
Tesla can detect aftermarket hacks designed to defeat EV performance paywalls - wgx
https://www.thedrive.com/news/35946/tesla-can-detect-aftermarket-hacks-designed-to-defeat-ev-performance-paywalls
======
murgindrag
It feels like $40k is a lot of money to pay Tesla to license a car, at least
so long as I can buy a car outright from its competitors for less than that.

I'd rather have a car I own, all things being equal. All things being unequal
too, actually. Tesla cars would need to be much better to compete, given the
licensing versus ownership model.

I imagine at some point, Tesla will switch to car-as-a-service models. I guess
most companies already have those in the form of leases, but I don't lease
cars.

~~~
zpeti
All they are doing is voiding the warranty, so you're not exactly "leasing"
the car.

Change it all you want, but don't expect Tesla to fix your car once you've
messed with it yourself. And don't expect to sue them when autopilot kills
you, because it's not their responsibility any more.

~~~
murgindrag
> All they are doing is voiding the warranty, so you're not exactly "leasing"
> the car.

That's all that's described in this article. This is not an isolated article.
You can see articles about:

* Tesla stripping features from cars when people resell them

* Articles from small repair shops, unable to work on Tesla vehicles because of locked-down software

* Articles about Tesla's surveillance on car owners

* Deactivating vehicles it doesn't think should be driven (e.g. ones from serious accidents)

* Forcing updates

And so on. With Tesla, you clearly don't fully own your car.

~~~
craftinator
I'd really like to be able to disconnect my car from the internet.

~~~
athms
Connected cars using a data communication module (DCM) are going to be
required in every market eventually. The EU has already mandated this. In
Japan, Toyota rolled out its Connected Cars initiative to all its vehicles in
2018. In the USA, Toyota put a DCM in select cars for telemetry almost ten
years ago and this year they stated all their remaining vehicles will get
them. All the luxury brands such as BMW and Porsche have a DCM for telemetry,
safety, and service support.

States that use fuel taxes to fund road improvements will need to find other
ways to tax electric vehicles and data derived from DCM will help them. Plus,
autonomous transport will need to communicate.

~~~
poizan42
> The EU has already mandated this.

Are you thinking about eCall? That is only supposed to be activated during an
emergency.

[https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/security-and-
em...](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/security-and-
emergencies/emergency-assistance-vehicles-ecall/index_en.htm#shortcut-3)

~~~
fomine3
If communication module is mandatory even only for emergency, it makes easier
entire car to be connected.

~~~
argb
The EU requires the module to be powered off except in an emergency. So it's
not in contact with cell towers all the time, except when it needs to make an
emergency call. It's easy enough to detect the transmissions with simple
hardware.

------
markvdb
If I'd ever buy a car, I'd rather not have antifeatures in it. I'd rather have
the Lada/Zhiguli [0] of the future:

\- safe

\- simple

\- electric

\- cheap

\- mass produced

\- open hardware

\- public road certified

The Dacia Spring Electric [1] might get close.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAZ-2107](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAZ-2107)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacia_Spring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacia_Spring)

~~~
starpilot
If you ever bought a car, your lifestyle would likely be very
different/shifted, and your anticipated viewpoints might not hold. It's like
saying, "If I was vegetarian, I would like these foods." You have no idea what
you would like because you have never been part of that subculture.

~~~
beervirus
I eat meat and dislike spinach. Will I suddenly start liking spinach if I cut
the meat out of my diet?

------
rbecker
> your connected car knows when you've hacked it, and it might be logging that
> data to use against you in a future warranty claim. [..] Nobody except Tesla
> really knows the answer to this right now, but knowing that my car could
> potentially tattle on me to its mommy is a bit unnerving.

It's almost like the car is a hostile entity, loyal to its manufacturer
instead of its owner..

~~~
TheChaplain
Well imagine you download Te5lA-b00ster-5.zip from Pirate Bay and install it
into the car. Next thing you know the autopilot goes haywire and kills you.

Who do you think will get the blame?

~~~
serf
well, historically in the US, if I modify a car and have an incident, _if the
modification is found to be the cause_ the liability falls to me, the person
who modified it, not the manufacturer.

One can say that Tesla is further still limiting liability by going to these
measures, but if other manufacturers have not chosen to take such measures ,
even with the same practical liability and ability to do so, then one can
surmise that Tesla is acting in a way that is against consumers who feel
strongly about personal ownership and right-to-repair/right-to-modify.

If car companies considered liability to be the penultimate measure of success
they wouldn't sell 500+ horsepower sports cars. The risk is worth taking for a
chance to capture the market sector. Same here -- Tesla might find this a good
business decision, but a portion of their market will be inevitably lost on
matters of personal principal.

It's up to them whether or not that gamble is worth taking. Given that sports-
cars and car modification in general seem to have been on a downward decline,
they're probably correct to assume such postures; but i'm not a fan.

~~~
TheChaplain
Yes from a legal perspective I agree.

But what I am talking about is the MSM and they having field day. "Tesla
autopilots off a bridge", "Telsa hacked, killed driver" etc etc.

And bad press is a real threat for business, especially when it comes to comes
to safety of the driver/passenger.

For the downward car modification trend, I get the impression it's improved
protection from manufacturers that are the reason, wouldn't you agree?

~~~
kllrnohj
We have almost 100 years of history to show such concerns are largely not
real.

Nobody blamed Honda for the Fast & Furious movies, for example. Nobody blames
Chevrolet for lowriders. Nobody blames Ford for these asshats:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVyBaX6sCd4)

There's vanishingly few examples of modified cars generating mainstream media
shitstorms. Appealing to fear is rarely a good justification for stripping
rights & freedoms.

------
devit
The fact that they sell the hack for $1500 is pretty ridiculous.

Seems like there's a market for a reverse-engineered version of the hack,
priced at slightly above the cost of materials (which I suspect to be around
$50 at most).

~~~
jayd16
The way I look at it, they have some time to failure calculation for the
normal and performance usage. That TTF calculation goes into the price of
servicing the warranty and that goes into the price of the car.

You're basically paying for the warranty extension and that doesn't seem that
bad to me. Feels more like overclocking to me.

------
pratio
This can also be useful in some cases right?

\- What if some external accessory or change was made without the owner's
knowledge?. As cars become more software dependent, steps like these might
become necessary.

\- Manufacturers obviously want to take their hands-off during warranty claims
if the car has been tuned or modified.

\- The owner in the issue mentioned above hasn't had any issues while driving
except a notification that wouldn't go away. As long as i can modify my car
and drive it without a hassle, i would like my car to tell me what changes
have been made to it.

~~~
heavyset_go
> _What if some external accessory or change was made without the owner 's
> knowledge?. As cars become more software dependent, steps like these might
> become necessary._

Should whoever built your house be notified if you modify it after buying it?
After all, those changes could have been made without the owner's knowledge.

~~~
estebank
Although I agree with the sentiment, when changing a house after buying it you
might have to notify your local government or even ask for permission,
depending on what you're changing and where you are.

~~~
heavyset_go
The motor vehicle inspection agency isn't the one who is notified when a Tesla
car is modified, Tesla is.

------
raxxorrax
Nothing unusual and also applicable for other manufacturers and petrol cars.
You loose warranty of course, but some people still opt for "chip" tuning
right after buying. Others might wait the 4 years.

~~~
jaxx75
The difference is that tuning an IC engine is pushing components into/past its
designed safety/mechanical thresholds. Does 'tuning' a Tesla actually do this?
If it is designed to perform at this level after paying Tesla, how could they
deny warranty coverage with Magnuson-Moss in mind?

~~~
jayd16
Do they bin batteries and parts? Is the price based on a calculation of
failure rates and warranty service costs? Or is it just a cash grab? I'm not
sure.

------
capableweb
Maybe slightly off-topic but in general, do people buy random electronics over
the internet and connect it to their car? Feels like a overly easy way of
hacking a massive amount of cars, by simply having them buy a thing you
connect to your already IoT-ified car, and allow anyone to read and control
your car.

Seems like the detection feature from Tesla is meant to provide this, rather
than preventing 3rd party mods. As I would never connect anything to my cars
IT systems, I would happily receive a warning if the car did detect something
like that.

~~~
kortex
Sounds like a great way to put yourself out of the tuning business.

Unless we are talking some Ocean's 11 style scheme where you make a tuner
company just to get their exploit into cars, all to be turned on at once on
the big day.

------
Tinyyy
I wonder if Tesla will limit supercharger usage to unmodified cars.

~~~
toomuchtodo
They do. Modified cars or those with a salvage title are blacklisted from
Superchargers by VIN. It's their right of course, as it's their charging
network.

~~~
djaychela
It's worse than that, they also block fast charging at non-Tesla charging
locations, which to me is an over stepping of the mark, abs punitive action
against salvage vehicle owners.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Its Tesla's liability and reputation if a Tesla vehicle with questionable
integrity burns at a DC fast charger. I don't think that's "worse", that's the
deal if you own a Tesla vehicle (regardless of how you obtained ownership).
Just takes one careless tinkerer to ruin the narrative for everyone. Tesla
previously had a recertification program, where you could pay for a tech to
inspect the HV battery and powertrain to confirm it's state supported fast DC
charging, not sure if they're still offering it though.

~~~
hansvm
> Its Tesla's liability and reputation if a Tesla vehicle with questionable
> integrity burns at a DC fast charger.

That same argument could be made for just about anything being sold -- the
original owner could still exert control over your purchase because their
reputation might be damaged if you weren't careful. You're not wrong that the
court of public opinion can be vindictive, but I think that's by far the
lesser evil compared with not actually owning the things you buy. We grant
exceptions here and there (can't use your baseball bat to kill a person,
usually), but none anywhere nearly as invasive as prohibiting any activity
that might give a former owner bad PR.

The fact that Tesla has an automated means of enforcement is a big part of why
this is coming up at all. They don't have to wait to figure out what the
courts say; they can use software to do what they want till they're explicitly
forbidden.

~~~
potatochup
It will be interesting to see what impact right-to-repair laws have here. They
are already forcing the release of service documentation, tooling &
procedures. But does that also apply to re-certifying a crashed vehicle? Will
denying charging to crashed vehicles even be allowed?

------
argb
These aftermarket hacks should definitely be legal, but don't expect Tesla to
provide any more online services such as automatic firmware upgrades. These
would have to be done manually by the owner now.

------
natch
The pioneers in any field always get attacked when they add safeguards.

And then later when they catch up, the laggards add similar safeguards.

Usually there are valid reasons beyond just the usual “protect profits” this
gets portrayed as. Even if that’s part of it, it’s often more about protecting
the brand and product safety.

Autos are different from some products in that there are real safety issues if
stuff is not done right.

------
Dylan16807
> Others bring up the very valid point of right to repair—but does that also
> include right to modify?

Yes.

------
grishka
So what happens, exactly, if you buy a Tesla and never connect it to the
internet?

~~~
slivanes
I believe they have a built-in SIM and mobile connection for its own purposes.

~~~
grishka
And if you remove that?

~~~
generaljargon
Presumably they can void your warrenty all the same since the car is no longer
phoning home

~~~
potatochup
Teslas don't have to phone home to operate. They work just fine off-grid, and
you can also opt-out of any data collection/phone home [1] if you want. As
mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the burden of proof is on the manufacturer
to prove that the modification caused the damage (at least in the USA), so
removing the sim and turning off wifi is unlikely to void any warranty

[1] [https://www.tesla.com/about/legal#choice-
transparency](https://www.tesla.com/about/legal#choice-transparency)

