![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
armbhttp://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-oakland2010.pdf
"Over a range of experiments, both in the lab and in road tests, we demonstrate the ability to adversarially control a wide range of automotive functions and completely ignore driver input —
including disabling the brakes, selectively braking individual wheels on demand, stopping the engine, and so on."
If I'd seen some of the possible attacks on a TV show or in a film, I'd have thought it was implausible that so few safeguards were built into the system. In real life there almost certainly isn't someone wanting to compromise your car in this way, and they could use cruder and easier to detect physical methods anyway, but the way some of the protocol specifications have safety or security features that the actual implementations ignore is still worrying.
"Over a range of experiments, both in the lab and in road tests, we demonstrate the ability to adversarially control a wide range of automotive functions and completely ignore driver input —
including disabling the brakes, selectively braking individual wheels on demand, stopping the engine, and so on."
If I'd seen some of the possible attacks on a TV show or in a film, I'd have thought it was implausible that so few safeguards were built into the system. In real life there almost certainly isn't someone wanting to compromise your car in this way, and they could use cruder and easier to detect physical methods anyway, but the way some of the protocol specifications have safety or security features that the actual implementations ignore is still worrying.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-26 08:20 am (UTC)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/10158517.stm