-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Firmware 7.0
- Thread starter MarcG
- Start date
green1
Active Member
And yet there is zero evidence to support the idea that such a security risk exists. All known security issues require physical access to the car, and were fixed prior to the 7.0 update.
I would love to know of a Wifi exploit for the Model S. Folks have spent a large number of hours scanning the Model S for vulnerabilities and gone to great lengths just to get an "in". I'm fairly confident that a Wifi vulnerability (arguably much simpler than those that have been proposed) would have been spotted at this point.
Having said that, if someone knows something, I'm all ears and would love to try it out on my Model S.
Having said that, if someone knows something, I'm all ears and would love to try it out on my Model S.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Yay, Tesla is at it again. Because the build numbers clearly weren't screwed up enough, we are now adding 102.38.13 to the list with so far two reports (one in Germany, one in the US).
And to all the discussions about how the ranger was "appalled" and how I'm creating a nightmare and extra work for Tesla by staying on 6.2... too bad. I could not possibly care less. If Tesla didn't want this to happen, they shouldn't have ignored the feedback from their beta testers (several of which gave them very strong feedback that the new UI sucked). Don't try to take away a part of the reason why I bought the car. And no, dear TMC members who love to tell me what I should be thinking or feeling. You do not get to decide which things were important to ME when I bought my car and which aspects of the car I care about or don't care about.
Speaking of things I don't care about, I also don't care one bit about the vague "ohh, but SECURITY!" threat, because lets face it, there have always been and there will always be exploits in the firmware. My bet is that there are more exploits in the younger 7.0 code base then in the much more mature 6.2 code base. And even if there is a known exploit that people could use on my car, so what? Who would know which car is mine and that it is on 6.2 and would be close enough to do anything and have the skill and equipment and time and motivation to do such a thing. Yeah, right.
And to all the discussions about how the ranger was "appalled" and how I'm creating a nightmare and extra work for Tesla by staying on 6.2... too bad. I could not possibly care less. If Tesla didn't want this to happen, they shouldn't have ignored the feedback from their beta testers (several of which gave them very strong feedback that the new UI sucked). Don't try to take away a part of the reason why I bought the car. And no, dear TMC members who love to tell me what I should be thinking or feeling. You do not get to decide which things were important to ME when I bought my car and which aspects of the car I care about or don't care about.
Speaking of things I don't care about, I also don't care one bit about the vague "ohh, but SECURITY!" threat, because lets face it, there have always been and there will always be exploits in the firmware. My bet is that there are more exploits in the younger 7.0 code base then in the much more mature 6.2 code base. And even if there is a known exploit that people could use on my car, so what? Who would know which car is mine and that it is on 6.2 and would be close enough to do anything and have the skill and equipment and time and motivation to do such a thing. Yeah, right.
Muzzman1
Active Member
Yes, i just got the 102.38.13 iteration, and with it came no changelog list. What I mean to say it did not even give me the old 7.0 release notes screen after the update. Nothing. I have yet to drive it, but the interface is unchanged so far.
Cyclone
Cyclonic Member ((.oO))
Well, at least from 6.2 / 2.5.71 to 7.0, Tesla was able to stack updates over the air. My car had "Software Update Available" over-the-air since the first few hours of 7.0 / 2.7.56 out in the wild. I finally hit update and 45 minutes later, my car is on 2.9.12. So they clearly can get certain versions prepared OTA even when an owner stays back for a while.
Last edited:
Cyclone
Cyclonic Member ((.oO))
Well, when the first update appeared on my car weeks ago, 2.7.56 was the only one out there.
Pilot_51
Member
With all the bickering about 7.0 and most people getting updates OTA, it would seem I was the only one to essentially beg Tesla to update my car to 7.0, about a week after the rollout completed. I wanted the IC brake light feature and hoped that the very annoying media playing alone bug would be fixed (it wasn't), plus the promise of improved HVAC and regen (eh, not seeing it), and of course wanted corporate to see the OTA issue since service was unable to fix it (so far no evidence that corporate fixed it either, but it's still early). I had a pretty good idea of the UI changes and figured the trade-off was worth it. Though, I did make sure to offer a few suggestions when I asked for the update, including reproducible steps for the media bug. I don't regret my decision and can live with the drawbacks until 7.1 is sure to get the UI back where it should be.
Cyclone
Cyclonic Member ((.oO))
I must not be understanding your question. I was on 2.5.71 and got notified on day 1 that an update was ready. A couple times since then I got notifications on my phone. Every day I would just X out of the update window. Today, without any prompting on my phone, I decided to hit update on the car and I went from 2.5.71 straight to 2.9.12.
- - - Updated - - -
Just to cover all bases, what is your offset settings for TACC set to? Absolute/relative and what offset?
Similar threads
