Posts Tagged ‘Car’

Car Control Software Chaos Revealed in Major Safety Study

January 31st, 2012

Automated software control systems are proliferating in cars, but vehicle safety authorities do not have anywhere near enough expertise to measure or regulate their usage.

That is according to the stark warnings of a US government-commissioned report, which found that it was “unrealistic” for the country’s vehicle safety agency to be able to maintain the skills to keep up with rapid technology change.

The report paints a picture of a chaotic set of circumstances, in which car makers are producing vehicles controlled highly by software, but industry regulators have a very limited ability to judge their safety or ascertain the cause of incidents.

The news comes after Toyota discovered sudden acceleration problems in its cars in 2009, and after Jaguar found a severe control software risk in its cars last year.

In its report, the US National Research Council said the government had been “justified” in closing its investigation into the Toyota problems, after reaching the conclusion that the car’s pedals were becoming stuck. But it said that although the government concluded that computer systems were not a plausible cause, persistent questions around IT remained.

It described as “troubling” the fact that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) still “could not convincingly address public concerns about the safety of automotive electronics”.

Louis Lanzerotti, distinguished research professor at the New Jersey Institute of Technology and chair of the National Research Council, said it would be difficult for NHTSA to keep pace with the technology. But he called for it to develop much better knowledge by engaging with industry.

“A standing advisory committee is one way NHTSA can interact with industry and with technical experts in electronics to keep abreast of these technologies and oversee their safety,” he said. “Neither the automotive industry, NHTSA, nor motorists can afford a recurrence of something like the [Toyota] unintended acceleration controversy.”

The National Research Council said the advisory committee needed a panel of individuals with backgrounds central to the design, development, and safety assurance of car electronics systems – including experts in software and systems engineering, in human factors, and in electronics hardware. It would be consulted on technical matters for regulatory reviews, defect investigation processes and research assessments.

It was vital that NHTSA becomes more familiar “with how manufacturers design safety and security into electronics systems, identify and investigate system faults that may leave no physical trace, and respond convincingly when concerns arise about system safety”, said the report.

The NHTSA needed to become “proactive” to technology development, it said, including assessing how drivers interact with electronics systems. It added: “In the future, the possibility of electronics leading to increasingly autonomous vehicles presents a new set of safety challenges and will demand even more agency planning and foresight”.

The National Research Council said it supported an NHTSA initiative to install event data recorders in cars, saying the devices must become “commonplace in all new vehicles” in order that investigators of incidents have the data they need.

Source:http://www.pcworld.com/article/248911/car_control_software_chaos_revealed_in_major_safety_study.html

Ottawa’s QNX driving in the fast lane of in-car tech

January 12th, 2012

Unfortunately for Andrew Poliak, he’s not allowed to drive the gleaming 2011 Porsche Carrera S parked at his company’s booth here at the Consumer Electronics Show.

Instead, he’ll have to be content with simply talking to the sexy German sports car.

As the director of automotive business development for QNX Software Systems, the Ottawa-based subsidiary of BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Mr. Poliak is spending his week in Las Vegas showing car makers, technology companies and the media how technology similar to the core architecture of the BlackBerry PlayBook tablet can transform the in-car experience for millions of drivers.

If you have a car with an in-dash computer that allows you to make calls using voice commands, operate satellite radio or get live weather updates, chances are good that it’s running on technology developed in Ottawa.

This week at CES, there are a number of auto manufacturers showcasing the power of QNX technology; QNX software forms the bedrock of the new application platform inside General Motors’ OnStar technology and is also behind Audi’s MIB Infortainment System, which gives users access to services like Internet radio and Google Earth.

Among the new features QNX is showing off this year is the use of Near Field Communications (NFC) technology, enabling users to simply touch their smartphone to a chip in the car in order to sync the devices and give the user access to email and other information on in-car screens.

The Porsche Carrera QNX has outfitted for the show features a pair of BlackBerry PlayBook tablets affixed to the back of the front headrests, in order to show how the computer in the centre console can independently operate screens in the back of the car.

QNX has come a long way since launching its car technology division more than a decade ago. When the division started, it would take the company sometimes between four and five years from the beginning of a project to when it would be installed in a car. Now, that window has narrowed to slightly more than a year in some cases.

At first, QNX would often supply only basic software to help power these in-car computer systems. But now, as manufacturers demand new features each year, QNX is providing more engineering, while still leaving the cosmetics of the technologies to the manufacturers.

“If you notice what’s happening in automotive though, they’re trying to make the development cycles more compressed, more like consumer products,” Mr. Poliak said. “Manufacturers are getting all sorts of requests from consumers who want things like Pandora in their car, so we’re providing more of the platform so it can come to production faster.”

Source:http://business.financialpost.com/2012/01/11/ces-2012-ottawas-qnx-driving-in-the-fast-lane-of-in-car-tech/

Software error qvercharges some north providence car owners

October 21st, 2010

Some people in North Providence, are waiting for a car tax refund that may never come.

Mayor Charles Lombardi admits that a software error overcharged some drivers, but he claims the city isn’t obligated to refund the difference.

According to Lombardi, the money has already been factored into the budget, and he says the city may not be able to afford to give it all back.

ABC6 Reporter John Guice hit the streets to get some answers in today’s “Voice of the People” report.

Source:http://www.abc6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13358921

Cracking the code: can hackers kill your car?

May 16th, 2010

US researchers from the universities of California and Washington will present a paper this week at a security conference in California that will likely set the automotive industry into a spin – provided it gets sufficient traction in the media.

It seems the modern car has become so computer controlled it’s vulnerable to cyber attack.

This story reads like what happens when Dorothy drives down the rabbit hole with Ethan Hunt and Rod Serling. In a demo of just what a malicious hacker can do to a modern car, held at a decommissioned airfield in Washington last year, researchers were able to remotely lock the car’s doors, kill the engine, change the speedo calibration so it no longer reported the correct speed, blast hot air into the cabin, and keep the stereo up on ‘11’ – all despite driver intervention.

That’s not all: they were able to prevent the brakes from operating, regardless of how hard the driver hit the brake pedal. And, equally nasty, they were able to command the brakes to apply – unevenly. These last two events read like deleted scenes from The Matrix, except they’re real.

In one demo ‘attack’ the researchers called “self destruct” they were able to launch a 60-second countdown visible on the dashboard and complete with second-by-second beeps on the audio system. In the final seconds, there are more strident warning beeps, then the engine just dies and the doors lock. Cue the Twilight Zone theme.

The self-destruct attack takes just 200 lines of computer code – most of which, say researchers, are used to keep time during the countdown.

Here’s how they do it.

All modern cars have a computer entry port so the dealers can hook up a bespoke diagnostic computer. This computer hooks into a system in the car called a Controller Area Network (CAN), which is just like, say, a home or office network integrating individual computer systems – only these ones control the engine and transmission, steering, brakes, central locking, etc.

The researchers wrote a program that they called CarShark, which was used to eavesdrop on the CAN traffic and develop its own data packets which it could then inject into the CAN.

Then they used a hacker technique called “fuzzing” in which they send a large volume of random packets of data into the car’s operating system to see what happens. (There’s already a name for that – trial and error – but ‘fuzzing’ sure sounds cooler.) After a while, it seems you can map out exactly how to do a range of really antisocial things – not unlike what a hacker can do you your unsecured wireless network at home, only with additional potential for mayhem provided by Newton’s Laws of Motion.

Associate Professor Stefan Savage from the University of California told Bloomberg in the USA that computer control was essential to many of the advanced systems in modern cars, but they could be very vulnerable to attack. “When you expose those same computers to attack,” he said, “you can have very surprising results, such as you put your foot down on the brake pedal and it doesn’t stop.”

Co-researcher Tadayoshi Kohno from the University of Washington told Bloomberg the pair was very surprised at how easy it was to breach the car’s systems. “We expected to spend significant effort reverse-engineering,” he said. “However, we found existing automotive systems – at least those we tested – to be tremendously fragile.”

The pair was even able to conduct unauthorised firmware upgrades (although in the case of malicious hacker interventions, we’re almost certainly talking downgrades here) to some systems.

After wiring a laptop with WiFi (or, presumably even just something with WiFi and an OS like an iPod Touch) into the car’s onboard diagnostic port, hackers can breach the car’s systems remotely from a laptop in a nearby car, using a standard WiFi connection.

Neither researcher would name the brand(s) of car(s) they hacked in conducting the project.

The point of this research? To show the automotive industry just how important IT security is – and perhaps how under-done it is today.

The modern car is incredibly dependent on massive volumes of software. To put this in perspective, the elite F-22 Raptor fighter jet runs on about 1.7 million lines of software code. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, scheduled to be operational later this year, needs about 5.7 million lines of code, and Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner will require about 6.5 million.

Professor Manfred Broy from the Munich Technical University told Discovery recently that, incredibly, a modern premium car contains about 100 million lines of software code, executing itself across a network of between 70 and 100 ECUs – electronic control units (think: computers).

In the same Discovery story, Daimler’s director of IT management, Alfred Katzenbach, said the radio and navigation systems in the current Mercedes-Benz S-Class contain a mind-bending amount of code in excess of 20 million lines, and the car itself contains almost as many ECUs as the Airbus A380.

Experts say the cost of software and electronics in a modern premium car can be as high as 40 per cent of the total cost. And IBM says around 50 per cent of warranty claims on modern cars relate to software and electronics glitches.

The elephant in the room here is, of course, Toyota. After massive recalls, one of the ‘fixes’ for future runaway throttle scenarios is merely software that allows the brakes to win if they compete with the engine. But that’s not the first big software issue for the Big T. In 2005 the company recalled 160,000 Prius cars thanks to a software glitch that caused the engine suddenly to shut down. Almost all car makers have had software glitches. Last year GM recalled almost 13,000 Cadillac CTSs when it was found that defective software was disabling the front passenger airbag when a passenger was present in the seat.

Makes you wonder how secure your car really is, doesn’t it?

Source:http://www.caradvice.com.au/67732/cracking-the-code-can-hackers-kill-your-car/

Microsoft, Ford Team on Electric Car Software

March 31st, 2010

Microsoft will expand its Hohm consumer energy management software to work with Ford Motor Company electric cars, the two companies announced Wednesday.

With Hohm, future owners of Ford’s electric vehicles will be able to determine when the best times will be to recharge their vehicles at home, executives from the two companies said at a press conference in New York.

As consumers start using electric and hybrid electric vehicles en masse, electric companies will experience surges of power demand in the evenings when people come home from work and plug in their automobiles for recharging, explained Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, via satellite.

“The demand placed on the energy grid will be momentous,” Ballmer said. “Addressing the challenge of how that demand is managed in a smart and affordable way is absolutely going to be critical. And information technology will be an essential part of supporting the energy ecosystem.”

The two companies pledged to work with utilities and municipal power companies so the software can determine when the most affordable times will be for consumers to recharge their vehicles.

According to a survey from Accenture, 42 percent of consumers are considering purchasing electric or hybrid electric vehicles. Ford plans to introduce five electric or hybrid vehicles for the North American and European markets by 2013. Already, Ford and Mercury offer four hybrids and Lincoln will introduce a new hybrid later this year.

Hohm is a Microsoft service that analyzes home electricity usage, suggesting changes for power savings.

Ford already collaborates with Microsoft for its Sync in-car technology, which allows personal electronics such as MP3 players and mobile phones to be controlled by voice recognition. Sync is based on Microsoft’s Windows Embedded Auto platform

Currently, over 2 million Ford vehicles use Sync, said Ford President and CEO Alan Mulally at the press conference.

Source:http://www.pcworld.com/article/193030/microsoft_ford_team_on_electric_car_software.html

Apps aim to curtail phone use in cars

March 29th, 2010

Cars use lights, bells and buzzers to remind drivers to fasten their seat belts as they start their engines.

It would seem natural, then, to offer motorists friendly, yet stern warnings about another bad habit: holding a cell phone while driving, whether for texting or talking.

Several software and gadget companies – many of them at the country’s biggest trade show for the wireless industry last week in Las Vegas – have sprung up to address that challenge. But creating an effective, widespread solution looks a lot harder than putting in reminders for seat belts.

Furthermore, we’re only just beginning to figure out what constitutes a dangerous distraction, and how best to curb it. Are hands-free conversations dangerous? What about dictating text messages to your phone? Does everyone need help staying away from the phone while driving, or just teens and employees?

Many states ban drivers from using cell phones without hands-free devices. (In Washington it’s a secondary offense, but hand-held cell phone use becomes a primary offense in June.) A recent insurance industry study found that such laws haven’t reduced crashes. It’s not clear why, but one reason might be that drivers flout the laws.

At least a dozen startups have produced phone applications designed to curb the temptation to use the phone while driving.

But these applications work only on some phones and have a hard time figuring out if the user is driving. Potentially important players – wireless carriers, phone makers, auto manufacturers and the federal government – have yet to step in, leaving the field to smaller companies that lack the clout to put services in widespread use.

And some of the tools might not even improve safety.

“Technology without a clear vision for how it’s going to actually help drivers could end up doing more harm than good,” said John Lee, professor of industrial and systems engineering at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

For instance, Drive Safely Corp. proposes to put software on phones to detect, using a built-in GPS chip, when a device is moving faster than 15 miles per hour. To figure out whether the phone is being used by a driver or a passenger, who can safely text in the car, Drive Safely intends to have the phone flash a series of numbers and letters that the user has to match on the keypad. The assumption is that drivers won’t be able to match the sequence while watching the road, so they won’t be able to unlock it for texting.

Lee suspects that won’t deter teens, and perhaps other motorists, from trying.

“They will try to do that task while they drive,” Lee said. “And by making that task really difficult, you make it more dangerous for them.”

A half-dozen other services are either available or in the works to use the phone’s GPS chip to figure out if the device is moving. With names such as ZoomSafer, TxtBlocker, CellSafety and Textecution, these software tools can respond in a number of ways, such as holding incoming text messages in quarantine until after the trip or by blocking the writing of new ones.

They’re expensive compared with regular downloadable applications, possibly because the startups figure that parents of teens will pay for a feeling of security. Some cost $40 to buy, then charge recurring fees of $4 or so per month.

None of them can tell, however, whether the owner is in a bus or a train rather than an automobile, or if someone in a car is just a passenger and not the driver. So most of these tools have an override option – which a determined motorist can take advantage of even while driving.

Power consumption from constant GPS use also is a concern, possibly draining the battery twice as fast on some phones and applications.
Another approach is to dispense with using the GPS chip and rely on the car to tell the phone that it’s in a moving car.

Services such as Cellcontrol and Key2SafeDriving come with a small gadget that plugs in to a port generally found under the car’s steering column. It’s intended to help mechanics diagnose problems with the car, but it can also tell the gadget how fast the car is moving. If it’s above a certain speed, a wireless signal is sent to the phone’s Bluetooth receiver. The application then goes into “drive mode,” locking out some features.
This method avoids the battery drain of GPS. But it adds the element of hardware installation, and the cost of the Bluetooth transmitter.

The Department of Transportation’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration is looking at ways to reduce phone distractions, but it wants to make sure that technology promising better safety won’t also create an additional distraction.

Source:http://www.theolympian.com/2010/03/29/1188168/apps-aim-to-curtail-phone-use.html

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes