|
autism ZX spectrum posted:I'm super stoked to hear that Tesla uses the CAN bus because that's always gone absolutely swimmingly for other manufacturers. I'm confused, hasn't that been the international standard for almost 30 years, and is the basis of most modern ECU's?
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
yes
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
The CAN bus is fine, and especially the modern separated circuits anyway
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
The Door Frame posted:I'm confused, hasn't that been the international standard for almost 30 years, and is the basis of most modern ECU's? Yeah I mean, aircraft use canbus. It's secure and reliable* and bandwidth isn't important for the applications it runs. *unless you get a lovely terminating resistor/splice somewhere because God help you then.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Doesn't the CAN bus not have interrupts built in and just assigns everything a priority on the same bus? I could be mixing things up but wasn't a possible Prius braking issue to do with inadequate memory sizes and as a result not running some instructions fast enough? Are the circuits actually separated now? Last I was reading anything on CAN bus could be a possible vector for malicious code.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
The weather was nice today so everyone was out in their convertibles. I was behind a guy wringing out his 350Z when I noticed something smelling funny... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Luxrage posted:The weather was nice today so everyone was out in their convertibles. I was behind a guy wringing out his 350Z when I noticed something smelling funny... That's normal operation for a VQ over 50k miles?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
autism ZX spectrum posted:Doesn't the CAN bus not have interrupts built in and just assigns everything a priority on the same bus? I could be mixing things up but wasn't a possible Prius braking issue to do with inadequate memory sizes and as a result not running some instructions fast enough? In the past few years the trend has been to segregate devices on discrete CAN buses and forward select data between buses as necessary at some central gateway device.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
Luxrage posted:The weather was nice today so everyone was out in their convertibles. I was behind a guy wringing out his 350Z when I noticed something smelling funny... I've noticed a fairly new Audi S4 around a few times that's lowered, on nice wheels, loud exhaust, etc. Blowing blue smoke. And the guy drives like a dipshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
jamal posted:I've noticed a fairly new Audi S4 ... the guy drives like a dipshit. Checks out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
I used to see an Audi TT RS on my way to work every morning that drove like a huge dipshit. He'd pass on the shoulder on an onramp, and every single time floor it through this two-lanes-left turn and rely on the TCS/Stability control to keep him from smacking the curb. I haven't seen him in a long time so either he wrecked it or he moved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 08:37
|
|
|
DiggityDoink posted:green POS supremacy  Amberpos superior, greenpos inferior
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 08:50
|
|
|
Frinkahedron posted:In the past few years the trend has been to segregate devices on discrete CAN buses and forward select data between buses as necessary at some central gateway device. you mean the stereo
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:you mean the stereo ... if you're Fiat. Competent OEMs use a separate module.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
Weren't those Defcon hacker guys able to hack that Jeep via the entertainment system due to it talking to the can bus via the reverse camera setup? Car security seems awful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
The CAN bus was originally designed as a trusted network. Security was never a consideration, because they never thought that anyone would be dumb enough to connect it to the INTERNET.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
I really don't see how have multiple discrete CAN bus systems is any good if you send them all through a central point anyway. Obviously this central gateway device would be the biggest weakness and it will only be a matter of time before someone figures out how to make their malicious code take precedence over everything else. I honestly don't understand why critical systems like braking and steering aren't either designed as entirely separate entities, as in, if you absolutely need to move away from a purely mechanical steering/braking solution the computer in charge of braking/steering doesn't communicate in any way with the CAN bus. I mean, I understand the answer is cost, but it's such a huge vulnerability.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
autism ZX spectrum posted:I really don't see how have multiple discrete CAN bus systems is any good if you send them all through a central point anyway. Obviously this central gateway device would be the biggest weakness and it will only be a matter of time before someone figures out how to make their malicious code take precedence over everything else. The thing is, with front facing radar and adaptive cruise control, not to mention lane keeping assist (aka "autopilot" in this case, not the "you're drifting from your lane" warnings), trying to sever the CAN bus from the steering, brakes, and throttle is going to be a losing battle now. Everyone wants to be lazy. If you want to be lazy, ride a bus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
autism ZX spectrum posted:I really don't see how have multiple discrete CAN bus systems is any good if you send them all through a central point anyway. Obviously this central gateway device would be the biggest weakness and it will only be a matter of time before someone figures out how to make their malicious code take precedence over everything else. Or we can just...not connect cars to the internet? I don't see a good reason to secure cars against hacks that involve physical access to the car's electronics, whether the stereo or under the hood. At that point, anyone who wants to do me harm can just nick the brake lines. Or, y'know, just loving stab me, stuff me in the trunk, and drive to the nearest river. I ask this non-rhetorically and non-ironically: what are we actually trying to secure against? I feel like we're discussing what pad lock to use on a screen door. Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Aug 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
I would be okay with 2 separate CAN buses, one that is completely severed from any network and one that runs the infotainment and other junk. We're at a point where cars will be more and more connected to the internet. Chevy just had an ad where it shows Alexa/Siri opening the car doors. Why? Who knows. What are we securing against? Malicious code, probably, but bad manufacturing definitely. Instead of another key fiasco where a physical component causes accidents because no one took the time to think that people have keychains, we're opening up cars to have faults that you can't possibly test against. It's going to be something stupid like someone using up the available memory by having the car on too long and inadvertently causing some process to crash or freeze but since it was never really possible for it to crash there's not going to be an error message and whoops now the brakes don't work. Or just one of those ransomware attacks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 21:34
|
|
autism ZX spectrum posted:I would be okay with 2 separate CAN buses, one that is completely severed from any network and one that runs the infotainment and other junk. We're at a point where cars will be more and more connected to the internet. Chevy just had an ad where it shows Alexa/Siri opening the car doors. Why? Who knows. Envisioning a heist where a hacker in the getaway car causes the doors in all the cars around theirs to open on the freeway while going 90 mph with police in pursuit. That would be a pretty cool (and gory) movie scene somehow.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Oh gently caress that brings up another possible vector/motive to defend against. Remember back in early remote garage door opener days when thieves would just build a circuit that ran through all possible code combinations? Like that, but with your car doors and the internet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
autism ZX spectrum posted:Oh gently caress that brings up another possible vector/motive to defend against. Remember back in early remote garage door opener days when thieves would just build a circuit that ran through all possible code combinations? Already been done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR8RrmEizVg
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
STR posted:They've been doing it since 2010 or so, and still do it. indeed terrible car stuff and ends up just being another annoying variable to consider when driving in busy cities
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
MRC48B posted:The CAN bus was originally designed as a trusted network. Security was never a consideration, because they never thought that anyone would be dumb enough to connect it to the INTERNET. The same is true about the internet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
I went around a corner pretty hot and heard metal rolling against pavement, and assumed i lost a hubcap. On the return trip, i spotted the culprit so i leaned out and grabbed it.  Based on the internal wear, i'm assuming it's from a tire shop. Still, how would you like to get that fucker pitched up at your windshield by a passing truck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:I ask this non-rhetorically and non-ironically: what are we actually trying to secure against?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
STR posted:They've been doing it since 2010 or so, and still do it. I. loving. Hate. This.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
I guess I really do need to sit down and write that automotive cybersecurity thing. Re: CAN, these days cars are adding other, more secure networks like automotive Ethernet, flexray, and so on, as well as things like gateways with firewalls, anomaly detection, authenticated traffic, and so on. There’s a whole raft of automotive security firms working with tier 1s and OEMs, and the industry as a whole is taking the issue a lot more seriously than even two or three years ago. The goon who worked for Tesla has evidently been out of Tesla long enough for his NDA to expire so his work there probably predates all this seachange. I’ve talked to a lot of people in the last couple of years and while the attack surfaces are growing, very few people can point to actual credible threats. Malicious actors are going to make more money ransomwaring a hospital or utility than they are a bunch of individual cars in the hope each owner pays them a bitcoin or something. And whether you think the connected car is a dumb idea or not, get used to it. The prospect of monetizing your data has everyone salivating to the point that it’s going to happen if you like it or not. The profit margins for building new cars is tiny compared to the profit margins the OEMs are looking at for leveraging your data.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
tesla bad, touchscreens in cars should be illegal, connecting a car to the internet should be illegal, anything more than an RTOS running on a 32-bit or preferably 8-bit microcontroller should be illegal if it's electrically connected to any critical or mechanical system
atomicthumbs fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 07:25
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:tesla bad, touchscreens in cars should be illegal, connecting a car to the internet should be illegal, Yes quote:anything more than an RTOS running on a 32-bit or preferably 8-bit microcontroller should be illegal if it's electrically connected to any critical or mechanical system No
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
Old_man_yells_at_cloud.txt
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 07:35
|
|
|
The Door Frame posted:Old_man_yells_at_cloud.txt code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
The Door Frame posted:Old_man_yells_at_The_Cloud.txt FTFY
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 08:39
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:tesla bad, touchscreens in cars should be illegal, connecting a car to the internet should be illegal, anything more than an RTOS running on a 32-bit or preferably 8-bit microcontroller should be illegal if it's electrically connected to any critical or mechanical system unironically agree
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Cars and anything else that might kill someone if it stopped working (power grids, medical equipment, pipelines, military hardware) should basically be designed as if we were fighting the Cylons. It's true that disaster planners now often imagine a zombie apocalypse to get themselves in the right headspace. Systems engineers should imagine Cylons.
Imagined fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
At that point, you're better off running an airless tire. Not to mention that inertia is a bitch and hates huge wheels like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
I wouldn't trust that wheel/tire to be gently rolled off a trailer onto a perfectly smooth carpet tiled convention center floor!
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
But seriously, if you ever want a demonstration of why tires for racing generally have thick sidewalls, watch open wheel racing. It's much more obvious on those cars than closed wheel: https://i.imgur.com/quz6RhK.mp4 They act as part of the suspension.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:15
|
|