Comment on Cyberattack on vehicle breathalyzer company leaves drivers stranded across the US

• x00z@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Please explain further because I do not believe that.

  source

  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Someone knowledgeable enough could tamper with the local equipment to get it to give false negatives, or always pass regardless of blood alcohol content. If it doesn’t phone home, the company (or the court) doesn’t know it’s been tampered with.

    source

    • bladerunnerspider@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It could phone home regularly without the ability to receive command to disable the car. Sounds like lazy enforcement.

      source
    • teft@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I agree with you in principle but you could just have the person show up once a week for tamper checking. Those interlock devices are punishment for DUI/DWI so making the user show up once a week wouldn’t be too harsh, imo.

      source

      • QuadratureSurfer@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Showing up once a week isn’t a problem if it’s only a handful of people going to the same place.

        However, when you have a lot of people on this device in a small area, you’ll have to ask them to go farther and farther away. Or else you’re going to outsource who is checking on the device, and that’s going to start driving up the price for this service.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • XLE@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      If somebody is good enough to tamper with the part that checks for BAC, why not also tamper with the part that phones home? Would they even need to?

      source

      • Archr@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        The device doesn’t just phone home while driving. It does it constantly. It’s likely that any tampering would alert the vendor and by proxy the court.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Ulrich@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      If it knows it’s been tampered with, it doesn’t need to phone home, it can be disabled locally…

      source
• Ulrich@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If you want to circumvent it, it’s as simple as disconnecting it. Source: I’ve done it (professionally)

  source
• gian@lemmy.grys.it ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It make sense only if there you keep in mind that there is no way to be sure that it will be always connected, which does not seems to be the case…

  source