Vehicle Security

Every new car released within the past ten years has had some sort of built in tracking device like OnStar, 3/4G routers, and GPS chips. With cars produced before this trend quickly coming to the end of their life-cycle, how can we cope with this new threat to our privacy. ITT link resources and methods for making vehicles more secure and private.

OP here. I just did some preliminary searches and found a couple of articles about removing OnStar and the GPS. >OnStar https://www.wikihow.com/Deactivate-Onstar >GPS http://www.brighthub.com/electronics/gps/articles/66342.aspx I haven't found anything about removing the LTE router yet. If there are any other components in "modern" cars that can track you, post some links

Won't matter anyway when licence plate recognition is networked.

>>3649 Your tires have RFID and status chips too I got a new car that has a bluetooth, but no other tech hardwired into it. they are still out there, but much harder to find unfortunately

>>3645 You're worried about that, how about the inevitable driverless car fad that we are approaching. Wait till the laws change in the future and we can't even drive our own vehicles anymore.

Jesus, it's hard enough finding some monolithic old yank tank that won't die in an EMP, now we gotta worry about fuarrrking spyware in cars.

>>3652 Or that one series of cars where for some reason, the entire driving computer for the ignition system, brakes, and lights etc. was tied into the android entertainment system, with "in car wifi" or some other bullsoykaf... long story short, the car had all the vulnerabilities of a smartphone, and the entire driving system was susceptible

>>3655 Oh God, Terminator 3 didn't lie to me? Oh Jesus, it's going to be like Arrow, isn't it, where Felicity can hack into random construction equipment to drop bags of cement on people.

>>3656 >Felicity I just have to wonder just how clueless she is with tech in real life.

>>3656 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OobLb1McxnI

I heard that auto lane assist functions on vehicles use small cameras or something to detect lines and thought that it might be dangerous. what if someone were to cause the camera image to bleed out using IR strobes or other methods of camera image obfuscation techniques https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdX6J5KQXS0 >No machine vision system is perfect. Lane departure warning works less capably in rain or snow, and it will shut down, sending an alert to the driver, when visibility is limited. Obviously, it doesn’t work when snow covers the road, or if there are no lane markings at all. On highway exits where the markings veer off, the system has to rely on the single lane marking that remains (and also scan the road ahead for where the right-side marking picks up again). There will be occasional false alerts when the car says you’re drifting across a lane and you’re still properly centered. This is markedly better than five years ago, though. >LDW works less well when lane markings are old, or when the lane markings are raised dots, rather than 20-foot painted stripes. A vigorous program to renew road surface markings before they fade would benefit machine vision systems such as LDW, benefit drivers with so-so eyesight, and benefit all drivers in rainy weather. This is one very small reason why America’s infrastructure is no longer world class.

>>3649 but with that there are still huge areas of the world where nobody could track you. With GPS, your location can be known no matter where you are.

The project I'm on right now uses DSRC for V2X communication. My understanding is that the industry is split on using DSRC or LTE for V2X communication, with it leaning somewhat toward LTE (at least, that's the impression I got from a colleague who went to the ITS World Congress conference back in November). Because it's short-range and because of some of the details of the WAVE protocol that it implements, it's somewhat harder to track than 3/4G routers, but of course since the goal of the industry is to eventually modify existing infrastructure to be able to communicate with vehicles, once that infrastructure is in-place, it could be used to mine data and track you, as well.

>>3663 Upon re-reading I realize my writing my have been unclear. In the sentence >Because it's short-range ... the "it" is DSRC.

is it realistic to tear out all wireless-enabled and GPS-enabled computers in a modern car?

>>3730 removing the hardware will lead to errors of the automobile's computer unit of course. Depending on the programming, you'll be able to get away with it - otherwise annoying error symbols in the dash or even the system refusing to start the engine might occur. All car computers are proprietary soykaf as well so it's not so trivial to just remove hardware from an otherwise crude machinery like an automobile. There are a few FOSS ECU projects I think but hardly applicable at this point.

>>3732 Mabye instead of removing the wireless components we could replace them. We could use a raspberry pi and spoof input from a GPS. You could record your position as you drive in a circle, then just have the pi repeat the co-ords. That way whenever you start your car it just looks like you're going in circles until you park. Or mabye we wouldn't even need to do any hardware modification. We could just isolate the GPS and put it in a box that blocks the signal. We could then put a pi that spoofs the GPS in that box. Close the box and nobody could know.

>>3734 pretty clever made me think of the truman show, reverse engineering whatever protocol they expect the data in could be heavily manufacturer dependent.

>GPS data readings don't match up cellular towers you pass by >You are still being pretty accurately located in dense city areas >ohshart.nsa >Wrap LTE modem in lots of foil, spoof modem data with Raspberry Pi >Your car disappears from central maps but is still operable >Traffic cams take your pictures wherever you go >Police patrol stops you >They check their map readings and don't see your car on it. >Oi m8tey what do we have here >You ain't doin' anything stupid there, boi? >Get sued by manufacturer company for tampering with car's electronics >Go to jail for being the bad citizen and obstructing government's ways to care for you

>>3735 most likely, its standard type of signal. I dont know much about vehicle standards. but if its anything like boats, there is a standard format for boat GPS data called NMEA. the idea is that a standard signal can be used in any number of devices. http://gpsworld.com/what-exactly-is-gps-nmea-data/ some links that may be of interest http://blackberry.qnx.com/en/solutions/industries/automotive/index http://www.qnx.com/news/pr_6118_3.html >More than 40 automotive OEMs now use QNX® software, including the QNX Neutrino® OS, the QNX CAR™ Platform for Infotainment, and QNX acoustics middleware, for their head units, handsfree systems, connectivity modules, and digital instrument clusters. Examples from the 2015 model year include the virtual cockpit in the Audi TT, the entertainment system in the Mercedes-Benz S-Class Coupe, and the new OnStar 4G LTE system for GM vehicles — a range of systems that reflects the sheer flexibility and scalability of QNX technology.

>>3736 >>3730 >>3732 Spoofing GPS is a well known trick in the maritime world, the implication being boats can show u where they are not supposed to be or messing with autopilot. the big problems you would encounter aside from sending out a false signal would be that you may tamper with the functionality of autonomous vehicles (if they use a hive type communication system through the cloud) or that spoofing a GPS timing signal would mean prison time with the FCC. >“Spoofing” a GPS receiver is the intentional transmission of false GPS signals to cause it to provide incorrect time or location information. “Jamming” is blocking reception of GPS with stronger signals and is easier and more common than spoofing. >“In July, we followed-up on the June report and found evidence that, for some in the Black Sea, GPS signals were still being periodically disrupted. We then contacted Windward Ltd., a leader in maritime data and analytics to investigate further,” said Goward. >By running its algorithms on data from vessels' Automatic Identification System (AIS), Windward experts identified two additional instances of mass GPS interference in 2017, lasting for months each. >“Because we see the same disruption patterns in multiple vessels and in specific areas, it appears that the issue is GPS rather than AIS disruption and is therefore likely to affect everything in the area, not just ships,” said Matan Peled, Co-founder of Windward. >“Most interestingly, all three locations involve airports - Gelendzhik Airport and Sochi International Airport near the Black Sea, and St. Petersburg Airport near the North Sea. Windward also found that some of the vessels that mistakenly appear in Sochi Airport were really located near Gelendzhik, about 200 kilometers (124 miles) away. Even yesterday, the 25th of September, two vessels appeared at Sochi Airport, 20 kilometers (12 miles) from their actual positions near the Sochi harbor,” said Peled.

I drive a '99 Cadillac Deville Concur with the OnStar ripped out. And if it die, i'll get another old land yacht

What year is the safe cutoff for vehicles, 1999?

>>5784 safe from what? having wireless tracking features mentioned in OP? they didn't really become standard until at least 2010ish. depends on the brand, specific car, and options though. even today you can find cars without them. it's not like they hide it from you either, they're seen as upmarket options and will be advertised proudly. >>3732 >removing the hardware will lead to errors of the automobile's computer unit of course i don't think this is typically the case. i've never owned a car with integrated gps and so i've never tried, but i do know that the engine computer and the entertainment system are typically completely separate, especially with older (pre 2008ish) cars. this is not always the case (see >>3660) but it's certainly unusual to have it any other way. remember, people replace factory entertainment systems all the time. if most cars depended on some particular entertainment system, you wouldn't be able to do this. the reason manufacturers tie the ECU to the entertainment system is so that you can read sensor data without having to use the OBDII port. If you can't do that on your car, then the ECU probably doesn't depend on the entertainment/nav system at all.