Hackers Cut A Corvette’s Brakes Wirelessly

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The good news? This hack requires physical access to the vehicle for it to work. The bad news? The type of device used for the hack is in tons of vehicle already.

General Motors gets to join Fiat Chrysler and Tesla in an unenviable lineup this week: Using cheap gadgets and text messages, researchers have proven they can hack that most traditional of cars, the Chevy Corvette. And worse still is that this line of attack will work on basically any car with a computer in it, which is to say… all of them.
 
I was going to post a bunch of shit, but rather than turn this into a shit show: any car that has a modem is vulnerable. Don't buy a car with a built in modem.

Manufacturers that i know install modems at least as an option in their vehicle (which you need to worry about because in Chrysler case for example they put a modem in any car with a touch screen, regardless of if you bought the option or not):
Chrysler
GM
BMW
Toyota
Mercedes-Benz

Car Manufacturers that DO NOT have a built in modem
Ford
Honda

Obviously this is not a complete list, its just what i know
 
Romale23 said:
I was going to post a bunch of shit, but rather than turn this into a shit show: any car that has a modem is vulnerable. Don't buy a car with a built in modem.

Manufacturers that i know install modems at least as an option in their vehicle (which you need to worry about because in Chrysler case for example they put a modem in any car with a touch screen, regardless of if you bought the option or not):
Chrysler
GM
BMW
Toyota
Mercedes-Benz

Car Manufacturers that DO NOT have a built in modem
Ford
Honda

Obviously this is not a complete list, its just what i know
Click to expand...
Glad I went with another Mustang this time around instead of a Camaro or Challenger. I still don't understand why cars have to be connected to anything outside of itself at all.
 
Armenius said:
Glad I went with another Mustang this time around instead of a Camaro or Challenger. I still don't understand why cars have to be connected to anything outside of itself at all.
Click to expand...

I still can't figure out why there is 2 way communication between the ECU and the infotainment system. one way modems have existed since the 50s
 
Am I the only one who finds that the addition of "must have physical access" to be a case of "calling this more than it is?"

If I have physical access to the car, I can also physically cut the brake line. Or add a remote-control gizmo to do the same. The fact that they have been able to do it via the CAN bus (or some other data bus,) is just a different mechanism.

It's like complaining that someone with physical access to your computer can then later remotely access your data. OF COURSE THEY CAN. Once you gain physical access, you can do almost anything you want if you're malicious and have sufficient tools.
 
CharonPDX said:
Am I the only one who finds that the addition of "must have physical access" to be a case of "calling this more than it is?"

If I have physical access to the car, I can also physically cut the brake line. Or add a remote-control gizmo to do the same. The fact that they have been able to do it via the CAN bus (or some other data bus,) is just a different mechanism.

It's like complaining that someone with physical access to your computer can then later remotely access your data. OF COURSE THEY CAN. Once you gain physical access, you can do almost anything you want if you're malicious and have sufficient tools.
Click to expand...

I agree, cutting the brake line is just as easy. It's not the same level of problem that Chrysler has.
 
Romale23 said:
I was going to post a bunch of shit, but rather than turn this into a shit show: any car that has a modem is vulnerable. Don't buy a car with a built in modem.

Manufacturers that i know install modems at least as an option in their vehicle (which you need to worry about because in Chrysler case for example they put a modem in any car with a touch screen, regardless of if you bought the option or not):
Chrysler
GM
BMW
Toyota
Mercedes-Benz

Car Manufacturers that DO NOT have a built in modem
Ford
Honda

Obviously this is not a complete list, its just what i know
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with 'modems'. It has to do with the OBD-II Port which is available for access from the interior of every car sold. The only variation is how much diagnostic related control is offered via that port.

Anyway someone has to break into your car's interior to compromise it. Someone could break into the engine compartment and put a remote control relay on your brakes too since the 50's or 60's.
 
CharonPDX said:
Am I the only one who finds that the addition of "must have physical access" to be a case of "calling this more than it is?"

If I have physical access to the car, I can also physically cut the brake line. Or add a remote-control gizmo to do the same. The fact that they have been able to do it via the CAN bus (or some other data bus,) is just a different mechanism.

It's like complaining that someone with physical access to your computer can then later remotely access your data. OF COURSE THEY CAN. Once you gain physical access, you can do almost anything you want if you're malicious and have sufficient tools.
Click to expand...

In the Tesla you had to have physical access. In the demo where they used the Corvette it didn't require physical access. Just for the car to have one of the insurance dongles installed. The weak point was the dongle and it's ability to send information to the car instead of just reading it. Read the article it states how this dongle tech in general is in widespread use and is exploitable.
 
So, they didn't hack the corvette. They hacked the third party OBD2 based dongle someone plugged into their corvette...
 
WARNING!!!

Strangers can gain access your wired internet connection if they have access your switch.

WARNING!!!
 
A vulnerability is a vulnerability. Physically cutting someone's brake line is a hell of a lot more detectable than electronically and temporarily disabling the brake. There probably wouldn't even be evidence of the latter.
 
I'm sure you could build a wireless solenoid to cut the brake lines without entering the car.
 
I find it somewhat ironic that a device provided by insurance companies to encourage safe driving has flaws that can decrease safety.

Wonder how long before we have a patch Tuesday for insurance dongles?
 
Is this Wired article anymore a farse then the last Wired article about hacking a car? Or any more of a farse about the Wired article where they say a hacker claimed he took control of an airplane through the infotainment? And then went and admitted that he never actually did it on a podcast nor had he ever heard of anyone even hacking an airplane.

Cause if it's one of those Wired articles, then I am totally scared!
 
Got to love it when tech people think they are car people :rolleyes:

first off this isn't a hack, I could do the same with a ELM327 Bluetooth adapter or a wireless SAE J2435 compliant device and any number of off the shelf software, provided by both third parties and the manufactures for legit use. except I know that I could apply the brakes, turn off the brakes, I could blow up the motor, burn up the transmission, and if equipped with electric power steering, even steer you into a tree. any electronic control or function on the vehicle is fair game.

on EVERY vehicle manufactured MY2006 and later is equipped with a CAN bus network connection at the DLC pins 6 & 14. most everyone attached additional network connections on the remaining 14 pins in the DLC and I know of at least one model with a second DLC for additional network connections. this connections is the primary access point tot he vehicles networks. as a result if you can gain access to those pins, you have access to the network.

So the question really should be: Why is the network so open?
The answer: because, as consumers, we demanded it to be.

The CAN bus is open so 3rd parties can have access to it, not just the manufacturer. this is so you can have your vehicle serviced outside of a dealer. the access commands are also open, so you can have 3rd party diagnostic software and not just the dealer software. what can be locked down is the proprietary software commands to control hardware functions, however many of those commands are made available in order to allow proper servicing by outside facilities. Things like Snap-On's MODIS for example can frequently perform hardware commands via software.

safeguards such as not opening the ABS dump valves when a vehicle speed sensor signal is present are present in the interfacing software, not the hardware controller. if you know the command, and you can interface with the controller to send it, then you can perform the control. Thus, they could have commanded the throttle opening to 100% and leaned the injectors out enough to blow the engine. they could have lightly applied multiple clutches in the transmission and burnt them up. they could have closed the ABS hold valves and brought the car to a stop. doesn't matter what car, doesn't matter if it has a modem or not. if you can access the data networks, then you can access the controller. from there, it is just learning the hardware commands.

So in this case, they managed to reverse engineer a scan tool and diagnostic software through an OBDII CAN Interface Dongle exploit.

reality is, the data busses will never be secure, until the safeguards are coded into the controllers, as long as we demand 3rd party access.
 
Kaitian said:
Oh good, I'm unaffected. Recently bought a Civic that has a touchscreen. :)
Click to expand...

the person you quoted is wrong.

secondly, this applies to any vehicle built MY 2006 and later.

thirdly, it is working, exactly as it is suppose to. the "researchers" just reverse engineered a diagnostic tool without any safeguards, then claimed it as a hack and vulnerability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top