2021 Ford F-150 will update software over the air

[BehindBlueI's]

https://www.motor1.com/news/423604/2021-ford-f150-ota-updates/


Connectivity going forward certainly has advantages when it comes to vehicle maintenance, remotely troubleshooting problems, and plugging in software updates to improve various systems. Gathering data on features customers use can help guide Ford in determining costs for options and extras, and then there's the supplier/vendor side of the equation with various apps and services. We’ll likely have to wait until the new truck arrives before understanding the full scope of this system. For now, just know it's coming.

I'm not in the market for a new truck for hopefully at *least* another 5 years or so, but should I be concerned about vehicles going to OTA updates? Couldn't the manufacturer, in theory, brick my truck?

I drive a 4th gen Ram now and have no interest in the 5th gen. I don't like the dial shifter and I don't like the aesthetics of the exterior. Unless I hold out long enough for a 6th gen I think I'll likely go back to Ford with my next truck, but OTA stuff makes me nervous. I do really like the looks of the new interior, though, and the exterior is at least acceptable.

[JAD]

Live monitoring makes everything better, sincerely. We do it for high end propulsion equipment on cruise ships and the like, and they get radically better service and much more rapid product improvement. Being able to fix something in the canaries with a guy at a desk in Kansas City is pretty bitchin.

[mtnbkr]

should I be concerned about vehicles going to OTA updates? Couldn't the manufacturer, in theory, brick my truck?

Yes, you should be concerned. Not because the manufacturer will break your truck, but because security is hard and there will be vulnerabilities that are exploitable. My company was approached by an auto manufacturer last year to implement monitoring for "connected vehicles". That part of the market is very green right now.


Live monitoring makes everything better, sincerely.
Agreed.


We do it for high end propulsion equipment on cruise ships and the like, and they get radically better service and much more rapid product improvement. Being able to fix something in the canaries with a guy at a desk in Kansas City is pretty bitchin.
Security in large scale OT* is a *bit* more mature than in consumer-owned vehicles (or at least more known). However, it's still not great. There are a lot of otherwise obsolete systems out there managing our power grid, factories, etc. Stuff running on DOS, ancient versions of Windows, and embedded systems that were never intended to be connected to a global network, but now are.

Know how everyone is concerned about the inherent lack of security in the IoT? OT (including consumer autos) isn't a lot better and can be worse due to the age of the tech in question (OT can be in place for decades).

I won't have a "connected" vehicle until I see some real effort put into securing the vehicles or a definitive way for the consumer to turn off OTA updates and access.

Also, we haven't even touched on the risk to privacy. If they can "touch" your car remotely to "update" it, what else can they access and learn? The risk to consumer privacy was a major risk I identified in the connected car project I mentioned. GDPR was believed to have applied once the specter was raised. The rest of the world has strong privacy controls, the US does not.

*OT=Operational Technology

Chris

[Grey]

Live monitoring makes everything better, sincerely. We do it for high end propulsion equipment on cruise ships and the like, and they get radically better service and much more rapid product improvement. Being able to fix something in the canaries with a guy at a desk in Kansas City is pretty bitchin.

Live monitoring makes everything better as long as your hardware/software doesn't become legacy and unsupported and can be replaced as necessary... Industrial Control Systems wants to say hello...

[littlejerry]

I think the biggest concern is ongoing support. Many software companies have gone to a subscription based model. Consider many "outdated" OS's are now unsupported and users have been told they they are on their own. "Sorry, if you don't want sum dood in India to hack you please upgrade to our new subscription service!"

For a mature technology I'd be inclined to buy as-is with known deficiencies rather than have the rug pulled out from under me later on.

[mtnbkr]

Ongoing support is already a concern without OTA. My 2013 Focus gets updates to its software, just not OTA. I have to take it to a dealer and have them plug the car into a computer in order to modify the software.

The concern here, at least with me, is the OTA nature of these updates and how well the system and the remote access element of it is going to be secured against unauthorized access. It has already been proven cars can be hacked and remotely manipulated (https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/), though OTA wasn't a factor. OTA will just make it easier.

Have a gander at the OWASP Top 10 (https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/) if you want to see how repetitive certain design and coding weaknesses are in the online world. Now imagine those weaknesses being translated to your vehicle. OWASP is concerned with online apps, but many of the Top 10 would apply to an OTA system in autos (Broken Auth, Sensitive Data Exposure, Broken Access Control, Security Misconfig, Using Components With Known Vulnerabilities, Insufficient Logging and Monitoring).

Chris

[farscott]

This is an area in which I have some tangential involvement as we supply some modules to OEMs that can be updated OTA. Right now, the simple answer is not all OEMs are at the same place when it comes to security. I cannot say too much, but my last new vehicles are 2017 MY Ford Taurus and Mustang which do not support OTA, and there is no way I am ever buying the first year's production of any new vehicle with a new architecture and/or platform. That lesson goes back to the 1990s when I worked for an OEM and launched four model years of product.

There will be bugs and holes, and it will take some time for them to be patched or architected out of the vehicle systems.

[Stephanie B]

I think the biggest concern is ongoing support.

When one considers that a reasonably maintained car or truck will last twenty years or more, that's a real concern.

(Well, maybe not for me. I'm going to run my '05 Honda until the wheels fall off.)

[Hambo]

I've always liked the looks of 2nd Generation GMC C-series pickups, and this thread confirms that I need one. :cool:

[rob_s]

I've always liked the looks of 2nd Generation GMC C-series pickups, and this thread confirms that I need one. :cool:

Just because society, trends, and generations seem so intent on being contrary, I keep wondering at what point do we see a “down with technology” generation that goes out looking for old analog items in an effort to be (or appear to be) the least technological. There’s some amount of that already with “mantiques” and the like, but at some point I wonder if it doesn’t become mainstream enough to really start driving prices up, and possibly even influence new manufacturing. I’d love a new-manufacture Jeep or Miata type car that eliminated all of the whiz-bang and was very stripped down.

But I also want a pre-blue-oval f100 or f150...

[BehindBlueI's]

But I also want a pre-blue-oval f100 or f150...

I ran across this in my standard "let's see what those guys have today" browsing and figured in the spirit of PF enabling:


http://www.rustfreeclassics.com/Ford/73F100_4x4_LB_Custom_Blue_White.htm

http://www.rustfreeclassics.com/images/Ford/73F100_Custom_LB_Blue_White/20190711_170131%20[1024x768].jpg

[RJ]

I was a bit startled when my 2016 RAM 2500 did a nav map update automatically...driving East on I80 at 65 mph. I suppose it’s a sign of the times that ECM modules would get updated the same way. As an owner, I think I’d like a ‘disallow’ setting but I suspect I might not have a chance. Hey as long as it’s not Microsoft, I’m ok. :cool:

[Hambo]

Just because society, trends, and generations seem so intent on being contrary, I keep wondering at what point do we see a “down with technology” generation that goes out looking for old analog items in an effort to be (or appear to be) the least technological. There’s some amount of that already with “mantiques” and the like, but at some point I wonder if it doesn’t become mainstream enough to really start driving prices up, and possibly even influence new manufacturing. I’d love a new-manufacture Jeep or Miata type car that eliminated all of the whiz-bang and was very stripped down.

But I also want a pre-blue-oval f100 or f150...

I really do want modern safety technology, but the thought of future cars having software issues like our consumer electronics is not pleasant. While the ideal would be a stripped down version, I can't see the auto industry doing that. So that leaves older cars, or figuring out a way to strip down the electronics in a modern car. Leave the air bags, but have a transmission that doesn't use software.

[mtnbkr]

I really do want modern safety technology, but the thought of future cars having software issues like our consumer electronics is not pleasant. While the ideal would be a stripped down version, I can't see the auto industry doing that. So that leaves older cars, or figuring out a way to strip down the electronics in a modern car. Leave the air bags, but have a transmission that doesn't use software.

That's kind of where I'm leaning. I like modern safety features and power windows (which tend to be more reliable over very long-term use than crank windows), but I don't need integrated GPS or cars that talk to me. If I want integration with my phone, I can add that via an aftermarket stereo and control what features are part of the system.

My 23yo 4Runner still runs good and has everything I *need* in a vehicle. I decided I wanted a modern stereo that could stream content from my phone and play digital content directly from a USB drive, so I bought a Kenwood head unit and new speakers. It works and sounds better than an equivalent system in my 2013 Focus!

Sometimes I wonder if I would have been better off to take the money I spent on my Focus and put that into my 4Runner, making it virtually "new". Granted, the Focus is more comfortable and gets better gas mileage, but it hasn't proven to be more reliable (while the 4Runner has never suffered non-wear failures, the Focus has).

Chris

[blues]

OTAR was great in our motorola radios at work. I really don't think I want more methods of intrusion in my personal rides, however. I imagine it's going to happen one way or another, anyway.

[Navin Johnson]

Will this allow programed system failures and lower performance if it is kept too long like a cell phone?

My nephew has an iPhone 4 that he refuses the near daily system update attempts and it runs like new.

[Greg]

A Toyota Corolla rental (my company spares no expense :cool:) did not have a navigation screen but it did display the local speed limit in the gauge cluster.

It also had a super annoying lane change monitor that would actually tug on the steering wheel if you changed lanes without signalling. This kinda tells me the car has connectivity and GPS even though you don't get to enjoy them.

I decided to go down the highway with my hands off the wheel (empty road) on a slight curve and the car followed the curve but was nagging me to put my hands back on the wheel. It eventually shut off the lane change monitor on it's own to discourage hands free driving.

There is no freaking way I would have this crap in a car I'd pay for. I'll drive old beaters if I have to.

[OlongJohnson]

Just because society, trends, and generations seem so intent on being contrary, I keep wondering at what point do we see a “down with technology” generation that goes out looking for old analog items in an effort to be (or appear to be) the least technological. There’s some amount of that already with “mantiques” and the like, but at some point I wonder if it doesn’t become mainstream enough to really start driving prices up, and possibly even influence new manufacturing. I’d love a new-manufacture Jeep or Miata type car that eliminated all of the whiz-bang and was very stripped down.

But I also want a pre-blue-oval f100 or f150...

All of the above. My current fun car was a version built with all the go-fast stuff and none of the heavy luxury electronic self-obsoleting crap. The car I keep saying I wish I could buy new off the assembly line is a 1998 M3.


I ran across this in my standard "let's see what those guys have today" browsing and figured in the spirit of PF enabling:


http://www.rustfreeclassics.com/Ford/73F100_4x4_LB_Custom_Blue_White.htm

http://www.rustfreeclassics.com/images/Ford/73F100_Custom_LB_Blue_White/20190711_170131%20[1024x768].jpg

Love those old Fords. There's some old guy (10-15 older than me, at least) who rocks a late-'80s/early '90s F-150 that's pristine.

I'm actually thinking this may not be overpriced: JRB

https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?listingId=552876606


Leave the air bags, but have a transmission that doesn't use software.

That's called a manual. They are still made, for a little while.

Automatics have been controlled to a significant extent by software since the '80s, and are massively better for it, although the shifting is still mechanical on the vast majority of automatics.



A Toyota Corolla rental (my company spares no expense :cool:) did not have a navigation screen but it did display the local speed limit in the gauge cluster.

It also had a super annoying lane change monitor that would actually tug on the steering wheel if you changed lanes without signalling. This kinda tells me the car has connectivity and GPS even though you don't get to enjoy them.

I decided to go down the highway with my hands off the wheel (empty road) on a slight curve and the car followed the curve but was nagging me to put my hands back on the wheel. It eventually shut off the lane change monitor on it's own to discourage hands free driving.

There is no freaking way I would have this crap in a car I'd pay for. I'll drive old beaters if I have to.

Lane keeping assist is coming soon enough on all cars.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-iihs-announcement-aeb

So far, the agreement only includes braking, but having the sensors on board enables other technologies. They will likely all become ubiquitous in time.

-------------------

Am I the only one who imagines "opt-out island" where we can go back to the tech level of the late '90s, early '00s?

[hiro]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a moment, bear with me.

What are the actual security risks we're talking about here?

I get that introducing software has ramifications of bugs and such but that's just the 21st century version of using the wrong steel or finish and things breaking when they're not supposed to. It's always happened in one way or another.

What kind of info is there to be concerned about in a car's OS?

Our phones already track us and hold our personal lives. I'd guess most of reading this thread are not as savvy with our online privacy as we'd like to be. I know I'm not but I'm working on it.

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

[blues]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a moment, bear with me.

What are the actual security risks we're talking about here?

I get that introducing software has ramifications of bugs and such but that's just the 21st century version of using the wrong steel or finish and things breaking when they're not supposed to. It's always happened in one way or another.

What kind of info is there to be concerned about in a car's OS?

Our phones already track us and hold our personal lives. I'd guess most of reading this thread are not as savvy with our online privacy as we'd like to be. I know I'm not but I'm working on it.

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

When you have a private conversation and the vehicle responds: "Ford has a better idea".

[hiro]

When you have a private conversation and the vehicle responds: "Ford has a better idea".

Siri, Alexa and whatever cute name the Google assistant has have been doing that for a while.

[farscott]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a moment, bear with me.

What are the actual security risks we're talking about here?

I get that introducing software has ramifications of bugs and such but that's just the 21st century version of using the wrong steel or finish and things breaking when they're not supposed to. It's always happened in one way or another.

What kind of info is there to be concerned about in a car's OS?

Our phones already track us and hold our personal lives. I'd guess most of reading this thread are not as savvy with our online privacy as we'd like to be. I know I'm not but I'm working on it.

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

Some examples of security violations that I know happened under controlled testing environments.

1) Anti-lock brake system disabled

2) Spoofing vehicle speed sensors while on cruise control, causing vehicle to accelerate well beyond set point.

3) Changing power steering boost and making steering inputs unstable.

Most people already share too much information with the vehicle, using when pairing phones to head units, but those will not lead to injury or death. Messing with SW and data on vehicle connected buses can lead to injury or death.

[blues]

Siri, Alexa and whatever cute name the Google assistant has have been doing that for a while.

I don't use those, by and large, but when I have, at least I know that they are present and how to set their controls. And delete anything they "heard". (If you can actually believe that anymore.)

I am opining on the possibility of being eavesdropped on in the vehicle without knowledge. Playing devil's advocate. I really don't know much about OnStar or any of these communications options other than I can link my phone via bluetooth to speak hands free.

[Caballoflaco]

Siri, Alexa and whatever cute name the Google assistant has have been doing that for a while.

But siri doesn’t come permanently installed in all houses yet, and isn’t necessary for a house to do house stuff.

Auto emergency braking: carjacker’s paradise. I might have a need to run something over or smash something with a vehicle one day.

Constant connectivity. I can leave my cell phone at the house or turn it off and put it in a faraday.

There was a Terminator novel where Skynet re-routes all of the autonomous cars back to major population centers before nuking the cities.

Imagine the possibilities if enemies of the country foreign or domestic have the ability to gain control of operable vehicles while simply sitting behind a computer.

Hey, we don’t need cops because your car will never again exceed posted speed limits or perform other illegal maneuvers. Or insurance companies will demand access to that data for all drivers rather than it being an opt in program.

[littlejerry]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a moment, bear with me.

What are the actual security risks we're talking about here?

I get that introducing software has ramifications of bugs and such but that's just the 21st century version of using the wrong steel or finish and things breaking when they're not supposed to. It's always happened in one way or another.

What kind of info is there to be concerned about in a car's OS?

Our phones already track us and hold our personal lives. I'd guess most of reading this thread are not as savvy with our online privacy as we'd like to be. I know I'm not but I'm working on it.

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

Bricked is a huge concern. Ever hear about all the Nest thermostats that got turned off by a faulty update?

In terms of ongoing support look at Microsft not supporting Windows 7, or various smartphone companies stopping security updates after 2 years.

Security isn't stable. It requires ongoing support to eliminate newly discovered vulnerabilities. Thats not a problem when you have controlled hard wire access, but it is huge when you connect it to the rest of the world.

I won't be buying connected appliances for similar reasons. I have zero confidence these companies will maintain security for as long as I'd like to keep a fridge, oven, washer, etc.

I like my 2006 Tundra. Its pretty analog for a modern car. Toyota gets a lot of flack for not updating the Tundra, Tacoma, 4Runner, etc, but in my mind it makes them more appealing.

[blues]

https://youtu.be/8CtjhWhw2I8

[blues]

Reading this thread, I suppose that the new definition of "Luddite" will be anyone who wants to have control and make decisions for themselves.

Here be dragons.

[mtnbkr]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a moment, bear with me.

What are the actual security risks we're talking about here?

I get that introducing software has ramifications of bugs and such but that's just the 21st century version of using the wrong steel or finish and things breaking when they're not supposed to. It's always happened in one way or another.

What kind of info is there to be concerned about in a car's OS?

Our phones already track us and hold our personal lives. I'd guess most of reading this thread are not as savvy with our online privacy as we'd like to be. I know I'm not but I'm working on it.

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

Did you read the article I linked above? It documented an actual attack leveraging a real vulnerability in the target vehicle. Now add on top of that an ability to deliver updates OTA resulting in an open path being available on each and every vehicle. Now add on top of that the inherently poor security in most consumer products (think IoT devices like smart appliances, thermostats, etc). Do you *really* want to risk that in a vehicle you could be hurtling along at 60+mph?

If you consider car systems to be "operational technology" and not "information technology", then experience shows that security is not a core concept of those systems. Mainly because until recently, most OT was not connected. The control and access was locally significant. Adding remote management, internet connectivity, and now OTA to OT without appropriate controls and a security-focused development cycle is a recipe for disaster. Even in IT systems where the general risks have been known for decades, we're still routinely uncovering new threats and vulnerabilities that require ongoing development. This is why when a company like MS finally stops support of an OS, you're advised to dump it ASAP or why you should keep your phones updated with a current version of IOS or Android that is receiving regular updates.

At the moment, the risk of an attacker taking over your car and driving you into a wall is slim, but as cars add more self-driving capabilities, that risk will grow. However, an attacker could turn off critical systems, force the car to do things that would damage itself (shift into low gear at high speeds, turn off cooling systems, tinker with engine controls, etc), or just turn the car off at inconvenient or dangerous times (crossing a train track maybe).

Just so you know where I'm coming from on this...
24 years in IT, 20 of that in security (FedGov and private industry).
I managed a global SOC for a large international telecom.
I've designed and launched multiple commercial security services.
I've consulted on security monitoring projects specifically related to connected car concepts (this is an example of "connected car").
I hold two security-oriented industry certifications (Certified Information Security Manager and Certified Information Systems Security Professional) and one privacy-oriented certification (Certified Data Privacy Solutions Engineer).

Chris

[Caballoflaco]

mtnbkr

I’m not terribly knowledgeable about you’re magical electron world so I have a question.

Let’s assume that some of the car’s electronic components are produced in China. How difficult would it be for that company to hide a bit of code that acts as a back door for the CCCP to brick every car produced with said component if they decided an infrastructure hit on the US was a good thing.

[randyho]

mtnbkr

I’m not terribly knowledgeable about you’re magical electron world so I have a question.

Let’s assume that some of the car’s electronic components are produced in China. How difficult would it be for that company to hide a bit of code that acts as a back door for the CCCP to brick every car produced with said component if they decided an infrastructure hit on the US was a good thing.
Not mtnbkr. But, trivial. Supply chain security is a huge deal.

[BehindBlueI's]

BBI said a concern was the car being bricked, aside from that, and leaving the tin foil in the kitchen drawer, what are the concerns?

I think bricking shouldn't be glossed over. During evacuations in FL, Tesla OTA updated their vehicles to increase the range. I get F-150s aren't electric (mostly, and yet) but do I want a private company deciding if I can drive that day or not. Even if a bad actor never gets the ability, why do I want Ford to have that ability? Particularly if I can't control when and if they change things?

[OlongJohnson]

Makes me want to get me an old mechanically-injected diesel.

[JRB]

On several occasions, our customers asked us to disable and remove all OnStar functionality from their cars. I totally understood why and never questioned it.

A friend of mine just flew to Denver to pick up his Tesla P85D. They did a software update before he hit the road, and ended up staying the night up there because they'd bricked the car. The software update's major new feature? A video game you can play on the console tablet. Hardware had to be replaced to fix this issue. The P85D is brutally fast and very impressive, but I'll never want one. Since my friend is a realtor that drives clients around all day, it makes sense for him though.

As time goes on there are fewer and fewer new vehicles I'd ever be interested in owning. Currently I can't imagine buying anything newer than 2015 or so as everything's getting worse. Lots of these newer models have the 'bloatware' effect with nanny bullshit and other straight-up creepy shit built into the cars that is NOT for the owner/driver's use or benefit.

OlongJohnson - that autotrader link leads me to a very overpriced ho-hum 2006 Chevy truck. Best bet to find old iron is to look in the various craigslists in Southwest cities. It's worth the trip to avoid the rust issues.

[mtnbkr]

mtnbkr

I’m not terribly knowledgeable about you’re magical electron world so I have a question.

Let’s assume that some of the car’s electronic components are produced in China. How difficult would it be for that company to hide a bit of code that acts as a back door for the CCCP to brick every car produced with said component if they decided an infrastructure hit on the US was a good thing.

It would depend on that device's access to the rest of the system, but theoretically possible. This would not be all that different than Stuxnet except preloaded from the start. This could be mitigated by reverse engineering, source code review, and adopting a zero trust architecture (becoming more common in IT, but not sure if it has spread to OT yet).

Speaking of Stuxnet, that was loaded via an infected USB drive, but with OTA, a similar malware could theoretically be loaded by attackers in the car next to yours on the highway.


Not mtnbkr. But, trivial. Supply chain security is a huge deal.
Yup. I'm increasingly becoming reluctant to use electronics from random Chinese companies (ie the random weird crap on Ebay and Amazon).

I'm probably being a bit paranoid about OTA on vehicles, but given how the IT industry struggles with security and how auto makers aren't likely to be taking security even that serious, I'm not confident this won't turn into a shit show. 17 years ago I was sitting in traffic in my wife's Pointiac Grand Am (early to mid 90s vintage) when the cruise control decided I needed to be going instead of stopped. I took me standing on the brake to keep from rear ending the car in front of me. It did this twice before I sold it. Now imagine a hacker flipping a bit and turning on your cruise control with the last speed you set and then using the self-driving mechanism to steer you into the nearest telephone pole. If the systems are there and there is remote access, it could happen if the system isn't appropriately hardened.

Chris

[BehindBlueI's]

It would depend on that device's access to the rest of the system, but theoretically possible.

At the risk of even further showing my ignorance, I'm assuming that there's some antennae that OTA updates are received by and that it's by cellular data connection. Could you disable the OTA capability by simply disconnecting, or using a Faraday bag, over the antennae?

[mtnbkr]

At the risk of even further showing my ignorance, I'm assuming that there's some antennae that OTA updates are received by and that it's by cellular data connection. Could you disable the OTA capability by simply disconnecting, or using a Faraday bag, over the antennae?

Show me the antenna on your phone. :)

At the frequencies used by modern cellular networks (or higher), the antennas are very short and often integrated into devices. Disconnecting the antenna may not be possible. Blocking the signal to the entire device may work if you can get to it. However, you can be sure the manufacturer will tie the warranty and ongoing support to that car being connected at all times (or often enough) and being kept up to date to within some level of update. If I were writing the warranty language I would require it because from the service provider's perspective you need to have access and you need to be able to provide updates to ensure a expected and agreed outcome (struggling to not slip into my GRC language here :) ).

The upshot of all this is that if you want a new(ish) car with warranty support, you're probably going to have to accept OTA when it becomes commonplace. The only thing we can do is to keep pressure on the manufacturers to implement appropriate security controls and to not tolerate the sort of nonsense we've been given with IoT so far.

Chris

[BehindBlueI's]

Show me the antenna on your phone. :)

At the frequencies used by modern cellular networks (or higher), the antennas are very short and often integrated into devices. Disconnecting the antenna may not be possible. Blocking the signal to the entire device may work if you can get to it.

I mean specifically with automobiles. I have the little puck on the roof of my Ram, for example, and I would guess whatever signal Uconnect uses is probably going through that puck. I don't want or need a cell signal to my truck and I don't use the XM radio, so I could probably just disconnect it *if* my truck were OTA compatible, right? I get the warranty thing, but I mean would it work technically. If it needs to "phone home" to start that'd be even worse. There's no cell coverage at my rural property, so surely that's not going to be how it works.

I guess the better question is if someone screws up my truck OTA could I disable the antennae and then "reboot" with a handheld tuner maybe?

[mtnbkr]

I mean specifically with automobiles. I have the little puck on the roof of my Ram, for example, and I would guess whatever signal Uconnect uses is probably going through that puck. I don't want or need a cell signal to my truck and I don't use the XM radio, so I could probably just disconnect it *if* my truck were OTA compatible, right? I get the warranty thing, but I mean would it work technically. If it needs to "phone home" to start that'd be even worse. There's no cell coverage at my rural property, so surely that's not going to be how it works.

I guess the better question is if someone screws up my truck OTA could I disable the antennae and then "reboot" with a handheld tuner maybe?

I had to google Uconnect. :)

It could work like that, but it doesn't have to. If that's the same (and only) antenna used for OTA, then disconnecting it would do the trick.

Yes, the truck would still work when not connected. They could be total prats and not let it start when not on the network, but that would backfire real quick. It might not be cellular though, it could be sat-based for the coverage reasons you mentioned.

As far as screwing up your truck via OTA, it depends on the extent of the damage I suppose. I don't know how much the tuner could overwrite (literally or operationally).

BTW, one of the connected car projects I was involved in had a use case where an alert would be generated if a monitored vehicle was offline or didn't get updates for too long. Granted, this was for fleet operations, but you know it's going to extend to the rest of us eventually.

Chris

[Sig_Fiend]

Mark my words, the 90s to the mid 2000s is the end of an era and sweet spot for usable vehicles that are still modern. For certain manufacturers, you might be able to push that back to the 80s. Buy now, because they're not exactly making more of them! Best part is most people are still on about buying the hottest, new, depreciating asset from the manufacturers they like. So these "old" cars are, mostly, not in high demand or selling for a premium.

I'm a car guy that likes having the ability to do my own work when I can. I realize that's not everyone, so take my words with a grain. My major issue with newer cars is that much of this freedom is being stripped away from us. Nothing real sinister about it. Just manufacturers innovating and trying to protect their bottom line. For an entertaining example, check out Rich Rebuilds (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfV0_wbjG8KJADuZT2ct4SA) on YouTube. He's a guy that has built a business rebuilding used or wrecked Teslas. That guy has gone through some trials and tribulations in the process to be sure. The less you have full control of your vehicle and its technologies, the more you're at the mercy of others.

[randyho]

And this (https://www.wideopencountry.com/john-deere-tractor-hack/) and this (https://tractorhacking.github.io/) are where this all leads to.

The tools and knowledge are already out there (https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/hacking-cars-a-guide-tutorial-on-how-to-hack-a-car-5eafcfbbb7ec/https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/hacking-cars-a-guide-tutorial-on-how-to-hack-a-car-5eafcfbbb7ec/). But, if the OTA feature is always on, that's a problem.

[farscott]

I mean specifically with automobiles. I have the little puck on the roof of my Ram, for example, and I would guess whatever signal Uconnect uses is probably going through that puck. I don't want or need a cell signal to my truck and I don't use the XM radio, so I could probably just disconnect it *if* my truck were OTA compatible, right? I get the warranty thing, but I mean would it work technically. If it needs to "phone home" to start that'd be even worse. There's no cell coverage at my rural property, so surely that's not going to be how it works.

I guess the better question is if someone screws up my truck OTA could I disable the antennae and then "reboot" with a handheld tuner maybe?

The "puck" on the roof is actually more than one antenna; it usually contains a WiFi antenna for the HU, a GPS antenna for the navigation system, a SiriusXM antennae, and may contain other antennae such as AM/FM. In Europe, a GSM (mobile phone) antenna is frequently added as the European mobile system needs gain lost from running signals through the vehicle body. If the cable is disconnected from the puck, the HU and navigation systems will suffer significant capability loss.

[Caballoflaco]

Here’s another possibility... all of your options will be based on a subscription. Want heated seats or maybe even 4wd, that will be an extra $$$ per month.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bmw-vehicle-as-a-platform/

[ranger]

Here’s another possibility... all of your options will be based on a subscription. Want heated seats or maybe even 4wd, that will be an extra $$$ per month.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bmw-vehicle-as-a-platform/

I am seeing this in heavy industry. Big OEMs do not want to sell a big stainless steel asset for $$$ every 30 years, they want to make $$ per month for 30 years for "service" and "optimization".

[Caballoflaco]

I am seeing this in heavy industry. Big OEMs do not want to sell a big stainless steel asset for $$$ every 30 years, they want to make $$ per month for 30 years for "service" and "optimization".

I think I saw a link to it here on PF, but John Deere is doing the same thing with their commercial tractors. Want the model with more horse power? Pay the upgrade fee and they just digitally re-tune your motor to allow more hp.

[ranger]

I think I saw a link to it here on PF, but John Deere is doing the same thing with their commercial tractors. Want the model with more horse power? Pay the upgrade fee and they just digitally re-tune your motor to allow more hp.

Yes, John Deere is very active in the Digital Transformation world - I have seen them present at several events. Farming has definitely gone high tech.

[Poconnor]

I would not want to buy any vehicle that requires OTA. I want my vehicles to work. Reliability is important. Especially in the middle of no where which means no signal. They can do any software updates when I’m getting maintenance at the dealer.