Not trying to probe too much, but was that system operating over CAN? I only ask, because I'm curious how that would work within the confines of CAN data package standards.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Ingenext Boost Modules [aftermarket]
- Thread starter JPELKA
- Start date
Not trying to probe too much, but was that system operating over CAN? I only ask, because I'm curious how that would work within the confines of CAN data package standards.
That's really just semantics IMO. Why would Tesla have to open it up for all cars? We already have bifurcated Autopilot issues with the Model 3 and change over from v2.5 hardware to v3.0 hardware.
I live in Gainesville! One of their investors is from Ocala, so they are opening a spot there. Investor recently injured himself badly though, so they're still trying to make it happen with a temporary warehouse space...but it may be delayed right now.
That isn't really true, because if you buy FSD Tesla upgrades the hardware from 2.5 to 3.0. They aren't going to offer a cheap performance upgrade that requires them to replace the motor. I suppose they could offer the upgrade to only the early AWD Model 3s that have the performance motor, but that wouldn't go over well.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Why?
The S75 uncork for example only applied to some of the cars (restricted by build date)- same thing here though it's a "built before" date instead of a "built after" date.
In fact- that's better for Tesla as it doesn't cannibalize future new car P sales.
SomeJoe7777
Marginally-Known Member
No, the interface was RS-232 serial between device A (the device that the hackers wanted to change the behavior of) and a security module (device B, which authorized various functions of device A). The security module was fully hacked, including full EEPROM dumps and code analysis, allowing the hackers to program the security module to authorize functions of device A that were not paid for. The designer re-secured the system over a several-month period with a series of EEPROM firmware updates to the security module (done remotely) that used the aforementioned encryption, digital signatures, and dynamically-changing code on the security module that defeated the hacks. In some cases, the code updates would detect a hacked security module and actually render it unusable by writing to a non-erasable portion of EEPROM.
Granted, this system was non-standard, allowing great freedom to change various specifications as required. CAN may not be quite as flexible, but I think it could be done if required.
timk225
Active Member
I think Tesla has two ways to go with this whole performance hacking thing.
1. They can refuse it, fight it, cancel warranties, and file lawsuits, and look like the bad guy in the situation.
2. They can offer complete, factory approved performance boosts for a REASONABLE cost. And even boosts beyond a certain level, for which powertrain warranties would go away, because the Model 3 motors probably weren't intended to run 2.0 0-60 times all day long.
As others have said, people (including me) have been tuning their cars for many years. And when newer computer controlled cars came out over the last decade or so, I used to read how they were done differently to discourage tuning, and within a year or two, someone got them unlocked. What one man can encode, another man can decode!
If I were the factory engineer encoding these things, I'd be going to the aftermarket performance companies on the side and saying "Pssstt... for a nice little pile of cash, I'll give you this piece of paper which tells how to unlock it and do your custom tune correctly. Or, you can do it the hard way and spend 2 years trying to figure it out.....".
And some have said that in Teslas, tuning the car means getting into the CAN bus and altering more things than you might have to mess with on a 10 year old gasoline car. Which could affect autopilot and other systems. All the more reason for Tesla to say "Fine, here's your speed, but don't come crying to us when you break it. Bring your high limit credit card for replacement parts".
1. They can refuse it, fight it, cancel warranties, and file lawsuits, and look like the bad guy in the situation.
2. They can offer complete, factory approved performance boosts for a REASONABLE cost. And even boosts beyond a certain level, for which powertrain warranties would go away, because the Model 3 motors probably weren't intended to run 2.0 0-60 times all day long.
As others have said, people (including me) have been tuning their cars for many years. And when newer computer controlled cars came out over the last decade or so, I used to read how they were done differently to discourage tuning, and within a year or two, someone got them unlocked. What one man can encode, another man can decode!
If I were the factory engineer encoding these things, I'd be going to the aftermarket performance companies on the side and saying "Pssstt... for a nice little pile of cash, I'll give you this piece of paper which tells how to unlock it and do your custom tune correctly. Or, you can do it the hard way and spend 2 years trying to figure it out.....".
And some have said that in Teslas, tuning the car means getting into the CAN bus and altering more things than you might have to mess with on a 10 year old gasoline car. Which could affect autopilot and other systems. All the more reason for Tesla to say "Fine, here's your speed, but don't come crying to us when you break it. Bring your high limit credit card for replacement parts".
M109Rider
Active Member
Hacking a company’s product or service they have spent many millions developing should be illegal shouldn’t it ?
You’re suggesting you give them two options. :
1. Have the nerve to protect their product and service, and be the bad guy for doing that.
OR
2. Force them to offer an upgrade path at a substantially reduced price or else, we hack and take it.
I wonder if you’d feel the same with similar options posed to you if a thief said to you:
1. “You can either protect your home from us invading your home” and look like the bad guy for doing that. “
OR
2. You can just give us a few things you own, and we won’t invade”
Which option would you choose ?
Tesla made the car, but I own the car. Once Tesla sells the car they forfeit any right to complain about what I do with it.
I can paint it pink. I can replace the brakes with some got from the dollar store. I can enhance body panels by hitting them with sledgehammer. Tesla may not agree with my choices, but it is none of their business what I do with my property.
What should be (and is) illegal is Tesla trying to exert control over what I do with my property.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
If it involves breaking decryption, it literally is illegal under the DMCA.
And despite what the guy you are replying to claims- there's performance cars that still don't have hackable factory computers in part for that very reason.
Folks usually end up switching to expensive stand-alones to work around that... (or in some cases piggyback computers, using non-US-model ECUs, and other weird workarounds- don't imagine most of these options would work very well on a Tesla though)
nayr14
Member
You can go out and do everything you just mentioned and Tesla won't care.
But if you modify the HV system (software or hardware), expect to loose access to DC fast charging, all software connectivity, and the warranty on the entire HV system. I don't think they will sue, they don't need to. The value of your property will drop like a rock.
I am in complete agreement here, same as the iPhone....but....jailbreaking my iPhone probably wont kill someone. Hacking the computer on the Tesla is adjusting things that a 4,000pound moving object may need to keep it going in a straight line. I would say Tesla has skin in the game to the operating system so they dont get sued for traffic deaths, versus your sledgehammer to the fender.
MagnusMako
Member
Tesla isn't responsible for someone's modifications to their systems so I don't think them getting sued holds any kind of water. Modding and tuning of a car's computer systems has been around forever. At the very most, Tesla can absolve themselves of any kind of support for the car, including warranty and connectivity, but at the very least people should be allowed to tune it just like we've been doing to ICE cars for decades. As long as the risks and consequences are accepted I don't see a problem.
M109Rider
Active Member
You bought a car that requires on going software maintenance and updates from Tesla.
That requires control of your car. ...
I don’t think you understood this when you bought the car.
Tesla has the tools and backing at their disposal to make hacking their cars an exercise in futility, or at the very least, very frustrating. Even if a hacked car's owner couldn't care less about the warranty, online services or supercharger network, Tesla could still deem such a car as unsafe and unfit for street use and send the VIN off to the proper authorities with warnings and recommendations. The state DMV would salivate for that kind of info.
I don’t disagree that Tesla can and will do things on their side. That seems like a stretch though with contacting the DMV.
It may seem like a stretch, but to protect their interests, it may not be as far fetched as one might think. There's a lot at stake if you think about the possible legal ramifications surrounding a company who knew there were hacked cars that could pose a danger to the public, but kept quiet anyway. And with bad publicity being the big thorn on their side that it is coupled with the resulting scrutiny, the motive is there. Just my 2 cents.
