But these 4G connected smart ODB dongles scare the crap out of me. You are giving an IOT device the ability to disable breaks, the transmission, and lock you inside. I'm not really worried about a Maximum Overdrive type situation, giving this much control to a category of devices that was able to take down Dyn because so many of these devices used a subset of 60 common factory default usernames and passwords.
I think there is a good use case for these type of devices, but I think ODB, isn't the right mechanism for it. But I don't know if there will be a new standard.
There is some danger of control over the interface, but the interface does not specify any control operations beyond resetting diagnostic codes. The vulnerabilities in the interface stem from automakers repurposing the protocol, and are model/maker specific.
It seems like another protocol would only help if it defined control mechanisms so that carmakers would stop abusing OBD2.
This is false.
OBD2 is utilized very differently by different manufacturers.
I am capable of applying brakes through the ABS system, applying any given throttle percent, shifting the cars sequential manual gearbox, forced over-pressurization of the transmission hydraulic system (for pressure vessel testing and relief valve testing) , or reflashing ANY of the ECMs available to the CANBUS network via the normal OBD2 interface on my BMW E46 M3 using the (bootlegged) OEM Rheingold/INPA software. (Among many many other things)
The ONLY ECM on the E46 M3 that is cordoned away from the OBD2/CANBUS interface is the SRS system (thankfully)
This software is freely available on most public trackers. It's by no-means rare or uncommon.
OBD2 is MUCH more capable than most are aware, especially on manufacturers like BMW or Audi that needed to shoehorn additional tech and diagnosis capabilities into the system.
P.S. I know you mentioned that manufacturers make the interface unsafe; I just wanted to clarify to those reading that it is by no means uncommon for manufacturers to do so nowadays. A consumer should by no means make a judgement about the control of their car by thinking "OBD2 is incapable of doing any of those things." when that's demonstrably not the case for many modern cars.
On my car (Mk6 VW) there are multiple CAN buses which are separated by a gateway device. A device plugged into the OBD port has to negotiate with the gateway in order to access the other buses, but once it has done so can control the windows, lighting, instrument cluster, etc.
Question to HN: What can Alexa/GA integration enable in a car other than the mundane music search, ask directions, etc. scenarios? How many of you would want to use it to send short messages (e.g. "Sorry!" after cutting someone off) to a small LED display mounted on your rear bumper?
Best example I could find is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTcvE5ptk6Q
http://www.techradar.com/news/you-can-now-get-amazons-alexa-...
I have Android Auto and love it for navigation/music, but it is missing any car specific controls, eg. climate controls, reporting speed, maintenance, etc. I have to exit out of Android Auto and into Sync to access some specific functionality only available through the Sync touchscreen.
Is this just a case of the manufacturer needing to provide the right app, or is that information not available to third party apps running in those environments?
There's a lot to be said for air gapping critical systems.
I guess Ford already patented something like this but it would be nice to have it open source too.
http://www.biometricupdate.com/201502/ford-granted-patent-fo...
Voice recognition and personal assistants are annoying enough in a quiet house (but arguably useful). I would be surprised if it is useful yet in a noisy moving car.
Now, whether I would trust Google with that data is a different question. (Spoiler: no.)
Probably depends on some environments.
The experience is still uneven. There are times when I'm amazed the recognition and language models could pick out proper names of friends and other times when I'm red in the face shouting "I SAID 'PLEASE GET CELERY', NOT 'PLEASE SELL TO ME!'"
For the time being, we still need analog button backups to handle the cases where speech rec fails or routinely misinterprets. The long tail of error cases can actually be even more dangerous for the driver than a simple button press, since they can take your mind off the road for several seconds.
If you have a phone with a high-quality mic, mount it in the right spot, and speak loudly, it can usually get the job done though.
Performance in general has gotten a lot better in recent years, though it's tough to call it a "solved problem".
Some cars are built this way too, thankfully.
I just want the best of both worlds .. trying to hold onto being the main user interface feels short sighted. I'm not going to NOT buy your vehicle because I can use Android Auto vs your custom UI, so having both available shouldn't be a negative to the manufacturer.
Of course, one thing you could do is have the AutoPi locked down to only reply to a certain IP, VPN connection, etc, but the underlying security issues once connected, remain.