Comment on Cyberattack on vehicle breathalyzer company leaves drivers stranded across the US
Honse@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days agoWhy is remote access the intention? Should the device not verify the alchohol % locally and then mechanically allow the car to star or not? What part of that needs any form of remote oversight?
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Probably the part where keeping everything local would allow the driver to easily bypass the device. Splice a few wires, and boom. But if it is doing some off-site verification, they’ll be able to immediately know if the device is disabled. Similarly, they could do things like monitor the car’s location in real time, and have it throw up a red flag if the car is moving but the driver hasn’t performed a test. That would be a sign of tampering.
It also allows them to know if the driver fails the test, which is important for probation/parole reasons, where not drinking is often a condition of release. So if they fail the test, it should automatically alert their supervising officer. Can’t do that if it’s all local.
KotFlinte@feddit.org 5 days ago
Yeah I don’t know, that’s a whole bunch of unnecessary surveillance.
Make the device work locally, make it in any way tamper resistant and mandate a yearly check up at a certified autoshop.
The solution to problems does not have to be “control every possible thing at all times”.
People deserve not to be monitored around the clock.