to pay for a feature that is already physically present in your car. Software-only upgrades like full self driving are understandable, hardware upgrades locked behind a software gate aren’t.

    [cross-posted from my reply to the same article on c/news]

  • Boogeyman4325@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Quick question: Couldn’t Tesla’s telemetry servers detect this kind of jailbreaking and, say, remotely disable the device? I’m kind of thinking of Nintendo consoles and their bans on some jailbroken consoles (typically the ones that play pirated games online).