I could think of possible two reasons. First, the title could be seen as dramatic or clickbaity. Second, some people have blind faith in the Biden administration and this challenges that.
Yeah I was worried the title was too dramatic, but when I post YouTube videos I don’t like to editorialize the title, but instead use the exact one from the video.
It’s because this is a bad take. It’s the wireless access … That’s a step too far, and it posses a risk to consumer safety, which is why the Biden administration is breaking from its normal support for right to repair bills in this narrow case.
Now, according to Reuters, NHTSA has written to automakers to advise them not to comply with the Massachusetts law. Among its problems are the fact that someone “could utilize such open access to remotely command vehicles to operate dangerously, including attacking multiple vehicles concurrently,” and that “open access to vehicle manufacturers’ telematics offerings with the ability to remotely send commands allows for manipulation of systems on a vehicle, including safety-critical functions such as steering, acceleration, or braking.”
That excuse is a big part of this video. The whole remote attacks thing is nonsense, and clearly not the real reason the Biden admin is telling automakers to ignore the law. Did you watch the video?
I did not I was busy; I guess I need to read the legislation. It sounds like the law would require over the air update mechanisms/over the air patching to be opened up based on the NHTSA’s comments.
But, the video makes it out to be that this is a ploy/fear mongering over what a shop would do to your car’s software.
So which it is, does the law require an insecure point of access pre-repair which could be exploited by remote hackers or is it FUD about what might happen after a repair is physically performed.
I don’t understand the downvotes on this. I would’ve thought the lemmy community would be pro right to repair.
I could think of possible two reasons. First, the title could be seen as dramatic or clickbaity. Second, some people have blind faith in the Biden administration and this challenges that.
Yeah I was worried the title was too dramatic, but when I post YouTube videos I don’t like to editorialize the title, but instead use the exact one from the video.
It’s because this is a bad take. It’s the wireless access … That’s a step too far, and it posses a risk to consumer safety, which is why the Biden administration is breaking from its normal support for right to repair bills in this narrow case.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/06/feds-tell-automakers-not-to-comply-with-mass-right-to-repair-law/
That excuse is a big part of this video. The whole remote attacks thing is nonsense, and clearly not the real reason the Biden admin is telling automakers to ignore the law. Did you watch the video?
I did not I was busy; I guess I need to read the legislation. It sounds like the law would require over the air update mechanisms/over the air patching to be opened up based on the NHTSA’s comments.
But, the video makes it out to be that this is a ploy/fear mongering over what a shop would do to your car’s software.
So which it is, does the law require an insecure point of access pre-repair which could be exploited by remote hackers or is it FUD about what might happen after a repair is physically performed.