this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
1165 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59590 readers
5441 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jarmer@slrpnk.net 185 points 1 year ago (5 children)

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?

[–] Cliffmode3000@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The captalism, American politics bought and paid for.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Djennik@lemmy.world 171 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"you wouldn't download an in-car feature"

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd do it even if I didn't want the feature.

[–] Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago

You are stealing that feature. Because of you some innocent tesla owner will have their in-car features taken away by the piracy enforcement team.

[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 99 points 1 year ago (10 children)

good. software locks are anti human and anti consumer. everyone inherently feels ripped off by them, but the more capitalist minded think 'oh that's the company's right to do'

if it's my property in my house I can fuck with it to do whatever I want

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] gogosempai@programming.dev 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

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.

[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funnily enough, Intel tried something similar already in 2010 (way before their pay-as-you-go bullshit). It was a Pentium that you could unlock hyper-threading on for $50.

[–] Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thankfully they sold terribly, but one has to wonder how long until they try it again

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That model is here already for cloud computing, literally dollars for CPU cores and bandwidth and memory. But that only works out well for renting other people's servers and would be bad for any product that you purchase outright. I suggest we all not buy those products if they do that.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The "you wouldnt pirate a car" crowd will be shook when they finally realize " yes we would"

[–] fsxylo@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

I used to think " I wouldn't because that's a stupid metaphor" but now that it's not a stupid metaphor oh yes the fuck I would.

[–] Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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?

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Ive been genuinely thinking about getting into business selling dumb stuff exclusively. Dumb tvs, fridges, washers, phones, printers watever. Just a safe online vendor where you know that what you buy wont connect to the internet, need a subscription, or require a credit card on file to work. I just need a business name.

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a neat idea, and definitely a product group that I've been actively looking for. But I do find it ironic that your business model is of an online vendor that sells offline versions of online appliances haha

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] madnificent@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] goo@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] afa@sh.itjust.works 55 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] fishhf@reddthat.com 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google: time to add DRM to chrome

[–] LeadSoldier@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google has betrayed Google.

As all corporations eventually do.

Google is eating its children.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Heated rear seats I can get behind

[–] JaymesRS@midwest.social 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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…

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] noisypine@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 year ago

Researchers jailbreak Tesla to allow usage of the entire car they purchased. FTFY

[–] swirle13@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (7 children)

This looks to have already been discovered years ago as this company sells an OBD2 plug that can toggle all of this stuff, as well as highjacking some controls to add new functionality, as well as adding 50HP to those cars with a specific rear motor version https://ingenext.ca/products/ghost-upgrade

Is this method software only? Because the upgrades on that site are pretty expensive and proprietary.

[–] 4thDimensionDuck@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

as well as adding 50HP

Holy shit, IRL health buffs to mounts

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] mydickismicrosoft@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 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. 

"Researchers remove limits that shouldn't be there on features that are already part of the car"

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"how to jailbreak your Mr coffee grinder and grind any beans you want!"

"5 hacks to get your doorbell to keep working without a subscription!"

"How to beat Microsoft Office drm to turn in assignments for free!"

"4 clever ways to keep your AC running all summer long for free, no CC required! #3 will shock you!"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bisexualskunkie@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Can't imagine a bigger "fuck you" to give to the Muskrat... other than when Xtwitter finally implodes.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why the heck would they install the equipment in the first place if it's only to block it???? Is that why the base model is so expensive? You're basically buying the deluxe version but are simply stuck using basic features because of the software???

[–] BeardyGrumps@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Because it’s cheaper for them. Building all the cars the same simplifies production and inventory management. They don’t have to configure each car for the end users requirements; they just use software to turn these features on.

The question that should be asked is if they can put these features into the car and still make a profit why are these added features so expensive as all the fees are 100% profit!

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›