FBI Warns About Car Hacking. Encryption Security Helps Prevent That.

Beware of hatchback doors in your cybersecurity.

Credit: Tabercil

While FBI prepares for a court hearing next week to try to force Apple to help it break into the work phone of San Bernardino, California, terrorist Syed Farook, the agency also wants you to pay attention to your cybersecurity to protect yourself from hackers attempting to commandeer your car.

This somewhat schizophrenic argument (all tech experts seem to agree that what the FBI is asking for in San Bernardino would weaken everybody's data security) is a result of increasing concerns that our highly computerized automobiles are susceptible to hackers. As we approach a future of self-driving automobiles, it is obviously a risk that cannot be ignored. Wired last year famously had a couple of guys hack into and shut down the transmission of a vehicle while it was traveling down the highway.

So the FBI, the Department of Transportation, and the National Highway Transportation and Security Association have put out a press release and resource page warning consumers about how important cybersecurity is for your vehicles.

Wired takes note of the irony of the FBI calling for careful protection on security and access to digital tools on the one hand while going to the courts to mandate the opposite:

The announcement also notes that drivers should be careful about offering physical access to their vehicles to strangers. "In much the same way as you would not leave your personal computer or smartphone unlocked, in an unsecure location, or with someone you don't trust, it is important that you maintain awareness of those who may have access to your vehicle," the announcement reads. (If only the FBI felt quite so strongly about keeping intruders out of your iPhone.) [Emphasis added]

Mind you, the government is insisting on arguing that ordering that Apple help make a single phone more vulnerable to hacking is an isolated request that cannot possibly get out of hand. But that seems to be an argument presented solely by government representatives. Everybody in the tech industry seems to be lining up behind Apple.

Read more about car hacking here.

Comments

[Enjoy Every Sandwich]

How long before the very same officials are whining "But what if a terrorist is driving down the road? We have to be able to access his car's computer!"

[FreeToFear]

That's why we have the secure FBI chip mandated into all the cars, to protect you against hostile incursions! What? Well of course it has access to the GPS data - we have to track the terrorists, after all! Wait, where are you all going? Don't you know this is for the children?!

[Playa Manhattan.]

My car starts without a key now.

I wonder if I've been hacked.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

I the old days, that just meant your 1974 Chevy Nova needed a new ignition lock.

[Playa Manhattan.]

My key is supposed to be paired to the engine, and the spark plugs won't fire without it.

[Playa Manhattan.]

Supposed to.

After 2 dead batteries, I finally shelled out the dough for a deep cycle Optima yellow top.

Then, I discovered that the key was coming out in the #1 position, and that's why my battery kept draining.

[Florida Hipster]

I hear those Fiat500 are trouble.

[0x90]

I had a 64 Skylark once, for which I never got a key.

[gah87]

Today's hacking is just yesterday's hotwiring... except now you can do it from the comfort of your own home... or even someone else's.

[gah87]

Or your new Corvette.
http://nypost.com/2016/03/17/w.....-misfires/

[Zeb]

You know what I liked? When cars had keys that unlocked the doors, opened the rear gate and started the engine. That was great.

I know I'm probably getting to "old man yells at clouds" territory here. But cars are just too fancy these days.

And what's with the electric parking brakes on cars now? No good for handbrake turns and what happens if your electrical system fails catastrophically and you need to stop? I thought the point of the e-brake was that it would work even if everything else is broken.

[Fist of Etiquette]

That's why I drive a 1971 Volkswagen Super Beetle and will always drive a 1971 Volkswagen Super Beetle.

[Agammamon]

Well, that and the fact that you're on welfare and can't afford a new car . . .

[FreeToFear]

That's why I drive push around a 1971 Volkswagen Super Beetle and will always drive push around a 1971 Volkswagen Super Beetle.

FTFY

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

You know who else drove a Volkswagon?

[Florida Hipster]

My dad? He still has his 73 beetle.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Two generations driving "The Peoples' Car"?

[Florida Hipster]

My sister had it for awhile, until she crashed it. Now my dad has it back, so yeah.

[Fist of Etiquette]

I WILL BUY IT OFF OF HIM.

[Tonio]

Beware of hatchback doors in your cybersecurity.

[narrows gaze at Shackford]

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

This is why Shackford pimps Reason when he puts forefinger to touchscreen.

[gah87]

That pun immediately conjured an image of an AMC Pacer. Was that intended?

[ant1sthenes]

The chief obstacle to IoT security (for now) is not Big Brother, but failure to give a fuck on the part of manufacturers. A few well-publicized tragedies and lawsuits will probably change that, though.

[Jickerson]

But as long as they use non-free software, the IoT cannot be trusted anyway. If random criminals aren't abusing users, then it will be the government and/or the company itself with the aid of backdoors.

[gah87]

Open source, too, is riddled with bugs. In Linux, for instance, over the last couple of years was found Heartbleed, POODLE, GnuTLS... an ever growing list. A lot of IoT appliances are based on Linux variants. You think the masses are going to run monthly security patches on their refrigerators and TVs? Or keep their firewalls and routers up to date? Throw in a healthy dose of government-encouraged backdoors and you've got a fertile mix for billions of zombie devices.