this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
217 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

63134 readers
3579 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 other!
  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
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A Seattle-based appellate judge ruled that the practice does not meet the threshold for an illegal privacy violation under state law, handing a big win to automakers Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen and General Motors.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 65 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's a very good reason to not connect your phone to your car.

[–] narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's a very good reason to not buy any car which has this interception "feature".

[–] there1snospoon@ttrpg.network 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s a very good way of saying don’t buy anything built in the last five years

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 year ago

*9 years, actually.

[–] criticon@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago

Or you can deny the permission when you connect it

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Appellate court (appellate judge) aka second instance court. So while not the end of discussion, that is quite absurd.

[–] kirklennon@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

I'm short of time so I haven't found the original complaint but according to the appeals court ruling, the plaintiffs never claimed any actual damages. The heading of the law in question is "Violating right of privacy—Civil action—Liability for damages."

Is this a privacy violation? Yes. Did these people suffer any actual damages under the law? Evidently not.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I bought my first car this year, I am very happy with it, it is a 2021 Seat Leon PHEV, but shit like this is terrible.

I remember several years ago when I noted that cars had started comming with emergency SOS buttons and apps, that made me realize that there had to be a built in mobile phone connection, and after reading some more, yep, I was right, automakers put in a cell phone module with an eSIM that is allways connected, meaning the car keeps talking to the automakers servers, even if you don't connect a phone.

This means that it is worth it to the automakers to add a phone module and continously pay for a subscription for every car, even if you don't use the feature, that is scary.

[–] DarkwinDuck@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago

Working for a Mobile network provider that does connectivity for cars among other things i can add to that, that they are paying a fairly high price for this stuff too.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok so maybe the legislature should stop it

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Not just maybe. This must stop.

encrypt everything, layers and layers of encryption and then feed them garbage

[–] kirklennon@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

OK, I finally read the original allegation and this is grossly irresponsible reporting. We can put our pitchforks down. The plaintiffs never even claim that the automakers can access your text messages in the first place. This is entirely about the car’s hardware locally caching the messages it displays, some of which could possibly then be read from the cache using specialized and not commonly available equipment.

Is it something to be aware of? Sure. Is something the average person should be concerned about? Not really.

[–] Melpomene@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't believe my car is connected to the internet, thankfully, but I dislike the idea that the data may be stored somewhere in the system. Any idea whether there's a hack to access and remove the data yet?

Currently, nothing is shared through the car (audio only, enjoy my boring music habits) but that was not always the case.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But how can you really be sure? Lte chips are small. Also what if you take it in for service and they pull the data 😂

[–] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

But how can you really be sure?

By refusing to own any car manufactured after the technology became available. That's my strategy, anyway.

(It's also 'cause I like things like manual transmissions that are harder to find on newer vehicles.)

[–] Melpomene@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I can't, but worrying about hidden LTE chips is s path that leads to madness. Unless I ditch all tech, there's no way to be sure.

For the data pull, yeah. I tend to avoid dealers though so I'm not sure that there is much incentive for my mom & pop service station to monetize my data.

[–] haulyard@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is anyone familiar enough to know if this includes text via Apple CarPlay?

[–] notannpc@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I believe CarPlay is still almost entirely controlled by the Apple device and the screen in the car is a glorified display. So the car would likely know that you’re using CarPlay but probably not much else.

[–] zepheriths@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Well, sucks for Washington.