The problem with this isn't the idea of a car repossessing itself per se, because repossession is already a legitimate thing; it's the idea that your car can be remotely controlled by anyone other than you. There are already so many things that can go wrong. I don't want to buy a car that can be remotely disabled because I drove near a protest, or because there was a "clerical error" at Ford, or because my payment didn't go through, or because of a spotty connection or a software bug or a hacker! I'm also not sure I want to drive a car that collects and uploads analytics to my insurance company. (Although maybe it would be interesting as an opt-in system with a hardware kill switch that saves you boatloads of money if you don't drive like an a-hole...)
I'm pretty happy with the old, non-Internet-connected car that I drive. My phone already has all the smarts that my car needs for navigation and playing media and stuff. And from backup cameras to safer lane changing to full self driving, I can't think of a feature that I'd want to be built into the car and Internet-connected except for remote start (not sure I'd use it) or full-on "tell my car to drive somewhere without me."
Tech literate people often complain about buying portable consumer devices and not "really" owning them.
This is a whole nother level of control loss. Not only do you not completely own the hardware but in the worst case scenario, the hardware can remotely be used to restrict freedom of movement or kill you and others.
I personally wouldn't recommend buying an electric vehicle unless it's extremely dumb or is capable of running an open-source and customizable operating system.
I think a much better bet (though expensive) is to convert a somewhat old car into an electric one with fully custom firmware. I hope someone would be able to commercialize conversion kits for the most popular vehicles in operation today.
There are conversion kits and electric crate motors [0] that are available to enthusiasts.
The problem is that EVs and traditional ICE vehicles are built very differently. In order to fit enough batteries, the batteries are usually built under the vehicle in what's called a "skateboard". You can't do that easily when retrofitting an ICE vehicle, so you end up sacrificing trunk space. Modern EVs are also much more lightweight and aerodynamic than ICE vehicles, and they can do regen braking. Without all of the modern EV innovations, you just don't get nearly the same range.
So yeah. You should probably get a modern EV and just crack the firmware to jailbreak it instead, which is likely to happen in short order. A challenge there though is that when it comes to autonomous vehicles, you're likely going to need updates to the map data on a semi-regular basis. You could also become liable if someone gets hurt and it's found that you tinkered around with your autonomous car's software.
> Modern EVs are also much more lightweight and aerodynamic than ICE vehicles
It's probably worth noting, just in case anyone is accidentally misled here, EVs are vastly heavier than ICE equivalents, but most of the delta is the battery, and the frame and supporting structures are often lighter.
Brace yourself then, because the future of automotive is highly connected, and in many ways it already is. Every car since the early 2000s has computerized components that control everything from power steering to infotainment systems, and your car probably already communicates with some servers using a built in cellular sim.
Hackers have been able to compromise cars for at least a couple of decades, and while car manufacturers are getting better at securing their products, they are all pushing hard for further connectivity. This means apps and subscriptions for your car, new protocols that lets cars exchange information, and a huge reliance on cloud.
Source: first hand sources working in well known automotive corporations.
Every new Ford on sale today in the US, from the cheapest Maverick to the most expensive F150 configuration, now has remote monitoring and access via 5G as standard - it's needed if nothing else to offer the apps to remote start and unlock the car that consumers just expect now.
My 2013 F150 periodically asks me if it should upload a “Vehicle health report”. I have always declined.
The idea of a vehicle repossessing itself does bother me. In the early 2000s I bought a vehicle from Mitsubishi, financed through them. At the time, setting up an automatic payment through them cost a monthly fee, so I set it up through my bank instead.
About 3 years later I got a call from them threatening repossession because I was three months behind on payments. I checked and every payment had been sent.
It turned out that Mitsubishi Motors East had transferred my loan to Mitsubishi Motors West, or something like that, and I had missed that. It was probably in one of the statements I never bothered opening.
Yeah what happens when someone gets out to pump gas with their child and phone in the car and fords automated repo algorithm decides is the optimal time to drive away.
Always connected, no fee. Although the car (at least my 21) also offers a cellular wifi hotspot that appears to use the ATT network[0]. No clue what the monthly pricing is, I've never signed up for that trial.
I have the lowest spec, cheapest car Ford had available and it still has the cellular antenna. I checked, and at leadt on an ecosport the cell antenna is very easy to remove and doesn't impact functionality of the car. That being said, I did reconnect the cellular antenna since app-enabled remote start is a genuinely useful feature. I can warm the car up from my desk without having to walk within range of the keyfob, so I am accepting that bit of privacy loss.
You're assuming that the traffic sent is free to be whatever. I could easily see telcos restricting this "5G for IoT" stuff to be just traffic to designated servers, with the more permissive hotspot use a separate extra service -- at which point, you're paying for it regardless of this hack.
Do we think ford even bother with SIM cards? Lots of modern 5G devices have e-sims etc, much easier for the factory floor if SIM card can be loaded via software too. None of my families cellphones have physical sims anymore either.
In this case, take the modem chip itself. Most off-the-shelf USB/Mini-PCIe/etc modem cards use the same underlying chips, so you can just move the chip over which would contain both the eSIM as well as the original IMEI.
I can't help but chuckle at the use of the word "just" here. Sure, if we are now into reverse engineering hardware module interfaces and potentially desolder jobs on a (at a minimum) ~$20k vehicle, of which many features will stop working once you remove the module as well as triggering how many warning and service lights...
Car connects free for itself, and loads navigation, traffic, location on app etc. If you want a wifi hotspot, thats $300 a year from ATT network 2ith 22GB fast speed per month.
No, GPS Shows a red circle & Line if car is far in basements or in downtown. No Traffic Data if no mobile coverage (although no symbols to show how much mobile coverage it has). App shows only last known location (& gas level, odometer, tyre pressure etc) from last point in time connected. Remote start & doors lock/unlock will not work if car is not connected.
I recently was working on highly connected autonomous public transportation. Can confirm that connectivity is only increasing, and that cloud connectivity is going to be a hard requirement in the future.
As for security, while the automotive manufacturers are aware of dangers, and standards like ISO21434 https://www.iso.org/standard/70918.html are driving them towards better security engineering practices, there is a huge gulf between process/compliance/governance, and truly secure engineering practices as a core part of engineering culture.
Many/most of the people working on the on-board systems come from an embedded development background that doesn't include pervasive connectivity. That's a problem. They might check the boxes to appear secure, but they aren't necessarily invested in the process.
My prediction; there _is_ going to be a severe and widespread automotive security event which cannot be ignored, before that culture shifts.
Likely because they are inexpensive and are beloved track cars. I was hoping the GT88/BRZ would oust the miata from this position- I much prefer a hard top over a convertible, but I think the existing after market and price point make it hard to compete.
Same, at least in part. I wish there was a database or wiki of some sort that collected when every model stopped being un-connected and adopted the rest of these user hostile features.
"clerical error" reminds me, recently rewatched Gilliam's Brazil (1985). From the Wikipedia article's section on Plot:
> One day, shortly before Christmas, an insect becomes jammed in a teleprinter, which misprints a copy of an arrest warrant it was receiving. This leads to the arrest and death during interrogation of cobbler Archibald Buttle instead of renegade heating engineer and suspected terrorist Archibald Tuttle.
> (Although maybe it would be interesting as an opt-in system with a hardware kill switch that saves you boatloads of money if you don't drive like an a-hole...)
This exists and just serves to charge customers more money while blowing smoke up their asses, people want to believe they're better drivers than the rest.
Curious whats your plan if new cars become increasingly internet connected, kinda how smart TVs went? Will you keep driving early 2000s cars until they become "vintage"?
Yep, I tested with my 21 Ford and removing the TCU (telematics control unit, that acronym should be general to most of the industry) disabled cell communication but didn't impact operation of the vehicle.
I did end up hooking it back up to re-enable remote start since I'm in a cold climate, but I couldn't help myself but test this. Something mobile like a car can't assume connectivity, although I have heard reports of people stranded when using rental services that rely on cell connection.
Of course they can, the car will check in at least once every few months, so you can go without internet connectivity for 30 days or so without problems.
Almost everyone will get within range of internet at least once every two months, so few Wil notice or care that the car requires constant contact with the mother ship.
Aftermarket parts are available to repair old cars. I for one plan to keep repairing mine, even if that means rebuilding/replacing the engine, transmission, etc.. I will never accept the tyranny of an internet connected automobile.
Our government want to phase out fuel cars entirely by 2030 which makes no sense but, at that point it would probably be illegal to use an older fuel car.
There’s a video of a Jeep getting remote controlled in the middle of a highway, all because the audio and entertainment system was connected to the brain. Iirc wired had an article on this.
I think all parents will agree that having a connected car is a dream come true. Ideally, I would be able to drive my children remotely using my phone so that I can ensure they are not driving recklessly.
I'm pretty happy with the old, non-Internet-connected car that I drive. My phone already has all the smarts that my car needs for navigation and playing media and stuff. And from backup cameras to safer lane changing to full self driving, I can't think of a feature that I'd want to be built into the car and Internet-connected except for remote start (not sure I'd use it) or full-on "tell my car to drive somewhere without me."